Jelling:a Central Place or a Royal Place, and what is the Difference in the 10th Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first known references to Jelling are from the Danish chroniclers Sven Aggesen (c. 1185) and Saxo Grammaticus (c. 1200). By then, two centuries had passed since the death of King Harald and it cannot wonder if details of events were omitted or forgotten, and the narratives adapted to suit the agenda of their authors. Jelling has long been perceived as a place of burial and royal commemoration, and the monuments have played a key role in discussions of the process of state formation and religious transition, lending name to both the Jelling dynasty and the Jelling centre. The results of the most recent excavations have added both scale and complexity to the site, and it has proved even more impressive in terms of the knowledge and the resources required for its construction. The extravagant dimensions and stringent layout of the site and its components have given rise to new questions. This chapter presents the most recent suggestions for interpretations of the function and purpose of the place in the socio-political milieu of 10th-century Scandinavia and northern Europe.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".