Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cemetery and landscape studies have been hallmarks of North African archaeology for more than one hundred years. Mortuary Landscapes of North Africa is the first book to combine these two fields by considering North African cemeteries within the context of their wider landscapes. This unique perspective allows for new interpretations of notions of identity, community, imperial influence, and sacred space. Based on a wealth of material research from current fieldwork, this collection of essays investigates how North African funerary monuments acted as regional boundaries, markers of identity and status, and barometers of cultural change. The essays cover a broad range in terms of space and time - from southern Libya to eastern Algeria, and from the seventh century BCE to the seventh century CE. A comprehensive introduction explains the importance of the 'landscape perspective' that these studies bring to North African funerary monuments, while individual case-studies address such topics as the African way of death among the Garamantes, the ritual reasons for the location of certain Early Christian tombs, Punic burials, Roman cupula tombs, and the effects of rapid state formation and imperial incorporation on tomb builders. Unique in both scope and perspective, this volume will prove invaluable to a cross-section of archaeological scholars.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".