LATE BRONZE AGE MARITIME TRADE IN THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN: AN INLAND LEVANTINE PERSPECTIVE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper emphasizes the nature of trade relations in the EasternMediterranean in general and from a Levantine inland perspective inparticular. The ‘maritime’ trade relation of the ancient city of Hazor, located in the interior of LB Canaan is a case study investigating the Mycenaean and Cypriot pottery on the site. The influx of these vessels peaked during LB IIA. The distribution and types of this pottery at Hazorpoint to four interested groups that wanted it. These were the royal andreligious elites; the people in Area F; the religious functionaries of theLower City; and the craftsmen of Area C. The abundance of imports inArea F, among other evidence, indicates that this area might havecontained a trading quarter from where the imports were distributed toother interested groups.A model of ‘interregional interaction networks’, which is a modified world systems approach, is used to describe the organization of trade connections between the Levant, Cyprus and the Aegean and even beyond. The contents of the Ulu Burun and Cape Gelidonya ships, wrecked on the coast of south Turkey, show that luxury items were traded from afar through Canaan via the coastal cities overseas to the Aegean.Such long-distance trade with luxury goods requires professional traders familiar with the risks and security measures along the routes and with the knowledge of value systems and languages of diverse societies. These traders established networks along main trade routes and settled in trading quarters in particular node cities. The paper suggests that Hazor, as one of the largest cities in Canaan, located along the main trade routes, possessed such a node position. In this trade the Levantine coastal cities of Sarepta, Abu Hawam,Akko and possibly Tel Nami seem to have played important roles. These main ports of southern Syria and northern Palestine were all accessible to Hazor, although some of them in different periods of LB.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".