I metalli a Pyrgi tra circolazione, tesaurizzazione e offerta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ancient authors record the extraordinary wealth of Pyrgi’s sanctuary through the account of the looting by Dionysius of Syracuse in 384 BC. The treasure stolen from the sanctuaries of Leucothea and Apollo were claimed to have yeilded 1000 talents (Diod. 15. 14. 3-4) or 500 talents (Polyaen. Stratagem. 5. 2. 21), and special mention is made of the silver trapeza ripped away from the statue of Apollo (Aelian. Var. Hist. 1. 20). The hoard of nine silver Greek coins from the rear of temple A can be considered an indication of the large amount of money that circulated at the site and that was kept in the monumental sanctuary, which functioned as the seat of Caere’s aerarium. On the other hand, the well-known votive deposits from the Southern Sanctuary highlight the hoarding of economic resources closely connected with ctonic/ demetriac cults. This paper provides an overview and analysis of the extraordinary amount of metal (gold, silver, bronze, iron, lead) finds recovered from both of the Pyrgi sanctuaries, as well as the public ceremonial quarter N of temple A. The treatment takes into consideration all categories of objects discovered (ingots, premonetary bronze, inscribed tablets, jewels, weapons, containers and tools, furniture) as well as evidence for the ritual use of melted metal. This paper provides an overview and quantification of the extraordinary amount of metal (gold, silver, bronze, iron, lead) finds recovered from both Pyrgi’s Sanctuaries and the public ceremonial quarter N of temple A, considering all categories of objects (ingots, premonetary bronze, inscribed tablets, jewels, weapons, containers and tools, furniture) and evidence for the ritual use of melted metal.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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".