Crossing Heaven and Earth: Pilgrimage to Mountain Monasteries of Meteora as a Sacred Act
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In northwestern Greece lies a sandstone formation of pillars climbing 1300 feet above the plain below. These massive stone columns were named Meteora, meaning lofty or elevated, signifying how their sheer cliffsides made access very difficult and dangerous. Despite this topographic challenge, the peaks of these pillars have been home for a community of Eastern Orthodox monasteries since the 9th century. Beginning as a refuge to hermit monks, the political upheavals in the 13th century led them to construct monasteries for shelter from Turkish attacks upon Greece. As a defense strategy, the only access points were removable ladders, hoisting ropes, or nets. These political threats have since disappeared, and yet monks have continued to keep the monasteries practically inaccessible. Why have they chosen such an isolated and perilous location to make their sacred dwelling? This paper explores the relationship between ascetic practices, extreme rituals, and spatial configurations to argue that architecture is not merely a background for religious practices, but what renders certain experiences possible. Monastic architecture does not provide solely a dwelling but can provide an environment for spiritual practices and define sacred space. This research draws on the distinctions between sacred and profane space as developed by Mircea Eliade and further explored by scholars such as Shelley Ashdown, who states that sacred space is not exclusive but an ephemeral paradox. To illustrate how the sacred is constructed, this research also engages themes of liminality and spirituality through the works of Victor Turner and Thomas Barrie. By examining the monasteries through the lens of these scholarly works, this paper shows how the journey to access the monasteries of the Meteora mountains can blur the boundaries between profane and sacred space and evoke a liminal state.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".