Bibliographic record
Abstract
The death of the Prophet Muhammad in 10/632 left a vacuum of authority in the early Muslim community. Ever since, Muslims of various sectarian persuasions have produced conflicting versions of the events which took place in the wake of Muhammad’s death and the behaviour of certain prominent personalities. This dissertation examines the role played by the surviving daughter of the Prophet, Fatima, during this early, tumultuous period. The objective is not to present a ‘historical’ reconstruction of events, but rather to explore how the formative Islamic histories (2nd-4th/8th-10th centuries) and Shiite hadith (2nd-6th/8th-12th centuries) creatively shaped the image of Fatima in her conflict with the first caliph and successor to Muhammad, Abu Bakr, and his allies. For Sunnites, Abu Bakr was a wise leader who aimed to safeguard the unity of the Muslim community even if that entailed Fatima’s dissatisfaction. For Shiites, on the other hand, Abu Bakr and Umar (the second caliph and a key advocate of Abu Bakr’s leadership) were usurpers who marginalized and even viciously assaulted the daughter of the Prophet. In the making of both images, gender is at play. For the Shiites, Abu Bakr and above all Umar betray ideals of maleness by bullying a defenceless woman who is portrayed, somewhat against conventional views of the feminine, as sagacious and strong. The Shiite image of Fatima also draws on the idea of women as emotional to make her into a righteous sufferer and mourner on a cosmic scale. In the Sunnite-leaning histories, on the other hand, Fatima conforms to stereotypes of femininity by exhibiting excessive emotion and irrationality, while Abu Bakr plays the role of a wise, indulgent, paternal male. Western scholars have tended to view Fatima as a marginal figure; but an examination of the early sources shows her image to be key to the development of sectarian views and competing Sunnite and Shiite appraisals of the companions of Muhammad.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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".