MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289994554 · doi:10.1093/ahr/120.3.1142

Chouki El Hamel. Black Morocco: A History of Slavery, Race, and Islam.

2015· article· en· W2289994554 on OpenAlexaff
Ellen Amster

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Historical Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Maritime and Colonial Histories
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamRace (biology)MythologyHistoryState (computer science)White (mutation)Ancient historyReligious studiesGender studiesGenealogyEthnologySociologyClassicsPhilosophyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chouki El Hamel has given us a thorough, well-researched, engaging study of Islam, slavery, and race in Morocco. He weaves together Islamic jurisprudence, Moroccan court histories, European travel accounts, Sufi hagiography, diplomatic correspondence, and social history to explode long-standing cultural myths: the idea of a “benevolent” domestic African slavery distinct from the transatlantic chattel trade, and the North African Mediterranean as a race-blind “melting pot.” El Hamel makes the case that black people have often been marginalized in Morocco, and that cultural racial bias enabled the Alawid sultan Mawlay Ismaʾil (r. 1672–1727) to enslave free Muslim Moroccans on a mass scale, creating a tremendous army and a state system of black soldiers and concubines. This book extends far beyond Bernard Lewis's Race and Slavery in the Middle East: An Historical Enquiry (1990) to a North and West African history of slavery, race, and its legacies. El Hamel's careful history proves both provocative and politically timely.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Historical ReviewSame topicGlobal Maritime and Colonial HistoriesFrench-language works237,207