Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on the first monarch to embrace the Baha'i Faith, Queen Marie of Romania. It sets out to convey the stature and the character of this remarkable woman, her unique position in the early twentieth century, and, above all, her position in the Baha'i Faith. It also sets out to examine two issues. First, it is widely known that Queen Maries was a Baha'i. yet, a number of her own statements seem to contradict this affiliation and bring into question her conversion to the Baha'i Faith. Through examining her diaries and publisc statements, this work attempts to clarify the apparent contradiction. the second issue concersn Queen Marie's plan to visit the Baha'i World Centre in Haifa in 1929. Shoghi Effendi had made arrangements for a visit that never took place. It is well known that she reached Haifa in Palestine (Israel) on March 30, 1929, but failed to contact Shoghi Effendi or to visit the places she had deeply desired to visit. Information from her unpublished personal diaries sheds new light on her aborted pilgrimage. In the process of exploring the above issues, what emerges is the faithful friendship of Martha Root, an early Baha'i teacher, from the moment Martha met the Queen in 1926. An integral part of that relationship were some deeply touching, loving letters from Martha to Marie about the Baha'i Faith. Excerpts from these letters are included in this article.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".