MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111612266 · doi:10.1163/22118993-00371p03

The Abbasid Mosaic Tradition and the Great Mosque of Damascus

2020· article· en· W3111612266 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bea Leal

Bibliographic record

VenueMuqarnas Online · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMosaicEleventhNinthMamlukAncient historyPeriod (music)HistoryIslamIslamic architectureQuarter (Canadian coin)CraftArabicClassicsArtArchaeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Glass wall mosaic is a major feature of early Islamic architecture, surviving above all in the Umayyad monuments of the Dome of the Rock and the Great Mosque of Damascus. These grand mosaics inspired periodic revivals from the eleventh century onwards. The centuries between the Umayyad commissions and the first of the documented revivals, however, have been seen as a period of decline for the craft; the Abbasid dynasty that defeated the Umayyads in 750 has not traditionally been associated with the medium. This article reexamines the question, looking at textual and material evidence for Abbasid mosaic production. It argues that, in fact, there was a continuous mosaic tradition well into the ninth century, under the patronage of both caliphs and lower-ranking officials. The first part of the article considers written evidence for mosaics in Mecca and Medina. The second part looks in detail at a surviving example that, it will be argued, dates to the Abbasid period, on the Bayt al-Mal (Treasury) of the Great Mosque of Damascus. The concluding section discusses factors behind the general decline in mosaic production in the tenth century and the possibility of pockets of continuity.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuqarnas OnlineSame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207