Mònica Colominas Aparicio. <i>The Religious Polemics of the Muslims of Late Medieval Christian Iberia: Identity and Religious Authority in Mudejar Islam</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I really enjoyed reading Mònica Colominas Aparicio’s The Religious Polemics of the Muslims of Late Medieval Christian Iberia: Identity and Religious Authority in Mudejar Islam. It is a welcome addition to the slowly growing yet still relatively sparse literature available on writings by Muslims living under Christian rule in later medieval Iberia. These Muslims, known to modern scholarship as Mudejars, struggled to maintain viable socioeconomic as well as religious lives in many villages and rural regions of Castile and Aragon, above all, from the twelfth to the early sixteenth centuries, before gradually being forced to convert to Christianity (or emigrate to Muslim territory). Distinct from the so-called Moriscos, converted Muslims who subsequently managed to preserve elements of Islamic tradition until their final expulsion in the seventeenth century, Mudejars left behind a small but important corpus of manuscripts in Arabic and Aljamiado—Romance dialect written in Arabic characters—which have delighted and bemused researchers for over a century. Mònica Colominas Aparicio’s contribution to this field is important and timely, providing both an update on recent findings and advancing several compelling conclusions of her own.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.004 |
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".