'They Shall Speak the Arabic Language and Take Pride in it':reconsidering the fate of Coptic after the Arab Conquest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complaints on the adoption of Arabic by the Copts that are voiced by the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Samuel have often been quoted as the expiring words of the dying Coptic language. This article seeks to show that they are not to be taken so literally, and that they should rather be inserted in the context of a rift within the medieval Coptic church over the question of language choice, and beyond this, over that of accommodation with the Muslims. The use of Arabic by the episcopal church of Miṣr and by some prominent figures around it, which was linked to their proximity to the Fatimid court, was resented and denounced by more traditional circles, centred on the Patriarchate and on some important monasteries such as the one at Qalamūn where the Apocalypse was written. The suggestion is also made that the text is contemporary with the beginning of Coptic literary production in Arabic and with the introduction of Egyptian Christians at the caliphal court, namely in the last quarter of the tenth century, at the time of Severus ibn al-Muqqafa‘.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".