Abubakr bin Tufayl's Hayy bin Yaqzan and its Reception in Early Modern England
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study of Abubakr bin Tufayl's Hayy bin Yaqzan and its reception in early modern England aims to determine the extent and nature of John Milton's, John Locke's and Daniel Defoe's engagement of Hayy. I begin with historical research that offers the interpretative contexts upon which my comparative analyses rely. The dissertation begins with a study of seventeenth-century England where Hayy was received and twelfth-century Morocco where it was written, correcting misunderstandings in recent studies of the meaning and role of Hayy. In Chapter Two, I argue that Milton's representation of Adam's awakening in Book VIII of Milton's Paradise Lost may have been influenced by Hayy. I further suggest considering whether Milton had access to other medieval Islamic sources, particularly Islamic stories of ascent. The shared elements suggest considering these stories part of a common cycle. As for John Locke, my analysis corrects earlier suggestions that his Essay Concerning Humane Understanding and Hayy are in agreement. I show that Locke in fact disagreed with the claims made in Hayy. In Book II of his Essay, Locke closely examines the arguments made in Hayy in order to point to epistemological errors. Finally, Chapter Four discusses the importance of Daniel Defoe's reliance on Hayy in conceiving the relationship between Friday and Crusoe in the Crusoe trilogy. Defoe mimics the Hayy-Asal relationship in Hayy to develop the religious or spiritual aspects of Crusoe's character, whose religiosity is in some ways complicit with the colonial project. However, the development of Crusoe's character through his relationship with Friday allows Defoe to reveal the violence of colonial practice and to critique the moral and political philosophies that underpinned colonialism. The comparative analyses of Milton's, Locke's and Defoe's engagement of Hayy rely on viewing these texts as mediating between different historical worlds. The three English writers found Hayy attractive because it offered new ways of imagining and thinking. They imitated some of Hayy's major aspects but responded in original ways to their own contemporaneous English world. I conclude by suggesting further research on the extent of seventeenth-century English knowledge of medieval North African history.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".