← New Books Network
New Books Network
Rosemary Admiral, "Living Law: Women and Legality in Marinid Morocco" (Syracuse UP, 2025)
00:49:00
Loading summary
Transcript37 lines
- [00:01]
A
This episode is brought to you by State Farm. Checking off the boxes on your to do list is a great feeling and when it comes to checking off coverage, a State Farm agent can help you choose an option that's right for you. Whether you prefer talking in person, on the phone or using the award winning app, it's nice knowing you have help finding coverage that best fits your needs. Like a good neighbor, State Farm is there.
- [00:28]
B
Lowes knows how to get you ready for holiday hosting with up to 35% off select home decor and get up to 35% off select major appliances. Plus members get free delivery hallway, basic installation parts and a two year Lowe's Protection Plan when you spend $2,500 or more on select LG major appliances. Valid through 10. One member offer excludes Massachusetts, Maryland, Wisconsin, New Jersey and Florida. Installed by independent contractors. Exclusions apply. See Lowes.com for more details.
- [00:57]
A
Some days call for working up a sweat, working on your passion and endless action. Ditch the glitch with Liquid IV's new energy multiplier, Sugar free refreshing flavors like strawberry, Kiwi and BlackBerry lemonade. Scientifically formulated to support physical energy, hydration.
- [01:18]
C
Focus, mood and social stamina.
- [01:20]
A
Liquid IV's new energy multiplier Sugar free Hydrating energy. Tap the banner to learn more.
- [01:27]
B
Welcome to the new New Books Network.
- [01:31]
A
Hello and welcome to another episode on the New Books Network. I'm one of your hosts, Dr. Miranda Melcher, and I'm very pleased today to be speaking with Dr. Rosemary Admiral about her book titled Living Women and Legality in Marinid, Morocco, published by Syracuse University Press in 2025. This book takes us back in time to the sort of 13th, 15th century range in Morocco to look at Islamic legal tradition, but from a point of view that perhaps we don't usually examine it from from the perspective of women's relationships with these systems. So we're going to be talking about courts, we're going to be talking about legal decisions. We're also going to be talking about conceptualizations in the sort of dry legal texts, but perhaps more importantly in what people actually thought about the law and how it interacted socially, which turns out to be a really interesting way to get insight into this time and place. So I'm quite looking forward to our conversation. Rosemary, thank you so much for joining me on the podcast.
- [02:33]
C
Thank you so much for having me. It's a pleasure to be here.
- [02:36]
A
I'm very pleased to have you. Could you start us off by introducing yourself a little bit and tell us why you decided to write this book yeah, thank you.
- [02:45]
C
So I'm an assistant professor of History at the University of Texas at Dallas. I teach classes in mostly the pre modern Middle East. I'm really interested also in historical methodology. I teach the historical methods class that's required for history majors. I also teach classes on North African history, specifically as part of a study abroad that I lead to Morocco. I have a PhD in history, but I also have an MA in international studies and a BA in computer science. You'll see that my work is a history, but very interdisciplinary in approach. So I became interested in Islamic family law in Morocco when I was studying Arabic as part of my master's. And I was in Morocco around the time of the legal reforms to the Mudawana, or the Moroccan Personal Status Code that covers marriage, divorce, child custody and inheritance. And there were a lot of debates over this reform. And so when I started my PhD, I was interested in learning more about these debates and specifically women's relationship to modern family law, which was often characterized as Islamic law. So as I learned more about the process of codification after independence and the European style court system that implemented this new legal code, I started to wonder what exactly people meant when they said Islamic law. And so I actually shifted the focus of my dissertation research to pre colonial Morocco. I thought if I could get a better understanding of what Islamic law looked like before colonialism and the transformation of the legal system after independence, I would better be able to understand modern implementations of law.
- [04:58]
A
I'm glad you mentioned the question around sort of, what is Islamic law, because it sounds like, you know, a very straightforward term, but obviously has a lot of connotations and meaning built into it. So to make sure that we have a clear idea for the rest of our conversation, can you help us understand what you mean by Islamic law in the book?
- [05:18]
C
Yes, absolutely. So there are, like you said, a couple different levels and meanings. So for Muslims, Islamic law, or sharia means God's divine law. God's perfect divine law. Right. So how do humans understand this divine law? They do it through a process of human interpretation, and that's fiqh or jurisprudence. So neither of these are actually how I understand Islamic law in this book. The way I understand Islamic law and define Islamic law goes beyond these views of theory or doctrine to include its implementation and practice. So basically, I take a historical approach to Islamic law and it's both the theory and the implementation. So with this broader definition, I can look at support structures that aren't visible otherwise. When you would look at legal texts such as community mediation, Dispute resolution, social safety networks, family and tribal support. Local legal scholars who advise on an informal basis and are very accessible to the local community, including women. So this more comprehensive view of Islamic law lets me see law beyond just the legal books and also beyond just the court and into what's going on within society. And I think it's particularly important for writing a social history that we don't just look to doctrine, because that doesn't help us understand how people lived the law or engaged with it in their daily lives. And what I can see through this approach is also how people themselves understood the law. And this in some ways is different from a modern approach, because people viewed it as a baseline. They viewed it as a starting point and not an ideal, basically a starting point for negotiation. And in this starting point, women had fewer rights and men had more rights. And so negotiation always meant giving women more rights while removing rights from men.
- [08:00]
A
All right, that's a really helpful understanding of what we mean in this context by Islamic law. And I think the point is very well made about the restrictions we put on ourselves if we only look at legal texts. And obviously that's an important type of source to engage with. But we do need this wider picture. The only challenge, of course, is often that having that wider picture means you have to use different kinds of sources, and often many kinds and types of sources all sort of pieced together. So can you talk a little bit about the sources you've used for this book?
- [08:32]
C
Yes, absolutely. So my main source for these legal disputes is fatwa records from Marinette, Morocco. And a fatwa is composed of two parts. It's a question asked to a jurist and a response. And actually, the response of the jurist is technically the fatwa. But I using it here to refer to the whole record. And actually the records preserved from Marinette, Morocco include often much more than the question and answer. They include, at times, documents or other identifying details or descriptions of events that happened leading up to the point where the question was asked. So this has been a great source for getting at how people interacted with each other before they interacted with the law, before a case got to an encounter with either a court or another jurist. So one of the main sources for my study is the Miyar of Ahmed Alwan Sharisi. It's a very large compilation that brings together opinions from jurists all over North Africa and Spain for a number of centuries. So I'm using some of the fatwas in this collection that are specifically from the Marinid jurists. Another collection I rely on is that of Abu Al Hasan al Suhayr, who was active in the late 13th and early 14th century, and Abdullah Abdusi, who was active in the first half of the 15th century. And so for pre modern North Africa, we don't have court records like those available in areas that were under Ottoman control. So we don't know, you know, we don't have as much information about what the courts looked like and what happened in courts and what decisions were made. If we have that information, it's because it was mentioned in the context of a dispute. For example, a couple went to court and then they asked a question from a mufti. And that's where we have our record, but not the actual court record. But like I said, a lot of the times, these records contain a lot of information about the dispute. So it wasn't edited out in many cases. In some cases it was was. But we can see, you know, kind of the drama leading up to. To the actual question. So that's where I am able to see a lot of interactions between people, their lives and their relationships, and also about how they use the law within society before it got to the point of a formal encounter with legal authorities. And people were very well versed in the law and legal principles and also had access to, you know, a lot of legal advice from local authorities. So these are my main sources for the actual cases. And then I draw in context from many other sources, such as biographical dictionaries of the jurists involved, local histories, autobiographical writing, and political texts.
- [12:12]
A
And I think it's worth emphasizing that kind of the richness of the detail here. Right. As you said, these documents don't just sort of say name of person versus name of person. Here was outcome. We can actually get quite evocative images of exactly who was yelling at who and where and what was all going on. And one of the ways this comes through in the. The book is you focus on a particular case of a young woman from Taza. So can you tell us a bit about the sort of outlines of this case and why you've made it so central to the book?
- [12:45]
C
Yeah. So this is a case that has fascinated me since the first time I read through it as a graduate student. And it's 23 pages long. So, you know, it's not a simple question, is this okay? And an answer yes or no. It is very detailed description from multiple perspectives of a case, many different answers and many related documents. So for me, this case spoke to so many questions I had about how women navigated law and family and community relations, and how local legal systems functioned and interacted also with political powers and many other aspects of law and women's relationship to the law. So in some ways, it's an example of how things went wrong and how legal loopholes were exploited or possibly abused. But more significantly, especially for this book, is it's an example of how a vulnerable young woman was able to navigate the system, to escape an abusive home and marry the man she wanted to marry with the strong support of the local legal system, Even though if you looked just at doctrine, at theoretical legal texts, it seems like the challenges she was facing would be insurmountable. So, for me, this is the thread that ties the book together. And we don't have a clear picture of events from the documents. We have two very different sides of the same story. So both sides agree that there was a young woman from the town of Taza, near Fez, and she ran away from her father's home in the early 14th century and sought refuge with the local judge. She made some allegations against her father and asked the judge to marry her to the man she wanted to marry, which she did eventually. And her father challenged this ruling by bringing the case both to the Sultan's council of Jerusalem, to the sultan himself. And the judge and his ruling to allow the daughter to marry faced a huge amount of pushback from. From the jurists of Fez, you know, the. The most respective jurists of the region. But ultimately, he did not overturn his ruling, and the daughters stayed married. So in the end, you know, the. The outcome was that she remained in her marriage and this local legal system essentially served to protect her.
- [15:41]
A
All right, that's a very helpful outline of the case, and we are going to pick up on it in more detail as we talk about some of these themes you mentioned earlier. So the one I would first, I think, like to go to is sort of, how does she know how to navigate all of this? I mean, legal doctrine in any time and place is not the most accessible thing. So in this particular case, we. What do we know about how she knew to take this to court to try and get what she wanted? And I suppose more generally, like, what do we know about how people knew how to use the courts?
- [16:16]
C
Oh, thank you. That's a great question and one that I spend significant time on in the book in general, how women got the information they needed to navigate the legal system. And just. I'll go over that briefly before I talk specifically about this young woman. But we see women learning from other Women, we see them learning from local legal officials, and we see sometimes in the responses of jurists almost educational principles. So they give an answer, and it's as if they're giving advice to women as to how to navigate this type of case. So this legal knowledge was very readily available, and it was very common in society. So one thing specifically about the system that's different from a modern system is that it was much less formal. It was much easier for women to access. For poor people, you didn't need a lawyer, you didn't need to pay a big fee. And in this case, the young woman, she actually went to the judge's house. So he was the. The top legal official in the area, but also someone she trusted on a personal level, and she knew she could go straight to his home when she needed help. But later she did actually make a formal complaint. And it was extraordinary in the amount of legal knowledge exhibited. So basically, her father had complete control over contracting her marriage because she was a virgin. There were. There was almost no way around this. So the case she ended up bringing addressed the only loopholes that existed in the law. So I'm assuming that she was able to, you know, maybe talk to the judge or other local legal officials or find out exactly how to present her case in a way that could allow her to marry, because it was virtually impossible otherwise to get around her father's authority on this issue. So I'm assuming she was able to gain her knowledge within the community from local legal scholars. Perhaps the man she wanted to marry helped get the information. But I'm also thinking the judge would have helped.
- [18:53]
B
I'm Christian McCaffrey, pro running back, and Abercrombie is an official fashion partner of the NFL. I'm not kidding when I say NFL by Abercrombie. Broke the Internet last year, and I think this season's lineup is even cooler. And so does my wife, who keeps stealing all my hoodies. Stay fit for the season. And Abercrombie's newest arrivals. Shop NFL by Abercrombie in the app, online and in store.
- [19:25]
A
When did making plans get this complicated? It's time to streamline with WhatsApp, the secure messaging app that brings the whole group together. Use polls to settle dinner plans, send event invites and pin messages so no one forgets. Mom 60th and never miss a meeting or milestone. All protected with end to end encryption. It's time for WhatsApp message privately with everyone. Learn more@WhatsApp.com okay, that's helpful to understand that it's not kind of all on the one individual, that there are sources of assistance available that's useful. But I suppose we should probably step back a moment and think about kind of the circumstances under which you would need to seek this out in the first place. This is about, as you've mentioned, who she marries and who essentially gets to decide. So in this context, what was the sort of norm? How did women usually get married? Was this instance where she had to go to a judge to get help, things working as normal, or sort of a weird extreme outlier like what are we talking about here in terms of what was supposed to happen and things escalating to meeting A court ruling.
- [20:35]
C
So typically, marriage was a family affair. There would be strong family support to help navigate the process. There were disagreements. I have other sources where there were disagreements, but these were the exceptions. If they arose, they were almost always resolved in a much smoother way than the case of the young woman from Taza. So usually it was the family who relented to pressure from the daughter. But the main goal in negotiations, in contracting in a marriage and kind of, you know, forming this union, it was to secure a daughter's financial stability. That's where we see often a father or other family members working on behalf of a daughter to secure her financial well being in the marriage. And at times, we also see other stipulations inserted into contracts that maybe speak more to emotional well being. But financial well being was really a main concern in setting up a marriage. Typically, there weren't a lot of disputes. So this case from Taza was extremely atypical, extremely exceptional. There are no other cases like it. This. This case is exceptional because no one backed down from their position. The daughter refused to marry anyone else. She only wanted to marry this one person. The father refused to allow her to marry anyone else, this man. And then when she actually did, he tried to get it annulled. So he didn't just accept it. And the judge refused to overturn his ruling. He also refused to back down. The jurists of Fez kept insisting that the ruling should be overturned, even though they had no power to do this. So it was essentially a stalemate that only the Sultan could resolve. And he chose to let it stand. He did not directly intervene. He indirectly intervened at multiple points to kind of guide the process. But he did not overturn the judge's original ruling that had allowed the daughter to marry. So this ruling stood and she stayed married. So again, there's nothing like this in the sources.
- [23:18]
A
Hmm. Okay. That's really Interesting when we come across examples that extreme. So this extreme case, one of the reasons, I imagine it's extreme, not just for the details you've shared with us already, but also for the fact that it doesn't just get one court ruling. It goes up to higher authorities. Which higher authorities are we talking about here? And what did they say?
- [23:44]
C
So, first, the judge actually checked his ruling with local legal officials in Taza, and he even ran it by the jurist from Fez who made up the Sultan's council. And they had initially agreed that he had made the right ruling. But when the father leader appealed the case to the Sultan and the same council of jurists, after hearing the father's side of the story, the jurists changed their position and took the father's side. And this is in some ways because of the nature of these muftis of the Sultan's council. Their role was to answer a question based on the facts presented. So when the father presented his side, they saw a very different story and very different legal facts than when they had originally heard the the side of the judge. But ultimately, their rule was advisory. These were the most prominent jurists of Fez, but they were not judges. They couldn't overturn the ruling of a judge. Only the Sultan could do so, or he could appoint another judge who could overturn the ruling. And while the sultan, he did carry out his own investigation of the case, he did not order any action. He didn't overturn the ruling himself, even though his jurists really asked him to, or, you know, called on him to. To overturn this ruling. And also, when the original judge of Taza died, a new judge was appointed. So the case was again appealed to him, and he declined to overturn the ruling. So that was essentially the end of the case. So we do see an appeals process. It existed and it played out. But in this case, the original ruling was not overturned, and because the Sultan decided not to directly intervene and overturn it himself. So ultimately, it ended up being the local judge who had the authority over his court, and this stood. Hmm.
- [26:10]
A
Okay. So interesting interactions there between the different types of courts. Can you tell us more about the legal system that this is all happening in? Like, is it normal, for example, for a case to kind of have that sort of outcome? I mean, obviously there's a sultan here somewhere. So what is he doing? What's the kind of system here?
- [26:33]
C
Yeah, so the. At the local level, the authority would be with the judge, and the judge in this case would be appointed by the sultan. So the judges in, you know, the main cities or towns would be appointed by the sultan. In this case, our judge was appointed by the father of the current sultan, but nevertheless he was serving as a royal appointment. Judges, even at the local level, they often consulted with muftis before making a ruling. And David Powers has written about this a lot about this dynamic of the judges consulting muftis and what would happen if they got maybe conflicting answers, if they consulted more than one mufti. And typically if a judge consulted a mufti, a well respected mufti who probably had more legal training than he did, they would usually implement that advice from the mufti and follow the advice of the mufti. In our case, the judge didn't consult the muftis until he had actually made his ruling. So, so he was, you know, he wasn't looking for guidance for validation after the fact. And the sultan, in addition to appointing the judges initially, he also served as a venue for appeals and had the power to overturn rulings. So this is kind of the formal legal system, but so much of the interaction that people had with the law took place outside of the courts or the formal legal system. People handled a lot of legal issues on their own. They had some understanding of the law. Sometimes they consulted with local legal officials, but they only brought in jurists or went to court when they needed more specialized guidance. But you can see from these sources a lot of law making taking place outside of the courts. And this is why I think it's important to take this broader view of the legal system, because otherwise we don't see how people were using the law before they have a more kind of formal encounter with either a court or a mufti.
- [29:24]
A
I'm glad you came back to that point about the kind of wider lens here, because the informal interactions about, or access, I suppose, to the court is a really interesting feature of this. So could you tell us a bit more about what those sorts of informal interactions look like? Like, is the judge just wandering around the village going, hey, does anyone need help? Like, what does that interaction involve?
- [29:48]
C
Yeah, that's a really important point. I think the judge was an available resource, especially in a smaller city like Taza. But he wasn't the only resource. There were many other scholars, local legal officials, muftis, but also educated people, people who were educated in Islamic law that could serve as sources of information for the community. And we see these actions in the lead up to cases. So sometimes a case doesn't get to a formal venue of law until it has had Many informal interactions. So, for example, a husband makes a statement that seemingly divorces his wife, but there's some confusion. So maybe he consults a local legal official or maybe the wife does. And if it's not resolved at that level, it might need more formal intervention. But a lot of issues are involved, are kind of resolved at that point. And we. We never would see these kind of informal legal spaces without this kind of source. And what's interesting for the Marinid period also is that we have evidence of women's scholarship and also women who were knowledgeable about Islamic law. So I don't have any concrete evidence that women sought out other women for legal advice, but I can imagine that this would also happen, that there were women who had legal knowledge, who were available to other women to answer questions.
- [31:38]
A
Okay, that's definitely painting more of a picture of how all of these things are happening. Let's talk, therefore, more about some of the ideas that are being contested in this particular case. But obviously it's sort of the extreme end for other things that do come up. One aspect you talk a lot about in the book is around virginity and what this meant legally and where the law didn't really know what it was thinking on this, but of course also what it meant socially. So can you map this out for us a bit?
- [32:11]
C
Yes. So the reason virginity was important to this case is because a virgin daughter in Malachi law, the law that was dominant in North Africa, it allowed a father complete control over the marriage of his virgin daughter, including marrying her to someone without her consent. So one of the tactics that this young woman used was to confess to the judge that she had committed Zina or had engaged in fornication and that she was no longer a virgin. So with this confessions, she essentially removed her father's power to coerce her into a marriage. And this might be surprising for listeners who think of, you know, Zina as a HUD crime with severe punishments, which it was. However, as we see in the sources from, well, basically all pre modern sources, it was rarely punished, especially mostly because of the extreme evidentiary burden that came with this type of crime, and also because there were so many ways for jurists to avoid punishment. But. But this was never the issue in this case. The girl, the young woman, she confessed to Zinna. And so basically she had removed her father's authority over her marriage. She later revoked her confession. So, so this was also normal. So she essentially could have, even if there was a question of punishment, with revoking her confession, she could have avoided It. But her not being a virgin was what allowed the judge partially to construct his ruling and take away the father's authority to marry his daughter. So virginity here as a legal category was significant in that it allowed a father more control over his daughter's marriage. It determined who could contract a woman's marriage, whether or not she had the right to consent. So that was virginity as a legal category. And the jurors do not make it into a moral issue. They barely mention this. But it's also a hard category to know. This young woman who ran away in this case, she ran away to the house of the judge. Other young woman women from this time, they ran away with men that they wanted to marry, essentially eloping. Even if there was no evidence of zina or premarital sexual relations, there was a possibility that it could have occurred. So there was kind of an unknown, an ambiguity to this category of virginity. So legally, the concern was with lineage, with ensuring that if something had happened that the woman was not pregnant, because then her children, their lineage would be uncertain. So what scholars did is they implemented a waiting period which did not restore virginity, but it did ensure lineage. After that waiting period, they usually married the man that they had eloped with. There was no accusation that they had committed zina because nobody knew. There was no proof. But because of the possibility, this waiting period was observed. And in the case from Taz at the, the judge did not implement this waiting period. So that was one of the possible missteps he made. But it could have also been a strategy just to protect the young woman and get her as fast as he could out of this abusive father's home. In terms of a social category, virginity was possibly, you know, it could have lowered a dower to not be a virgin at the time of marriage. It could have made it harder for someone to get married, but it did not appear to carry the kind of stigma that. That we might assume from. From modern society. So I.
- [37:20]
A
Okay, that's really helpful for understanding virginity, especially because of that last thing you said, that their understanding of virginity and how it mattered isn't the same as now. And that's exactly the kind of thing we have to interrogate as historians. So we don't just assume that what we think now has always been the case. And so it's in fact because of exactly that idea that I'd love to ask you about divorce as well, because that is coming up in these debates as well. What sort of legal agency or social agency did women have when it came to divorce?
- [37:55]
C
This is a really good connection to the idea of history, because from historical sources, we're able to see a much different picture than we see in legal theory. So scholars identify Islamic divorce rules as an area where women really have unequal rights. Women have much fewer ways to initiate a divorce, and men have essentially unlimited ways to initiate divorce, Although in the Maliki school of law, women do have a few more options for divorce than in the other Sunni schools of law. So with divorce oaths in particular, these have been pinpointed as a way for men to exercise control over their wives, because a man can swear an oath that if his wife takes a particular action, she'll be divorced. So, for example, if you leave the house, you're divorced. So in theory, this seems like the ultimate injustice to a woman and a great source of instability in a marriage. And a husband can swear a divorce oath on anything, not even the wife's own action. But what we see in the sources, and we see this divorce oaths, you know, many, many times in the sources because they were confusing and contested and often regretted. So what we end up seeing is that women with a divorce oath were actually transferred the power of divorce in this case. So if a woman did want a divorce and she wanted to leave the marriage with her financial rights intact, all she had to do then was step outside of the house if that's the oath her husband had sworn. So she was essentially given the power of divorce in that situation. And that is exactly what women did, but not always. And in some cases, the pair leader reconciled, and women worked alongside their husbands to try to find a way to restore the marriage. So we shouldn't assume that every woman was stuck in a marriage and just looking for a way out. Sometimes they were, and sometimes they were not. And there's other types of divorce. So. So the most typical type of divorce was a man could just, you know, initiate divorce with a statement and very easily with no need for legal intervention. So we don't see those cases in our sources because they didn't need to be registered. So we. We only see divorces where there's some kind of problem that arises at some point or some kind of confusion over whether a divorce occurred or not. And there's another type of divorce which women did have the power to initiate, and this is sometimes referred to as a female initiated divorce. And it was very, very common, and it was a negotiated type of divorce, but it also came with financial consequences for a woman, usually. So at the time of marriage, a husband would pay a dower to his wife and he would pay part up front and he would promise another part at a later date. This often ended up being paid at the time of divorce or death. So in this case, if a woman initiated this type of divorce, she would usually have to give up that delayed portion of her dower. But this seems like a very common way women ended up getting divorced. So they did have to give up financial rights. But we can also see what was important to them in leaving the marriage. And this was often making sure their children stayed with them. So they would write contracts for this type of divorce that would say they could keep their children with them. And again, they often had to make financial concessions to do this. For example, the husband was responsible for maintaining the children even after divorce. So often a wife would take over the financial maintenance of the child in exchange for allowing to keep physical custody of them. And often husbands were happy to agree. Sometimes they even ask their wives to ask for this kind of divorce because if they initiated the divorce, they would owe that delayed portion of the dower. So this is an area where in legal theory it looks like women did not have a lot of options. But in practice it shows that there were more ways that women could end a marriage and that these were very common. And I do want to add that in the Maliki school of law, women were allowed to go to a judge at the case of harm to end a marriage. But interestingly, we don't see this happening usually because this was a longer process that required evidence and perhaps family mediation. So what we see is often women would exit the marriage as quickly as possible and, and, and in this way where they had to give up some financial rights, then from a safe space, maybe the back in the home of their family, they would reopen the case and say actually this was a case of abuse and they would try to get the delayed portion of their dower in the end. So this is an interesting, the way the law didn't function exactly as it seems it would, but the priority seemed to be to get out of the marriage and then worry about the money after that.
- [44:27]
A
Huh. This is so interesting to hear about. Some of it sounds really familiar still in terms of what sorts of trade offs might be relevant. And the sum of course, isn't at all. So thank you for taking us back in time to help us understand what's going on with legal culture in terms of doctrine, but also very much in terms of the sort of social picture and this whole world more broadly. So I think that's probably therefore a good moment to end our discussion on the book, leaving me with just the question of what you might be working on now that it's done. Any upcoming or current projects, even if they're unrelated to this, that you want to give us a brief sneak preview of?
- [45:05]
C
Yeah, I'm actually working on two projects concurrently that are very much related to the first. And my second book is in some ways a spin off on the first. It looks at women's learning in the pre modern Islamic west. And I've been working on it for a number of years alongside Living Law because many of the jurists and other scholars and historians that I talk about in this book, when I went to their biographies, they have sisters, they have mothers, there's other learned women in their family. So I began tracing these women and this became the source, the start of my second book. So I'm interested in women's learning more broadly and expanding my time period and geographical focus beyond just Marinid Fez to look at how women learned in this period and how they're learning usually on the edges, on the margins and outside of institutional settings, how they're intellectual world overlapped with or intersected with the world of men's learning or especially scholars, legal scholars and lawmaking. So that's the next project, but after that I'm interested in returning to my initial questions about Islamic family law in modern Morocco. And now that I've written Living Law, I want to revisit these questions about what this means for modern law and understand from a more practical perspective how women navigate modern legal systems. And particularly now I'm interested in the support systems they can draw on. Because this is not something I was thinking about initially when I thought about the modern legal system was what kind of system supported it, what kind of structures and maybe what support systems are lacking in modern law. And it seems just from my initial research that women experience the modern Mudawana very differently depending on social status. It seems that poor women in the system are at a much greater disadvantage. This is something I want to explore further in this later project after I finish the book on women's scholarship.
- [47:55]
A
Well, it sounds like you've got all sorts of things to be keeping you busy, so best of luck with those projects.
- [48:02]
C
Thank you so much. And thank you so much for having me today and for your fabulous questions.
- [48:09]
A
Well, if any listeners are intrigued by everything we've talked about and want to know more, the book is of course titled Living Law, Women and Legality in Marinid, Morocco, published by Syracuse University Press in 2025. Rosemarie thank you so much for joining me on the podcast.
- [48:25]
C
Thank you for having it.