Access to translated source texts did not guarantee accurate medieval portraits of Muhammad
Evidence
- That the author (whether Peter the Venerable himself or not) had read the Cluniac translations seems clear from internal evidence although it is in some ways surprising that he does not take greater advantage of all the material available. When Peter of Poitiers speaks of Muhammad in these terms: proditor fuerit, incautos et dormientes saepe Jugulans, he conveys the natural but rather humourless impression of one who has read the Risalah knowing nothing whatever of the background. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 2070
Categorization
- XREF: Connects to the broader theme of how polemical texts were parasitical on the very sources they distorted — parallel to Orientalist scholarship debates.