Bible primacy made Latin writers structurally unable to credit the Qur’an

Evidence

Scripture might seem astonishing only if we did not reflect how difficult it is to discard assumptions that we take most for granted. Scripture was the framework of all mediaeval thought; for no Latin writer was it ever possible to think himself into a position outside and independent of Scripture. If Moses or Solomon behaved differently in the Qur’an and in Scripture, the account in the former constituted a legend too insubstantial to be believed by anyone. … It was inconceivable that the Qur’an should be the sole source, or sole reliable source, of knowledge of the prophets, or that the prophecies should not have been concerned exclusively with the Kingdom of the Messias. The Old Testament would always seem to be the primary source of such knowledge, and therefore in practice the Old Testament was used to refute the Qur’an. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1403

Categorization

• XREF: Corroborates the vault cluster’s claim that ‘Islam’/‘the Qur’an’ is constituted as the West’s excluded other through an unexamined Scriptural frame rather than through engagement with Islam itself — parallels Anidjar’s genealogy of Jew-Arab-Christian enmity.
• QUESTION: Worth chasing: does this medieval hermeneutic prefigure the modern framing of Islam as inherently a ‘correcting’ or derivative tradition, which later Orientalist discourse inherits?