Both Christianity and Islam in sixteenth-century Spain rejected religious compromise

Evidence

In the theology both of the victorious Christians and in that of the conquered Muslims there was agreement in that both religions required clear and unambiguous either/or decisions with regard to religious loyalty; both sides rejected compromise or fudging. The solution proposed by the mufti of Oran (that Islam should, if obliged to do so, be prepared to go underground) did not call into question the basic polarization demanded by both sides. His fatwa was simply, as has been pointed out, a “temporary” expedient to meet a specific situation envisaged as transient. In fact, following generations kept it in use for a century and more, but it was not intended at the outset as a ruling of permanent validity. … Nothing in the way of dialogue occurs in the sixteenth century. Entrenched positions were defended. — L. P. Harvey, Muslims in Spain, 1500 to 1614, 364

Categorization

• DEFINE: Explains the temporary expedient of taqiyya-style underground Islam: a ruling intended as transient that hardened into century-long practice.
• XREF: The ‘temporary expedient that outlasts its purpose’ pattern echoes the earlier Milgrom reading on institutions that outlive their founding conditions.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — L. P. Harvey, Muslims in Spain, 1500 to 1614, 364