Christian anti-Islamic polemic stayed medieval in method until the 1700s.

Evidence

The attitude of extreme prejudice survived without dilution long after it had become impossible that Orientalists should accept it. In a book published in 1785 we still find the dove that whispers in the Prophet’s ear, the idea that he married his old master’s widow, the complaint that the Qur’adn is disorderly and _ illexpressed and that Muhammad was bred an idolator, the claim that he was epileptic, as well as accusations more generally accepted, as that he relied on force of arms. … A Life published in 1799 would be distinguished in any period by the virulence of its hatred of Muhammad; its author conceived that Caligula, Nero and Domitian, and Judas Iscariot, would be ‘ashamed to associate with him in the regions of the damned’; he considered that ‘many millions of rational beings are degraded to the rank of brutes by the consummate artifice and wickedness of a single individual’. This sort of obsession seems incredible at so late a date; when this book appeared, Napoleon had already returned from Egypt, and the modern or ‘imperialist’ phase of European relations with the Arab world must be said to have begun. Yet even in 1859 Akehurst, in his Imposture Instanced in the Life of Mahomet, though free of many of the old inaccuracies, used traditional vituperation to make the traditional points. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1600 (#expands, via linked claim)

There has been a natural variety within the wider unity of that tradition, and the European West has long had its own characteristic view, which was formed in the two centuries or so after 1100, and which has been modified only slowly since. One chief reason for continuity has been, not only the normal passage of ideas from one author to the next, but the constant nature of the problem. The points in which Islam and Christianity differ have not changed, so that Christians have always tended to make the same criticisms; and even when, in relatively modern times, some authors have self-consciously tried to emancipate themselves from Christian attitudes, they have not generally been as successful as they thought themselves. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 37 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

The main attack on Islam was already determined in the thirteenth century. The Christian champions were convinced, not only of the truth, but of the best method to convey it, beyond any possibility of reviewing the force of their arguments. This is most apparent in their treatment of the Qur’an. Ricoldo tells us that as often as he read it, he placed it upon the altar, and indignantly demanded of God that He read what it said. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 382 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Vituperative anti-Islamic polemic persisted into the 1780s and 1790s.; Western Christian anti-Islamic polemic stabilized after 1100 and persists unchanged — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 37; Anti-Islamic polemic survived nearly unchanged into the imperialist nineteenth century. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1600 (+5 more)

Related

• Anti-Islamic polemic survived nearly unchanged into the imperialist nineteenth century. (similarity 0.92)
• Virulent anti-Islamic polemic survived into the imperialist era largely unchanged (similarity 0.89)
• Vituperative anti-Islamic polemic persisted into the 1780s and 1790s. (similarity 0.88)
• Western Christian anti-Islamic polemic stabilized after 1100 and persists unchanged (similarity 0.88)
• Anti-Islamic polemic froze into its framework by the thirteenth century (similarity 0.87)
• Medieval anti-Islamic polemic circulated as a living shared tradition (similarity 0.85)
• Christian anti-Islamic polemic targeted Christian readers, not Muslims (similarity 0.85)
• Medieval anti-Islamic polemics aimed to fortify Christians rather than convert Muslims (similarity 0.83)
• Christian polemists preferred their own readings over traditional Islamic interpretation (similarity 0.83)
• Mediaeval anti-Islamic polemics convinced neither Muslims nor Christians (similarity 0.83)
• Prejudiced Christian polemic against Islam persisted into the late seventeenth century (similarity 0.82)
• Medieval Christian polemics against Islam were written for Christian audiences, not Muslims (similarity 0.82)
• The Western view of Islam was fixed by 1350 and persists today (similarity 0.82)
• Medieval Christians weaponized accurate Islamic learning for polemics (similarity 0.81)
• False statements about Islam persisted for centuries because community good seemed to require them (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Anti-Islamic polemic survived nearly unchanged into the imperialist nineteenth century. #expands (0.85) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1600
• Western Christian anti-Islamic polemic stabilized after 1100 and persists unchanged #corroborates (0.82) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 37
• Anti-Islamic polemic froze into its framework by the thirteenth century #corroborates (0.82) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 382
• European anti-Muslim polemic images persisted virtually unchanged from medieval to modern eras #corroborates (0.80)
• After 1300 Europe reused old anti-Islam polemics rather than forging new ones #corroborates (0.78)
• Anti-Muslim rhetoric was founded in the Middle Ages and persists into today #expands (0.78)
• Medieval Christian polemics against Islam were written for Christian audiences, not Muslims #expands (0.75) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1421