Christians understood Islam only through the distorting analogy of Christ

Evidence

My point, however, is to emphasize the truth that the Orientalist, as much as anyone in the European West who thought about or experienced the Orient, performed this kind of mental operation. But what is more important still is the limited vocabulary and imagery that impose themselves as a consequence. The reception of Islam in the West is a perfect case in point, and has been admirably studied by Norman Daniel. One constraint acting upon Christian thinkers who tried to understand Islam was an analogical one; since Christ is the basis of Christian faith, it was assumed—quite incorrectly—that Mohammed was to Islam as Christ was to Christianity. Hence the polemic name “Mohammedanism” given to Islam, and the automatic epithet “imposter” applied to Mohammed. — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 165

Categorization

• DEFINE: Introduces the analogical constraint mechanism: how the observer’s own categories force the Other into a distorted template.
• XREF: Connects to the reader’s scaffolding goal — this is the ‘limited vocabulary and imagery’ mechanism of Orientalist representation that Islamophobia readings will assume. — connects to: Christian polemists preferred their own readings over traditional Islamic interpretation; Christians misread Islamic ritual by assuming it mirrored their own; Medieval Christians understood Islam only as a distorted copy of Christianity
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 165