Islamic religious toleration was predicated on silence about Muhammad

Evidence

Most mediaevals assumed that Islamic refusal to dispute arose from a fear of reason. It is perhaps more likely that it came, on the part of Muslim governments, from a desire to avoid trouble, and on the part of Qur’anic scholars and jurisprudents from a contempt for Christianity. None of the Latins whose knowledge of Islam was extensive made an important point with which the relatively ignorant Acqui preceded a reference to the execution of those who publicly attacked Muhammad: whoever willed, whether Christians or Jews or people of any other faith, might live in the lands of the Muslims, so long as they did not speak against the Prophet. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 714

Categorization

• SHARE: For someone into medieval Christian-Muslim relations — the detail that Muslim lands tolerated Christians and Jews so long as they did not speak against Muhammad reframes the standard ‘Islam spread by sword’ narrative.
• XREF: connects to: Medieval Christian polemic invented a silent Muslim opponent who never objected