Medieval Christian polemics against Islam were written for Christian audiences, not Muslims

Evidence

Admittedly, many writers wrote expressly for Christian consumption; but even where that is not so, it is very noticeable that nearly all the themes of Christian writings are far better suited to Christian consumption than to the sympathetic consideration of Muslims. The phrases of the Cluniacs reflect a real and an ostensible intention. Peter the Venerable apostrophised the Muslims constantly. Yet his use of Latin makes it impossible to suppose that he really intended his work to reach the Islamic world in integral form. His translators of Islamic sources claimed to have found their work profitable to them; if this was not said solely to flatter Peter’s projects and decisions, it must mean that they thought the translation inherently interesting or polemically useful. It is most likely that they meant the latter; as Ketton put it, the Qur’an was the witness to Christianity’s sanctity and excellence (particularly, a cynical critic might think, as he translated it). — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1421

Admittedly, many writers wrote expressly for Christian consumption; but even where that is not so, it is very noticeable that nearly all the themes of Christian writings are far better suited to Christian consumption than to the sympathetic consideration of Muslims. The phrases of the Cluniacs reflect a real and an ostensible intention. Peter the Venerable apostrophised the Muslims constantly. Yet his use of Latin makes it impossible to suppose that he really intended his work to reach the Islamic world in integral form. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1421

The overwhelming probability is that the public intended by the polemists was Christian. We may forget any suggestion that some real debate between the two religions was ever practicable. Nearly all the arguments that we have just reviewed were well calculated to be effective with such an audience, and only with such. They were admirably formulated to uphold faith. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1469

Categorization

• SEED: An essay angle: the rhetorical fiction of ‘dialogue’ in religious polemic — works addressed to an opponent that are structurally designed to never reach them.
• XREF: Connects to the vault cluster on how ‘Islam’ is discursively constructed for Western consumption — the audience here is the Christian self, so the ‘other’ serves an internal constitutive function, — connects to: Christian polemists preferred their own readings over traditional Islamic interpretation; The claim that Muslims refuse to dispute became Christian dogma; Medieval anti-Islamic polemics aimed to fortify Christians rather than convert Muslims (+3 more)
• QUESTION: Does the fact that polemical genre targets Christian readers complicate Said/Anidjar’s genealogy of Islam as constructed enemy? Audience analysis adds a layer not central in those accounts.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1421; Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1469