Muslim and Western historians radically disagreed on which battle mattered

Evidence

For the Western Christians, this was the decisive battle between Christendom and Islam. For the Muslims, it was a minor skirmish involving a group of raiders in the wild country far beyond the imperial frontier. A Western parallel might be a reverse suffered by some scouting party from nineteenth-century British India, caught by tribesmen in the wilds of Afghanistan. Early medieval Muslims were very conscious of the great struggle in which they were engaged against Christendom—of the issues and the stakes involved. They were also well aware of their defeat in the attempt to conquer and convert Europe. But in their perception, the real turning point in the attack on Europe was the repeated failure of the armies and fleets of the Caliphate to capture Constantinople in the late seventh and early eighth centuries. The Byzantine capital was rightly seen as the citadel of Christendom, the successful defense of which saved Europe from Islamization. — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans, 660

Categorization

• XREF: Directly qualifies the Said-adjacent representation cluster: shows the battle over meaning (Poitiers vs Constantinople) as a competing-framings case, with canonized Western memory dwarfing a more consequential Muslim-remembered defeat.
• ADDENDUM: The comparative framing device (two civilizational memories of one clash) could strengthen the asymmetry argument in the Islam-West representation essays.