Praise of Muslim morals served only as a satirical critique of Christians

Evidence

It was apparently this satiric intention that governed Ricoldo in his praise of various Muslim practices and institutions, as he personally found them in Baghdad. His is the best example of realistic satire, since what he praised are really Muslim virtues: They received us indeed like angels of God, in their schools and colleges and monasteries, and in their churches or synagogues (i.e. in mosques), and their homes; and we diligently studied their religion and their works; and we were astounded how in so false a religion could be found works of such perfection. We refer here briefly to some of the works of perfection of the Muslims, rather to shame the Christians than to commend the Muslims. Who will not be astounded, if he carefully considers how great is the concern of these very Muslims for study, their devotion in prayer, their pity for the poor, their reverence for the name of God and the prophets and the Holy Places, their sobriety in manners, their hospitality to strangers, their harmony and love for each other? — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1086 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Only a reader who was already well-informed would have been able to pick out the statements that were true. There was not even much interest. There was practically no systematic comparison of the interior life of the two religions. What interest did exist was genuine, but it was very limited. Christendom was relatively indifferent to what did not touch immediate Christian interests. This is not to say that there was no perception at all of the realities of Islamic spiritual practices; but these had little significance except as a contrast or a foil to the ways of Christians. Islam was always a reflection, often a muddied reflection, of what was familiar at home. In the consciousness of mediaeval writers, it was never inherently attractive or by its nature edifying. Even when Muslims were seen to obey the divine law in morals, it was usual to interpret Islam as a falling short of being Christian. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1280 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Yet it remains true that the satire, however common-place in itself, was in many instances specifically related to Islamic disapproval; the bare fact that it was supposed that Muslims must disapprove the wickedness of Christians is evidence of a sense of solidarity, perhaps even of community, with Islam, which persisted in spite of the theories about Muslim morals which then obtained. Moreover, there is at least sometimes the implication that Muslims exercised the virtues opposed to the Christian vices in question; and Busone’s choice of epithets for Saladin to apply to God, mild, merciful, just, wise, is distantly suggestive of Qur’anic language. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1111 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Christian satire implying Islamic disapproval reveals solidarity with Islam — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1111; Medieval Christian views of Islam mixed praise with condemnation. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1124; Medieval Christians viewed Islam only as a negative foil to Christianity — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1280 (+4 more)

Related

• Medieval Christian critics praised Muslim virtues mainly to shame their own co-religionists (similarity 0.92)
• Christian satire implying Islamic disapproval reveals solidarity with Islam (similarity 0.88)
• Medieval Christian views of Islam mixed praise with condemnation. (similarity 0.88)
• Medieval Christian distaste, not ignorance, distorted portrayals of Islam (similarity 0.86)
• Medieval praise of Muslims recorded genuinely observed Islamic virtues (similarity 0.84)
• Medieval writers ignored Islamic ritual because praising it served no polemic purpose (similarity 0.84)
• Medieval polemicists quoted Qur’anic praise of Christ chiefly as ammo against Islam (similarity 0.83)
• Medieval Christians viewed Islam only as a negative foil to Christianity (similarity 0.83)
• Some mediaeval Christians considered Muslims morally superior to Christians. (similarity 0.83)
• Medieval Christians understood Islam only as a distorted copy of Christianity (similarity 0.82)
• Medieval polemic attacked Muslim aspects that scandalized Christian observers (similarity 0.82)
• Medieval Christian critics mirrored modern assumptions about Muslim shrine devotion (similarity 0.82)
• Enlightenment praise of Islam extended the mediaeval attack on infidels to Christianity itself (similarity 0.82)
• Medieval Christian polemics could only read Islam as affirming or negating Christianity (similarity 0.82)
• Medieval Christian critics of Islam lacked Arabic competence and historical perspective (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Medieval Christian critics praised Muslim virtues mainly to shame their own co-religionists #corroborates (0.90) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1086
• Christian satire implying Islamic disapproval reveals solidarity with Islam #complicates (0.80) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1111
• Medieval Christians viewed Islam only as a negative foil to Christianity #contradicts (0.80) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1280
• Medieval Christian views of Islam mixed praise with condemnation. #qualifies (0.75) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1124
• Christians selected from Muslim sources only details that served their polemic #expands (0.75) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1353
• Encyclopedists used Islam as a disguised symbol for criticizing Christianity #expands (0.75)
• Medieval Christians used Islam’s marital norms to claim moral superiority #complicates (0.75) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 67