Scholars perpetuated apocryphal Islamic legends despite knowing they lacked sources

Evidence

San Pedro had some doubts about the Maurus legend but felt sure that episodes told by ibn Ishaq (the delay in revelation over the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus and the accusation by the Quraysh that Muhammad had a foreign teacher) implied the substantial truth of the main point of it. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 2044 (#expands, via linked claim)

Pedro’s reasonably scientific account of the Islamic view was given a widening publicity, exemplified by the Anonymous Minorita, which omits his rationalised explanations and Christian criticism, however, as do the Legenda Aurea and Peter de Pennis. Marino Sanudo, explicitly citing Pedro as his authority, paraphrased both of the relevant paragraphs of his source in one clear and consecutive passage. He ‘improved’ the source, suppressing Pedro’s unambiguous admission that Muhammad himself abolished the idol-worship that he found, so far as he was able; and he introduced the motif by which the lapidation became a deliberate form of Venereal worship. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1208 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Medieval polemicists used Muslim sources to validate anti-Muslim legends — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 2044; Even well-informed medieval authors chose implausible stories when framing Muslims; Later polemicists distorted early scholarly accounts of Islam for propaganda purposes — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1208

Related

• Medieval polemicists used Muslim sources to validate anti-Muslim legends (similarity 0.91)
• Informed medieval polemicists still clung to untenable anti-Muslim fables (similarity 0.90)
• Later polemicists distorted early scholarly accounts of Islam for propaganda purposes (similarity 0.89)
• Medieval Christian polemicists treated Christian and Muslim legends as mutually confirmatory (similarity 0.88)
• Polemical scholars adopted textual accuracy only as a tactical weapon against Islam (similarity 0.88)
• Even well-informed medieval authors chose implausible stories when framing Muslims (similarity 0.88)
• Medieval polemicists ignored known facts to fabricate Muslim heretical intent (similarity 0.88)
• Christian polemicists read Muslim sources as unwittingly confirming Christian legends (similarity 0.87)
• Medieval critics saw Islamic truths as deliberate bait for deception (similarity 0.87)
• Medieval polemicists recycled general accusations of Muslim vice without personal knowledge (similarity 0.87)
• Best-informed authors combined fabulous Christian legends with reliable Islamic sources without resolving conflict (similarity 0.85)
• Medieval annotators traced specific Qur’anic verses to Arian and Nestorian heretical origins (similarity 0.84)
• Medieval polemicists quietly dropped claims lacking cross-tradition confirmation (similarity 0.83)
• Early Western scholars preserved fabricated Islamic legends despite correction (similarity 0.83)
• Seventeenth-century European scholars still presented Islam as a Christian heresy built on medieval legends (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Even well-informed medieval authors chose implausible stories when framing Muslims #corroborates (0.90)
• Medieval polemicists used Muslim sources to validate anti-Muslim legends #expands (0.85) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 2044
• Later polemicists distorted early scholarly accounts of Islam for propaganda purposes #expands (0.82) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1208