The essay critically assesses the contemporary scholarship on Christian Islamophobia, arguing that it often overlooks the internal Christian divisions and portrays Christianity as a monolithic entity united against Islam. By focusing on the diverse Christian attitudes towards the Ottomans, particularly the Orthodox perspective, the essay demonstrates that the fear of theological compromise with the Latins was considered a worse fate than Muslim conquest.

Evidence

I will argue that while the Byzantine Orthodox and Latin West both viewed the Muslims as an enemy, the idea of theological compromise with the Latins was seen by the Orthodox as a worse alternative to a Muslim conquest. — Ali Qureshi, The Fall of Constantinople, 25 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

This schism between Orthodox and Latin Christianity is significant for any discussion of the historical dynamics of Christianity. In contemporary scholarship about the history of Christian Islamophobia, many authors when describing the period largely ignore this inter- Christian tension. Some authors of this bent are Anidjar, Kumar, Todd, and Allen. For instance, in Anidjar’s book The Jew, the Arab: A History of the Enemy, he argues his case with the claim from another author that Muslims were a “common enemy” against all of Christendom (Anidjar 2003). — Ali Qureshi, The Fall of Constantinople, 25 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Medieval depictions of Islam as heresy served to justify violence and resist conversion — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 139; Luther portrayed Islam as a faith that spreads only by violence — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 151; Jews and Muslims occupied a shared proximity-distancing position in Christian self-definition (+24 more)

Broader Connections