Ibn Warraq: Walter Scott, The Talisman, the Crusades, Richard I of England and Saladin: Myths, Legends and History (Part 1)

Walter Scott, The Talisman, the Crusades, Richard I of England and Saladin: Myths, Legends and History
by Ibn Warraq
PART I

PREAMBLE.

Genesis of an Idea.

The present essay grew out of my inquiries into something that Edward Said wrote about Sir Walter Scott’s The Talisman. It took on a life of its own, and grew and grew, and led me into the Crusades generally. What follows is not meant as a complete narrative history of the Crusades -- some superb new histories of the Crusades have appeared in the last ten years [1], I do not need to add to these, even if I could -- rather, I wish to examine some of the myths and legends perpetuated by Sir Walter Scott in his novels on the Crusades, and at the same time I wish to elucidate, if possible, the motives of the Crusaders, and the real origins of the Crusades. I began my studies of Scott’s Crusade novels three years ago with an examination of Ivanhoe in Sir Walter Scott, Jews and Saracens, and Other Sundry Subjects [2], but never finished them; this present essay is my belated effort to make good on my promise. While recently researching the historical background of Scott’s novel The Talisman, which recounts the exploits of Saladin and Richard the Lionheart during the Third Crusade, I came across Sir Hamilton Gibb’s biography -- or rather hagiography, as we shall see later -- of Saladin. Gibb [1895-1971], born in Alexandria, Egypt, but later educated in Edinburgh, was one of the last great Orientalists, or as Albert Hourani described him, “the last of the universal Arabists”; a professor at SOAS, then Oxford, and finally at Harvard. I discovered something that delighted me, since the discovery adds a certain poetic symmetry and brings some kind of justification to my study of Scott’s The Talisman. Here is the treasure: Sir Hamilton Gibb not only attended the same school as Scott in Edinburgh, he also immersed himself in Scott’s novel at an early age, and Saladin became his hero; and when he became a historian and university professor, Gibb recommended The Talisman to his students as “a work of art from which they could learn much about Islamic history”. [3]

Three years ago, I began my essay on Scott’s novels with what Edward Said said of The Talisman:

Edward Said, the late Professor of Comparative Literature at Columbia University, has, in his influential Orientalism, a characteristically shallow, sneering aside on Sir Walter Scott, and, in particular, on his novel, The Talisman:
In Scott’s novel The Talisman (1825), Sir Kenneth (of the Crouching Leopard) battles a single Saracen to a standoff somewhere in the Palestinian desert; as the Crusader and his opponent, who is Saladin in disguise, later engage in conversation, the Christian discovers his Muslim antagonist to be not so bad a fellow after all. Yet he remarks: "I well thought…that your blinded race had their descent from the foul fiend, without whose aid you would never have been able to maintain this blessed land of Palestine against so many valiant soldiers of God. I speak not thus of thee in particular, Saracen, but generally of thy people and religion. Strange is it to me, however, not that you should have the descent from the Evil One, but that you should boast of it." For indeed the Saracen does boast of tracing his race’s line back to Eblis, the Muslim Lucifer. But what is truly curious is not the feeble historicism by which Scott makes the scene “medieval,” letting Christian attack Muslim theologically in a way nineteenth-century Europeans would not (they would, though); rather, it is the airy condescension of damning a whole people “generally” while mitigating the offense with a cool “I don’t mean you in particular.”

Not only does Said make the unwarranted assumption that Sir Kenneth is voicing Scott’s thoughts [Said would have done well to heed Waugh’s motto to Brideshead Revisited, “I am not I; thou art not he or she; they are not they”], he misunderstands and or at least fails to mention, the entire import of Scott’s novel, the contrast between the two cultures, particularly in the early chapters, with the Muslim one emerging to its advantage many times over. We come away from the novel with a sense of the chivalrous superiority of the Saracens. [4] (Incidentally, Said accuses Scott, creator of the historical novel, of “feeble historicism”, when he clearly means “historicity”).

[1] Thomas Asbridge. The Crusades. New York: Harper Collins, 2010.
Christopher Tyerman. God’s War. A New History of the Crusades. Cambridge [Mass.]: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2006
Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Crusades, A History. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005 [2nd Edn.]
Jonathan Riley Smith. The Crusades, Christianity, and Islam. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008.
Thomas F.Madden. The New Concise History of the Crusades. New York: Barnes and Noble, 2006.
Peter Frankopan. The First Crusade. The Call from the East. Cambridge [Mass.]: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2012.

[2] See http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/37551/sec_id/37551

[3] Albert Hourani. Europe and the Middle East. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1980, p106.

[4] Paul Pelckmans. Walter Scott’s Orient: The Talisman. In Oriental Propects Edd. Barfoot, D'Haen. Rodopi: Amsterdam & New York, 1998, p.99.

To be continued.

Ibn Warraq is the author of numerous books, including Why the West Is Best and Why I Am Not A Muslim.

| 13 Comments
del.icio.us | Digg this | Email | FaceBook | Twitter | Print | Tweet

13 Comments

| Leave a comment

The next general elections in post-revolutionary Tunisia will take place “around the 20 or 21 March” 2013, once a new constitution is ready, Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali has announced.

Read more: http://www.maghrebchristians.com/2012/06/01/tunisian-elections-set-for-next-march-prime-minister/#ixzz1wYTxGb6w

Youssef

The Crusades didn't "just happen" as the first-in-history act of Islamophobia by the West against the always-innocent, hapless Muslims.

As explained in this 3500-word summary of Muslim invasions against the then West, the Crusades were a measured response of self-defense against the aggression of Muslim. This piece lists out the numerous acts of Muslim aggression in the 450 year period from Mo's death to the First Crusade. Take away this point: the West exercised great patience before it acted. The lesson to be taken away: non-Muslims do NOT act in their own best interests in delaying themselves from Muslim aggression. This lesson applies with the same force to us today.

THE CRUSADES IN CONTEXT
By Dr. Paul Stenhouse © 2007 Chevalier Press.
http://answering-islam.org/Authors/Stenhouse/crusades.01.htm

From Islam's very beginnings up to this very day, Muslims are out-and-out brutal aggressors.

And Muslims will practice their aggression against everything that's not Muslim. Societal value or usefulness of The Other is irrelevant to Islamic "thinking" (though Muslim behavior is more crudely and basally instinctive, than being the product of thought). Every decision is framed in a stark, bipolar world reference: If x is Islamic, then it's good (or at least acceptable); otherwise it must be destroyed.

The sword I swing now at the Muhammedan : ''Blessèd are the peace makers''. . Put your books on the table, and do not try to stifle free speech. You are on notice.

Ibn Warraq mentions Edward Said. From the little I have read of Said, I find his work a not-so-subtle attack on the intellectual curiosity that made the West great. As for Sir Walter Scott, I can't say that his romanticism appeals to me all that much, and I wonder how much he might have actually known about the Middle East.

'Blessed are the Meak They SHALL Inherite the earth", under Muhammadism it's seems impossible, but 'God Is NOT A Man that HE should Lie'.

Dear Robert Spencer

Did Muhammad Exist???
In 628 CE, a delegation from St. Catherine's Monastery came to Prophet Muhammad and request his protection.

St.Catherine's Monastery is located the foot of Mt. Sinai
and is the world's oldest monastery...

That was a charter of rights and treaty was given to all
Christian, near and far...

any comment on these matter, Mr Spencer....

Fullofflies wrote:

Dear Robert Spencer

Did Muhammad Exist???
In 628 CE, a delegation from St. Catherine's Monastery came to Prophet Muhammad and request his protection.

St.Catherine's Monastery is located the foot of Mt. Sinai
and is the world's oldest monastery...

That was a charter of rights and treaty was given to all
Christian, near and far...
.................................

I realize your question was to Robert Spencer, FoF, but I can answer it.

The document you refer to is a well-known forgery, written well after the fact by desperate Christians hoping to stave off Muslim aggression with a supposed pact with the "Prophet" himself.

Here's the text:

This is a message from, "Muhammad ibn Abdullah", as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.

Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.

No compulsion is to be on them.

Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.

No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses.

Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.

No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.
The Muslims are to fight for them.

If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.

Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.

No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).
...

I believe it is entirely clear what was going on here: Muslims were turning monks out of their monasteries, looting and destroying churches and monasteries, and kidnapping and forcibly "marrying" Christian women.

The desperate monks hoped that if they could get Muslims to believe they had received this letter right from the "Prophet" that they would not be molested.

St. Catherine's Monastery has this to say about their letter:

“According to the tradition preserved at Sinai, Mohammed both knew and visited the monastery and the Sinai fathers. The Koran makes mention of the Sinai holy sites. In the second year of the Hegira, corresponding to AD 626, a delegation from Sinai requested a letter of protection from Mohammed. This was granted, and authorized by him when he placed his hand upon the document. In AD 1517, Sultan Selim I confirmed the monastery’s prerogatives, but took the original letter of protection for safekeeping to the royal treasury in Constantinople. At the same time, he gave the monastery certified copies of this document, each depicting the hand print of Mohammed in token of his having touched the original.”

Note that this is another case where the supposed original no longer survives. In addition, these details make no sense—Muhammed and the Muslims were reportedly holed up in Medina for their first couple of years there. Muhammed would *not* have been traveling all the way to Sinai during this period.

In addition, even if he had, he would have had absolutely no influence on the local Arabs during this period—this was *before* his conquests. This also means that there were no Muslims in Sinai persecuting monks and other Christians in Islam's name, because none of the local Arabs had become Muslim yet—or, likely, even have heard of Islam even if we accept the historical timeline presented in the texts of Islam.

But there is no doubt that Muslims were persecuting and oppressing the Christians in Egypt at a later date—hence this fraud.

here's a facsimile of the letter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Patent_of_Mohammed.jpg

Please note, the illumination *uses perspective*. It is unlikely that any letter by the image-hating "Prophet" would be illuminated, and this sort of use of perspective simply did not exist anywhere during the 7th century.

So—why illustrate it at all? Firstly, I imagine the monks felt that an actual image of the monastery would make if clear that it referred to their locale, and no other. Secondly, the monks would likely have been ignorant of 7th-century Arabian norms.

In any case, this offers no contemporary proof of the "Prophet's" existence.

As far as Sir Walter Scott goes, I believe he just wanted to give the crusaders a chivalrous, worthy foe for the sake of the narrative. He simply didn't find it interesting or sufficiently tragic for his crusaders to face an enemy who were nothing but a bunch of violent barbarians.

In any case, he wasn't writing history, but fiction.

Hi G.I, I just noticed your reply to full of flies. I had been working along the same lines as you but went out for supper and didn't post my reply because it hadn't been checked for spelling, grammar and working links.

I have decided to post my reply as a comment to yours seeing as you posted first. Much of what I say parallels yours but there are some additional thoughts. I hope you don't consider this poaching on your territory.

*****

Hi fullofflies, the document that you reference is an obvious fraud probably of the same ilk as "The Donation of Constantine."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine

It's pretty damn convenient, that the monastery no longer possesses the original document but somehow possesses a copy of it. It is pretty damn convenient that the original document was taken from the monastery in 1517 by soldiers of the Ottoman Caliph Selim who just happened to make the monastery a copy, complete with Muhammad's hand prints!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achtiname_of_Muhammad

Hmmm, is this event documented in Muhammad's first biography? You would think that having a foreign delegation coming to speak to Muhammad and asking for his protection would have created quite the stir in Arabia. This might have been looked at in the same way as Christians view the coming of the wise men at the birth of Jesus.

As far as I've been able to determine the document isn't referenced by any Muslim source from the 7th century.

Also, it's strange that the delegation came to Muhammad during a time when he hadn't consolidated his position in the Arabian peninsula and there was no indication that he or his army would leave the peninsula. Remarkably prescient of those monks don't you think?

It also strange that Christians get it into their heads to go to Arabia and ask for his protection rather than trying to arrange for protection from the Roman Empire. Prior to the Muslims coming out of Arabia and conquering the 'Middle East', the Arabs were pretty much an unknown quantity. Rome and Persia were the super powers at that time and it would have been to these two empires that the monks would have sought protection.

Is the original Achtiname on display somewhere in Istanbul? It should be because tradition says that the original was removed from the Monastery around 1517 by the army of the Ottoman Sultan Selim.

Obviously, this document would have been of great historical and religious value being the first 'International' treaty signed by the Prophet. The presence of Muhammad's hand prints would have further enhanced its value.

There are all sorts of 'Muhammad Relics' on display in Istanbul or so some claim.

His beard, his tooth, his foot print, his battle standard, his holy mantle, and his sacred seal are on display but no hand print, no original copy of the Achtiname. Speaking of which, you would think that Muhammad would have signed the document with his holy seal rather than with his hand print. That was certainly the standard in Roman times when authorizing treaties, covenants and the like.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relics_of_Muhammad

Below is a link to an article that contains an English translation of part of the Achtiname:

http://www.iviews.com/Articles/articles.asp?ref=IC0609-3110

I find it interesting in the opening of the agreement that Muhammad refers to himself as ibn Abdullah. His father's name is Slave of Allah but Allah was an abandoned god until Mohammad 'resurrected' him supposedly when he was 40. You might think that in a polytheistic society Muhammad might have wondered why his father's name was Abdullah (slave of the one true god). I don't recall ever reading about such a curiosity on Muhammad's part. There is a good reason for this: he never existed. He was manufactured in a later period of history and those who invented him where not too careful in their invention. They didn't catch on that naming Muhammad's father Abdullah would create an anachronism.

Another indication of a direct fraud is the use of the term Muslim in the Achtiname. This is like having a coin with a date of 100 BC stamped on it. As Mr. Spencer has pointed out, such terms were never used until long after the Arabic invasion of Egypt. This document somehow uses that term before the Arabic armies move out of Arabia.

Also, if I read the document correctly, its provisions apply to all Christians from 628 onwards for all time.

Yet we get this information on what happened when the Arabs started their conquest outside of Arabia:

A TRAIL OF DESTRUCTION
Over 3200 churches were destroyed or converted into mosques during the first century of Islamic Jihad alone. During the Muslim invasion of Syria in AD 634 thousands of Christians were massacred. As Mesopotamia was conquered between AD 635 and 643 many churches and monasteries were ransacked, and ministers and Christians slain. In the conquest of Egypt AD 640 and 641, the towns of Behnesa, Fayum, Nikiu and Aboit were all put to the sword. When the Muslims invaded Cyprus, they looted and pillaged homes and churches and massacred much of the population. In North Africa, when Tripoli was captured in AD 643, all the Jews and Christians were forced to hand their women and children over as slaves. When Carthage was captured, it was burned to the ground and most of its inhabitants slaughtered.

http://www.frontline.org.za/news/end_of_islam.htm


A strange thing to have happened considering Muhammad's Achtiname should have provided the Christians with total protection from Islamic raiders forever. Are there any stories of Christians of this period invoking such protection?

Stranger still, why would the Covenant of Umar have been necessary? Wouldn't it have been ultra vires considering that the Achtiname was signed by Muhammad himself and must therefore have represented the will of Allah?

It's strange that the Achtiname doesn't talk about jizya considering Allah mandated it in Qur'an 9:29. Maybe Muhammad was forgetful, or more likely whoever forged this document was unaware of the jizya requirement.

I think it is pretty obvious that the document is junk of the same ilk as the Donation of Constantine.

If you have any more information on this document I would be interested in reading it because I can find no historical reference to it until around 1500.

Do you have any evidence that a Pope in Rome or a Patriarch of Constantinople ever referenced this document? I suspect no such reference exists until long after Muhammad's death.

PETER SHEARER wrote:

I have decided to post my reply as a comment to yours seeing as you posted first. Much of what I say parallels yours but there are some additional thoughts. I hope you don't consider this poaching on your territory.
.........................................

*Of course not*, Peter. I always look forward to reading your comments, and I'm not so petty, and I hardly consider any of these issues to be somehow "my turf", in any case.

More:

Is the original Achtiname on display somewhere in Istanbul? It should be because tradition says that the original was removed from the Monastery around 1517 by the army of the Ottoman Sultan Selim.
.........................................

Good point, Peter—and one I didn't think to make. Of course, the only "copies" extant are at the monastery itself.

While doing some additional research, I ran across this *clearly identical* document, which is supposedly the "the Najran Treaty" between the "Prophet" Muhammad and the Christians of Najran on the Arabian peninsula:

"This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.

"No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.

"No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them.

"If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.

"Their Churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation (of Muslims) is to disobey this covenant till the Last Day (end of the world)."
...

Of course, that "till the Last Day" thing didn't prevent the Christians from being expelled from the Arabian peninsula by Muslims shortly thereafter.

The only reference for the document's existence in the article on Wikipedia is that it appeared in a 2010 book, "Us versus Them and Beyond" by one Maryam Sakeenah.

Since Maryam Sakeenah is a notorious Jihad apologist and Taqiyya artist, it may be that she just "repurposed" this fraud for her own uses.

"Christian community of Najran"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_community_of_Najran#Najran_pact

Hi G.I. thanx for your reply, and for not fining me for poaching. Above all, thanx for the link. That led me a merry chase due to the reference to the 'Book of the Himyarites' of which I'd never heard.

I thought you might be interested in the 'stuff' I found out along the way.

Regarding the 'Book' itself only fragments of it remain so using it as a source for anything is an iffy enterprise. Also, the 'Book is dated to around 932 long after the Himyarite kingdom was destroyed so whatever remains in the fragmenst is even more suspect as a resource (although not necessarily wrong).

The following link provided the dating. The article might be of interest to you due to its discussion of the history of the early Christian Church. The third last sentence of the article has to be the most politically correct statement I've ever read on Islam. The last sentence has to be the best unintended double entendre I've ever come across.

http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1553&C=1362

Next, in trying to trace down the elusive Book of the Himyarites, I came across this link

http://ia700304.us.archive.org/31/items/pts_theethiopianchurch_1687_3/pts_theethiopianchurch_1687_3.pdf

This link is to a pdf version of a book titled THE ETHIOPIAN CHURCH: HISTORICAL NOTES ON THE CHURCH OF ABYSSINIA

The book was written in 1936 and appears to be unavailable. The pdf is actually a microfilm version stored in the Princeton Library (Theological Seminary)

If there is anything that interests you in this book, you should be able to save the pdf to your PC by using your Internet Browser's save feature.

Another link I found which might be of interest to you is a pdf version of a book published in 1937 titled: THE NESTORIAN CHURCHES: A CONCISE HISTORY OF NESTORIAN CHRISTIANITY IN ASIA FROM THE PERSIAN SCHISM TO THE MODERN ASSYRIANS. It too is a microfilm of the original. It too can be saved to your PC if you find it useful. You might find it so as it has a fair amount of information on Christians in pre-Islamic Arabia as well as a fair amount about all early Christian history.

http://ia600304.us.archive.org/6/items/MN41565ucmf_1/MN41565ucmf_1.pdf

In all the research I did I never found anything containing the text of the 'Book of the Himyarites'. It is curious how so much can be said about what the book proves when the text of the book is so hard to find.

I did find something else in which you might be interested (it certainly interested me). It is an article written by Vassilios Christides titled THE HIMYARITE-ETHIOPIAN WAR AND THE ETHIOPIAN OCCUPATION OF SOUTH ARABIA IN THE ACTS OF GREGENTIUS (ca. 530 A.D.). The article was published in Annales d'Ethiopie in 1972.

This article is fascinating because it provides quite a bit of information on how the pre-Islamic Arabs and Christians behaved in this region. It is definitely worth a read.

One of the themes that keeps coming up in Christides article is forced conversion. Apparently this was the standard 'modus operandi' for pagan armies in the region at this time.

As Christides says:

While the Acts of Gregentius do not include these pagan-inspired episodes, they present the newly converted Christians as retaining much of their former pagan attitude. The forced conversion of others at swordpoint demonstrates the shallowness of the Christians' own conversion. Characteristic of this attitude of thinking is the injunction issued jointly by Abraha, king of the Himyarites, and Archbishop Gregentius after the departure of the Ethiopias which declared that unless all the inhabitants abandoned their false religion and accepted Christian baptism, they would be decapitated.

This information may be related to what we see going on in Egypt nowadays where Christians are kidnapped and force do convert. This Arabic 'custom' may have been passed on to other countries such as Pakistan. That is to say, the pre-Islamic predilection for forcing conversions may trump the Qur'an which state that there must be no compulsion in religion (2:256).

You may recall our discussion regarding the Nicholai Sennels article on the mindset of Muslim males in prison. I had asked Nicholai whether he had ever looked into the possibility of an underlying Warrior Honour Code philosophy in that mindset. This would be something that long pre-dated Islam itself.

What Christides is talking about is that pre-Islamic Honour Code mentality. If a peaceful religion like Christianity can't supplant that mentality, then Islam with its built-in concepts of violence and supremacism couln't do so either.

Christides next states:"One further example of the mingling of paganism and Christianity in the Acts of Gregentius can be found in Archbishop Gregentius'
suggestion to King Abraha : "After we try to persuade them [the Jews], if they still do not accept baptism, then proceed agains them as your reign in Christ bids you to do (i.e. slay them)".

This passage has me wondering if the story of Muhammad's massacre of the Banu Qurayza is based on this story. It feels possible especially if Muhammad didn't exist as Robert has shown. If the Muhammad myth was created long after the Arabs left the Arabian peninsula, then a folk memory of what happened to the Himyarites may have been spun around the Muhammad 'hero'.

Anyway, nice talkin' to yah as usual G.I. I hope there was something of interest to you in the soap boxing above. Take care and have a nice day.

PETER SHEARER WROTE:

The third last sentence of the article has to be the most politically correct statement I've ever read on Islam. The last sentence has to be the best unintended double entendre I've ever come across.
....................................

You aren't kidding on either count, Peter:

"Islam which originated in Arabia in the seventh century was a great missionary religion. Islam slowly began to penetrate into central Asia and by the 13th century, Islam became the predominant faith among the Turks in central Asia. Yet numerous bodies of the Nestorian Christians were still scattered over all Central Asia."

Even though it's pretty dark humor, that last *is* grimly hilarious.

Anyway, this is a lot to digest. Thank you so much for all your research, though.

And speaking of research, after reading this series by Ibn Warraq, I now want to go back and read Scott's work, something I haven't done for years now.

Be well, and I'll look forward to your posts.

Thanx G.I. You too. Talk to yah soon.

Leave a comment

NOTE: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.







Not Peace But A Sword by Robert SpencerDid Muhammad Exist? The Muslim Brotherhood in America, by Robert SpencerIslamophobia: Thoughtcrime of the Totalitarian FutureMuslim Persecution of Christians, by Robert Spencer Obama and IslamThe Ground Zero Mosque: Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks
The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran


Stealth Jihad


The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam


The Truth About Muhammad


What they’re saying about Robert Spencer
“My comrade-in-arms, my pal, my buddy.”
Oriana Fallaci

“Robert Spencer incarnates intellectual courage when, all over the world, governments, intellectuals, churches, universities and media crawl under a hegemonic Universal Caliphate’s New Order. His achievement in the battle for the survival of free speech and dignity of man will remain as a fundamental monument to the love of, and the self-sacrifice for, liberty.”
Bat Ye’or

“Robert Spencer is indefatigable. He is keeping up the good fight long after many have already given up. I do not know what we would do without him. I appreciate all the intelligence and courage it takes to keep going despite the appeasement of the West.”
Ibn Warraq

“America's most informed, fearless, and compelling voice on modern jihadism.”
Andrew C. McCarthy, Senior Fellow at National Review Institute

“Robert Spencer is the leading voice of scholarship and reason in a world gone mad. If the West is to be saved, we will owe Robert Spencer an incalculable debt.”
Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs

"The consummate Islam critic and expert." — Bruce Bawer

“Over the years, we have become friends, and I have received his assistance on several pieces of legislation I proposed.”
Former Congressman Tom Tancredo

“Few people are capable of applying scholarship, analytical reasoning, and objectivity to their topic -- while simultaneously being readable and witty -- as can Robert Spencer.”
Raymond Ibrahim

“A national treasure...The acclaimed scholar of Islam.”
Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy

“I am indeed honored to call him my friend.”
Brad Thor, novelist

“A top American analyst of Islam....A serious scholar...I learn from him.”
Daniel Pipes

“A brilliant scholar and writer.”
Douglas Murray

"One of my best teachers."
Ashraf Ramelah, Voice of the Copts

“Thank God there’s at least one man with balls left in the West.”
Kathy Shaidle, Five Feet of Fury

“I read people like [Mark Steyn] and Bob Spencer and the rest of them, and I say, ‘Boortz, you’re pretending you’re an author. These people really are. They really write some entertaining, some standup stuff.’”
Neal Boortz

“Robert Spencer is the Stephen King of Jihad.”
Chris Gaubatz, Muslim Mafia

“Armed with facts and fearlessness, Spencer stands up for Western civilization.”
Michelle Malkin

“Widely read in conservative foreign policy circles.”
New York Times

“Widely read in many quarters in Washington.”
Washington Post

“A canny operative who likely has the inside track on the State Department’s Middle East affairs desk should the tea party win the White House.”
New York Magazine

“A hero of the American right.”
Karen Armstrong

"The leading anti-Islamic intellectual in the United States....The go-to Islam expert for the right wing."
Salon Magazine

“Robert Spencer is an Edward Said turned upside down.”
Stephen Suleyman Schwartz

“One of the nation's most notorious Islamophobes.”
Hamas-linked CAIR

"Geller and Spencer are probably the most important propagandizing Islamophobes in the world. These people's voices speak very loudly — not just here in the United States but overseas."
Heidi Beirach, Southern Poverty Law Center

“Satanic ignoramus.”
Khaleel Mohammed

“The Likud anti-Christ.”
Dar al-Hayat newspaper (Saudi Arabia)

“Zionist Crusader, missionary of hate, counter-Islam consultant.”
Al-Qaeda’s Adam Gadahn, “Azzam the American”



Follow me on Twitter
facebook islam
RSS feed

Monthly Archives



Donate
Jihad Watch is a 501 (c) 3 organization. Donations are tax-deductible.


Robert Spencer debates on The Quran Teaches WarVideo: Robert Spencer on CPAC Breitbart News
SIOAFreedom Defense InitiativeJihad Watch VideosAmerican Freedom Law Center
Note: Listing here does not imply endorsement of every view expressed at every linked site.

» ACT for America
» Always on Watch
» American Center for Democracy
» American Coptic Association
» American Council for Kosovo
» American Freedom Alliance
» American Freedom Law Center
» American Islamic Forum for Democracy
» American Sheepdogs
» American Thinker
» Americans Against Hate
» Americans for Legal Immigration
» Amerisrael
» Amillennialist Contra Mundum
» Annaqed
» A New Dark Age Is Dawning
» Answering Islam
» Answering Muslims
» Anti-CAIR
» Apostates of Islam
» Aramaic Broadcasting Network (ABN)
» Armies of Liberation
» Assyrian International News Agency
» Atlas Shrugs
» Atour — The State of Assyria
» Australian Islamist Monitor
» Biafra Nation
» Blazing Cat Fur
» Bosch Fawstin
» Brad Thor
» Brussels Journal
» CAIR Watch
» Campus Watch
» Caroline Glick
» Christians Under Attack
» Citizen Warrior
» Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights
» Conservative Nation News
» Copts.com
» Creeping Sharia
» Daniel Pipes
» David Horowitz Freedom Center
» The David Project
» David Thompson
» David Yerushalmi Law
» D. C. Watson
» Dearborn Underground
» DEBKAfile
» Dhimmitude.org
» Dry Bones
» Ellis Washington Report
» Europe News
» Eye On Islam
» Ezra Levant
» Faith Freedom International
» Father Zakaria
» Federale
» Five Feet of Fury
» Foundation for Democracy in Iran
» Free Congress Foundation
» The Free Copts
» Freedom Defense Initiative
» FrontPage Magazine.com
» Geert Wilders
» Genocide1915.info
» Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center
» History of Jihad
» Hizb ut-Tahrir Watch
» Honest Reporting
» Honor Killings
» Human Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities
» India Defence
» Infidel Blogger’s Alliance
» Infidels Are Cool
» The Intelligence Summit
» International Analyst Network
» International Free Press Society
» Internet Haganah
» The Investigative Project on Terrorism
» IOwnTheWorld.com
» IranPressNews
» Iran va Jahan
» Islam Review
» Islam Speaks
» Islam Versus Europe
» Islam Watch
» Islamic Terrorism in India
» Islamist Watch — Middle East Forum
» Israel Matzav
» JihadOnBuddhists.org
» Kejda Gjermani
» KRSI: Radio Sedaye Iran
» Liberated
» Logan's Warning
» Looking At the Left
» Mahdi Watch
» Mapping Sharia
» Mark Steyn
» Martin Kramer
» MEMRI TV
» Middle East Facts
» Middle East Quarterly
» Middle-East-Info.org
» Middle East Media Research Institute
» Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA)
» Militant Islam Monitor
» Morning Star
» Muhammad Tube
» The Muslim Issue
» Muslim World Today
» Myths and Facts
» National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition
» NewsReal Blog
» No Mosques At Ground Zero
» Nonie Darwish
» Northeast Intelligence Network
» Occidental Jihadist
» One Jerusalem
» Open Speech
» Operation Give
» Operation Gratitude
» Organiser
» Orwellian Culture
» Palestinian Media Watch
» PamelaGeller.com
» Panun Kashmir
» Pedestrian Infidel
» The People's Cube
» The People of the Book
» Persecution Project
» Political Islam
» Politically Incorrect
» Politiskt Inkorrekt
» Q Society of Australia
» Radio Farda
» Radio Jihad
» RAWA: Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
» Raymond Ibrahim
» Red Alerts
» Refugee Resettlement Watch
» Religion of Peace
» Republican Riot
» Reuters Middle East Watch
» The “Reverend” Jim Sutter
» SANE: Society of Americans for National Existence
» The Second Draft
» Shire Network News
» SITE Intelligence Group
» Small Wars Journal
» Smoke-Filled World
» The Snooper Report
» Snow Report Blog
» StandWithUs
» Steve Lackner
» The Stiletto Blog
» STOP! Honour Killings
» Sultan Knish
» Tell the Children the Truth
» Terrorism Awareness Project
» Theodore’s World
» Tom Gross Media
» Translating Jihad
» Una via per Oriana
» Undaunted
» United States Central Command
» Urban Infidel
» Walid Shoebat
» Winds of Jihad
» Women Against Shariah
» World Council for the Cedars Revolution
» Yid With Lid
» Z Street
» Zilla of the Resistance
» Zionist Conspiracy
Crucified Again by Raymond IbrahimDavid LittmanOriana Fallaci Thousands of Deadly Terror Attacks Since 9/11The incredible Reza Aslan automated insult generator! iGoogle Gadget
Site Meter