Rewriting history to whitewash all Muslim misdeeds is a big business, and an important component of the effort to Islamize the West. The jihad warrior Saladin has accordingly been elevated to near-Gandhi status, despite the trail of blood he left in his wake — and as Egyptian scholar Youssef Zeidan has discovered, one must not question such canonizations.
In our age Saladin has become the prototype of the tolerant, magnanimous Muslim warrior, historical proof of the nobility of Islam and even of its superiority to wicked, Western, colonialist Christianity. In The Crusades Through Arab Eyes, Amin Maalouf portrays the Crusaders as little more than savages, even gorging themselves on the flesh of those they have murdered. But Saladin! “He was always affable with visitors, insisting that they stay to eat, treating them with full honours, even if they were infidels, and satisfying all their requests. He could not bear to let someone who had come to him depart disappointed, and there were those who did not hesitate to take advantage of this quality. One day, during a truce with the Franj [Franks], the ‘Brins,’ lord of Antioch, arrived unexpectedly at Saladin’s tent and asked him to return a district that the sultan had taken four years earlier. And he agreed!”
In one sense it’s true: Saladin set out to conquer Jerusalem in 1187 because Crusaders under the command of Reynald of Chatillon were taking a page from Muhammad’s book and raiding caravans — in this case, Muslim caravans. The Christian rulers of Jerusalem ordered Reynald to stop because they knew that his actions endangered the very survival of their Kingdom. Yet he persisted; finally, Saladin, who had been looking for a reason to go to war with the Christians, found one in Reynald’s raids.
A lot is made of the fact that when Saladin recaptured Jerusalem for the Muslims in October 1187, he treated the Christians with magnanimity — in sharp contrast to the behavior of the Crusaders in 1099. However, the real Saladin was not the proto-multiculturalist and early version of Nelson Mandela that he is made out to be today. When his forces decisively defeated the Crusaders at Hattin on July 4, 1187, he ordered the mass execution of his Christian opponents. According to his secretary, Imad ed-Din, Saladin “ordered that they should be beheaded [in accordance with Qur’an 47:4, “When you meet the unbelievers, strike their necks”], choosing to have them dead rather than in prison. With him was a whole band of scholars and Sufis and a certain number of devout men and ascetics; each begged to be allowed to kill one of them, and drew his sword and rolled back his sleeve. Saladin, his face joyful, was sitting on his dais; the unbelievers showed black despair.”
Also, when Saladin and his men entered Jerusalem later that year, their magnanimity was actually pragmatism. He had initially planned to put to death all the Christians in the city. However, when the Christian commander inside Jerusalem, Balian of Ibelin, threatened in turn to destroy the city and kill all the Muslims there before Saladin could get inside, Saladin relented — although once inside the city he did enslave many of the Christians who could not afford to buy their way out. Despicable indeed.
“Egypt scholar in hot water for calling Muslim leader Saladin ‘despicable,’” Al Arabiya, May 14, 2017:
Notorious Egyptian scholar Youssef Zeidan has stirred another controversy by going against mainstream Islamic history, this time by calling the famed Muslim military leader Saladin “one of the most despicable figures in human history.”
Salahuddin Ayyubi (or Saladin) is known as one of the most esteemed Muslim figures of the medieval Islamic world, most importantly for reclaiming Jerusalem from the Crusaders during the 12th Century.
But recent statements on Saladin by Egyptian philosopher Zedian, an expert on Arabic and Islamic studies, have ignited a heated debate on social media and in Egyptian newspapers.
The storm broke out when Zeidan replied to a question on a night talk show about older Egyptian films on Islamic history.
He claimed that such films included “historic fallacies” about Islam.
In comments on one of these films, Zedian said the way Saladin was portrayed in current Islamic history did not reflect “his brutality against the Fatamids,” the founders of the Shia Islamic Caliphate that ruled Egypt and Syria back then….
“Salahuddin is one of the most despicable figures in human history,” Zeidan told interviewer Amr Adeeb. “He committed crimes against the Fatimids.”…
Jaladhi says
Well this scholar should have started with Mo and then gone to describe Saladin.and he would have found lot of similar traits!!
marina says
Agreed. Mo will top the list of the most despicable figures of human history.
Kay says
Kudos to the brave historian for speaking the truth.
DRHazard says
Muslim insecurity about the validity of their faith is widespread. To help ease the burden entire categories of false information have been built up to support the “truth” in the Quran and the stories about Muhammad. Under the category of science naive, uneducated or willfully ignorant Muslims find evidence that Allah spoke of scientific facts long before they were discovered by the non-Muslim world. Then we have the Muslims who freely reinterpret the Quran and other scriptures to suit their “image” of what they want Islam to be. But then we get to rewriting Muslim history, which can only be done from a state of total denial, and never by an actual historian. The general rule is to take the facts and then claim the opposite to be true. So a devout Muslim must somehow turn “spread by the sword” to “defended by the sword”. How is this done? Easy, make up new “facts”, disregard or reconstruct any conflicting scriptures, then manufacture a false narrative around these concoctions that supports the image of Islam the believer wants the world (and usually themselves) to see. From that point all you have to do is upload your lies to the internet, resting assured that no Muslim will ever question your claims. If it fills some gap where doubt might creep in, then your fabrication will have lasting value.
Muslims have been in the fake news business for a long time.
marina says
Everything related to Islam has to be pretty and sweet in a typical muslim mind. Critical thinking is absent. Muslims never grow up. Their mind is so immature that they can’t handle anything said in a negative way no matter how much negativity it deserves.
lebel says
“Crusaders under the command of Reynald of Chatillon were taking a page from Muhammad’s book and raiding caravans — in this case, Muslim caravans”
This is a bit rich even for jihadwatch. Let me guess, when the crusaders were murdering jews they were also taking a page from Muhammad’s book? Its all the Muslim’s fault, the crusaders were good guys but the Muslims made them bad.
gravenimage says
More apologia from lebel. Is anyone surprised?
Once he said–laughably–that he was here to oppose Jihad. And yet, he has never posted anything here that did not whitewash Islam or cast aspersions on anyone taking a stand against Jihad and Shar’ah.
lebel says
Of course I oppose extremism such as IS or AQ but that does mean that I should support blatant lies about Islam.
Step outside your comfort zone (Islam is ALL evil ALL the time) and try to question your own assumptions, try to see through your own biases (such as the confirmation bias)
Aardvark says
Yes, Islam IS all evil, all of the time. This is not my ‘comfort zone’, it is my considered opinion of Islam having looked at the life of the founder of Islam, the history of Islam over the past 1400 years, the teachings of Islam, and the behaviour of mohammedans today. They are thoroughly despicable, nasty, and evil.
Matthieu Baudin says
Stick with this Website Lebel, it’s one of the safest places to dissent and to get a fair hearing. If you feel that some of the European ancestors have been sugarcoated then go ahead and say it. You can expect to get a little flak if you get stuck on the moral equivalence theme as it’s been done to death as a stratagem to neutralise judgements; but don’t worry, it’s really good that you’re taking the time to read what others are saying in Jihad Watch and nice that you’re putting in the effort to make a contribution of your own.
lbmiller247517 says
Guerilla warfare predated Islam and the Crusades, so maybe Mr. Spencer’s language was a little loose. But, if you’ve ever read Mr. Spencer’s books, he admits that atrocities were committed on both sides of the Crusades. Furthermore, Western rules of warfare have evolved since the 7th century, but Islam views the 7th century as the glorious past. And Islamic terrorists still use 7th century tactics and “rules” of warfare. Finally, the Crusades were a response to Muslim aggression and offensive military campaigns against European countries.
I would ask, what else about the post do you not agree with?
lebel says
I think Mr. Spencer is doing a kind of reverse whitewashing of Islamic history so that it becomes ALL bad. Nothing reddemable whatsoever. Its simple but effective and its what some in the extreme left have done to the west.
Gbox says
The hard fact remains that Islam made the Crusades inevitable by their invasions and occupations, and that after 470 years of occupation it is easy to see that the people of Andalusia would look at all non-Christians with suspicion. And so the Jews were expelled, but also for the simple reason that it was easier than removing the Muslims, and the fact that many Jews had cooperated and aided the first Muslim invaders, in the belief that their lives would be easier.
Rob says
“many Jews had cooperated and aided the first Muslim invaders”
What about the Rhineland massacres then where no Muslims set foot? Lebel is right. People like you go to the opposite end of the apologist spectrum.
carol says
Are you suggesting Mohammed DIDN”T raid caravans?
Tom says
Sure, let’s debate the Crusades until we are blue in the face. The question at hand is “When are the current leaders of Christianity going to call a modern Jihad to establish a Christian state in the Middle East?”
“Antioch” should stretch from the the northern border of Israel to the south western border of Turkey, encompassing all of Lebanon and western Syria, 50 km in from the Med.
This is something Russia and the Western alliance can work together on. The Muslim genocide against Christians will continue until this gets done.
Christopher471 says
Surely the Christian territory should include Egypt, Syria and Lebanon since they were all Christian lands until invaded by the Muslims although they did not call themselves Muslims till 100 years later.
rich mills says
there is no need to retake christian territory, just destroy islam worldwide while we still have nuclear monopoly. this having deported muslim from the west and other places. these should not be let back in. let them rot and give the more punishment where necessary
Tom says
I meant “Modern Crusade”. Sorry.
mortimer says
Genuine, uncorrupted scholars Youssef Zeidan are concerned about valid research, facts, accuracies and sustainable conclusions based on years of carefully sifting the details until those conclusions become certain and inevitable.
Propaganda, foregone conclusions, and guesswork are NOT what modern historiography is about! Far from it. A modern historian is not a propagandist, but a clinician who avoids jumping to conclusions and who scrupulously looks for anomalies that test previous, hasty conclusions.
Eventually, Arab universities will be examining Mohammed and finding the anomalies in the early stories and the textual problems in the sources. At that point, the Arab universities will take the work of the ‘Revisionist School’ of early Islam and take it to the next level. That will be pretty much the end of the road for Islam.
mortimer says
Quote about Saladin: “With him was a whole band of scholars and Sufis and a certain number of devout men and ascetics; each begged to be allowed to kill one of them, and drew his sword and rolled back his sleeve. Saladin, his face joyful, was sitting on his dais; the unbelievers showed black despair.”
The Sufis were eager for the treat of murdering a man in cold blood. Not so ‘peaceful’, were they?
Saladin sounds just like Saddam Hussein or Moammar Khaddafi.
overman says
mortimer – if this is true [it sounds dubious to me] then these would have been ‘lslamized sufis not True sufis. No true sufi would beg to kill someone. There are many sects in Sufism and the one’s around saladin would have been frauds. Sufism goes back way beyond lslam and like most religious groups, would have undergone forced conversion, and if indeed they did beg to kill christians, it wouldn’t have been voluntary IMO.
isabella van der westhuizen says
I mean orlando Bloom said Saladin was good chap in that movie about how terrible the Crusaders were
Surely Hollywood would be truthful
overman says
Yes isabella, Saladin was a saint in that movie LOL – and he was so magnanimous that he let all the christians go home in the end.
Pal says
Al-Aziz Uthman, Sultan of Egypt, and son of Saladin, tried to destroy the Pyramids in 1196. The Muslim fanatic started by attacking the Pyramid of Menkaure which he mutilated but did not manage to demolish. He eventually gave up because the task was too big.
Monty says
George Orwell saw this coming. The central character of 1984 was employed to rewrite history. While there is not an official government department dedicated to this function, countless individuals see it necessary to change the facts to suit their own opinions. Since very few people know history, even fewer care and most people will believe anything, it is highly effective. I was taught at school to investigate for myself. There were always different aspects to examine. Not any more. Anyone who disagrees with the latest PC nonsense is abused, harassed or shouted down. So we reap what we sow. “History” becomes whatever you want it to be.
Stan Lee says
Saladin, supposedly the most honored and heroic leader of the Muslims in history, would today, if he was alive to again lead fighting men, lead the Kurds. He was a Kurd and most likely would be fighting for a free Kurdistan. Kurdistan has been deprived of having its own homeland by governments of Turkey, Iraq, and Iran.
To the U.S. troops in the Mid-East as Special Ops and cadre for training Muslim fighters in their fight against ISIS, the Kurdish fighters are the ones with the most fighting spirit and willingness to be trained properly, according to U.S. military operating there.