Yes, the author of this article is apparently really named Rebecca Onion, but this is not The Onion, this is that renowned Leftist comedy publication, Slate. In this entire interview, Onion and interviewee Alan Mikhail both behave as if Columbus set out for the New World because of what Mikhail calls “anti-Muslim sentiment,” but both give the impression that this sentiment was a baseless prejudice, “an ideological extension the Crusades.” Mikhail discusses the fall of Constantinople (in a section not excerpted below) and the fact that “the Ottomans, or so they thought, were poised to invade.”
“Or so they thought”? In fact, the Ottomans did invade. The History of Jihad shows that after they conquered Constantinople, the Ottomans made more or less continual war against Europe, and conquered and occupied large portions of Eastern and Southern Europe for hundreds of years. Mikhail and Onion, however, give the impression that the Europeans’ fear of Islam was baseless — an irrational “Islamophobia” that right-thinking people must eschew. Nor does Mikhail mention that the Ottomans had closed European trade routes to India, which is why Columbus had the idea of sailing west to find new ones in the first place.
This article is yet another in the apparently endless series of articles marking the West’s cultural suicide. All of them are based on the assumption that the West has been uniquely violent, even genocidal, and hateful, while the (largely Islamic) East has been more sinned against than sinning, and encapsulates a wisdom and nobility that we have lost. And thus we are guilt-tripped into accepting mass Muslim migration into the West, without any attempt at assimilation, and a good deal more.
“Was Columbus’ Voyage to the ‘New World’ Driven by Islamophobia?,” by Rebecca Onion, Slate, October 12, 2020 (thanks to M.):
Tucked inside historian Alan Mikhail’s new biography of Sultan Selim, the ambitious early-16th-century ruler of the Ottoman Empire, is a riveting series of chapters about Christopher Columbus. Mikhail’s ambition in writing God’s Shadow: Sultan Selim, His Ottoman Empire, and the Making of the Modern World was to restore the place of the Ottoman Empire in the global history of the early modern period. To that end, the Columbus chapters make the argument that at its inception, European exploration of the New World can be understood as an ideological extension of the Crusades—a new effort to circumvent the ever-more-powerful Islamic presence in Europe.
Because this argument is somewhat hidden inside a big biography of an Ottoman ruler, it’s not been as controversial with traditionalists as the 1619 Project’s recasting of American history around slavery, but it’s got a similar power to make you look at a major historical happening in a completely new way. I asked Mikhail to explain how Columbus came to commit himself to combating Islam, how his feelings about Muslims affected his approach to the New World, and whether the Europeans of this time could rightly be called “Islamophobic.”…
These were ideas he absorbed when he was young, but he had personal experience encountering Muslims, too, before he set off on the voyage….
Famously, he went to a lot of people to try to get them to fund his voyages. And during that process, he did cite what he saw as the existential battle between Christendom and Islam as one of the reasons for his voyages.
And this worked with Isabella and Ferdinand in part because of the politics of European rulership. They controlled property in Italy, specifically Sicily, that the Ottomans, or so they thought, were poised to invade, at various points. And of course, there were still many Muslims in Spain after the conquest of Granada; the sovereigns saw those Muslims that remained as a potential fifth column—internal enemies, maybe allies to the Ottoman Empire, the Mamluks, or Muslim powers in North Africa.
They sort of felt like Islam was breathing down their necks.
There are a lot of examples of the ways Columbus and other explorers approached the Native people in the New World, primed to perceive them in the same way they thought of the Muslims they had encountered in Europe.
Yes, well, it depends on who you’re talking about; Columbus, until the day he died in 1506, thought he’d landed in Asia. So he thought all he needed to do was find the right path in, to the Grand Khan. But even much later, way beyond Columbus’ time, in the 1580s or something, when it was clear the Americas weren’t Asia, the Spanish authorities in what is today Peru reported rumors that Ottoman ships were off the West Coast of South America. There’s zero historical evidence so far that this was true—I mean, I’m open to change my mind if somebody finds evidence!—but what I’m interested in is this idea they still seemed to have that Islam is everywhere; Muslims are all around us.
Is it possible to use the word Islamophobia to describe the way Columbus, Isabella, Ferdinand, and other Christian Europeans felt at this time? I don’t know if that’s ahistorical. What was the motivation for their animus? Anxiety about territory? Religious fear?
I didn’t use the word Islamophobia in the book. That’s a very modern term; I would be hesitant to apply it to this period. Maybe something like “anti-Muslim sentiment,” which, to be fair, is clunkier.
It’s very tricky, the answer to this question. The idea is that there’s a thread of anti-Muslim sentiment from this period, and maybe even before, to today. In some ways you can draw a throughline. But I don’t want to buy into a story about some kind of eternal “clash of civilizations,” because there are plenty of examples of Christian Europeans and Muslims having quite positive interactions at the same time I’m talking about: the sharing of ideas, the exchange of goods, diplomatic relationships, fighting on the same side of wars against other enemies. And that’s part of the book, too—to point out that the Ottoman Empire has been part of “our history.”
Why do you think it was important to highlight this angle on Columbus’ story?
As I started writing this as an epic history, curious about the Western perspective on this, I thought, Why isn’t this motivation—this crusading motivation—part of the Columbus story? I mean, if you go back to Columbus and the Spanish sovereigns we are talking about, who wanted to deny and defeat Islam, they succeeded, in that the narratives about the New World do exclude Muslims. That’s part of the legacy….
Dude says
Yes, he and the Spanish royalty were all Islamophobes, after suffering under the crescent sword for so long.
Colombus set sail to prove that the Koran was wrong: that the earth does not end at the murky puddle where the sun disappears.
Vladimir says
Come on, everybody knows too that the Koran is right about the Earth being flat, lol…
gravenimage says
Some Muslims are *still* claiming that the earth is flat.
Vladimir says
Providentially, the New World was settled by Europeans and Christians mainly for 500 years, and societies grew up free of the shadow of Islam over them, and became so successful that twice the New World liberated the Old World in the past 100 years. Unfortunately society in the New World, the Americas, has forgotten and does not believe in the threat of Islam that they had been insulated from for so long, at a time when Islam is resurgent.
Tony Naim says
Vladimir, well said !
It was the hand of Providence guiding Christian European settlers to the Americas. Compelled by The fall of Constantinople in Muslim hands which caused an economic depression in Europe.
9/11 was a wake up call for America thanks to Scholars like Robert Spencer.
Vladimir says
Thank you, and very true +1
gravenimage says
Hear, hear!
Dave Barnard says
More of the Global Gaslighting. The Spanish exhibited real fear based on reality; not at all the definition of “phobia”. Those of us who only see the re-write of history will never understand.
Vladimir says
well said, the Spanish having just reconquered Grenada from the Muslims in 1492 AD, the year of Columbus’s first journey.
gravenimage says
Yes–and that the Spanish achieved such a feat as the discovery of the New World *the same year* they were able to throw off the Muslim yoke and free their energies from this retarding creed is *very* telling!
Hoi Polloi says
I would like the right to sue anyone who falsely diagnoses a phobia for practicing medicine without a license. Knowing, after a fine education received in the virtual classroom of one R. Spencer, just how violent an ideology we are facing is hardly equivalent to suffering from a mental illness.
FYI says
Meanwhile a statue of Abraham Lincoln was knocked down in Portland yesterday.
Hold up,wait a second,something ‘aint right here:surely Abraham Lincoln was against slavery?
Maybe the protestors thought:”looks like some old white guy….,twill do”
gravenimage says
Thanks, FYI. This is at least the second time that rioters have pulled down statues of Abraham Lincoln–the idea that this destruction of the man who freed the slaves has anything to do with the rights of Black people is obvious bs. This is about destroying the free West.
E T says
Hillary’s hero Saul Alinsky said “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy, look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty”. BLM is working with Antifa and the Muslim Brotherhood hoods to bring down America.
gravenimage says
Grimly true.
Brando says
Alain Mikhail,historian and his book ” God’s Shadow: Sultan Selim, His Ottoman Empire, and the Making of the Modern World”.
I wonder, if, as a historian,he KNOWS about THIS, regarding SPAIN:
FRANCISCO DE VITORIA ( 1483-1546)
1.He is the FATHER of INTERNATIONAL LAW and founder of the SCHOOL of SALAMANCA ( philosophical tradition,one of the sources of LIBERTARIANISM )
2.He was a Catholic priest and Way Ahead of His Time.
HIS IDEAS
1.Basing his ideas on the GOLDEN RULE or LAW of RECIPROCITY ( which he said was a NATURAL LAW ) he REJECTED the decision of Pope Alexander VI in 1493 that SPAIN and PORTUGAL had the Right to Conquer New Territories to be Discovered ( due to COLUMBUS’ 1492 trip )
2.He Rejected COLONIALISM and IMPERIALISM
REGARDING WAR
Vitoria accepted the JUST WAR concept of AUGUSTINE but under the following conditions:
1.A war should NOT be conducted for TERRITORIAL EXTENSION
2.A war is the LAST ACTION to take,when diplomacy fails( in this he coincides with SUN TZU,who wrote the ART of WAR )
3.In war the DAMAGE INFLICTED on the ENEMY should be PROPORTIONAL to that given.
4.A war is NOT to be conducted in the NAME of RELIGION: to spread Christianity,for example, or because of a religious difference.
5.War is NOT to be done for the KING’s PERSONAL GLORY.
OTHER OF HIS IDEAS
1.Christianity should be spread PEACEFULLY
2.He anticipated the concept of REVEL ( French intellectual) called DROIT D’INGERENCE: one can Invade Another Country to STOP human-rights violations, like in the case of RWANDA ( where 800,000 were killed by MACHETES in ,I think,it was like 100 days only )
3.In his case, Vitoria said one could intervene in another country to STOP HUMAN SACRIFICE.
James says
I am so sick and tired of the term “phobia.” It is pop science piffle and twaddle. It is overused, improperly used, and needs to go to the dump. As soon as I hear that word in politics I turn off the speaker; I turn a deaf ear to them from that point forward.
gravenimage says
Slate: “Was Columbus’ Voyage to the ‘New World’ Driven by Islamophobia?”
…………………….
Good grief. The conquest of Constantinople cut off any European access to the Orient almost entirely, so Europeans did indeed search for another way, either around Africa or via a western route.
Nothing “Islamophobic” about that.
Rarely says
Trade with the Orient through the Middle East to Europe via Venice (and other Italian cities) was not cut of by the conquest of Constantinople. The Ottomans liked the income it derived too much. However, it was natural to search for cheaper, more reliable routes. Columbus tried and failed (it had nothing to do with islam). Vasco da Gama was successful in 1497 rounding the Cape of Good Hope and securing a safe and cheap route for Portugal. The European ships, built for ocean travel, were barely bothered by the Ottomans whose ships were no match for them.
However the Ottomans were a real threat to Europe and had they not been distracted by intermittent wars with Persia, almost certainly would have had more success against Europe.
gravenimage says
Rarely, it cut off any *direct* trade, as I noted.
And Columbus was a failure in on the most literal sense, in that he didn’t find a more direct route to the Indies.
Jeremiah Freedmansky says
Another feminist jerk making excuses for and defending the honor of people that would marry her off as a fourth wife to some old sheikh then sew her into a burqa
Zé Manel Tonto says
And she would deserve it.
The problem is that the ones that don’t buy into this ideology would get that or worst.
So we need to fight islam for our sake, and in the process save these idiots that will be on board with the next civilisation destructive theory that shows up.
It is way simpler when this type of people go with two afghans to a refugee home.
gravenimage says
It is not just women who are dhimmis.
somehistory says
According to experts on the matter, the thinking of the psychopath is, “It’s all about me.” No matter the issue, to the psychopath, everything is always about him/her.
For moslims, everything is always all about them, all about islam.
Suppose Columbus saw what moslims were doing…destroying everything, looting, killing, enslaving…and wanted a place to go away from this crowd of children of the demons. Who could blame him?
I moved to get away from the drug dealers and the constant “rap” that some call music. If I lived near a moslim barracks, or in a country where moslims were the majority, I would get out as fast as my feet could carry me. And not because I am in fear of the evil. “Fear not those who kill the body, but cannot destroy the soul,” Jesus said. But, I wouldn’t choose to live close to the evil either.
But, of course, that was not the reason Columbus sailed the ocean blue and those who aren’t trying to rewrite history to favor islam and make moslims the “victims” of a “phobia,” clearly know it.
It is questionable whether any of the idiots know it, because, after all, they are idiots. Anything goes as long as they can sell their ‘work’ and make moslims the darlings of the age.
The Istanbulian says
So when westerners invade, colonize, and blockade it is enough to cause trauma and fear 200 years later – when muslims do it, it only causes an irrational reaction at the time.
They probably have chinese letter tattoos that they mean ‘peace and love’ but actually translate to ‘kill me first’ when the ccp invades…
Zé Manel Tonto says
In the case of muslims, westerners did not invade, colonise or blockade any region that was not invaded, colonised and blockaded by the muslims first.
But this is so out of control that I once had a conversation with a PhD educated person that had no idea that Egypt and Syria were Christian regions before muslims invaded.
FYI says
@ze manel tonto
Regarding “PhD educated persons”..
There is a difference between Knowledge and Wisdom.
A PhD in a particular field just means you specialize in that field and so would have a certain amount of specialized knowledge associated with that field but it doesn’t mean you have Wisdom.
islamic ‘scholars’ for example boast about “the incredible knowledge” in the koran{most of it erroneous} but they lack the Wisdom to understand the following…
If the koran has errors in it{and it does} it cannot be said to be ‘perfect’: so allah’s word is imperfect.
{In koran 4:82 allah says if you can find ANY errors in the koran then the koran cannot come from God but must come from ‘other than allah’ : but laughably,the koran is full of errors…}
If the koran is allah’s eternal world such errors are also eternal and allah’s perfectly preserved koran in paradise has errors in it.{which is on a ‘guarded tablet’ in allah’s paradise koran 85:22}allah’s paradise has ERRORS in it.
If allah mistakenly thinks MARY is in the Trinity{koran 5:116} then he cannot be omniscient as an omniscient god would KNOW Christians don’t believe MARY is in their Doctrine of the Trinity
If allah gets Science and Theology spectacularly wrong then he cannot possibly be God as God would be expected to understand Science and Theology
A PhD in islamic studies involves knowledge but no wisdom as wisdom shows the folly of qualifying in a BOGUS subject:the koran is a demonstrably FALSE plagiarized scripture but that awkward fact does not obviate the possibility of getting a PhD in it.
A physicist friend once showed me photos of what he said were fairies in his flowerbeds.
I didn’t see anything.I tried not to laugh:he was serious.
He had great technical knowledge in his field but sadly,very little wisdom.
FYI says
@istanbullian
Or… maybe the chinese letter tatoos,instead of representing some deep Confucian aphorism,says something like ‘Crispy Aromatic duck with egg fried rice please’
E T says
Battle of Bedr – 624
Battle of Ohod – 625
Expedition Against the Jews – 625
Siege of Medina, Extermination of the Jews – 627-628
Mohammed’s Pilgrimage of Mecca – 629
Subjection of Mecca – 630
The Victory of Honain and Autas……………..