Voltaire and “Islamic Tolerance”: Apologetic Cut-and-Paste

A quote from Voltaire is periodically used on social media as a historical proof to the supposed Islamic tolerance in Spain conquered by the Arabs. The quotation is authentic. The manipulation begins when a comparative judgment formulated by an eighteenth-century author is separated from the historical period it is describing, isolated from other words in the same chapter, and transformed into a general conclusion about centuries of Muslim rule.

“The victors did not abuse the success of their weapons; they left their possessions, their laws, and their worship to the vanquished, contenting themselves with tribute and the honor of command. […] The Arabs were the most clement of all the conquerors of the earth and brought new sciences and new arts to Spain.”

Voltaire, Essai sur les mœurs et l’esprit des nations , chap. XXVII

Voltaire and Islamic tolerance: the quotation belongs to the first phase of the conquest

The phrase belongs to chapter XXVII of the Essai sur les mœurs , entitled De l’Espagne et des musulmans maures au VIIIe et IXe siècles . Voltaire is recounting the conquest of the Visigothic peninsula and the initial organization of Muslim rule: the arrival of Ṭāriq, the defeat of Rodrigo, the subjugation of the territory, and the condition of Christians in the first decades of the new domination. It is in this context that he defines the Arabs as “the most clement of all the conquerors of the earth.”

This judgment belongs to the period Voltaire is analyzing. It does not automatically describe al-Andalus from 711 to 1492. Over nearly eight centuries, the emirate and caliphate of Cordoba, the taifas, the Almoravids, the Almohads, and the Nasrids succeeded one another, each with its own distinct political and religious relationships. Applying an assessment of the first conquest to the entire Muslim history of the peninsula means erasing chronology. This is precisely one of the mechanisms upon which the myth of al-Andalus and the convivencia is constructed : different periods, dynasties, and conditions are compressed into a single, edifying image of “tolerant Islamic Spain.”

Tribute and “clemency”: the pragmatism of conquest

The same chapter prevents Voltaire’s phrase from being transformed into a celebration of religious equality. A few lines before the praise of Arab clemency, speaking of Rodrigo’s widow and ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, Voltaire states that the conqueror’s weapons had reduced his country and his religion to “servitude.” Shortly thereafter, he describes the victors leaving the vanquished with property, laws, and worship, but being “satisfied with a tribute and the honor of commanding” : satisfied with a tribute and the honor of commanding. Continuing the narrative, he speaks again of tributary Christians, of the “yoke,” of homage, and of Muslim domination.

What Voltaire called “clemency” must also be placed within the political logic of the early stages of a conquest. An army that has just occupied a vast territory has an interest in not destroying what it needs to govern it: administration, tax systems, local authorities, productive properties, and community structures. Maintaining these structures under a new sovereignty reduces the costs of occupation, limits resistance, and allows the conquered territory to be rapidly transformed into a source of revenue.

This political-administrative pragmatism also characterized the first Islamic conquests. In several territories, the new rulers utilized officials, fiscal structures, and skills inherited from previous systems rather than immediately replacing them. Even in the Iberian Peninsula, capitulation could prove much more useful than destruction: preserving what was functional, subordinating it to the new power, and extracting obedience and tribute . The classical legal doctrine of jihad would later systematize the relationship between conquest, submission, tribute, and the treatment of subjugated populations.

The comparative clemency of the conqueror does not equate to the equality of the conquered, and the pragmatism with which a new power preserves what it needs does not become a religious virtue simply because it avoids destroying it.

The Pact of Tudmīr: Protection in Exchange for Submission

The so-called Pact of Thudmir of 713 illustrates this logic concretely. The agreement between ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn Musa and Theodemir, the Visigothic ruler of a portion of the southeastern peninsula, allowed the new power to control the territory without dismantling its entire organization. Theodemir retained his position; his followers received guarantees regarding their lives, families, property, and churches and were not forced to abandon Christianity.

The guarantees, however, came with specific conditions: recognition of the new authority, political loyalty, a ban on aiding or hiding its enemies, informational collaboration, and annual payment of tribute in money and produce. The advantage for the conqueror was clear: the local elite continued to govern a population they knew, the economy remained productive, resistance was reduced, and the new power cashed in.

Voltaire’s formula—worship preserved, tribute paid, conquerors in command—thus acquires a far less edifying meaning than that attributed to it by apologetics. The preservation of worship was perfectly compatible with political and fiscal subjugation; indeed, in the initial phase of conquest, it could make it simpler, more stable, and more profitable.

Dhimma: the “protection” of the vanquished within a system of submission

When Voltaire wrote that the conquerors left the vanquished with property, laws, and worship, “contenting themselves with tribute and the honor of command,” he was describing a structure of domination, not a society of equals. In classical Islamic law, the subordination of non-Muslims found legal form in the dhimma : Christians and Jews could maintain their religion under Muslim suzerainty by paying the jizya and accepting a distinct and inferior status. For the normative structure of the dhimma and the restrictions imposed on non-Muslims, see also the Charter of Umar and the Condition of the Dhimmi .

The fundamental Qur’anic basis is Quran 9:29 , which commands the People of the Book to be fought until the jizya is paid , under the condition expressed by ṣāghirūn , a term associated with subjection and abasement. Subsequent legal elaboration translated this confessional hierarchy into differences in status and restrictions which, depending on the period and school, affected public worship, religious buildings, public functions, testimony, dress, and relationships of authority.

Simply calling this “tolerance” reverses the meaning of the system. Being spared, taxed, and maintained under a superior religious power doesn’t mean being treated as equals: it means being tolerated to the extent that one accepts submission.

What Voltaire wrote in the later stages

The other chapters of the Essai further highlight the problem of cutting and pasting. Voltaire does not take the judgment formulated on the first conquest and apply it indiscriminately to subsequent centuries. The historical phase, the object of analysis, and its very register change.

8th-9th century: conquest and subordination

In Chapter XXVII, the Arabs are the conquerors whom Voltaire judges to be relatively clement, but the picture remains that of a subjugated country: servitude, tribute, command, homage, and yoke. Clemency pertains to the way in which he judges victory to be exercised; it does not eliminate the relationship between victors and vanquished.

Muslim Cordoba: Culture and then Fragmentation

In Chapter XLIV, Voltaire shifts to a now consolidated Muslim Spain. His cultural assessment is overwhelmingly positive: he praises Cordoba and attributes the cultivation of geometry, astronomy, chemistry, and medicine to the Arabs. However, when he recounts the subsequent political fragmentation, his tone shifts and he attributes the corruption of Muslim rulers to luxury and pleasure. The history of Cordoba and its use in the modern myth of al-Andalus also demonstrates the inappropriateness of transforming an important cultural phase into general proof of the nature of the political and religious system.

12th-13th century: political and military decline

In chapter LXIV, the picture changes again. Voltaire recounts the North African invasions, Las Navas de Tolosa, and the progressive advance of the Christian kingdoms. He writes that “the Moors were no wiser than the Christians,” and, speaking of military skill, judges them at that stage to be inferior to the Spanish. Cordoba, Valencia, Murcia, and Seville gradually pass under Christian control. The tone is no longer that of the triumphant conquerors of chapter XXVII.

After Granada: The Arabs Against the Inquisition

In chapter CXL, Voltaire shifts perspective again. The target is the Inquisition and the forced conversions imposed after the Christian conquest of Granada. To condemn them, he favorably contrasts the conduct of the Arabs, arguing that they had not forced the original Christians of Spain to accept Islam. Here, the Arabs become an instrument of the Enlightenment polemic against Christian intolerance.

Voltaire thus formulates contextual assessments for the phases he analyzes: conquest and relative clemency in chapter XXVII, cultural splendor and fragmentation in XLIV, political-military decline in LXIV, and polemical confrontation against the Inquisition in CXL. Extracting one of these assessments and transforming it into the permanent definition of Islam in Spain means using Voltaire against the very structure of his narrative.

Al-Andalus was not eight centuries of tolerance

The extension of Voltaire’s phrase to the supposed “tolerance of Islam” also conflicts with the actual history of al-Andalus. The various dynasties did not follow a uniform religious policy. The most striking example is that of the Almohads, Berber Muslims who ruled large parts of the peninsula in the 12th and 13th centuries and subjected Jews and Christians to forced conversions.

The ethnic distinction is necessary: ​​Voltaire, in the original passage, speaks of “Arabs,” while the Almohads were Berbers. But it is precisely apologetics that extends the phrase from the Arabs of the conquest to the supposed tolerance of Islam and the entire Andalusian experience. It is this generalization that collapses in the face of the Almohad phase.

Al-Andalus experienced different administrations and policies, periods of continuity for the Christian and Jewish communities and periods of religious coercion. Reducing almost eight centuries to “the Arabs were the most clement conquerors” is not a summary: it is replacing history with a quotation. The overall picture is explored in the article dedicated to the myth of coexistence in al-Andalus .

Voltaire is not modern historiography

Finally, there is a basic methodological issue. Voltaire was born in 1694; the Muslim conquest of the Iberian Peninsula began in 711. The Essai sur les mœurs is a source on Voltaire’s thought and eighteenth-century historiographical culture, not a primary source for the eighth century, much less the last word in modern scholarship.

The very chapter used by apologetics demonstrates this. Voltaire places the decisive battle in 714, in which Rodrigo was defeated by Ṭāriq, while the modern reconstruction places the battle and the beginning of the conquest in 711. The case of the Mozarabs is even more evident: Voltaire links them to the Spanish who abandoned Christianity and reports that the term meant “half-Arabs.” Mozarab, on the other hand, derives from the Arabic mustaʿrib , “Arabized,” and refers to culturally Arabized Christians, not Muslim converts defined as “half-Arabs.”

In the same chapter, Voltaire also revisits the tradition of the one hundred girls Mauregato was supposed to hand over annually to the Muslims, a legendary tale that isn’t a proven historical fact. This case perfectly illustrates the problem: Voltaire cannot become an absolute historiographical authority on a favorable statement and suddenly revert to an eighteenth-century author when modern research corrects the rest.

Voltaire spoke favorably of the Arabs, but “more clement” does not mean “equal”

Voltaire genuinely expresses favorable judgments about the Arabs. He admires the culture of Cordoba, considers them relatively clement during the conquest, and uses them against the forced conversions of Christian Spain. It doesn’t take a change in his thinking to dismantle the apologetic argument: just understand what he’s actually saying.

“Les plus cléments de tous les conquérants de la terre” means “the most clement of all the conquerors of the earth.” The crucial word is conquerors . Voltaire compares different ways of exercising conquest and believes that the Arabs treated the conquered with relative moderation, leaving them possessions, laws, and worship while retaining command and tribute.

It’s a comparative judgment, not a theory of religious equality. Voltaire’s own admiration for certain aspects of Arab civilization also fits into his philosophical battle against fanaticism, clericalism, and the Inquisition: demonstrating that Muslims could behave better than Christians was also an extremely Voltairian way of attacking the latter.

Voltaire’s quote says what it says: a comparative assessment of the Arab conquerors at the time he’s describing. It proves nothing else.

Apologetic cut-and-paste

The operation is more refined than the false quotation. The “tribute” is not physically erased: it remains written before the reader, but is emptied of its meaning. “The most clement” becomes the message to be remembered; “victors,” “vanquished,” “tribute,” and “command” become decoration. The subordination described by Voltaire himself disappears from the conclusion.

Then chronology disappears. The judgment on the 8th-9th centuries is projected onto the entire history of al-Andalus; the Umayyads, taifas, Almoravids, Almohads, and Nasrids become a single “tolerant Islamic Spain.” Finally, Voltaire is singled out: those who praise clemency and Arab culture are displayed, while those who speak of servitude, yoke, tribute, political corruption, and decline are left out. Even his historical errors become invisible.

The result is constructed from the selection of fragments: an eighteenth-century comparative judgment is transformed first into a general description of al-Andalus and then into a demonstration of the tolerance of Islam.

Conclusion: the quotation is authentic, the apologetic argument is not.

Voltaire actually judged the Arabs to be relatively clement during the phase of the conquest he was describing, and used them on other occasions as a favorable comparison. But Voltaire himself speaks of tribute, command, servitude, and yoke; in later phases, he modifies his approach according to the historical context. Historiography also reconstructs a system in which the preservation of religion, administrative pragmatism, jizya , dhimma , and religious subordination could coexist perfectly.

The apologetic operation consists in taking “the most clement,” separating them from this framework, and transforming the relative leniency of a conqueror into religious equality, and therefore into tolerance of Islam. These are three different statements, and only the first belongs to Voltaire.

The quotation is authentic. It’s the apologetic argument built upon it that isn’t.

Return to index

Sources

Voltaire, Essai sur les mœurs et l’esprit des nations, chap. XXVII, «De l’Espagne et des musulmans maures au VIIIe et IXe siècles»; chap. XLIV, «De l’Espagne et des mahométans de ce royaume, jusqu’au commencement du XIIe siècle»; chap. LXIV, «De l’Espagne aux XIIe et XIIIe siècles»; chap. CXL, on the conquest of Granada, the conversions and the Inquisition.

Janina M. Safran, Defining Boundaries in al-Andalus: Muslims, Christians, and Jews in Islamic Iberia, Cornell University Press, 2013.

John Tolan, «Identity and Minority Status in Two Legal Traditions», in Flocel Sabaté (ed.), Identity in the Middle Ages, Cambridge University Press, 2022.

Maribel Fierro, «The Religious Policy of the Almohads», in Sabine Schmidtke (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Theology, Oxford University Press.

Brian A. Catlos, Muslims of Medieval Latin Christendom, c. 1050–1614, Cambridge University Press, 2014.

Dominique Urvoy, «La pensée religieuse des Mozarabes face à l’Islam», Traditio, vol. 39.

Ira M. Lapidus, Islamic Societies to the Nineteenth Century: A Global History, Cambridge University Press, 2012.