By Azizah Y. al-Hibri

 The text below represents excerpts from a longer article by Azizah al-Hibri entitled, "Islamic and American Constitutional Law: Borrowing Possibilities or a History of Borrowing?" Dr. Hibri is a law professor at the University of Richmond, Virginia, and president of Karamah: Muslim Women Lawyers for Human Rights. The excerpts provided here give important background on the longer history of how Americans have come to terms with Islam. In the past, as now, there appears to have been a significant disconnect between popular prejudice and the more nuanced understandings of the educated elite.

 Hibri's insightful discussion of Thomas Jefferson's knowledge of Islam might be further contextualized by the Unitarian tendencies of most of the "Founding Fathers." Indeed, a prominent minister in New York remarked in 1831, "Among all our presidents from Washington downward, not one was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism." The influential second First Lady Abigail Adams wrote to her son, John Quincy Adams in 1816: "I acknowledge myself a Unitarian -- Believing that the Father alone is the supreme God, and that Jesus Christ derived his Being, and all his powers and honors from the Father." She continued, "There is not any reasoning which can convince me, contrary to my senses, that three is one, and one three." John Adams himself reportedly considered the notion of the divinity of Jesus an "awful blasphemy." During his term in office, Adams signed the Treaty of Peace and Friendship with Tripoli, article XI of which reads:

 As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion - as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims], - and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan [Muhammadan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

 For more information on the Unitarian tendencies of the Founding Fathers, and for the sources for the above citations, see the articles, "President Adams and the Religious Right" at www.humanismbyjoe.com/Adams_Family_Religion.htm, and "The Religious Affiliation of the Second U.S. President, John Adams" at www.adherents.com.

 To view Professor Hibri's full article, see www.law.upenn.edu/journals/conlaw. The following excepts have been divided in two sections, the first describing popular conception of Islam in early America and the second discussing the Founding Fathers such as Thomas Jefferson. The subtitles used here are our own creation.

 ***

I. The Foil of Alleged Islamic Despotism for American Democracy
Islam is often viewed as an "Eastern" or "Oriental" religion, which is in its very essence incompatible with democracy and disrespectful of human rights.1 Its recent visibility in the United States and Europe has not ameliorated this view in any significant way. American Muslim immigrants, for example, are viewed even today as alien to our system of democracy and human rights, and hence somewhat suspect.2 This suspicion is deeply-rooted and has been manifest as early as the eighteenth century.3 During that period, several American novels featured either fictional Muslim spies in America or oppressed Muslim women confined to the seraglio.4

Many eighteenth century authors, from Voltaire to Prideaux and Volney, wrote important works about Islam that were eagerly read in the United States.5 Unfortunately, some authors were not quite concerned about historical accuracy.6 Furthermore, those individuals who contemplated religious views somewhat different from those of the mainstream were branded as "infidels."7 Various books about Islam that appeared in the eighteenth century created an atmosphere of disdain, hostility and distrust of Muslims. Among these books was one entitled The Nature of the Imposture, Fully Displayed in the Life of Mahomet.8 The message of the book was that the combined use of false religion and military power could subdue people.9 Both the book and the message were used by Mathew Lyon, a staunch critic of the Federalists, to attack President Adams.10

Another book, entitled Cato's Letters, an English work which became highly influential in this country, pronounced the Prophet Muhammad a great imposter who deceived and destroyed his people with their own consent.11 In support of their view, the authors cited the Turkish empire and other Muslim states which they claimed forbade printing and thus restricted free speech.12 Other authors corroborated these views directly or indirectly.13 Even Volney, who was a great admirer of old civilizations, noted the state of apathy and indolence that had permeated many Muslim countries.14

Volney and many other writers were concerned about the reasons that contributed to the decline of Islamic civilization. They wanted later civilizations, especially the nascent American society, to avoid a similar fate. Their conclusions varied. Some blamed what they perceived to be the Islamic attitude of fatalism.15 Others blamed what they believed to be the discouragement of free thinking within Islamic civilizations.16 There was, however, general agreement that tyranny, fostered by religion, coupled with the acceptance by the Muslim people of such tyranny, were at the heart of the problem.17 Subsequent discussion centered on how the American system of governance could avoid such a fate.18

Nevertheless, Islamic constitutional precedents played a part in the constitutional debates in the United States.19 For example, Alexander Hamilton argued for giving the federal government the right to impose taxes by referring to the example of the Ottoman empire. He noted that the sovereign of that empire had no right to impose a new tax.20 As a consequence, the Ottoman sovereign permitted the governors of the provinces to impose these taxes, and then squeezed out of the governors the sums he required for his and the state's expenses.21 Hamilton concluded, "[w]ho can doubt that the happiness of the people in both countries would be promoted by competent authorities in the proper hands . . . ?"22

In the debates of 1787, Anti-Federalists, using what they judged to be the example of the despotic Turkish government, argued against a strong central government, and demanded guarantees of individual liberties and religious freedom.23 In particular, Daniel Webster, Patrick Henry and Patrick Dollard spoke of the evils of Turkish despotism.24 Alexander Hamilton, on the other hand, saw deeper into the Turkish example, recognizing a complex power structure. He argued that, from one perspective, the Turkish sultan was in fact weak and had limited powers.25 Hamilton then concluded that a strong central government would protect people from oppressive local governments.26

Western commentators on Islam, as external observers, viewed Muslim regimes as embodiments of Islamic principles,27 although, as a later section of this paper will show, nothing could have been further from the truth. This Western misperception of Muslim regimes made it more difficult for most Western authors to understand or present Islam as it was truly revealed in the Qur'an.28 This problem has persisted in various degrees in this country for the last couple of centuries.

While Islam and Muslim countries were understood by the American population from the point of view of the "Other," some Founding Fathers made serious efforts to educate themselves about Islam and its civilizations. Despite these efforts, the Founding Fathers' attempts to avoid what they saw as the underlying reasons for the failure of democracy in Muslim countries were ultimately misdirected: Their misunderstanding of Muslim civilizations was based on inaccurate or incomplete information, which produced unreliable analysis.

II. Early Sympathies to Islam among the Founding Fathers

Many of the Founding Fathers were not as uninformed about Islam as are the rest of us, even today. Indeed, some made a special effort to read about Islam and related ancient civilizations.29 Thomas Jefferson's library contained at least one copy of the Qur'an and was rich with books about ancient civilizations, including Islamic ones.30 Jefferson appeared to consider his knowledge of these matters important for the development of the American model of political governance. In that approach, he was not alone.

Madison, for example, read about ancient confederacies before formulating his own proposal for a federal system in the United States.31 The resulting system, however, was decidedly American. It is, therefore, not surprising that T. J. Barlow reported to Jefferson from Paris that the "federality" of our system of government "is not at all understood in Europe even in theory. The best writers dont [sic] know what we mean by it."32

It is sometimes easy to forget how exciting the period was in which our Founding Fathers lived. It was a period in which they felt that they could design a system of governance from which the rest of the world would benefit.33 They took that responsibility seriously. So, while the general public was referring to Prophet Muhammad as an "infidel" and an "imposter," Jefferson was reading and corresponding with Volney, the author of controversial books on ancient Middle Eastern civilizations.34 Jefferson even quietly translated parts of Volney's controversial book entitled The Ruins, which discusses Islamic civilizations, among others. Jefferson asked Volney to keep this fact confidential, a testimony to the political pressures of the time.35 

The Founding Fathers were interested in any precedent, regardless of geography, which could illuminate their work. Patrick Henry, for example, asked the Virginia ratifying convention, "Who has enslaved France, Spain, Germany, Turkey and other countries which groan under tyranny? They have been enslaved by the hands of their own people."36 It was important for the Founding Fathers to lay down the foundation of a system of government which would not breed apathy or result in tyranny. To this end, the example set by the Muslim states was important, given the stature and long history of the Islamic civilization. 

Not all that the Founding Fathers read about Islam was negative. Despite popular opinion, some concluded that they needed to have a better understanding of Islam in order to reach a correct analysis. For this reason, Jefferson and others read many books that the public found highly controversial. The first volume of Sale's Koran,37 owned by Jefferson, consisted of the author's exposition and personal assessment of the Prophet Mohammad and the religion he professed.38 In a gesture reflecting public opinion, Sale refers to the Prophet as an "infidel" and an "imposter."39 The thrust of his discussion, however, is to provide a fair assessment of an individual and a religion which was grossly misunderstood in this country. In an introductory statement to the reader, Sale states: 

I shall not here inquire into the reasons why the law of Mohammed has met with so unexampled a reception in the world, (for they are greatly deceived who imagine it to have been propagated by the sword alone) or by what means it came to be embraced by nations which never felt the force of Mohammedan arms, and even by those which stripped the Arabians of their conquests, and put an end to the sovereignty and very being of their Khalifs.40

A few pages later Sale adds:

"For how criminal soever Mohammed may have been in imposing a false religion on mankind, the praises due to his real virtues ought not to be denied him."41 Sale concludes that the Prophet's "original design of bringing pagan Arabs to the knowledge of the true God was certainly noble and highly to be commended."42
 

Sale embarks on a long admiring description of the Prophet's personality and moral character, followed by long detailed chapters on Islamic history, theology, and law.43 In the course of his discussion, he disposes of many of the negative myths about Islam.44 He also compares Islamic law and Islam's historical track record with that of Christianity and Judaism, pointing out that Islam has done no worse than the other two religions.45 

Two points made in this manuscript are particularly salient in light of Jefferson's writings. First, Sale points out that Prophet Muhammad rejected the concept of the Trinity and the divinity of the Virgin Mary.46 Jefferson had taken a similar position in his correspondence with William Short.47 Second, Sale states that the Prophet declared that his "business was only to preach and admonish, that he had no authority to compel any person to embrace his religion."48 This point is reiterated by the Qur'an itself, which is translated in the second volume of Sale's Koran.49 Again, Jefferson expressed a similar point of view in his writings about freedom of belief.50 

Another author who wrote on such matters was Joseph Priestly.51 Both Jefferson and Adams were not only familiar with Priestly's writings, but may have even encouraged him to write about ancient doctrines.52 In fact, Jefferson ordered a copy of Priestly's book, The Doctrines of Heathen Philosophy Compared With Those of Revelation, for John Adams.53 Both Jefferson and Adams thought, however, that Priestly did not do justice to the topic.54 This critique indicates a certain level of sophistication in the knowledge of the two Founding Fathers of ancient doctrines, a level we are still struggling to acquire in this country today.

Interestingly, in an earlier book, Priestly addressed the doctrine of the unity of God. He argued that the great advantage "Mohammedanism had over the corrupt [C]hristianity" of that time was that it "asserted the great doctrine of the unity of God, against the Trinitarians."55 It therefore appears that, despite the fact that some individuals were quick to brand as "infidels" those who had somewhat different ideas about Christianity, some of the Founding Fathers did not relent in pursuing sources of information on the subject, and speaking out, despite the political fallout.56 This experience no doubt hardened Jefferson's resolve to guarantee freedom of religion for all.

In fact, Jefferson argued that society should be tolerant of the religious practices of others so long as they do not harm the public good.57 He gives the example of killing calves or lambs.58 This appears to be a reference to the Islamic annual custom in which a lamb is sacrificed to celebrate the event where Abraham's son was spared by God and a lamb was sacrificed in his stead.59 If Jefferson was in fact making this reference, then it is possible that Jefferson was thinking of slave practices, since most Muslims in the American colonies at that time were slaves who were brought forcefully from Africa.60 This raises a further question of the extent of contacts between Jefferson and other Founding Fathers, and their slaves, and how many of those were Muslim.

The question of whether the Founding Fathers had meaningful contact with Muslim slaves is not one of idle speculation, since it is established that many of the Muslim slaves were literate and hence assigned to house duties.61 Labor assignments in the house, as opposed to those in the field, would have allowed Muslim slaves to have increased contact with their "masters." Initial inquiry into relationships between colonial masters and slaves has already yielded information that Jefferson, in particular, had extensive contacts with two slaves: Jupiter and Sally Hemmings.62 We do not yet have adequate information as to their religious beliefs or the beliefs of other slaves in the Jefferson household.

Given this historical backdrop, we turn now to the task of presenting a more accurate and genuine understanding of Islam, its basic constitutional principles, and the dynamics of Muslim societies. This task is within reach because contemporary America is very different from, and significantly more free and diverse than, the America of the Founding Fathers. After all, in those early days, most Muslims in America were slaves. As such, they were denied the right to speak freely.63 By introducing Islam from the perspective of an "internal observer,"64 it is finally possible to present Islam accurately and, thus, to properly refute the claim that Islam is inherently anti-democratic and disrespectful of human rights.

To view the full article, see: http://www.law.upenn.edu/journals/conlaw/issues/vol1/num3/alhibri/alhibri_tf.html

NOTES

1  See, e.g., Judith Miller, The Challenge of Radical Islam, FOREIGN AFFAIRS, Spring 1993, at 43, 50-54 (quoting Bernard Lewis that Islam and liberal democracy do not make natural bedfellows and discussing human rights problems); JOHN ESPOSITO & JOHN VOLL, ISLAM AND DEMOCRACY 23 (1996) (stating that non-Muslims and some conservative Muslims have argued that it is impossible to have an "Islamic democracy"); Kathryn Webber, The Economic Future of Afghan Women: The Interaction Between Islamic Law and Muslim Culture, 18 U. PA. J. INTL ECON. L. 1049, 1056-57 & n.27 (1997) (referring to the ongoing debate over the compatibility of Islam and international human rights agreements); Dressing Down, FIN. TIMES (London), Feb. 1, 1994, at 19 (announcing a debate at the Oxford Union on whether Islam and democracy are compatible); Ken Adelman, WASH. TIMES, Apr. 3, 1996, at A15 ("That Islam remains incompatible with liberty limits the spread of democracy in the post-communist world."). For more on "Orientalism," see EDWARD SAID, ORIENTALISM 59-61, passim (1979).

2  See generally COUNCIL ON AM.-ISLAMIC REL. RES. CENTER, THE STATUS OF MUSLIM CIVIL RIGHTS IN THE UNITED STATES 1998, at 10, 11, 24 (1988). The negative perception of Islam in the West has been demonstrated in newspaper reporting:

After decades of scaring ourselves witless about reds-under-the-bed, it now turns out that we were worrying about the wrong men in beards. It's not the boring drones of Marxist-Leninism who threaten our world, but the mullahs-under-the-mattress, the supposed wild-eyed religious fanatics with bombs under their arms that we should have been terrified of all along as we live in an age of Islamaphobia.

-- Gavin Esler, Stereotypes of Terror That Are Fundamentally Flawed, SCOTSMAN, Aug. 31, 1998, at 11; see also Larry B. Stammer & Carla Hall, Terror in Oklahoma City, L.A. TIMES, Apr. 22, 1995, at A22 (reporting that in the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing American Muslims were stereotyped as terrorists and became targets of hostility).

This attitude, while disproportionately directed against Muslims, is not and has not been unique to Muslims. French visitors to the United States in the eighteenth century at times received similar treatment. For example, eighteenth century author Abbe Constatin Francois de Chassebouf Volney's presence in the United States sparked much controversy. Volney was accused in 1797 of being a French spy sent to obtain information to prepare for the re-occupation of Louisiana. See 4 E. MILLICENT SOWERBY, CATALOGUE OF THE LIBRARY OF THOMAS JEFFERSON 213 (1953); Letter from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson (Jan. 23, 1825), in 16 THE WRITINGS OF THOMAS JEFFERSON 102-03 (Albert Ellery Bergh ed., 1903) [hereinafter BERGH] (commenting on the lack of freedom of inquiry and speech in the United States and explicitly mentioning that translating the works of Volney and Dapin could get an individual in trouble). Volney is also singled out by the drafters of the Alien and Sedition Act of 1798. Jefferson sought to attack the proposed law before it appeared on the books. In a letter to James Madison, Jefferson mentioned that the bill would have given Congress the power to deport suspected aliens: "this is understood to be meant for Volney and Collet." Letter from Thomas Jefferson to James Madison (Apr. 26, 1798), in 18 BERGH, supra, at xviii.

3  See ROBERT J. ALLISON, THE CRESCENT OBSCURED: THE UNITED STATES AND THE MUSLIM WORLD 1776-1815, at xv- xvii, 20 (1995). A number of books on the Muslim world were published in the United States in the 1790s. See id. at xv-xvii, 20. These novels, histories, captivity narratives, and biographies on the Prophet Muhammad conveyed a picture of impoverishment wrought by despotic rulers, honest commerce perverted into piracy, and debased women. See id. In essence, to the Americans striving to forge a new country, these writings conveyed a cautionary lesson of what must be avoided.

4  See Timothy Worthington Marr, Imagining Ismael: Studies of Islamic Orientalism in America from the Puritans to Melville 103 (1997) (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University) (on file with the Yale University Library); see also ALLISON, supra note (3), at 61-85 (providing an Orientalist view of Muslim women).

5  See, e.g., HUMPHREY PRIDEAUX, THE TRUE NATURE OF THE IMPOSTURE, FULLY DISPLAYED IN THE LIFE OF MAHOMET (1697); ABBE CONSTANTIN FRANCOIS DE CHASSEBOUF VOLNEY, THE RUINS, OR A SURVEY OF THE REVOLUTIONS OF EMPIRES (1796) [hereinafter THE RUINS]; ABBE CONSTANTIN FRANCOIS DE CHASSEBOUF VOLNEY, TRAVELS THROUGH EGYPT AND SYRIA IN THE YEARS 1783, 1784 & 1785 (1798) [hereinafter TRAVELS]; FRANCOIS MARIE AROUET DE VOLTAIRE, MAHOMET, THE IMPOSTER: A TRAGEDY IN FIVE ACTS (1777).

6  See ALLISON, supra note (3), at 59. Muslims were consistently depicted as submissive and accepting of religious and political despotism. See id. The claim that Islam is the source of political tyranny was often a central theme. Prideaux, for instance, depicted Prophet Muhammad as a religious heretic who had exploited religious indifference to create religious and ultimately political tyranny. See id. at 38.

7  See ABBE CONSTANTIN FRANCOIS DE CHASSEBOUF VOLNEY, VOLNEYS ANSWER TO DOCTOR PRIESTLY ON HIS PAMPHLET ENTITLED, "OBSERVATIONS UPON THE INCREASE OF INFIDELITY" 4 (1797) [hereinafter OBSERVATIONS]. Priestly's pamphlet attacked Volney personally and his work The Ruins. In response, Volney wrote that Priestly was pleased to class his pamphlet among the writings of modern unbelievers, see id. at 4, and replied that no one had the right to ask him of his religious opinions, see id. at 8.

8  PRIDEAUX, supra note (5).

9  See id., passim (especially 23, 25, 27, 32, 68-69, 89-90) (warning that the consequences of religious indifference would be religious slavery).

10  See ALLISON, supra note(3), at 41. Lyon was jailed for charging Adams with using the "sacred name of religion" as a "State engine to make mankind hate and persecute one another." Id. Lyon was convicted because of this and other statements he had made in Congress, and in letters to his constituents, stating that Adams was a "notorious and seditious person, and of a depraved mind, and wicked and diabolical disposition." Id.

11  See 1 JOHN TRENCHARD & THOMAS GORDON, CATO'S LETTERS, OR ESSAYS ON LIBERTY, CIVIL AND RELIGIOUS, AND OTHER IMPORTANT SUBJECTS, vol. II, at 131 (Russell & Russell 3d ed. 1969) (1733).

12  See 2 TRENCHARD & GORDON, supra note (11), vol. III, at 33 ("In Turkey, Printing is forbid [sic] . . . . Nor is printing in other Arbitrary Countries of much use but to rivet their Chains."). "Arbitrary Countries" refers to authoritarian countries, many of which were Muslim. See id. at 301 (discussing the examples of the "Caliphs of Egypt," the "Monarchy of Persia," and the empire of Turkey); id., vol. I, at 188 (discussing the "Muley . . . of Morocco," and the Turkish Court); see also ALLISON, supra note (3), at 47-48 (claiming that in the West, books and pamphlets allowed all issues to be discussed freely and expressed in print, while in Turkey, only one book had been printed in the eighteenth century) (citing JOHN FOSS, A JOURNAL OF THE CAPTIVITY AND SUFFERINGS OF JOHN FOSS, SEVERAL YEARS A PRISONER AT ALGIERS: TOGETHER WITH SOME ACCOUNT OF THE TREATMENT OF CHRISTIAN SLAVES WHEN SICK:--AND OBSERVATIONS ON THE MANNERS AND CUSTOMS OF THE ALGERINES 75-76 (1798)).

13  See ALLISON, supra note (3), at 51-54 & n.26. For example, many American writers concluded that a wicked religion had fostered bad government, and a bad government had, in turn, thwarted social progress. See id. at 53-54. Jean Charles Leonard Simonde de Sismondi concluded that the poison that had destroyed the Muslim world came from within. See id. at 51.

14  See TRAVELS, supra note (5), at 7-8; see also ALLISON, supra note (3), at 48 (noting the fatalistic attitude of Muslim people as leading to "indolence").

15  See ALLISON, supra note (3), at 48 (arguing that Volney in particular believed that the "Islamic idea of predestination and the Muslim's willingness to accept everything and anything as the will of God" led to indolence). Allison argued that Turkish despotism had no reason to change, for its mere existence was viewed as reflecting God's will. See id. For a more recent discussion of the notion of Islamic "fatalism," see THOMAS W. LIPPMAN, UNDERSTANDING ISLAM: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE MUSLIM WORLD 75-78 (2d. rev. ed. 1995).

16  See ALLISON, supra note (3), at 50-51 (discussing how religious intolerance had stifled free inquiry and prevented men from rising out of their misery in Egypt and Syria).

17  The perception of tyranny in Islamic countries generally available to Westerners is illustrated in Catos Letters:

It is even Capital , and certain Death [in Turkey], only to reason freely upon their Alcoran . . . . A sure sign of Imposture [Islam, viewed as a false religion]! But by Imposture, Stupidity, and Janzaries [military or police force] his Throne is supported; and his vast but thin Dominions, know no inhabitants but barbarous, ignorant, and miserable Slaves.

-- 2 TRENCHARD & GORDON, supra note (11), vol. III, at 32-33 (bracketed statements added by Editor); see also 1 TRENCHARD & GORDON, supra note (11), vol. II, at 131 (noting the acceptance of Muslims of Mahomet, an "enem[y] of Liberty, Truth, and Peace"); id. at 300-01 (discussing the tyranny of Egypt, Persia and Turkey); id., vol. I, at 187-89 (discussing the submissiveness of Muslims to tyranny); ALLISON, supra note 3, at 51-53, 59 (discussing the Western use of Muslim culture as an illustrative example of the different consequences of religious and political beliefs); supra notes (6), 13-15 and accompanying text.

18  See Patrick Henry, Virginia Convention, 16 June 1788, in 2 DEBATE ON THE CONSTITUTION 696 (Bernard Bailyn ed., 1993) (examining the issue that there is no provision in the Constitution against maintaining a standing army during times of peace). See generally ALLISON, supra note (3), at 57-59 (citing the frequent reference to Muslim cultures during the constitutional debates of 1787-88).

19  See ALLISON, supra note (3), at 57, 59 (citing reference to Muslim cultures during the constitutional debates of 1787-88). Libertarians, such as Mathew Lyon and Thomas Paine, as well as conservatives, including John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, employed the popular view of Islam in their political arguments. See id. at 59. Anti-Federalist critics such as Patrick Dollard, during the South Carolina Convention of 22 May 1788, and Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Convention of 16 June 1788, used the image of Turkish despotism to attack the proposed government. See id. at 57-58.

20  See THE FEDERALIST NO. 30, at 188 (Alexander Hamilton) (Jacob Cooke ed., 1961).

21  See id (arguing for centralized authority to levy taxes by analogizing to the negative consequences illustrated by the Turkish empire).

22  Id.

23  See ALLISON, supra note (3), at 57.

24  See Patrick Dollard, South Carolina Convention, 22 May 1788, in 2 DEBATE ON THE CONSTITUTION, supra note (18), at 593-94; Patrick Henry, Virginia Convention, 16 June 1788, in 2 DEBATE ON THE CONSTITUTION, supra note (18), at 696; Daniel Webster, A Citizen of America, in 1 DEBATE ON THE CONSTITUTION, supra note (18), at 150-51 (arguing against a constitutional provision prohibiting a standing army during times of peace).

25  See FEDERALIST NO. 30, supra note (20), at 188 (noting that the sovereigns in the Turkish empire, although absolute masters of their subjects, had no right to impose taxes).

26  See id. at 188-89 ("In America, from a like cause, the government of the Union has gradually dwindled into a state of decay, approaching nearly to annihilation.").

27  Compare supra text accompanying notes (15-18), with infra Section V (discussing subsequent events which contributed to the demise of genuinely Islamic democratic principles in Muslim civilizations).

28  See infra notes (37-44) and accompanying text. George Sale was careful to cast his discussion of the Prophet Muhammad in negative terms, in conformity with the attitude of the day. Sale took liberty, however, in praising the Prophet for his virtue as a leader, see SALE, infra note (38), at 51, and commended the Prophet's ability to disseminate knowledge of the "true God" to the "pagan Arabs." Id. As to particular Islamic principles, Sale discussed the treatment of women, acknowledging that the Prophet enjoined Muslims to treat women with respect and recognize their right to inherit from their parents, husbands and other relatives. See id. at 183. Sale also noted that Islam put an end to the pagan custom of female infanticide. See id. at 174.

29  See generally 1-5 SOWERBY, supra note (2) (relating that Jefferson's personal library, sold to the Library of Congress in 1812, contained a significant number of books on these subjects, including works by Volney, comparative religious works by Joseph Priestly, Petis de la Croix's Histoire de Timur Bec, Kosmopolitos' The Revolt of Ali Bey, Sir Paul Rycaut's The History of the Present State of the Ottoman Empire, Thomas Broughton's History of All Religions, and Samuel von Pufendorf's The Law of Nature and Nations); see also THOMAS JEFFERSONS LIBRARY: A CATALOG WITH THE ENTRIES IN HIS OWN ORDER 58 (James Gilreath & Douglas L. Wilson eds., 1989); DOUGLAS L. WILSON, JEFFERSON'S BOOKS (1996) (discussing Jefferson's library and book collections).

Alexander Hamilton and James Madison evaluated the governmental structures of the Ottoman Empire and Persia. See THE FEDERALIST NOS. 19, 30, reprinted in 4 THE PAPERS OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON, 384-90, 450-51 (Harold C. Syrett ed., 1962); Constitutional Convention: Remarks on the Abolition of the States, reprinted in 4 THE PAPERS OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON, supra, at 211.

30  See FRANK L. DEWEY, THOMAS JEFFERSON LAWYER 14 (1986) (noting that records of the Virginia Gazette show that Jefferson purchased a copy of Sale's Koran while he was a student at the College of William & Mary in 1764-65). Most likely, <SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 1