Skip to main content
Intellectual history

Ideas & Arguments

The timeline shows what happened. These essays follow the arguments: how Locke's idea of toleration reached the founders, what they did with it, and what Muslims already here wrote. Each page leads with the answer, quotes the primary text, names the scholars and where they differ, and ends with what remains open.

Did the Founders intend to include Muslims as future citizens?

Some did, in argument; the record shows a debate, not a consensus. Locke (1689) named the “Mahometan” among those owed civil rights, Jefferson's account of the Virginia Statute (1786) said it protected “the Christian and Mahometan,” and North Carolina's delegates (1788) argued over Muslims in federal office. Opponents resisted in the same debates, and evidence of individual founders' private views of Islam is thin and mixed.

Essays 1 to 3 and 5 follow the argument from 1689 to 1797. Essay 4 covers Arabic writers under enslavement. Essay 6 shows how the texts named several religious minorities together.

  1. 1 · 1689

    Locke's Letter and the “Mahometan” as boundary case

    Did John Locke argue that Muslims should keep their civil rights?

    Yes. In A Letter Concerning Toleration (1689), Locke says neither pagan, Mahometan, nor Jew should be excluded from the commonwealth's civil rights because of religion. His toleration had limits, and Islamic-world influence on him is contested and unproven.

  2. 2 · 1765–1821

    Jefferson's Qur'an and the Virginia Statute: rights without endorsement

    What did Thomas Jefferson think about Muslims and Islam?

    Jefferson defended Muslims' civil rights as a matter of principle: in his 1821 Autobiography he said the 1786 Virginia Statute protected “the Christian and Mahometan.” He bought George Sale's Qur'an translation in 1765. Scholars disagree on how much this reflects interest in Muslims, and this site has found no document in which he endorses Islam as a faith.

  3. 3 · 1788

    North Carolina, 1788: could a Muslim hold federal office?

    Did the founding generation debate whether a Muslim could be president?

    Yes. On July 30, 1788, North Carolina's ratifying convention argued over whether Article VI's ban on religious tests would admit “Mahometans” to federal office. Anti-Federalist Henry Abbot warned they might; James Iredell replied that excluding any group would undercut religious freedom. It was a contest, not a consensus, and the convention declined to ratify that summer.

  4. 4 · 1731–1864

    From Timbuktu to Sapelo: Arabic scholarship under enslavement

    Could enslaved African Muslims read and write Arabic, and what did they leave behind?

    Yes. Two manuscripts show it: Omar ibn Said's 15-page Arabic autobiography of 1831, held by the Library of Congress, and Bilali Muhammad's 13-page Arabic legal text from Sapelo Island, Georgia, held by the University of Georgia. How many enslaved Muslims could write is estimated, not counted.

  5. 5 · 1796–1797

    The Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11: what it says and what it does not

    What does Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli say?

    Article 11 of the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli (Senate consent June 7, 1797) says the U.S. government “is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” It stands in the ratified English text; the Arabic text has a different passage there. It is a diplomatic assurance, not a constitutional ruling.

  6. 6 · 1689–1821

    Shared protections: Muslims, Jews, Catholics, and the founding lists

    Did the founding generation protect Muslims on their own, or religious minorities together?

    Mostly together. Founding-era texts name Muslims in lists: Locke beside pagans and Jews, Jefferson beside Jews, Christians, and Hindus, and North Carolina's 1788 debate beside pagans, deists, and Catholics. The protections covered several minorities by name, and the exclusions, such as Locke's of atheists and Catholics, also fell on groups.

How to read the labels

The document
What a primary source or institution says, quoted or closely paraphrased with its citation.
Interpretation
A reading of the documents. Named scholars, or this site, own it.
Where scholars differ
Informed scholars or sources disagree. Both positions are shown.

Review status

Written to the site's source hierarchy and uncertainty labels. Not peer reviewed; no outside historian has reviewed them. Unchecked items are listed in each essay's open questions. Qualified reviewers: see Review our work. Last updated October 22, 2026.