Much of the popular understanding of the crusades derives from the 19thcentury novels of Scott and the French histories by Joseph François Michaud. In a 2001 article"The Historiography of the Crusades"Giles Constable attempted to categorise what is meant by "Crusade" into four areas of contemporary crusade study. His view was that "Traditionalists" such as Hans Eberhard Mayer are concerned with where the crusades were aimed, "Pluralists" such as Jonathan Riley-Smith concentrate on how the crusades were organised, "Popularists" including Paul Alphandery and Etienne Delaruelle focus on the popular groundswells of religious fervour, and "Generalists", such as Ernst-Dieter Hehl focus on the phenomenon of Latin holy wars. The historian Thomas F. Madden argues that modern tensions are the result of a constructed view of the crusades created by colonial powers in the 19thcentury and transmitted into Arab nationalism. For him the crusades are a medieval phenomenon in which the crusaders were engaged in a defensive war on behalf of their co-religionists. The Muslim world exhibited little interest in the crusades until the middle of the 19thcentury. Arabic-speaking Syrian Christians began translating French histories into Arabic, leading to the replacement of the term "wars of the "Frankswith "wars of the Cross". The Ottoman Turk Namık Kemal published the first modern Saladin biography in 1872. The Jerusalem visit in 1898 of Kaiser Wilhelm prompted further interest, with the Egyptian Sayyid Ali al-Hariri producing the first Arabic history of the crusades. Modern studies can be driven by political motives, such as the hope of learning from the Muslim forces' triumph over their enemies.