CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

Gates of Vienna

far-right blog, one of the leading websites of the Counterjihad movement

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 22, 2026
Entity authorityQ71690333
Source-derived summary

Gates of Vienna is a far-right blog established in 2004 by Edward S. May and his wife. The website has featured the writings of international hardline anti-Muslim writers such as Fjordman and Paul Weston, and "is a central player in the counter-jihad movement within the United States and across Europe".

History and activities

The first blog entry was published on Blogspot in January 2003 by Baron Bodissey, a pseudonym used by May, along with his wife who wrote as Dymphna, and was run from Virginia, United States. The name of the blog comes from the 1683 battle of Vienna, in which the alliance of Polish and Austrian armies defeated the invading Turkish Ottomans, framed by the blog as part of a centuries-long war between Christianity and Islam. The blog considers this the beginning of the end of the "second wave" of the "Great Islamic Jihad", while considering the September 11 attacks in 2001 a significant part of the beginning of the "third wave". The website itself was founded in October 2004.

May also writes as Ned May, and describes himself as a "computer programmer with some outlandish right-wing political ideas". May has later participated in several "counter-jihad" conferences, has been on the board of directors of the International Free Press Society, and was the director of the International Civil Liberties Alliance (formerly the 910 Group and the Center for Vigilant Freedom). He wrote articles for Breitbart News around 2011, and was "the principal organizer of the international counter-jihad movement from 2006-2011" according to Hope not Hate. The blog was investigated by the FBI after the 2011 Norway attacks as it was revealed that it was one of the most cited websites in the manifesto of Anders Behring Breivik, a neo-Nazi who exploited counter-jihad writings.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Gates of Vienna” as far-right blog, one of the leading websites of the Counterjihad movement. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Gates, Vienna and far-right.

Editorial reviewMost valuable as an event-and-institution map that identifies actors, dates and record creators for deeper historical inquiry. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2004, 2003, 1683, 2001—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Gates, Vienna and far-right providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Gates of Vienna”, the useful work is to connect “far-right blog, one of the leading websites of the Counterjihad movement” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q71690333. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2004, 2003, 1683 and 2001.

Critical limits

Institutional narratives can privilege the records that survived while minimizing voices that were never formally collected. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Gates of Vienna”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Gates of Vienna primary sources, Gates of Vienna archive and Gates research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Gates of Vienna”?
  2. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
  3. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Gates of Vienna” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.