Possible Byzantium with a Muslim Emperor?

[Reggierock]

What i was originally asking was for a possible Muslim Emperor without a conquests, but all the ideas here are super interesting. Thats the great part about "What If"s.

In early Islamic literature it is said that Hiraculus was able to have a discussion with Abu sufian in Damascus where he probes the prophet's uncle about the message of Islam. Muslims will believe that hiraculous himself was interested in Islam but he couldn't turn his back on the empire's already established culture and religion. Maybe having Heraclius as a Muslim convert in this timeline would be an interesting take.

Meeting between Heraclius, Byzantine Emperor, and Abu Sufyan, Chieftain from Arabia

History has many stories to tell and many lessons to learn from. Mistakes made in the past can be avoided by the one who studies and reflects today.

saudigazette.com.sa

Sahih al-Bukhari 7 - Revelation - كتاب بدء الوحى - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)

Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (saws) in English and Arabic

sunnah.com

Some commentary: https://aljumuah.com/the-hadith-of-heraclius-part-1-abu-sufyan-enters-the-roman-court/

 

[Josh Snider]

Having the son of a Byzantine Emperor convert to Islam and then inherit the Imperium seems the most plausible to me. That could make the transition smooth in a way that a good general doing a coup would never be.

 

[holycookie]

Having the son of a Byzantine Emperor convert to Islam and then inherit the Imperium seems the most plausible to me. That could make the transition smooth in a way that a good general doing a coup would never be.

The son is going to be killed or deposed. Killing an heir with a religion that is an enemy of the empire will probably make whoever kills him become the savior of the nation. Becoming the new emperor. That or the Heir's father kills him.

 

[Elfwine]

Or just blinds him. No need to kill him to make it clear that he's no longer eligible for the purple.

 

[Nijm]

Is it possible that during a civil war with one of the claiment take constantinople with army of muslims and converting ?

 

[holycookie]

Is it possible that during a civil war with one of the claiment take constantinople with army of muslims and converting ?

What prevents the Muslims from killing the prince after they invade the city?
Who will strongly support a pretender with an invading muslim army. More importantly, is it possible to conquer the city before using cannons? The one who conquered in OTL was the most energetic and competent Muslim empire in all of history. And even then it was difficult.

 

[Iam9Begea]

What prevents the Muslims from killing the prince after they invade the city?
Who will strongly support a pretender with an invading muslim army. More importantly, is it possible to conquer the city before using cannons? The one who conquered in OTL was the most energetic and competent Muslim empire in all of history. And even then it was difficult.

Constantinople was conquered several times by Byzantine rebels, Venetians and Niceans. It is entirely possible they manage to bribe someone to open a gate, or just roll a nat 20 luck and have the enemy army raiding a random island.

 

[AtreusHashim]

I just want to point out that this very nearly did happen with Leo III.

In 715 the Arabs landed at Amorion and were met by a Byzantine general named Konon (who was possibly Syriac and/or Arab, certainly spoke Arabic fluently as his native tongue). Konon, who had been a minor official for various emperors, cut a deal with the Umayyad generals Maslamah and Sulayman ibn Muadh. Maslamah provided Leo III with an army of 6000 men and called him Leo, rightful Emperor of the Romans. In return, Leo would use his contacts in the Byzantine administration to get the Arabs into Constantinople, possible he agreed to become a vassal of the Caliph.

Here the sources diverge and it gets difficult to tell what exactly happened. We know Leo turns up in late 717 as emperor. Possibly he arrived at Constantinople with an Arab army at his back, or otherwise he convinced the forces of Theodosius III to back him as Emperor. Leo either immediately repudiates those "make war on the Lord" or he continues to write to Maslamah inviting him to come to the capital as quick as he can (while shoring up the city's defences). Whatever the case it is clear that Leo eventually broke his promises to the Arabs and that the Umayyad generals with whom he'd been in close cooperation with until this point were deeply confused. Here was an emperor of their own making, a puppet they'd plucked from obscurity, choosing to defy them at their very moment of triumph.

Unfortunately for the Umayyads, Leo III managed to pull off a Jon-Snow-at-the-Wall-esque last ditch defence of Constantinople with the highlight being him deploying Greek fire en masse, possibly for the first time in history; burning the Arab fleet and allowing his capital to be easily resupplied while the Umayyad host starved through a brutal winter.

Leo III doing a double-double-cross and remaining loyal to the Umayyads is a really interesting POD. The Arabs occupy Constantinople without a fight and swarm the countryside over the following years.

 

[Tyler96]

Maybe something very very late when the Empire is hard pressed by the Ottomans? Perhaps with a claimant emerging from one of the Byzantine-Ottoman intermarriages?

There's also that one Komnenid who converted to Islam, but don't think he has much of a shot at the throne.

 

[Messain]

Well, my first option is based upon an actual attempt by a former Sultan of Rŭm to over thrown Basileus Mikhael who's name was Kayka'us II. This guy, he was an engima, he literally had two faiths: One, Roman Orthodoxy, Second, Sunni Islam. His attempt could or could not have successful (Source about his overthrown attempt is extremely pitiful), but if he had succeded, he would need to convert, however, he would perhaps have synchronised Islam with Christianity bringing some traits here and there.

A second option would be the Sultanate of Rŭm conquering Constantinople. If Alexio I have died when he was routed by the Normans, without a compentant Basileus (The Normans couldn't have conquered Constantinople, their resources were already being stretched thin in Eprius)

 

[Metempsychosis]

What i was originally asking was for a possible Muslim Emperor without a conquests, but all the ideas here are super interesting. Thats the great part about "What If"s.

Actually, I think that's one way the Eastern Roman Empire can have a Muslim Emperor: have the Ridda Wars shatter Islam, and have some Muslims settle within the ERE, helping the ERE against other Arab conquerors. Eventually, these Muslims become accepted as Romans, and as history happens, one of them ascends the throne.

 

[Tibi088]

As I see it your best bet is if a bzantine Emperor secure on the throne decides to convert.

Than there is the additional bonus of the byzantines seeing Islam as a christian heresy.

Have the byzantines be extremely successfull in the XI century, retaking the levant and Egypt, maybe even more (Mezopotamia, the Kaukazus, Tunisia etc). The point is that they should acquire a huge number of muslim subjects. Have the Emperor either try to come up with a new syncretic faith - OTL they did try that a lot with the various christian heresis while they were ruling over them and they will regard Islam as such - that practically ends up a greek, more christian influenced version of Islam.