AHC: Persia adopts Christianity but Rome doesn't

[Whiteshore]

With a POD after 100 CE, find a way for Persia to adopt Christianity but the Roman Empire doesn't adopt Christianity (it doesn't matter what religion the Romans have ITTL as long as they aren't Christian).

Bonus points if you could get this Christian Persia to be the "springboard" of the Christianization of large swathes of India and China as well.

 

[Noblesse Oblige]

Not sure if this is feasible, but I'll give it a try.

Firstly, for Rome to not adopt Christianity, I'd say it's as simple as not have Aurelian get killed off by his own men, and as such Sol Invictus becomes the religion of the Empire. I feel that monotheism was going to win out regardless of what happened and the Cult of Sol Invictus would've held out if he lived, even more so if he were the one to stabilize the empire completely, and not his eventual successor in Diocletian. I'd say alternatively, have Constantine ultimately fail at Milvian Bridge or otherwise but it would not have solved the religion problem overall.

As for Christianizing Persia, that's an even tougher sell, since Zoroastrianism was one of the major pillars of Sassanid Persia. While it was greatly tolerated during the second half of what was the Sasanian's lifespan, I feel it would only take a Persian "Constantine" to be able to Christianize Persia.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

The POD is 100 CE so you could prevent the rise of the Sassanians in the first place.

Firstly, for Rome to not adopt Christianity, I'd say it's as simple as not have Aurelian get killed off by his own men, and as such Sol Invictus becomes the religion of the Empire. I feel that monotheism was going to win out regardless of what happened and the Cult of Sol Invictus would've held out if he lived, even more so if he were the one to stabilize the empire completely, and not his eventual successor in Diocletian. I'd say alternatively, have Constantine ultimately fail at Milvian Bridge or otherwise but it would not have solved the religion problem overall.

This is really pedantic of me, but Sol Invictus isn't monotheistic. It acknowledges Sol at the top of the pantheon of Gods, not the one and only god.

 

[bbbiiiaaabbbaaa]

As for Christianizing Persia, that's an even tougher sell, since Zoroastrianism was one of the major pillars of Sassanid Persia. While it was greatly tolerated during the second half of what was the Sasanian's lifespan, I feel it would only take a Persian "Constantine" to be able to Christianize Persia.

This might not make sense, but maybe constantines father, the founder of the dynasty, is born in Persia after his parents or grandparents or more are forced to flee arouta the PoD for some reason (maybe they themselves are early adopters if Christianity) and Constantine the great grows to power in Persia and makes christianity the main religion in Persia just like he did in rome in otl.

 

[Kirook]

This might not make sense, but maybe constantines father, the founder of the dynasty, is born in Persia after his parents or grandparents or more are forced to flee arouta the PoD for some reason (maybe they themselves are early adopters if Christianity) and Constantine the great grows to power in Persia and makes christianity the main religion in Persia just like he did in rome in otl.

That’s, uh...I’m going to say that’s unlikely and leave it at that.

 

[Urcea]

The Persians overrun the Greek-speaking part of the Empire in the early 200s and the quick-growing Christian faith continues to do so (also with Mesopotamia) until Persia goes Christian in the 300s

 

[FranzAncheNo]

After 100 CE:
Parthia somehow conquers Egypt, Levant and Anatolia.
As you can see the problem is SOMEHOW, the fact that this isn't actually a PoD and that this could end in a Civil War between a Christian and Greek West and a Zoroastrian and Persian East.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

I don't see why this Persian state has to physically own the Levant for this to happen.

 

[Mike Stearns]

I don't see why this Persian state has to physically own the Levant for this to happen.

It doesn’t. The Persian Kings were Zoroastrians. Zoroastrianism is highly tolerant of other gods. It might be as simple has having Jesus, Mary and Joseph flee to Persia instead of Egypt.

 

[Analytical Engine]

I don't see why this Persian state has to physically own the Levant for this to happen.

Probably not, but having a good chunk of the world's Christians at the time would give it a boost...

Once they have finally figured out which branch of Christianity was going to be the official version.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

I wonder if you could do something with Christianity seeing Rome as the enemy (they killed Jesus and displaced the Jews after all) and viewing Persia as a savior-maybe drawing from Cyrus's interaction with the Jew-and thus focus on spreading within the Parthian/Persian Empire rather than Rome.


Paul's influence poses a problem though...

 

[Monter]

Keep the Parthians and the lack of highly organized state-sponsored religion can allow Christianity to flourish east of the Zagros.

 

[Albert.Nik]

The Pagans here were the Romans. Persia already had their Monotheistic Religion of Zoroastrianism. It wouldn't as be easy to displace Zoroastrianism which is very structured and strong. Pagans on the other hand would be an easy target here and so the Pagan Roman Empire turned Christian first.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

The Pagans here were the Romans. Persia already had their Monotheistic Religion of Zoroastrianism. It wouldn't as be easy to displace Zoroastrianism which is very structured and strong. Pagans on the other hand would be an easy target here and so the Pagan Roman Empire turned Christian first.

It's not really clear how strong Zoroastrianism was before Sassanian patronage, right?

 

[piratedude]

Not sure its really possible with the given POD tbh.

The roman world was rather fertile ground for Christianity. Its cosmopolitanism, interconnectedness, and (generally speaking) stability, makes it easy to spread. Even if you include the sporatic and localized persecutions the church experienced early on (they didn't get that bad until the 3rd century crises).

Now im not that familiar with them, so i may be wrong, but i don't think persia is as ripe for a newborn faith

 

[Noblesse Oblige]

Not sure its really possible with the given POD tbh.

The roman world was rather fertile ground for Christianity. Its cosmopolitanism, interconnectedness, and (generally speaking) stability, makes it easy to spread. Even if you include the sporatic and localized persecutions the church experienced early on (they didn't get that bad until the 3rd century crises).

Now im not that familiar with them, so i may be wrong, but i don't think persia is as ripe for a newborn faith

You have to realize that while Persia isn't nearly as Cosmopolitan (fewer cities as far as I'm aware) they weren't any less interconnected or stable than Rome was.

That being said, Persia was probably ripe for one, it's always been stated since the fall of the Sassanids, even if they were able to resist the Arabs (which they didn't and it was how Persia was converted to Islam over the course of the Early to Mid Medieval Era) it was likely it would've fallen to a dynasty that would have converted the country to Nestorian Christianity, so Persia is ripe, just not with the current forces in play as we know.

 

[Whiteshore]

What about the possibility of this Christian Persia being a "springboard" for the spread of Christianity to India and China?

 

[Albert.Nik]

It's not really clear how strong Zoroastrianism was before Sassanian patronage, right?

I think it would be quite strong even before and otherwise. It formed a central identity and religion of the Iranians even before the Sassanids. The only difference otherwise would be that Zoroastrianism would look different.

 

[TachfineAlMansour]

I have a question ? If roman empire doesn't take christianism, that means that when it falls no papacy and no christian kingdoms ? So eventually, how would affect Islamic conquests, admitting that RE fall and the arabs crush the as OTL, won't that make it easy for them to conquer their way around Europe.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

A Mesopotamian origin Persian dynasty after the Parthians might due to the trick. Throw in a more hostile Roman state to Christians that causes a bit more chain migration in the leadup to the new Persian dynasty and make the Christians an important pillar of support.

From there, there is good incentive to curry favor with a loyal yet growing minority up to and including conversion.