What would be the most likely time for a Persian Empire (Mesopotamia + Persian plateau) with a Christian (Nestorian?) ruler class to emerge? From what I understand, in Sassanian Persia, Christianity was beginning to spread so that almost all of Mesopotamia (where Ctesiphon itself, seat of the Sassanian Kings and their court, was located) was solidly christian.

Assuming a PoD that prevents Islam from existing or expanding beyond Arabia, would the Sassanian Kings be compeled to convert as Constantine did in the Eastern Roman Empire?
 
Last edited:

scholar

Banned
Its a little more complicated than that, Constantine was not compelled to become a Christian. Christians remained a minority inside of the Empire until well after Constantine won the empire and converted. The institution of emperor actually was the main catalyst for the transformation in the first place. Persia's Zoroastrians were never the dominant faith among the people, only among the ruling classes. Manichean and Christian, and even some Buddhist missionaries had converted most of the populous at the point of the invasion by Khosrau II. Given litergical differences between the Christians in Persia and the Christians in Rome, cooperation between the two did not appear to happen often. Zorastrianism at this time was also quite different from Achaemenid Persia, which resulted in its largely being absorbed into the Abrahamic understanding of the world. While distinctly different, Judaic, Christian, and Manichean influences had more or less transformed the faith into a monotheism, and the royal family had a handful of Jewish marriages, even from the very beginning. This meant that Persia was never really considered Pagan, just not Christian. Muhammad and the Caliphate would eventually claim that the Zoroastrians were people of the book, and placed on a like level with Christians and Jews. This was not purely motivated by political realities, but by common cultural understanding. As a result Zoroastrianism was not seen with as much hatred as Pagan cults would otherwise receive in Rome as demographics flipped in their favor. Furthermore, Zoroastrianism was a fundamental marker of the Persian monarchical and administrative identity. Them converting on their own would be a very tricky proposition, and would most likely only occur during a period of civil war where an appeal was made to gather popular support.
 
Nestorianism was more of an Assyrian thing rather than Persian thing. They used Syriac. There was a Metropolitan in Rev Ardashir that was developing in Middle Persian but regulated to eastern Persia.
 
Its a little more complicated than that, Constantine was not compelled to become a Christian. Christians remained a minority inside of the Empire until well after Constantine won the empire and converted. The institution of emperor actually was the main catalyst for the transformation in the first place. Persia's Zoroastrians were never the dominant faith among the people, only among the ruling classes. Manichean and Christian, and even some Buddhist missionaries had converted most of the populous at the point of the invasion by Khosrau II. Given litergical differences between the Christians in Persia and the Christians in Rome, cooperation between the two did not appear to happen often. Zorastrianism at this time was also quite different from Achaemenid Persia, which resulted in its largely being absorbed into the Abrahamic understanding of the world. While distinctly different, Judaic, Christian, and Manichean influences had more or less transformed the faith into a monotheism, and the royal family had a handful of Jewish marriages, even from the very beginning. This meant that Persia was never really considered Pagan, just not Christian. Muhammad and the Caliphate would eventually claim that the Zoroastrians were people of the book, and placed on a like level with Christians and Jews. This was not purely motivated by political realities, but by common cultural understanding. As a result Zoroastrianism was not seen with as much hatred as Pagan cults would otherwise receive in Rome as demographics flipped in their favor. Furthermore, Zoroastrianism was a fundamental marker of the Persian monarchical and administrative identity. Them converting on their own would be a very tricky proposition, and would most likely only occur during a period of civil war where an appeal was made to gather popular support.

Pretty much this. The only thing that I'd add/amend is that there was a significant difference between the state Sassanian religion and more "folk" practices that could more easily be called Iranian paganism. We know a lot more about the lives of the royalty and the elite, of course, and there was a clear top-down program of trying to "reassert" or perhaps "restore" Iranian culture and traditions - i.e. state religion - but the Iranian religious tradition itself was rather resilient.
 
I mean one of the Ilkhans converted to Christianity (Church of the East). The Christians were by that time dominant in northern Mesopotamia. If the Mongols, and subsequently their Turkic brethren convert to Christianity , we might get at least 30% of Iran Christian (especially the region of Tabriz).
 
Top