AH Challenge: Bigger Shia and Ibadism

How is it possible to ensure that the Shia and Ibadi are larger subsets of Muslims by *2010? A majority is not required, but more along the lines of a 70-30 or a 60-40 split would be interesting. And for that matter, why have the Sunni become the majority Muslim sect?
 

Philip

Donor
How is it possible to ensure that the Shia and Ibadi are larger subsets of Muslims by *2010? A majority is not required, but more along the lines of a 70-30 or a 60-40 split would be interesting. And for that matter, why have the Sunni become the majority Muslim sect?

The Caliph has almost always been Sunni. The only exception I know of was under the Fatamid Caliphate[1]. To have a more even split, it seems to me that you need more areas to not be under the political control of a Sunni Caliph. Look at OTL - the largest group of Shi'ites is in Iran. It was successful primarily as a resistance movement against the Sunni Ottomans. So, you could have similar regions like that. Otherwise, I think you need the split to be more severe early on -- perhaps two rival caliphs unable to get the upper hand.



[1] It can be argued that the Caliphate under Ali himself was Shi'ite, but I think the Sunnis dispute that.
 
You can also dispense with the Caliphs earlier. My TL will probably end up butterflying away conventional Shiism and probably end up with a 30-45-20-5 split with Khariji Sufrism, Sunni, Ismaili, Other(including Ibadi). In mine, my Caliphs were driven from Baghdad in the late 800s by the Persians and were killed at last in the 1020s. While the Persians were at least nominal Sunnis, they were concerned with political control than doctrine and all sorts of weird stuff has sprung up to them culminating in the seizure of the middle east by the Qarmatian Non-Ismailis that united several Christians states with Muslim ones to drive these almost-commies out of the Holy Lands....
 
Save the Fatimid Caliphate!

It was the most successful Shia Muslim state in history, controlling, at its height, Egypt, much of North Africa, and parts of the Levant. If you prevent its destruction by Saladin in 1171, and either have it survive or have the successor states be Shia instead of Sunni, then you'll definately fill the conditions of the OP.
 

Nikephoros

Banned
It was the most successful Shia Muslim state in history, controlling, at its height, Egypt, much of North Africa, and parts of the Levant. If you prevent its destruction by Saladin in 1171, and either have it survive or have the successor states be Shia instead of Sunni, then you'll definately fill the conditions of the OP.

Fatimids?

I proposed a scenario a year or so ago. It asked: The Fatimid Caliphate captures Baghdad. What happens next?
 
Fatimids?

I proposed a scenario a year or so ago. It asked: The Fatimid Caliphate captures Baghdad. What happens next?

Depends on whether they hold it, and to whether they capture the Caliph or not (if he escapes, then he's almost certainly going to start running around the remaining Sunni areas trying to form a coalition against the "heretical unbelievers")

The best case scenario for the Fatimids-they take Baghdad, hold the city for some time, and prevent the Caliph from escaping-could well produce an Ismaili-majority Iraq, Levant, and North Africa, with Sunnism becoming a largely Persian and Turkic faith.
 
Depends on whether they hold it, and to whether they capture the Caliph or not (if he escapes, then he's almost certainly going to start running around the remaining Sunni areas trying to form a coalition against the "heretical unbelievers")

The best case scenario for the Fatimids-they take Baghdad, hold the city for some time, and prevent the Caliph from escaping-could well produce an Ismaili-majority Iraq, Levant, and North Africa, with Sunnism becoming a largely Persian and Turkic faith.
Heretical miscreants (=misbelievers =heretics)

My understanding was that Islam did a much better job at ranking 'heretics' as higher than 'unbelievers' than Christianity did. Christianity seemed at times to prefer rank unbelievers than someone who differed over some trivial piece of Christology. Sigh.
 
Top