AH Discussion: Nestorian Persia

It seems to have become a bit of a trope in AH that, minus an Islamic Invasion, Persia was likely to go Nestorian (Church of the East). Now, i find the idea interesting, but i wonder if people could discuss the reason that this notion began? Why would the persians mbrace the Eastern Church, how would the Zoroastrian establishment react to it, and what would its effects be on the development of Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism and, of course, The Church of the East.
 
Not likely to have happened without a Nestorian Turkic Invasion involved.

The Zoroastrian establishment would react extremely badly. Revolts, especially of the Revolutionary Heretic Kind are abound if the various Apocalyptic Sect Movements that sprung up after OTL Islamic Invasion are an indicator.
 
Not likely to have happened without a Nestorian Turkic Invasion involved.

The Zoroastrian establishment would react extremely badly. Revolts, especially of the Revolutionary Heretic Kind are abound if the various Apocalyptic Sect Movements that sprung up after OTL Islamic Invasion are an indicator.
Nestorian Turkic invasion? :confused:

That's highly unlikely lol. :p
 
Nestorian Turkic invasion? :confused:

That's highly unlikely lol. :p
Without Islam as a competitor, why so unlikely?
IOTL, even with Islam around, there was apparently at least one significant tribe amongst the Mongols (or their close neighbours, I forget) that followed Nestorian Christianity at a date as late as the lifetime of Genghiz Khan...
 
The first issue I see about a Sassanid Nestorian Persia is the association that is made between Christianity and Rome.
While Persians can support Nestorians as a rival group of Christians, hoping to weaken the orthodox imperial position, I doubt they'll associate themselves with this and would likely persecute them as OTL.

However, it seems that Nestorians still were quite powerful before Islamic conquest and nothing really prevent its rise if associated with a more important iranisation (and maybe zoroastrisation) of its institutions and beliefs.
However, for it being widely adopted, you'll need a pretender or a sucessor to imperial throne being himself Nestorian and such thing would likely push a civil war that could durably separate west and east of Persia.

I can't see Turks carrying Nestorianism and imposing it on Persia however : as long they were steppe people, they could be tengric, Christians, Muslims or whatever they pleased (While the huge use of Turkic mercenaries by Islamic rulers would anyway be a push for Islamisation), but once they ruled a population, critically in the Caliph's name...I don't see how it could be conciliated.
 
The first issue I see about a Sassanid Nestorian Persia is the association that is made between Christianity and Rome.
While Persians can support Nestorians as a rival group of Christians, hoping to weaken the orthodox imperial position, I doubt they'll associate themselves with this and would likely persecute them as OTL.

However, it seems that Nestorians still were quite powerful before Islamic conquest and nothing really prevent its rise if associated with a more important iranisation (and maybe zoroastrisation) of its institutions and beliefs.
However, for it being widely adopted, you'll need a pretender or a sucessor to imperial throne being himself Nestorian and such thing would likely push a civil war that could durably separate west and east of Persia.

I can't see Turks carrying Nestorianism and imposing it on Persia however : as long they were steppe people, they could be tengric, Christians, Muslims or whatever they pleased (While the huge use of Turkic mercenaries by Islamic rulers would anyway be a push for Islamisation), but once they ruled a population, critically in the Caliph's name...I don't see how it could be conciliated.

Agreed. Persians, being rivals to the Romans/Byzantines, will want to be able to push a thorn into the Roman's side by supporting a disenfranchised old orthodox sect. This would greatly strengthen the Nestorian position and prestige, at the expense of course of relations between Persia and Rome.

Note that (according to Wikipedia):

"The Church of the East developed from the early Assyrian Christian communities in the Assuristan province of the Parthian Empire, and at its height had spread from its Mesopotamian heartland to as far as China and India." (Assyrian Church of the East)

However, on the page for Nestorianism, we find:

"
Following the exodus to Persia, scholars expanded on the teachings of Nestorius and his mentors, particularly after the relocation of the School of Edessa to the Persian city of Nisibis in 489 (where it became known as the School of Nisibis). Nestorianism never again became prominent in the Roman Empire or later Europe, though the diffusion of the Church of the East in and after the 7th century spread it widely across Asia. But not all churches affiliated with the Church of the East appear to have followed Nestorian Christology; indeed, the modern Assyrian Church of the East, which reveres Nestorius, does not follow all historically Nestorian doctrine.
Despite this initial Eastern expansion, the Nestorians' missionary success was soon deterred. David J Bosch observes
By the end of the fourteenth century, however, the Nestorian and other churches—which at one time had dotted the landscape of all of Central and even parts of East Asia—were all but wiped out. Isolated pockets of Christianity survived only in India. The religious victors on the vast Central Asian mission field of the Nestorians were Islam and Buddhism...[2]"

(Nestorianism)

Finally, it should be noted that "Nestorianism was officially anathematized, a ruling reiterated at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. However, a number of churches, particularly those associated with the School of Edessa in Mesopotamia, supported Nestorius—though not necessarily the doctrine ascribed to him—and broke with the churches of the Roman Empire. Many of Nestorius' supporters relocated to Sassanid Persia.[3][9] These events are known as the Nestorian Schism." (Church_of_the_East#Nestorianism)

The question therefore, is whether the strength of the Nestorian church--increasingly divided at this point as we saw--can sustain this growth and become so prominent as to warrant a full conversion by Persia, though a rival to Chalcedonian (and later Nicean) Orthodox Rome.

ChristianMartyrsandCensus

From the graph on page 3, it can be observed that compared to the Oriental Orthodox Assyrians, Copts, Ethiopians, etc. the Nestorians (now known as the Assyrian Church of the East, though the Assyrians reject the Nestorian label) are relatively weak--in fact, it appears that their largest number was just before a mass martyrdom contemporary with the East-West schism of 1054. Therefore, the only way Nestorianism would gain momentum and succeed in Persia, like a previous poster has stated, would for it to be Zoroastrianized (though this is fairly easy, due to the already significant Near Eastern influence on the three Abrahamic religions) and for a ruler/member of the ruling class to convert to Nestorian Christianity.

However, as previously stated, this would likely trigger a civil war; without any allies (which, as a Nestorian state, is highly unlikely, unless one were to hire Armenian or Mongol mercenaries), the war would be unwinnable/become a stalemate (though highly favourable to the Zoroastrian candidate who has the backing of the majority of the populace) further weakening the Persian state. A possible compromise settlement would have to be achieved, possibly similar to the Peace of Augsburg, instructing the entire population to convert to the religion of its ruler, leading to massive population redistributions and a possible increase in martyrdom rates. Persia would be further weakened against either a Roman reconquest of Mesopotamia, an Arab conquest of Persia (if we are to indeed assume the rise of Islam takes place as in OTL), or the worst case scenario for the Persian state--both. In either case, it is highly unlikely that Nestorianism would survive as a large minority religion, let alone that of the majority or ruling class in Persia, even if the (highly unlikely) situation of a royal conversion does manage to take place.
 
Without Islam as a competitor, why so unlikely?
IOTL, even with Islam around, there was apparently at least one significant tribe amongst the Mongols (or their close neighbours, I forget) that followed Nestorian Christianity at a date as late as the lifetime of Genghiz Khan...

BUDDHIST turks would be more possible if Islam never come or that up - the buddhism of central asia, Ghandara, perhaps from Soghdians...
 
A fair academic source for Nestorianism in Central Asia
http://www.oxuscom.com/Nestorian_Christianity_in_CA.pdf

It importantly points out several interesting changes in the Nestorian Church as it moved eastward. When it split from Antioch the Bishop then Cathlicos then Patriarch moved to Selucia-Ctesphion, the capital of the Parthian and Sassanid Empire, at the behest of the Shah. It moved across Central Asia not as the original Syriac but as a much more local Sogdian language as it was taken by many Sogdian Merchants. I note myself that there was a third event where the Hierarchy of the Church of the East split as the Pahlavhi speakers in Persia and India seperated and had their head in Rev Aradashir.
 
Top