AHC: Turks convert to Buddhism by AD 700

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
....and stay that way for the most part, even if Islam emerges....what happens from there?
 
....and stay that way for the most part, even if Islam emerges....what happens from there?

Barring the arbitrary conversion of certain Khagans, you need an earlier Chinese unification and expansion into Central Asia which can outlive the Arab assault (which historically bested China in 751 AD at Talas).

That said, Buddhism is not as 'missionary' a religion as Islam, and so there's always the risk that the religion will eventually displaced through Arab mercantile/missionary efforts in the Central Asian region. The only way to really guarantee Turkic non-conversion is if the Turks manage to successfully invade and set up dynasties in China - like the OTL Later Tang.

Without Islamicized Turks, it's less likely that Arab monarchies will employ them throughout the Middle East as mercenaries, which also means less likelihood of Turkic governors throughout the Abbasid world, a smaller chance of Abbasid collapse in the 9th Century, and so on.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
So your thinking is that what the Turks do religiously is based less on their choice and more on where they live and move to. IE, they conquer China and accordingly migrate east they can go Buddhist. But the processes of Islamization and westward migration to the Middle East in OTL reinforce each other, and you couldn't end up with a Turkish Buddhist Anatolia for instance.
 
So your thinking is that what the Turks do religiously is based less on their choice and more on where they live and move to. IE, they conquer China and accordingly migrate east they can go Buddhist. But the processes of Islamization and westward migration to the Middle East in OTL reinforce each other, and you couldn't end up with a Turkish Buddhist Anatolia for instance.

This is basically true. As nomadic peoples, the Turks lacked a real 'high culture'. They tended to (like most nomads, see the Mongols) insert themselves at the top of a society and take the local form of high culture. This is why the Turkic Mamluks became Arabised, whilst the Ottoman Turks utilised a syncretic Persian-Byzantine form of governance. The Mongols did the same with the Ilkhanate becoming Persianised and the Yuan Dynasty becoming Sinicised. Not to mention the Timurids and their adoption of Persian court culture.
 
No, I'd say that Buddhism is actually a very proselytizing religion. The existence of OTL Buddhist missionaries also makes it easier to convert the Turks. In fact, I believe Buddhism already had a presence in Central Asia.

EDIT: This article nicely elaborates on what I mean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_transmission_of_Buddhism#Central_Asian_missionaries

Yes, it was from Central Asia that Buddhist first made inroads into China, and from there, Korea and Japan. The Central Asians at the time weren't Turkic-speakers, however - In the Tarim Basin city-states like Qiuci and Turpan, they were Tocharians, and the cities south of that like Kashgar and Khotan spoke Indo-Iranian Saka dialects. Xinjiang during this time wasn't monolithically Buddhist but also included a mix of Zoroastrian, Manichaean, and Nestorian elements. The Uyghurs adopted Manichaeism as their religion, and I believe the latter two monotheistic religions helped pave the way to Islam’s dominance. As for Zoroastrianism, modern Central Asians continue to practice Persian Zoroastrian influences including the Noowruz New Year festival and elements of fire veneration integrated into Uyghur and Tajik marriage ceremonies.
 
Top