AHC/WI: Several European countries convert to Islam peacefully like Indonesia

  • Thread starter Deleted member 97083
  • Start date
According to tradition, the Khazar Khan invited missionaries of Chalcedonian Christianity (speaking of "Orthodox Christianity" pre-1054 is inaccurate), Islam, and Judaism for a debate before choosing Judaism, so we could have gotten a Muslim Khazaria if the Muslim missionaries had been more able to convince the Khan.

Issue with that is that the Judaism was chosen as a middle ground, I. E. Wouldn't offend the Muslims and wouldn't offend the Christians.
 
I think and issue with this whole thread is that I doubt that very many people converted to Islam "peacefully". As @John7755 يوحنا says Indonesia didn't really convert peacefully, and equally I would say in Christianity most people converted not because a massive drive towards Christianity but massive preferential treatment. Really very few groups converted "peacefully", ironically I would say that mainly falls to the Goths, as peaceful conversion by Osmosis. Them or some other periphery groups around the Romans. But even then they largely converted due to the adoption of slaves into their societies.
 
Would it have been possible for many medieval European countries to convert to Islam as an internal movement among its ruling class to improve connection to Islamic trade networks?

Kievan Rus seems the most obvious possibility.

Perhaps Lithuania?

Plausible candidates:

1. Spain & Portugal, assuming things go slightly better for al Andalus
2. Italy (the Emirates in Sicily and Bari simply do better)
3. France (Arabs win at Tours in 732)
4. Greece (was actually ruled by Muslims for 400 years)
5. Poland (converts after the siege of Vienna. Or perhaps Constantinople falls in 717 and all the Slavs convert to Islam)
6. Austria (Vienna falls and the Ottomans conquer central Europe)
7. Russia (instead of adopting Orthodoxy, the Kiev Rus adopt Islam).

More generally, I see Italian states as most likely to adopt Islam for reasons of trade. Their access to markets was vital for their economy, and converting could have been good for profits.

Perhaps the leading converts could be Benevento, Amalfi, possibly Naples and maybe Venice. Genoa probably doesn't convert unless Islam has a bigger presence on the mainland than OTL. Maybe the Emirate of Bari unites with Taranto and the Emirate of Sicily or receives more support from North Africa and al Andalus.
 
Honestly, I think the only real PoD for this is one where the Roman Empire holds off Islam in the initial days - and Islam focuses on Persia/India/Central Asia.

Having a more co-operative relationship between Christianity and Islam could support peaceful trade and less overt condemnation of Christians and Muslims by one another. This can then lead to the same pattern of conversion as in East Asia.

So you start with a peaceful Muslim trading community buildup in Egypt, tolerated by the Emperor, which then spreads throughout the Med.

Considering the Abrahamic nature of Islam, I don't see it as unlikely, that after a few hundred years you could have significant European Muslim populations, even if they end up being heresies to Islam East of the Romans. It could (potentially, it depends on how the Empire evolves in the face of this flavour of Islam) even have the Romans convert (although the details of that conversion would be hard to understand, it may well be that a syncretic Christian heresy that has a large number of Muslim characteristics could become prominent in the Church.)
 
Would it have been possible for many medieval European countries to convert to Islam as an internal movement among its ruling class to improve connection to Islamic trade networks?

Kievan Rus seems the most obvious possibility.

Perhaps Lithuania?
How about the possibility of a Visigothic Emirate in Spain ? Or Muslim Magyars in Hungary before King Stephan converted to Catholics faith ?
 
Last edited:
According to tradition, the Khazar Khan invited missionaries of Chalcedonian Christianity (speaking of "Orthodox Christianity" pre-1054 is inaccurate), Islam, and Judaism for a debate before choosing Judaism, so we could have gotten a Muslim Khazaria if the Muslim missionaries had been more able to convince the Khan.

This story while common and romantic, is most likely incorrect or based upon very shallow water. For instance, no Muslim authority of the Abbasid period, would accept a Jewish state entity outside its realm more than a traditional faith or Christian one. There is no difference between the two, both cause fitnah (chaos) by failing to accept the sharia and authority of Allah. So, the idea of the Khazar making a compromise, for me lacks weight.
 
How about the possebility of a Visigothic Emirate in Spain ? Or Muslim Magyars in Hungary before King Stephan converted to Catholics faith ?
Are we still using the term peaceful? Spain might have been converted under more peaceful situations had the Muslims done better, they been able to stave off the Carolingians, and maybe if they were able to come to a more understanding accord with their Christain subjects under Cordoba. But while I think Islam might have become the majority faith in the region had things gone better, there would have been little "Peaceful" about it.

As for Hungarians, sure. But they would have become easy prey for the HRE or the Byzantines depending on the era. Their geopolitical position would have eventually meant they would have had to deal with kingdom and dutchies that would be eager to enrich themselves at the expense of Muslims surrounded on all sides. Rather the conversion to Christianity was a way to be seen by those that surrounded them as contemporaries and natives rather than "Other".
 

Deleted member 97083

This story while common and romantic, is most likely incorrect or based upon very shallow water. For instance, no Muslim authority of the Abbasid period, would accept a Jewish state entity outside its realm more than a traditional faith or Christian one. There is no difference between the two, both cause fitnah (chaos) by failing to accept the sharia and authority of Allah. So, the idea of the Khazar making a compromise, for me lacks weight.
Politics would be a factor as well over religion itself. If the Khazars compromise and choose Judaism, it doesn't show favoritism to either side. Judaism and Christianity may both be seen as equally incorrect disbelievers by the Caliphate, but Chalcedonian Christianity implies demonstrating some subservience to the Ecumenical Patriarch and Emperor in Constantinople, a factor that the Khazars don't want.

In Empires of the Silk Road: A History of Central Eurasia from the Bronze Age to the Present, Christopher Beckwith argues:

"The Khazars, the close allies of the Byzantines, adopted Judaism, as their official religion, apparently by 740, three years after an invasion by the Arabs under Marwan ibn Muhammad. Marwan had used treachery against a Khazar envoy to gain peaceful entrance to Khazar territory. He then declared his dishonourable intentions and pressed deep into Khazar territory, only subsequently releasing the envoy. The Arabs devastated the horse herds, seized many Khazars and others as captives, and forced much of the population to flee into the Ural Mountains. Marwan’s terms were that the kaghan and his Khazars should convert to Islam. Having no choice, the kaghan agreed, and the Arabs returned home in triumph. As soon as the Arabs were gone, the kaghan renounced Islam – with, one may assume, great vehemence. The Khazar Dynasty’s conversion to Judaism is best explained by this specific historical background, together with the fact that the mid-eighth century was an age in which the major Eurasian states proclaimed their adherence to distinctive world religions. Adopting Judaism also was politically astute: it meant the Khazars avoided having to accept the overlordship (however theoretical) of the Arab caliph or the Byzantine emperor." (p. 149)​
 
Politics would be a factor as well over religion itself. If the Khazars compromise and choose Judaism, it doesn't show favoritism to either side. Judaism and Christianity may both be seen as equally incorrect disbelievers by the Caliphate, but Chalcedonian Christianity implies demonstrating some subservience to the Ecumenical Patriarch and Emperor in Constantinople, a factor that the Khazars don't want.

In Empires of the Silk Road: A History of Central Eurasia from the Bronze Age to the Present, Christopher Beckwith argues:

"The Khazars, the close allies of the Byzantines, adopted Judaism, as their official religion, apparently by 740, three years after an invasion by the Arabs under Marwan ibn Muhammad. Marwan had used treachery against a Khazar envoy to gain peaceful entrance to Khazar territory. He then declared his dishonourable intentions and pressed deep into Khazar territory, only subsequently releasing the envoy. The Arabs devastated the horse herds, seized many Khazars and others as captives, and forced much of the population to flee into the Ural Mountains. Marwan’s terms were that the kaghan and his Khazars should convert to Islam. Having no choice, the kaghan agreed, and the Arabs returned home in triumph. As soon as the Arabs were gone, the kaghan renounced Islam – with, one may assume, great vehemence. The Khazar Dynasty’s conversion to Judaism is best explained by this specific historical background, together with the fact that the mid-eighth century was an age in which the major Eurasian states proclaimed their adherence to distinctive world religions. Adopting Judaism also was politically astute: it meant the Khazars avoided having to accept the overlordship (however theoretical) of the Arab caliph or the Byzantine emperor." (p. 149)​

It makes me wonder, what circumstances would make it beneficial to the Khazars to convert to Chalcedonian Christianity? All in all having the Khazars as a buffer state is very useful for the Romans, as well as having them able to support them in wars.
 

Deleted member 97083

It makes me wonder, what circumstances would make it beneficial to the Khazars to convert to Chalcedonian Christianity? All in all having the Khazars as a buffer state is very useful for the Romans, as well as having them able to support them in wars.
It's plausible that they could have done it. The Khazars were basically an ally of the Byzantium and enemy of the Caliphate for several decades after conversion, so even though Judaism was the middle ground, a conversion to Christianity is possible. IIRC, the Byzantines even funded the construction of fortresses in the Khazar territory.
 
It's plausible that they could have done it. The Khazars were basically an ally of the Byzantium and enemy of the Caliphate for several decades after conversion, so even though Judaism was the middle ground, a conversion to Christianity is possible. IIRC, the Byzantines even funded the construction of fortresses in the Khazar territory.

It wouldn't surprise me if the support would go so far as to support them controlling Central Asia under such a scenario.

I do like the idea of a Khazar "Western Mongol Timeline" - with the Romans as backers rather than uh, victims. It'd be interesting to see them adapt Roman influences to the steppe.
 
I'm not saying its ASB, actually. Maybe a more violent Danelaw leaves most of the island of Britain in Norse Pagan hands, who, as Scandinavia converts to Christianity, converts to Islam to gain access to Andalusian markets and as a kind of "screw you" to the pope and sink anything that tries to take England back, but even then that's kinda cheating.

I've toyed with the idea of how to get an Islamic Britain before. Can you explain why you think a more violent Danelaw would mean Paganism hangs on in the British Isles?
 
I've toyed with the idea of how to get an Islamic Britain before. Can you explain why you think a more violent Danelaw would mean Paganism hangs on in the British Isles?
It's a lot harder to convert to Christianity if all the Christian's in your realm are dead, on the run, or paying lip service to Paganism. And assuming Scandinavia converts to Christianiry like OTL, Islam will be a good alternative since the Caliph really doesnt give a shit about Britain and nobody theres gonna be in the line of succession to any kind of Caliphate so no threat to power so they're gonna gain recognition from him and most of the rest of the Muslim world.
 
Islam will be a good alternative since the Caliph really doesnt give a shit about Britain and nobody theres gonna be in the line of succession to any kind of Caliphate so no threat to power so they're gonna gain recognition from him and most of the rest of the Muslim world.

King John of England offered to convert to Islam in a letter to the Almohad Caliph around the year 1200. He wanted military help against his rivals at home.
 
King John of England offered to convert to Islam in a letter to the Almohad Caliph around the year 1200. He wanted military help against his rivals at home.
Holy shit, do you have a source? I heard somewhere Saladin ended up being fascinated with French culture to the point where at one point he wanted to counterinvade France and establish an Islamic state there, but naturally it never got off the ground, but I can't find a source. But while on one hand, converting to Islam just means King John is hated by everyone, but on the other hand, if he pulled it off...
 
Both Russian and Persian sources suggest that Vladimir (who, after a brief attempt at centralizing Slavic paganism, chose Orthodoxy) considered conversion to Sunni Islam. Once Kievan Rus goes Muslim, there's a good chance at Lithuania becoming Muslim too.

Given Constantinople's influence in the region and what exactly a conversion to Islam would entail in their relationship with the Byzantines, I find it unlikely for this to occur.
 
Holy shit, do you have a source? I heard somewhere Saladin ended up being fascinated with French culture to the point where at one point he wanted to counterinvade France and establish an Islamic state there, but naturally it never got off the ground, but I can't find a source. But while on one hand, converting to Islam just means King John is hated by everyone, but on the other hand, if he pulled it off...

Sure, here you go:

http://mbarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2006/02/king-johns-plan-to-convert-england-to.html?m=1
 
I think in this scenario we at least exclude kingdom around the Mediterranean as a peaceful category because they're in direct caliphs expansions and subversion to them if convert, if we use Indonesia as the reference then they are must be rather isolated or defensible, has economic or political advantage if convert to Islam and rather independence from caliphs authority after convert, the last is the ruler are successor of the pre-Islamic dynasty.
 
Islam with its' dietary laws in general and Ramadan in special is ill suited for more northerly latitudes. It simply woudn't do if a considerable portion the more religiously observant part of your population dies from dehydration whenever Ramadan happens to fall within 30 days of the summer solistice. So this pretty much rules out Scandinavia. Other regions that would have been unlikely to convert to Islam are those where viticulture was economically important so I'm rather doubtful that Italy, France or Greece would have converted voluntarily.
 
Top