Alternative Timeline of Islamic Expansion

Mujahid786

Banned
Islam begins out much the same. Divine revelation of Allah to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) Caliph Abu Bakr fighting apostates and making raids on Byzantine. He dies of sickness and the Caliphate is given to Umar.

more will be posted later
 
Last edited:

Mujahid786

Banned
all of spain, iran syria etc are conquered, though in spain instead of fighting charles martel, they make peace with himand islam is welcomed by martel. he doesnt convert butmuslims are allowed to setup missions and trading posts in his empire, muslims become a large and important minority in france, holding many important govermnet and trading jobs.

in india caliphs direct muslim forces to cross the ruver south and conquer the hindu rajputs. many rajputs are slaughtered and the massacres instill fear into most of northern india and they all submit. in africa, muslim trading posts stretch far down into abyssiania, and mali. islam stays in these particular regions for a while.

the reconquista never occurs
 
all of spain, iran syria etc are conquered, though in spain instead of fighting charles martel, they make peace with himand islam is welcomed by martel. he doesnt convert butmuslims are allowed to setup missions and trading posts in his empire, muslims become a large and important minority in france, holding many important govermnet and trading jobs.
I can see his brilliant reasoning in this:

"An incredibly powerful new army just conquered all of Visigothia. They are on my border and launching sporadic raids across it. What should I do? Fight back? No! I have a better idea. I will allow this hostile foreigners into my kingdom, and give them control over my government while they retain an army that rivals my own right across the border. What could possibly go wrong?"

And I think the Rajputs would not be as much of a pushover as you suggest. They resisted most other conquerors for centuries, and IIRC there was a battle in the area in which the caliphate lost to the Rajputs around this time. The Rajputs losing would not make all of Northern India submit, it would just make the other groups fight harder against the Caliphate.
 

Mujahid786

Banned
I can see his brilliant reasoning in this:

"An incredibly powerful new army just conquered all of Visigothia. They are on my border and launching sporadic raids across it. What should I do? Fight back? No! I have a better idea. I will allow this hostile foreigners into my kingdom, and give them control over my government while they retain an army that rivals my own right across the border. What could possibly go wrong?"

And I think the Rajputs would not be as much of a pushover as you suggest. They resisted most other conquerors for centuries, and IIRC there was a battle in the area in which the caliphate lost to the Rajputs around this time. The Rajputs losing would not make all of Northern India submit, it would just make the other groups fight harder against the Caliphate.

there are no raids at all against martel, they enter his court peacefully bearing gifts and friendship
 
I can see his brilliant reasoning in this:

"An incredibly powerful new army just conquered all of Visigothia. They are on my border and launching sporadic raids across it. What should I do? Fight back? No! I have a better idea. I will allow this hostile foreigners into my kingdom, and give them control over my government while they retain an army that rivals my own right across the border. What could possibly go wrong?"

And I think the Rajputs would not be as much of a pushover as you suggest. They resisted most other conquerors for centuries, and IIRC there was a battle in the area in which the caliphate lost to the Rajputs around this time. The Rajputs losing would not make all of Northern India submit, it would just make the other groups fight harder against the Caliphate.

Quoted for truth - especially the last part.

What's more, India east of Sind wasn't exactly "just a few Rajput petty states" during the Umayyad and Abbasid periods - roughly between 700 and 1000 AD, much of central India was dominated by the Pratiharas, a Hindu dynasty from Gujarat and one of the three major powers in India during this period (the other two being the Rashtrakutas from southern India and the Buddhist Palas from Bengal).

And the reason that the Arabs never expanded further than Sindh IOTL, is that the Pratiharas and the other Indian powers were simply far too powerful - the Arabs tried fighting them on a few occasions, but lost pretty much every single time.

...and then there's the fact that the Arabs never even managed to subjugate the Afghan highlands, in spite of many attempts to do so in order to control the trade routes between Central Asia and India.

Most of Afghanistan remained in the hands of the Zunbils, a powerful polytheistic dynasty, along with a few lesser native dynasties. It was not until the rise of the Saffarids during the 9th century that the Muslims got a firm foothold in Afghanistan.
 
there are no raids at all against martel, they enter his court peacefully bearing gifts and friendship
Why the hell do they do that? From the Umayyad point of view, Firanja is weak and divided into squabbling kingdoms (the decaying Merovingians). There was a fight between Aqutaine and Francia, and legends of the richness of Francia (monasteries, convents, and churches) had reached the Muslims. Also, thousands of Visigoths had fled into Septimania. All of those combine to be very compelling for the Muslims to invade. So why would they decide to make peace instead?

Quoted for truth - especially the last part.

What's more, India east of Sind wasn't exactly "just a few Rajput petty states" during the Umayyad and Abbasid periods - roughly between 700 and 1000 AD, much of central India was dominated by the Pratiharas, a Hindu dynasty from Gujarat and one of the three major powers in India during this period (the other two being the Rashtrakutas from southern India and the Buddhist Palas from Bengal).

And the reason that the Arabs never expanded further than Sindh IOTL, is that the Pratiharas and the other Indian powers were simply far too powerful - the Arabs tried fighting them on a few occasions, but lost pretty much every single time.

...and then there's the fact that the Arabs never even managed to subjugate the Afghan highlands, in spite of many attempts to do so in order to control the trade routes between Central Asia and India.

Most of Afghanistan remained in the hands of the Zunbils, a powerful polytheistic dynasty, along with a few lesser native dynasties. It was not until the rise of the Saffarids during the 9th century that the Muslims got a firm foothold in Afghanistan.
The Shahis were also in Afghanistan at this time, IIRC. They were Hindu and lasted until the 11th century when the Ghaznavids came along. They were supported in the Kabul Valley even around 900, which as you said confirms that Islam was not yet firmly established in the region. In 700 it would be even more precarious there.

Aside: Ran, do you have any more information about the Zunbils? They seem interesting and I have never heard of them, so it would be good to learn more.
 
Aside: Ran, do you have any more information about the Zunbils? They seem interesting and I have never heard of them, so it would be good to learn more.

Al-Hind, a book about Medieval India and the expansion of Islam from the 7th to the 11th centuries.

So far, this book is my best source on the Zunbils (and early Medieval Afghanistan in general, for that matter).

Most of the book can be read online - just follow the link.
 
ASB. The courts of the Frankish kings were governed by Catholic priests. I had this argument many times with a dear friend of mine from Morocco while I was in school in France, and in the end, at least in the first 100 years, Islam was spread by the sword. Otherwise, who's going to give a rat's ass about some upstart cult come out of the sands of Arabia? The Muslim conquest of the 7th and 8th centuries was a glorious thing, a feat never seen in history before or since, but it was a conquest by force of arms.
 
never seen in history before or since, but it was a conquest by force of arms.

I the Seljuk invasion has to rival the Arabs in the scale of expansion. There were already large Arab populations in the Levant and Iraq before the Rashidun expansion, they just went to Egypt, Northern Africa, and Al-Andalus.
The Seljuks built a huge empire from Central Asia to Anatolia and everything in between. They Turkified Anatolia, Azerbaijan, and part of Iraq and lead to Turkish domination for at least seven hundred years.

Also Genghis Khan. He created the largest contiguous empire ever. Plus he has 300,000,000 descendants. That's incredible.
 

Mujahid786

Banned
I the Seljuk invasion has to rival the Arabs in the scale of expansion. There were already large Arab populations in the Levant and Iraq before the Rashidun expansion, they just went to Egypt, Northern Africa, and Al-Andalus.
The Seljuks built a huge empire from Central Asia to Anatolia and everything in between. They Turkified Anatolia, Azerbaijan, and part of Iraq and lead to Turkish domination for at least seven hundred years.

Also Genghis Khan. He created the largest contiguous empire ever. Plus he has 300,000,000 descendants. That's incredible.

woah, he must have been busy!:D:p
 
all of spain, iran syria etc are conquered, though in spain instead of fighting charles martel, they make peace with himand islam is welcomed by martel. he doesnt convert butmuslims are allowed to setup missions and trading posts in his empire, muslims become a large and important minority in france, holding many important govermnet and trading jobs.



the reconquista never occurs

...they make peace?... Are you serious?

About the reconquista, I always think that was a civil war. Call it reconquista was a marketing strategy to win supporters. In fact many times it was a war between Christians, Muslims against Christians, and Muslims, that is, all against all
 
I can see his brilliant reasoning in this:

"An incredibly powerful new army just conquered all of Visigothia. They are on my border and launching sporadic raids across it. What should I do? Fight back? No! I have a better idea. I will allow this hostile foreigners into my kingdom, and give them control over my government while they retain an army that rivals my own right across the border. What could possibly go wrong?"
In fct, there wasn´t "an incredibly powerful ney army". They conquered us (Spain) with only about ten thousand soldiers (I don´t remember the figures from recent studies)
 
Top