Caliph in Constantinople: Hellenized Islamic World ATL

[Falecius]

Islam--the new Alexander the Great.

This is pretty big in Islam IOTL. Alexander is mentioned in the Qur'an after all (well, "The One with Horns" is, which a majority of both Classical Muslim and Modern secular interpreters take to be Alexander, with good albeit not entirely decisive arguments).
Alexander also features very prominently in Classical Islamic literatures, especially Persian.

 

[Falecius]

If only Allah had spoken to Muhammad in Greek

So that nobody in Arabia would have understood the Message?
The Qur'an makes a very clear point about being in a language that people understand, which is fairly odd since some critics found good arguments to believe that the language was not that understandable even in early times (big scholarly scuffles here).

 

[Falecius]

much more heavy concentration of scholarship and knowledge into Arabic civilization as a whole.

This is tall order. Scholarship and knowledge had about as much emphasis as humanly possible in Classical Islamic milieus. I cannot imagine how, given the physical and social constraints (that won't go away) you get much more of it (very scholarly reference: Knowledge Triumphant by Franz Rosenthal). Now, you can direct that focus on different topics though.

 

[Falecius]

However, I agree that Khalid remaining in service would provide a good POD.
I don't think he can take Constantinople, but taking a major chunk of Anatolia would be doable. Umar's assanitation is likely butterflied away (might happen at a different time or not at all). Khalid, if alive at TTL's Umar's death, is very clearly in line for succession over Uthman.
This changes the dynamic of the first fitna greatly. A civil war at some point is still very likely, but it may be delayed and/or played out differently.
This may mean no Umayyads, and no Shiism as we know it, so of course no Abbasids either.
However, i don't think that Constanople could be made the main Caliphal seat, not in the first century AH and very probably not later too. Antioch may be a possiblity though.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

This is pretty big in Islam IOTL. Alexander is mentioned in the Qur'an after all (well, "The One with Horns" is, which a majority of both Classical Muslim and Modern secular interpreters take to be Alexander, with good albeit not entirely decisive arguments).
Alexander also features very prominently in Classical Islamic literatures, especially Persian.

It is still debated heavily whether Dū al-Qarnayn was Alexander the Great or Cyrus the Great. Most modern Qurans cite Cyrus the Great rather than Alexander the Great. That being said it is true that scholars in early Islam considered this to be an easy subject and cited Alexander as the "he of the two horns" or Dū al-Qarnayn.

 

[Falecius]

It is still debated heavily whether Dū al-Qarnayn was Alexander the Great or Cyrus the Great. Most modern Qurans cite Cyrus the Great rather than Alexander the Great. That being said it is true that scholars in early Islam considered this to be an easy subject and cited Alexander as the "he of the two horns" or Dū al-Qarnayn.

There are other possibilities as well, but most modern Western scholars I am aware of tend to cling to Alexander. I personally favor this view as well, but mileages may vary. I can see why Cyrus is a popular choice, esp. in contemporary Iran. Anyway, you are right that the discussion is still on and not likely to be concluded anytime soon.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

I am not so sure about this "hellenized Khilafah". I don't know how you will get the Khilafah to forget it's past in Arabia and all its culture and just adopt Roman Hellenism.

First of all, Muslims of the day almost universally considered Arabic to be the most eloquent language in existence "We have not sent you a messenger except with the language of his people so he can make things clear to them." (Quran 14:4). With that known how exactly will Arabs just go around adopting Greek? It's not as if the Arabs have no culture and are looking for some new language to inherit. No, Arabic is already a mature language built off of Syriac, it has developed completely with the Kufic script, the Quran and a vast poetry base. This led (mainly from the Quran) to Arabs (during Umayyad & Rashidun) believing them and their lifestyle was better than the settled Syriacs or Copts, they proceeded to glorify the Arab and his Bedouin past shunning the Greaco-Roman lifestyle. This is evident by the actions of the multicultural egalitarian Khawarij who said that the Caliph does not have to be an Arab, why would this movement exist in Islam if there wasn't a sort of racism (cultural preference) towards non Arabs? So in short, why would a people who consider their own culture superior adopt another without being conquered?

The best I feel you could get is Hellenized architecture opposed to Persian based ones and possibly crowns and royal dress adopted by later Islamic rulers. Perhaps Greece becomes similiar to OTL Iran?

Also this brings us to how would this even help the Khilafah. Or would this overextend it completely? How exactly would the Khilafah enforce Jizya on the Levant, Iraq, Persia, North Africa and Greece/Anatolia? This isn't EU4, just painting the map your colour for base tax doesn't work lol. I feel any long term conquest of Greece and Persia and North Africa would result in the loss of one of them. Especially once the rebellions start kicking in, can you imagine a Greek Khwarij revolt like the Berber or Zanj revolt lol poor Khilafah, no chance. They were hard pressed holding on to their otl territory adding any more rebellios areas much less the entire Byzantine empire would be disastrous.

 

[Falecius]

I am not so sure about this "hellenized Khilafah". I don't know how you will get the Khilafah to forget it's past in Arabia and all its culture and just adopt Roman Hellenism.

First of all, Muslims of the day almost universally considered Arabic to be the most eloquent language in existence "We have not sent you a messenger except with the language of his people so he can make things clear to them." (Quran 14:4). With that known how exactly will Arabs just go around adopting Greek? It's not as if the Arabs have no culture and are looking for some new language to inherit. No, Arabic is already a mature language built off of Syriac, it has developed completely with the Kufic script, the Quran and a vast poetry base. This led (mainly from the Quran) to Arabs (during Umayyad & Rashidun) believing them and their lifestyle was better than the settled Syriacs or Copts, they proceeded to glorify the Arab and his Bedouin past shunning the Greaco-Roman lifestyle. This is evident by the actions of the multicultural egalitarian Khawarij who said that the Caliph does not have to be an Arab, why would this movement exist in Islam if there wasn't a sort of racism (cultural preference) towards non Arabs? So in short, why would a people who consider their own culture superior adopt another without being conquered?

The best I feel you could get is Helkenized architecture opposed to Persian based ones and possibly crowns and royal dress adopted by later Islamic rulers. Perhaps Greece becomes similiar to OTL Iran?

Also this brings us to how would this even help the Khilafah. Or would this overextend it completely? How exactly would the Khilafah enforce Jizya on the Levant, Iraq, Persia, North Africa and Greece/Anatolia? This isn't EU4, just painting the map your colour for base tax doesn't work lol. I feel any long term conquest of Greece and Persia and North Africa would result in the loss of one of them. Especially once the rebellions start kicking in, can you imagine a Greek Khwarij revolt like the Berber or Zanj revolt lol poor Khilafah, no chance. They were hard pressed holding on to their otl territory adding any more rebellios areas much less the entire Byzantine empire would be disastrous.

I agree that linguistic assimilation is very unlikely. I suppose that the OP assumed the passage of Greek cultural features into an Arabic linguistic medium, in a more lasting and deeper way than IOTL (where it still occurred to a considerable degree). Taking over the greek language altogether is not happening IMHO.
I am not sure about overextention being a given ITTL, although it surely a possibility. I see it as manifesting more as a split than a loss, anyway. Islam has proven to be very persistent in the areas it took hold, although of course there are some major exceptions like Spain.
However, Arabic was not built "off Syriac" although of course the two languages are related.

 

[hasdrubal barca]

I'm supposed to teach this stuff to some unlucky undergraduates, although at times I am embarassed at how little I know myself about certain relevant topics (for instance, numismatics, which provide a big deal of available evidence for the first-second century AH, is a large blank spot for me).


Actually it's the first time I hear of it. The title alone suggests a Western bias.

I will be glad to help for the TL within the limits of my knowledge and, of course, free time (currently in very short supply, due to the pressing needs of the aforementioned undergraduates).

I'm currently an undergraduate student. It sounds like i would love your class.

The book despite having a Western bias was actually given to me by one of my Muslim friends. So i suppose it is well read by all.

 

[hasdrubal barca]

4) The Abbasid-Mu'tazilite connection never stood a chance. The Mu'tazilites valued rational reasoning over communal consensus (oversimplistic here again). This was politically dangerous and conducive to discord within the community, and was opposed on that basis. Unless the Mu'tazilites were willing to reconsider a LOT of their epistemology, they were bound to remain an intellectual movement without mass following.

What could the Mu'tazilites do to make themselves more mainstream?

Is there anyway the rationalists (those who reconciled Greek philosophy with Islamic beliefs and the Quran) to win the debate over the traditionalists? or is the deck already stacked against them?

 

[Falecius]

I'm currently an undergraduate student. It sounds like i would love your class.

I think that you are safely far away from any chance of attending one, barring some very odd circumstance.
I will find more about the book you mentioned.

 

[hasdrubal barca]

Also this brings us to how would this even help the Khilafah. Or would this overextend it completely? How exactly would the Khilafah enforce Jizya on the Levant, Iraq, Persia, North Africa and Greece/Anatolia? This isn't EU4, just painting the map your colour for base tax doesn't work lol. I feel any long term conquest of Greece and Persia and North Africa would result in the loss of one of them. Especially once the rebellions start kicking in, can you imagine a Greek Khwarij revolt like the Berber or Zanj revolt lol poor Khilafah, no chance. They were hard pressed holding on to their otl territory adding any more rebellios areas much less the entire Byzantine empire would be disastrous.

They would need some extensive bureaucracy to accomplish anything thats for sure. The Umayyad in OTL did being to suffer financial difficulties after the failure to take Constantinople, so any conquests can only help in that department.


I do agree with you in regard to rebellions. I can't see them maintaining Persia. In this TL would they even be able to win the Battle of Talas and keep the Chinese out?

 

[Falecius]

What could the Mu'tazilites do to make themselves more mainstream?

Agreeing on something would be a great start.

Is there anyway the rationalists (those who reconciled Greek philosophy with Islamic beliefs and the Quran) to win the debate over the traditionalists? or is the deck already stacked against them?

The deck is stacked, but not so much that a reversal of OTL's outcome is impossible.
Also note that while the Mu'tazila disappeared as a school of thought in its own right, its Ash'arite opponents had to incorporate a lot of the rationalistic methods it used, in defense of "traditional" conclusions.
So, a "middle ground" was possible historically.
In my view, the conflict at its core was not so much between reason and tradition/revelation, but between individual opinion and communal consensus, both elaborated through a varying mix of reliance on rational methods and religious hermeneutics. The overarching worry of Muslim religious scholars was to prevent discord in the community at all costs, a point where, by the way, traditionalists, mu'tazilites and ash'arites all agreed.
Not having a Caliph of dubious orthodoxy such as al-Ma'mun trying to enforce a core mu'tazilite tenet as official doctrine would have possibly helped to reach an overall consensus closer to mu'tazilite ideas in some critical areas; jailing your opponents hardly helps making people believe in the rational soundness of your views after all.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

Agreeing on something would be a great start.



The deck is stacked, but not so much that a reversal of OTL's outcome is impossible.
Also note that while the Mu'tazila disappeared as a school of thought in its own right, its Ash'arite opponents had to incorporate a lot of the rationalistic methods it used, in defense of "traditional" conclusions.
So, a "middle ground" was possible historically.
In my view, the conflict at its core was not so much between reason and tradition/revelation, but between individual opinion and communal consensus, both elaborated through a varying mix of reliance on rational methods and religious hermeneutics. The overarching worry of Muslim religious scholars was to prevent discord in the community at all costs, a point where, by the way, traditionalists, mu'tazilites and ash'arites all agreed.
Not having a Caliph of dubious orthodoxy such as al-Ma'mun trying to enforce a core mu'tazilite tenet as official doctrine would have possibly helped to reach an overall consensus closer to mu'tazilite ideas in some critical areas; jailing your opponents hardly helps making people believe in the rational soundness of your views after all.

True. It was every Muslim scholars (except Khawarij, some Shiite sects and Salafi) to preserve the Ummah and avoid Fitna (discord). The difficulty I see here is to create a Ummah that would take Mu'tazalites as a mainstream ideology with Greek influences (perhaps Gnostics?) that are not immediately labelled as Bidaa (innovation in religion). Can you even imagine the fierceness of a Greek Khawarij movement after the Arabs shun Greek culture or a Khawarij revolt against the nobility of the Mu'tazalites. Like I said earlier, I feel Greece could become like Iran, Muslim but opposed to the widespread use of Arabic and somewhat different in theology an application of Shariah, perhaps icons are slightly more accepted.

Answering the Syriac connection, I was not saying built off of as in the language itself but it is obvious that Kufic and Naskh were built from the Syriac script as used in Iraq abd Edessa from 200 BC till the 500s AD.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

They would need some extensive bureaucracy to accomplish anything thats for sure. The Umayyad in OTL did being to suffer financial difficulties after the failure to take Constantinople, so any conquests can only help in that department.


I do agree with you in regard to rebellions. I can't see them maintaining Persia. In this TL would they even be able to win the Battle of Talas and keep the Chinese out?

Again how would they improve from this conquest? It would just add another Iran to their nation or North Africa. Unless they just move their capital to Nicea or something, but I have no idea what would posses them to do that. I mean Dimshaq and Baghdad were perfect for control over North Africa and Iran, adding another far flung land would just ruin this equilibrium that was fragile from the start. I don't see how loot from Greece and Anatolia would be worth the future troubles with Greece, with that said if the Khilafah is given the chance to take the city they will gladly do so, but I just feel that the annexation of Byzantium would be disastrous for the Khilafah especially if Greece is taken. If the Khilafah just takes Islands and interior Anatolia maybe then the conquest would be worth the future trouble.

I don't know Talas will probably still be won if it was fought (I doubt the Khilafah contests them). Either way what can Tang do? Tang is bound to break eventually, it is already in the decline and will be a non factor for the Khilafah whos powerbase is far from Bactria or Sogdiana.

 

[hasdrubal barca]

I put up the first part of the TL, enjoy. https://www.alternatehistory.com/Discussion/showthread.php?p=10768748#post10768748 This thread can still be used for discussion.

 

[hasdrubal barca]

Again how would they improve from this conquest? It would just add another Iran to their nation or North Africa. Unless they just move their capital to Nicea or something, but I have no idea what would posses them to do that. I mean Dimshaq and Baghdad were perfect for control over North Africa and Iran, adding another far flung land would just ruin this equilibrium that was fragile from the start. I don't see how loot from Greece and Anatolia would be worth the future troubles with Greece, with that said if the Khilafah is given the chance to take the city they will gladly do so, but I just feel that the annexation of Byzantium would be disastrous for the Khilafah especially if Greece is taken. If the Khilafah just takes Islands and interior Anatolia maybe then the conquest would be worth the future trouble.

Thanks for the post I'll try to incorporate the downside of the conquests in the ATL.

 

[Orisha91]

This is tall order. Scholarship and knowledge had about as much emphasis as humanly possible in Classical Islamic milieus. I cannot imagine how, given the physical and social constraints (that won't go away) you get much more of it (very scholarly reference: Knowledge Triumphant by Franz Rosenthal). Now, you can direct that focus on different topics though.

You have a point, I could have worded that better.

I was thinking that Ali and his support would try to define the ideal or proper muslim as having a more diverse and widespread base of knowledge in the gulf alongside the Islamic scholarship in the long term.

Basically have the gulf adopt as much as it can from Hellenized sources as it can to keep up with the richer less areas outside the gulf in the long term. This would result in the core of Arabian civilization not falling behind as much in the coming centuries. If we want, maybe get Ali and Co. to start translating some Greek and Coptic documents they come across in Anatolia and Egypt?

Maybe have the documents or any sources of knowledge focus more on agricultural, trading, or engineering focused documents? How about a heavier focus of sailing and trade through red sea?

 

[hasdrubal barca]

You have a point, I could have worded that better.

I was thinking that Ali and his support would try to define the ideal or proper muslim as having a more diverse and widespread base of knowledge in the gulf alongside the Islamic scholarship in the long term.

Basically have the gulf adopt as much as it can from Hellenized sources as it can to keep up with the richer less areas outside the gulf in the long term. This would result in the core of Arabian civilization not falling behind as much in the coming centuries. If we want, maybe get Ali and Co. to start translating some Greek and Coptic documents they come across in Anatolia and Egypt?

Maybe have the documents or any sources of knowledge focus more on agricultural, trading, or engineering focused documents? How about a heavier focus of sailing and trade through red sea?

I would seriously be interested in seeing a TL based around Khalid idn al-Walid living longer and Ali. If this Caliph in Constantinople TL is a success maybe i'll write a prequel for it revolving around this.

 

[Orisha91]

Cool wit me.
I'd look forward to a prequel.

Why not have the Abbasid choke off the more metaphysical and politically controversial proponents of the mu'tazilites in favor of those more geared to the harder sciences? Maybe have them concentrate on more tangible avenues or judge their worth based on how they can enrich the caliphate as a whole, from the common man all the way to Caliph?