Challenge: A Jewish Empire? (none Khazaria related)

Well it won't turn everybody, but you'd still see some growth. And it generally works better with the 1000s to 1600 or 1700 era, as the Ottoman Empire and the Mughal Empire can generally prove. There were a great many people who converted in order to reach the upper echelons of government, and should this Jewish state do something similar, it's an effect which could happen.

Well, I'm trying to imagine why you'd need to convert to reach the upper echelons of government. As opposed to the House of Solomon(?) accepting loyal governors of whatever creed.
 

Titus_Pullo

Banned
"we just need to make a dramatic change, nothing serious".


With a surviving unifified kingdom post 926 BC, no Babylonian Conquest no Babylonian captivity, trust me there will be very serious changes to Jewish religous doctrine over the course of time either through political marriages with neighboring kingdoms and empires, through conquest or simply through religious synchretism.
 
Well, I'm trying to imagine why you'd need to convert to reach the upper echelons of government. As opposed to the House of Solomon(?) accepting loyal governors of whatever creed.
I'm saying if you wanted to have more say on a national scale. And generally you improve your chances if you're a loyal Jewish governor over a loyal Pagan governor, for example. I mean there will still be a Jewish upper class if this empire has to stay stable, and that will mean preference towards certain candidates over others.
 
Maybe Athaliah would be a good bet. The daughter of King Ahab of Israel came to rule Judah for a period, roughly contemporary with the rule of her brothers in the northern kingdom. Once her brothers die, you could have her or her son or grandson uniting the two realms. Depending on who unites the two, you could a monarch more amenable to Baal worship/the syncretism of Yahweh/Baal Shamin/Baal Hadad etc.

When they go on a conquering spree, subjugated nations are forced to abide by Mosaic law or face the consequences (death). Not sure how viable that would be over all of the Near East, let alone an empire like Persia's.
 

Titus_Pullo

Banned
Well, I'm trying to imagine why you'd need to convert to reach the upper echelons of government. As opposed to the House of Solomon(?) accepting loyal governors of whatever creed.


Converting to the religion of your conquerors either to gain special favors like gaining tax exemption, joining the civil service, or in the course of time you just become a believer or whatever has almost always been the case whatever religion it is. I imagine in an Israelite Empire things wouldn't be much different. Simply put you would be in a better position to move up through the ranks of government or the army if you are a good (fill in the blank) in this case a Jew. History is full of examples that conquered people who convert to the dominant religion are in a much better position to move up.
 
Last edited:
With a surviving unifified kingdom post 926 BC, no Babylonian Conquest no Babylonian captivity, trust me there will be very serious changes to Jewish religous doctrine over the course of time either through political marriages with neighboring kingdoms and empires, through conquest or simply through religious synchretism.

Sure. But there's a big difference between "over the course of nearly three thousand years things won't stay the same" and "this change isn't a big deal".

trollhole: This explains why there were so many converts to the religion of the Acheamenids.

What's going to make this different?
 

Titus_Pullo

Banned
Sure. But there's a big difference between "over the course of nearly three thousand years things won't stay the same" and "this change isn't a big deal".

trollhole: This explains why there were so many converts to the religion of the Acheamenids.

What's going to make this different?

You know its one thing to offer suggestions to a given pod and another thing to offer no suggestions yourself other than "I can't think of any reason" and then proceed nit pick at other suggestions constantly. There's a word for people like that which I'm not going to say.

If you don't agree with my pod, then offer a better suggestion. The "I can't think of a good reason to" argument is an all too conventient excuse for the fact that you have no suggestions other than the "yes but" yest but" "That's Not What Happened Our Time Line" quip.
Your comment about not seeing any point to convert to the relgion of the conqueror to get promoted to higher office suggests a total lack of knowledge. Either offer a suggestion and say why its better or sthu.
 
Last edited:
You know its one thing to offer suggestions to a given pod and another thing to offer no suggestions yourself other than "I can't think of any reason" and then proceed nit pick at other suggestions constantly. There's a word for people like that which I'm not going to say.

If you don't agree with my pod, then offer a better suggestion. The "I can't think of a good reason to" argument is an all too conventient excuse for the fact that you have no suggestions other than the "yes but" yest but" quip.
Youre comment about not seeing any point to convert to the relgion of the conqueror to get promoted to higher office suggests a total lack of knowledge. Either offer a suggestion and say why its better or sthu.

I don't think you're going to get mass conversions to Judaism without a highly unlikely course of events even if the Jewish polity holds together.

There is no point converting to the religion of the conqueror just because he's the conqueror, or we'd see every conquered people converting - nevermind that the OTL equivalent polity to what you're proposing didn't see that. And no one has offered a reason why an Israelite empire would be different than the Achaemenids in that regard when the same reason for tolerating a wide range of diverse cultures and religions is just as present if not more so (given the number of Jews vs. subjects).

That's far more relevant than that in other circumstances we see conversions to the faith of the conqueror.

But if you'd rather ignore any problems with your proposed scenario, then that's your right - no one can force you to accept that some scenarios are infeasible. But acting as if saying they are is some kind of trollish thing isn't a good way to inspire positive feedback from skeptics.
 
Last edited:

Titus_Pullo

Banned
I don't think you're going to get mass conversions to Judaism without a highly unlikely course of events even if the Jewish polity holds together.

In other words, you still have no suggestions other than to be a donkey's rear end.

There is no point converting to the religion of the conqueror just because he's the conqueror, or we'd see every conquered people converting
-

History unfortunately doesn't agree with you.


nevermind that the OTL equivalent polity to what you're proposing didn't see that. And no one has offered a reason why an Israelite empire would be different than the Achaemenids in that regard when the same reason for tolerating a wide range of diverse cultures and religions is just as present if not more so. .

"Well that didn't happen in otl therefore impossible to happen in an ATL" is all you have to offer? If everyone were like you, the whole genre of alternate history wouldn't exist.

But if you'd rather ignore any problems with your proposed scenario, then that's your right - no one can force you to accept that some scenarios are infeasible. But acting as if saying they are is some kind of trollish thing isn't a good way to inspire positive feedback from skeptics.


That's rich coming from someone who has consistently offered no scenario.
 
What if you just limited the scope or area of this Jewish Empire?

Eygpt has a history of being conquered by neighbors from just about every direction. Could the Israelis pull off subjugating Eygpt for a time?
 
In other words, you still have no suggestions other than to be a donkey's rear end.

In other words, you have no ability to accept any criticism of your scenario.

-

History unfortunately doesn't agree with you.
Show me these mass conversions to the faith of the Achaemenids then. Not of other polities in other circumstances.

That some times in some circumstances some people converted to the faith of their conquerors does not mean that this being one of those times and places is feasible or likely.

You have a far flung polity where it's the interests of the rulers to tolerate diversity because centralization would be ineffective at best and resented at worst - why would King Whoever not adopt the OTL policy of the Achaemenids when facing the same circumstances they did in regards to maintaining his rule?

"Well that didn't happen in otl therefore impossible to happen in an ATL" is all you have to offer? If everyone were like you, the whole genre of alternate history wouldn't exist.
It didn't happen for good reason in OTL and there's no reason why TTL has better reason for it to happen because the same reasons for it not being worthwhile still applies.

Not even remotely the same as your strawman.

That's rich coming from someone who has consistently offered no scenario.
Because I don't think this is a feasible challenge, especially not based on the idea of Judaism being spread over the whole of the area.
 
Last edited:
Sure. But there's a big difference between "over the course of nearly three thousand years things won't stay the same" and "this change isn't a big deal".

trollhole: This explains why there were so many converts to the religion of the Acheamenids.

What's going to make this different?
I'm not talking about the majority of the empire being Jewish, however. But within the politics of an empire, it was generally good sense to convert when aspiring to be something greater. One such example is the Turks who went from slaves to arguably the upper class of political Islam. At the same rate, you'd see other people wanting to reach that upper class and becoming Jewish to do it.

Or as an alternative, the Mamluk system, where slaves who converted would be soldiers, creating a new class in this Jewish Empire.
 
I'm not talking about the majority of the empire being Jewish, however. But within the politics of an empire, it was generally good sense to convert when aspiring to be something greater. One such example is the Turks who went from slaves to arguably the upper class of political Islam. At the same rate, you'd see other people wanting to reach that upper class and becoming Jewish to do it.

Or as an alternative, the Mamluk system, where slaves who converted would be soldiers, creating a new class in this Jewish Empire.

Neither of which were in situations comparable to the Achaemenid polity that this is filling the territory of.

Sure, a Jewish empire where the Jews were dominant it would be a good choice to convert - but over this area, they're not going to be dominant - too few of them and too much area to cover.

The Mamluk system might work, but I'm not sure the situation where that was used is comparable either. Seems more likely than the previous, but what's the incentive on the part of the rulers to set up the slave soldier system?

These are questions that - much as Titus would like to ignore them - need to be answered.
 
Neither of which were in situations comparable to the Achaemenid polity that this is filling the territory of.

Sure, a Jewish empire where the Jews were dominant it would be a good choice to convert - but over this area, they're not going to be dominant - too few of them and too much area to cover.

The Mamluk system might work, but I'm not sure the situation where that was used is comparable either. Seems more likely than the previous, but what's the incentive on the part of the rulers to set up the slave soldier system?

These are questions that - much as Titus would like to ignore them - need to be answered.
Wait, Achaemenid polity? Er...

Well, on the Mamluk system, it's simply easier to use them to put down rebellions (of which there are many) and frankly, if we're talking the Achaemenids, then the Turks will again be a major pool for taking out these slave-soldiers. And suppose a Mamluk state is created, then the Jews in said state will be dominant, so the first system of conversion works once more, especially since people will see that "even slaves of that religion gain a higher place in society by being Jewish? That gives me an idea!"
 
And generally over time you'll see a trend towards conversion, as well, because of social mobility.:)

The focus could be toward a more Ethnic Empire, again like the Ottomans or Kassites who conquered Babylon. It depends also how much the nature of the Faith will be seen among the Jews in this empire. If they hold Blood and Faith to be inseparable then they could discourage their subjects from converting.
 
Wait, Achaemenid polity? Er...

Yes. That big sprawling decentralized Iranian empire that would be the "Persia" whose place Titus wants taken by Judea Maximus.

Well, on the Mamluk system, it's simply easier to use them to put down rebellions (of which there are many) and frankly, if we're talking the Achaemenids, then the Turks will again be a major pool for taking out these slave-soldiers. And suppose a Mamluk state is created, then the Jews in said state will be dominant, so the first system of conversion works once more, especially since people will see that "even slaves of that religion gain a higher place in society by being Jewish? That gives me an idea!"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the institution OTL is post-Islam. Which is to say, quite a few centuries after the latest possible POD for this. Not sure why earlier states didn't use it.

And this http://www.iranchamber.com/history/achaemenids/achaemenid_army.php suggests a lack of use of Turks.
 
Yes. That big sprawling decentralized Iranian empire that would be the "Persia" whose place Titus wants taken by Judea Maximus.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the institution OTL is post-Islam. Which is to say, quite a few centuries after the latest possible POD for this. Not sure why earlier states didn't use it.

And this http://www.iranchamber.com/history/achaemenids/achaemenid_army.php suggests a lack of use of Turks.
I'm saying a similar institution might occur. And I'm saying Turks, because the Mamluks were largely Turkic slaves, not the Achaemenid Empire's soldiers. If the "Jewish Empire" has Persia, it's easier to get those slaves.
 
Top