Could the Arabic civilisation have remained the preeminent one?

Fatal Wit

Banned
Could it have done so? The asiest way might be for the Islamic Spaniards to maintain their position in Spain-but would that be enough for the Arab's to remain the supreme civilisation of Western Eurasia?
 
Could it have done so? The asiest way might be for the Islamic Spaniards to maintain their position in Spain-but would that be enough for the Arab's to remain the supreme civilisation of Western Eurasia?

There is a serious economic problem in that the regions ruled by the Arabs, with the exception of Egypt, were extremely ecologically fragile. A lot of the irrigation infrastructure built up over millenia was laid waste in the Byzantine-Persian Wars. What survived was very vulnerable to destruction, like Mesopotamia vs. the Mongols. Europe, on the other hand, with its regular and abundant rainfall, was much richer and more secure. Arab power was largely dependent upon income from trade. If the New World is not discovered, perhaps the Arabs could remain a large power, although you'd need an earlier POD. No Mongols would be a plus, too.
 
There is a serious economic problem in that the regions ruled by the Arabs, with the exception of Egypt, were extremely ecologically fragile. A lot of the irrigation infrastructure built up over millenia was laid waste in the Byzantine-Persian Wars. What survived was very vulnerable to destruction, like Mesopotamia vs. the Mongols. Europe, on the other hand, with its regular and abundant rainfall, was much richer and more secure. Arab power was largely dependent upon income from trade. If the New World is not discovered, perhaps the Arabs could remain a large power, although you'd need an earlier POD. No Mongols would be a plus, too.


Well what if the Muslims did seize the riches of the New World? You would have to put down the Europeans earlier then that to an extent and keep the Caliphate of Cordoba strong as well as strong Moorish Raiding ships prescence in the north seas.
 

Typo

Banned
Could it have done so? The asiest way might be for the Islamic Spaniards to maintain their position in Spain-but would that be enough for the Arab's to remain the supreme civilisation of Western Eurasia?
It's actually a lot harder than you might believe. Western Europe was going to come out of the dark age sooner or later, even without stagnation of Islam/Mongol invasion etc.

And I don't see southern Iberia remainig Islam is going to change that much.
 
A simpler path might be to save the Ottomans - after all, they had similar heights, being more moderate than their neighbors. And, they had enough turf to do it, unlike Spain. But that's not so easy, as the Ottomans had got pretty corrupt.

Hmm, the more I think about it, still another successor state seems more likely, based somewhere other than Istanbul (big-country capitals seem to get stale). It'd have to adopt democracy either immediately, or soon after the British Empire showed promise, to keep up with the Jones'. Yeah, they'd have to get into the colony game.


Abdul Hadi Pasha, trade almost always makes more money than farming, and then traders buy all those relatively cheap crops to have plenty to eat. In fact, farming generally makes less money, is harder on bodies, takes more work, and is less reliable than just about anything, really, except, of course, early hunter/gathering. Notice that the Ottomans stayed successful until they grew fatally corrupt and also failed to keep up with the world.
 
Really, no mention of the Printing Press? The device that propelled a backward and dead last Europe to being the dominant region of the world via the newly educated masses?

Cut the printing press out of Europe, Arabia remains unchallenged by all except the Chinese.
 
A simpler path might be to save the Ottomans - after all, they had similar heights, being more moderate than their neighbors. And, they had enough turf to do it, unlike Spain. But that's not so easy, as the Ottomans had got pretty corrupt.

Hmm, the more I think about it, still another successor state seems more likely, based somewhere other than Istanbul (big-country capitals seem to get stale). It'd have to adopt democracy either immediately, or soon after the British Empire showed promise, to keep up with the Jones'. Yeah, they'd have to get into the colony game.


Abdul Hadi Pasha, trade almost always makes more money than farming, and then traders buy all those relatively cheap crops to have plenty to eat. In fact, farming generally makes less money, is harder on bodies, takes more work, and is less reliable than just about anything, really, except, of course, early hunter/gathering. Notice that the Ottomans stayed successful until they grew fatally corrupt and also failed to keep up with the world.

Yes, but when there's a famine, all the trading in the world won't stop mass starvation and serious unrest. Europe virtually never has to worry about famine - in the Middle East, it's an ever-present danger. Plus, trade routes can be disrupted. The Silk Road was hosed by the ocean route, and before that was intermittent, as it could be interrupted by trouble in either China, the Mid East, or anywhere in between, etc.

On top of that, Europe, being far agriculturally richer, could support a much higher population. The Ottoman Empire at it's height, stretching from Persia to Morocco, from Hungary to the Sudan, has a population not much greater than France, and over those kinds of distances couldn't utilize it as well.
 
Really, no mention of the Printing Press? The device that propelled a backward and dead last Europe to being the dominant region of the world via the newly educated masses?

Cut the printing press out of Europe, Arabia remains unchallenged by all except the Chinese.

Move the invention of the printing press anywhere and that region becomes a bastion of knowledge. Arabia had the advantage of mathematics and the modern numeral system.
 
There is a serious economic problem in that the regions ruled by the Arabs, with the exception of Egypt, were extremely ecologically fragile. A lot of the irrigation infrastructure built up over millenia was laid waste in the Byzantine-Persian Wars. What survived was very vulnerable to destruction, like Mesopotamia vs. the Mongols. Europe, on the other hand, with its regular and abundant rainfall, was much richer and more secure. Arab power was largely dependent upon income from trade. If the New World is not discovered, perhaps the Arabs could remain a large power, although you'd need an earlier POD. No Mongols would be a plus, too.

How about if they were able to keep the irrigation infrastructure? Maybe have something like the borders of the Muslim and Christian worlds stabilize early on (assuming we're more or less equating the Muslim world to the Middle East, since we're mentioning a Muslim Spain). With lessened impact from Crusades and the conquest of Anatolia, you might have the infrastructure remain. So we'd have a more stable economy in the middle east, and lessened cultural diffusion to Europe.
 
On top of that, Europe, being far agriculturally richer, could support a much higher population. The Ottoman Empire at it's height, stretching from Persia to Morocco, from Hungary to the Sudan, has a population not much greater than France, and over those kinds of distances couldn't utilize it as well.

But is they manage to hold onto Iberia, as the original post said, they already have one more fertile region to add to Egypt -and, more importantly, they have the preeminet maritime position Spain and Portugal had to discover America and circunnavegate Africa
 

Fatal Wit

Banned
On top of that, Europe, being far agriculturally richer, could support a much higher population. The Ottoman Empire at it's height, stretching from Persia to Morocco, from Hungary to the Sudan, has a population not much greater than France, and over those kinds of distances couldn't utilize it as well.
This is probably just a stupid thought, but could the Crimean/Ukranian area have been turned into a thriving agricultural center for the Ottomans(like it was in the Greek and Roman Eras)? Or had some fundamental environmental change taken place there?
 
The 'environmental factor' was an almost un-ended stream of nomadic horsemen moving through the area. Once pacified, however, it turns into one of the most agriculturally productive areas on the planet.
 
This is probably just a stupid thought, but could the Crimean/Ukranian area have been turned into a thriving agricultural center for the Ottomans(like it was in the Greek and Roman Eras)? Or had some fundamental environmental change taken place there?

I would think that it would still be possible; the Ukraine was the breadbasket of the Soviet Union and is still a major agricultural producer. but its a long way to ship grain if you want to support, say, western european population densities in the middle east, and it would be more vulnerable to interruption due to war or similar catastrophe (basically, if the population starts to rise, anything which cuts off the grain supply could cause catastrophe).

On a side note, I remember reading a theory postulated by some middle eastern historians that the region had never truly recovered from the depradations of the mongol incursions, due in part to the destruction of the local infrastructure. If this can be avoided or somehow repaired...
 
Top