DBWI: What if Arab Paganism was Wiped Out?

Pesigalam

Banned
So I just returned from my trip to see the Kaaba and its 360 idols. The statue of the golden-handed Hubal was truly breath-taking.

During the tour of the temple though our tour-guide mentioned that all of these rich artworks and holy sites came close to being lost in the 7th century when a tribal war-chief tried to capture Mecca and claim its holy places in the name of a singular god, destroying all traces of the worship of the other 359 gods.

My question to you is what would happen if this attack on Mecca has been successful and Arab paganism was wiped out?
 
Well, just claiming the Arabian Holy City wouldn't have been enough by itself, though it would have been a very big step. Probably Christianity would have made more inroads into the peninsula, since it did start in the same general vicinity and has been pretty darned successful in displacing other pagan faiths, especially in Europe. It's not far-fetched that a shared monotheistic religion would have led to more stable societies. Look at Persia and how long it's endured under Mithraism.
 
Don't be ridiculous. Listen, even when the Romans held the Kaaba during their campaigns in the 14th and 15th centuries they didn't try to destroy the idols, and this was when the Constantinopolitans were in full holy war mode. It's obviously an exaggerated story told by some over-enthusiastic guide.
 
I haven't even heard such event. And had Romans even any changes seize the city? I have many times met guides who don't know much or them have wrong information. Even in Glophilia* knows more.

*Equalement of Wikipedia.
 
Probably such an attempt would be pushed back considering the inconceivabillity of Arabs leaving polytheism. This monotheistic religion would likely die in the womb despite conquest and be subject to constant revolt. If they succeed in staying power, perhaps mass suncreticism?

Certainly not a state that conquers the largest empire the world, definitely not that.
 
I don't know; Arabia had a stronger monotheistic streak than supposed. If say Axum remains an important influence, or if the Jewish kingdoms are revived, you could see a general attenuation of Arab paganism-or at least reduction to the status of folk religion and a larger Christian/Jewish presence in the coasts.
 
I think I remember reading something about this; although its one of those 'less known' instances in Arabian history. I remember that they don't have a lot of detail about the faith he was trying to spread (probably because he failed.) I always wondered if it had any relationship to the Rahmanan faith that was present in Himyar centuries past, or else the later Jewish kings. Kinda a fascinating subject, really.
 
I think I remember reading something about this; although its one of those 'less known' instances in Arabian history. I remember that they don't have a lot of detail about the faith he was trying to spread (probably because he failed.) I always wondered if it had any relationship to the Rahmanan faith that was present in Himyar centuries past, or else the later Jewish kings. Kinda a fascinating subject, really.

Reminds me more of the Egyptian Pharaoh who tried to convert all of Egyptian religion to monotheism. Even if they had destroyed the idols, how do they convert people to their new religion and keep them from reverting the first chance they get? I think destruction of the idols is certainly plausible but I can't see this new religion lasting longer than a few decades at most and even then only when forced. I think we'd see the destruction of the idols, a brief period of enforced worship and a slow slide back to paganism.
 
Reminds me more of the Egyptian Pharaoh who tried to convert all of Egyptian religion to monotheism. Even if they had destroyed the idols, how do they convert people to their new religion and keep them from reverting the first chance they get? I think destruction of the idols is certainly plausible but I can't see this new religion lasting longer than a few decades at most and even then only when forced. I think we'd see the destruction of the idols, a brief period of enforced worship and a slow slide back to paganism.

Probably so. New religion would need strong foothold before it could be succesful. Roman Empire was able to change from paganism to Christianity because there was already much Christians. Spreading outside of Roman Empire lasted long time. Scandinavia is still polytheist despite that there was attembts to conversion centuries. There was even civil war on 13th century in Norse Kingdom over religions when Christian king tried convert Norses to Christianity.
 
Reminds me more of the Egyptian Pharaoh who tried to convert all of Egyptian religion to monotheism. Even if they had destroyed the idols, how do they convert people to their new religion and keep them from reverting the first chance they get? I think destruction of the idols is certainly plausible but I can't see this new religion lasting longer than a few decades at most and even then only when forced. I think we'd see the destruction of the idols, a brief period of enforced worship and a slow slide back to paganism.

Hey now, to be fair to these eikonoklastes, there's already a tendency in the neighboring lands towards purifying monotheism. Look at the Christian Romans and Egyptians and Abyssinians and the Mazdaki Sassanians, not to mention the Rahmani Jewish Himyarites.
 
The survival of the traditional beliefs of the Arab people is one of those real curiosities of the modern day - most similar polytheistic tradition were wiped out or subsumed into Buddhism, Christianity, or one of the other major world religions. Just look at Japan or Mahapajit, where tradiational polytheism is blended with Buddhism, or Hausaland where Christianity is worshipped alongside Bush-spirits. Arabian paganism is beautiful for its remarkable purity. Even Norse religion is deeply changed by history - no offense to Norse pagans, but we all know Odin is basically Jesus, guys. And the modern Scandinavia Trade Union is essentially atheist.

I don't know what can explain that - certainly there were substantial Hindu, Christian, and Jewish communities on the peninsula and those minority groups exist till this day. But does anyone have any idea why Arabian paganism specifically survived? The Roman Empire's 14th century revival was a bloody period of holy war and brutality - I'm amazed the middle east survived, let alone all these beautiful Arabian traditions. At least the modern Coptic Republic has done much to atone for the crimes of their forefathers.

Also, let's not be calling the Iranian Worker's State "Mazdakist" - I mean I know you're referring to its history under the Latter Sassanians, but that word has uncomfortable associations for many, given the Asori pogroms of the late 90's.

Ooc: I'm assuming the Sassanian and Roman polities still don't exist in the dbwi, right? That would be kind of weird.
 
Last edited:
The survival of the traditional beliefs of the Arab people is one of those real curiosities of the modern day - most similar polytheistic tradition were wiped out or subsumed into Buddhism, Christianity, or one of the other major world religions. Just look at Japan or Mahapajit, where tradiational polytheism is blended with Buddhism, or Hausaland where Christianity is worshipped alongside Bush-spirits. Arabian paganism is beautiful for its remarkable purity. Even Norse religion is deeply changed by history - no offense to Norse pagans, but we all know Odin is basically Jesus, guys. And the modern Scandinavia Trade Union is essentially atheist.

I think you are really stretching here. By your own words, the traditional Shinto beliefs of Japan or Hinduism of Mahapajit were never over written by Buddhism, but rather melded in. If anything, you could almost argue the opposite; that Buddhism was absorbed into the older belief structures. Asian beliefs have never been as monolithic as those found in the West, and faiths are allowed to mingle, co-exist and influence one another. Also, your statement about the Nordic Faith is purely wrong; although I would never argue that it wasn't influenced by Christianity (I'm not a Nordic fundamentalist by any means!), but the figure of Jesus has had precious little, if any, dictinfluence upon Odin. Balder, I will grant you (although there is some question about this; I've always felt that he picked up many of the redeemer features of Christ). Finally, just because the modern Scandinavian Trade Union's government is officially atheist, or, at least, doesn't dictate the faith to its constituent members, but that doesn't mean that the faith isn't important; I believe that temple attendance remains relatively high, especially in Saxony.

Now, all that being said, we're getting off topic. What I WILL agree with you about, is that the survival of paganism in Arabia is fairly remarkable, especially considering it has been surrounded by an aggressive Roman state, and successive Persian states throughout its entire existence. The art, mythology and literature created by the Arabs is some of the greatest in the world, and breath taking in its beauty.

Sorry; I'm kinda a "comparative religions" nerd at heart!
 
Now, all that being said, we're getting off topic. What I WILL agree with you about, is that the survival of paganism in Arabia is fairly remarkable, especially considering it has been surrounded by an aggressive Roman state, and successive Persian states throughout its entire existence.

It's unusual but not really surprising considering the situation. With no real natural resources to mention until the discovery of oil, all of the Empires that occupied Arabia sat very lightly on the ground. The Romans and their successor states in Egypt and East Africa rarely did more than secure the ports and some coastal areas. It just wasn't worth the effort to chase people into the desert. Even at the height of the Eastern Church's power mostly they plopped a church down in each town and as long as people gave lip service to the Church they were left alone. The state got trade tax, the Church got to say everyone went to mass, and the people were left alone.
 
You're right @DanMcCollum, I guess I don't know too much about the Nordic religion - I did know that religious attendance was higher among the Saxons, but that makes sense - they've always been a bit eager to define themselves against France and the other Christian states. Which imo is a shame. Europe shouldn't be disunited by these sectarian divisions.

Calling Arabia surrounded is a little unfair. Sure the Romans were a big threat for centuries, but Arabia always looked east and overseas for trade and prosperity, especially after Casaubon Tancredi managed his famous circumnavigation of Africa. Having spent some time working for Concordant United Oil Syndicate in the Gulf, I can tell you that the pan-Arabs are very proud of their maritime heritage. Indeed, I think the Romans milk the "centuries of grievances" rhetoric way more than the Arabs. But what do you expect? Romans are a bunch of fanatics with their heads are stuck in the fifteenth century who don't care about women's rights or workers rights.

[N.b. vaguely ignorant persona is not that of the actual author. New to the whole dbwi concept, want to make that clear.]
 
Though Monothesim is clearly not the only source of central rule, but maybe some ambitious Warlord uses Nestorian Christianity, or maybe Mithraism to unify the arab people an conquer the neighboring area, either the Jewish kingdoms, The Ethopia Copts, Romans, what have you. The Arabian Peninsula was exploding with population much like Mongolia was before the Mogul invasions. The Diffrence is that the Arabs didn't have a Chingus Khan. They instead squabbled with themselves and spread far in trade. You can to this day find large Arab communities dating back 800 years in places as far as Dai Nam. If this Hypothetical Warlord could unite the Arabs They might be able to establish a similar empire to the Mongols, establishing a hegemony from Agypt, to Somalia, maybe to India even. Though the population imbalance wouldn't last forever and eventually would be thrown out much like the Mongols, but hey Mongolia ruled Russia till only two hundred years ago, so clearly the arabs impact would be felt.

All said and done it doesn't require the removal of Arab Paganism, but removing it might help.
 
I am not sure if Arabs could be as Monotheists much more succesful as Mongols. Even that would be difficult enough enforce one new faith for every Arab. And them have long history with tribal wars. They might be able conquer Middle East but it wouldn't last many decades. And it is good to remember that Arab monarchies has always had very confusing succession system. Mongols had simpler one. If that person who ever create Arab empire doesn't create clear succession system whole Arab Kingdom will be dissolved due succession wars.
 
I am not sure if Arabs could be as Monotheists much more succesful as Mongols. Even that would be difficult enough enforce one new faith for every Arab. And them have long history with tribal wars. They might be able conquer Middle East but it wouldn't last many decades. And it is good to remember that Arab monarchies has always had very confusing succession system. Mongols had simpler one. If that person who ever create Arab empire doesn't create clear succession system whole Arab Kingdom will be dissolved due succession wars.

I don't know; maybe, maybe not. In tribal societies, a religious group being victorious in a war is usually taken as proof that the God of that group is powerful. We see this in the Middle East going back to the Babylonians. I could definitely see a new faith gaining traction in Arabia if the group pushing it has a series of military victories. Now, considering how well entrenched the different branches of Christianity and Zoroastrianism were in the region at the time, I'm not entirely sure how long lasting an Arabian Empire would be if they conquered the Middle East. But I do think its possible to have Arabia united under a single faith.
 
Top