Implications of Islam as a Universal Religion

[Mr_Fanboy]

I am no expert in Islamic history, but let me sketch out a very rough scenario. Say that during the early Muslim conquests the Umayyad Caliphate is able to take Constantinople, largely inheriting the mantle of the Roman Empire, and that later on, in some counterpart to the Battle of Tours, the Franks are absolutely smashed. Now, this does not necessarily lead to an immediate Muslim conquest of the entirety of Europe, but the Mediterranean is thoroughly under Islamic political control by 800 A.D. or so. With that sort of momentum, the early Slavs, Bulgars, and other groups that may populate Eastern Europe largely convert to Islam instead of Christianity. Meanwhile to the east, the Islamic conquests in Central and South Asia go even better than in our timeline, setting the stage for an earlier conquest of India by some Muslim dynasty. Missionaries to Tibet and China are eventually able to convert those countries, and in addition to the Turks, almost all of the nomadic steppe peoples follow suit.

After this point, Islam ceases to have any strong global competitors, and by 2020, at least 70% of the world population would describe themselves as Muslim. Sure, the world is not totally converted to this religion - there will likely be many Christians and Jews living in majority Muslim areas, and perhaps even Christian or pagan states in Northwestern Europe, while Buddhism and Hinduism will likely still have some sort of presence in East and South Asia. But in the main, this is a Muslim world.

What implications would such a situation have for the religion, though? What sort of doctrinal differences and schisms are likely to pop up throughout such a world? I have seen it argued that an Islam that successfully takes Constantinople and other large swathes of Europe early in its history might eventually find itself more Christianized, at least in that part of the world. What about Chinese Islam, and all of the other local permutations? Is this world liable to see some brutal religious conflict regardless?

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

@John7755 يوحنا

 

[Cymry-Korean]

Even with a smashing victory at a Tours analogue, the Umayyads were at the end of their rope logistically. I also doubt that missionaries will just "eventually convert these counties ".

 

[Cymry-Korean]

If we brush aside these concerns I'd think that the cultural and geographic chasms that would exist following this expansion would pretty much necessitate a diversification of the Islamic world. Think the reformation but on a much larger scale.

 

[Kerney]

Even with a smashing victory at a Tours analogue, the Umayyads were at the end of their rope logistically. I also doubt that missionaries will just "eventually convert these counties ".

While I agree to some extent, greater Umayyad success could lead to further conquests down the line (and like the idea of Norse Paganism surviving because Christianity is taken out) so a Muslim world is possible.

The point is not how the conquest comes about. It is that it is.

Arguing the fine points of the conquest is not the point. The point is a Muslim world and it's implications.

Let's stick to the point.

 

[Cymry-Korean]

While I agree to some extent, greater Umayyad success could lead to further conquests down the line (and like the idea of Norse Paganism surviving because Christianity is taken out) so a Muslim world is possible.

The point is not how the conquest comes about. It is that it is.

Arguing the fine points of the conquest is not the point. The point is a Muslim world and it's implications.

Let's stick to the point.

I did so in my follow up. I was just stating that getting to this point ran roughshod over lots of rather large bumps.

 

[Philip]

greater Umayyad success could lead to further conquests down the line (and like the idea of Norse Paganism surviving because Christianity is taken out) so a Muslim world is possible.

Why would Norse paganism survive? This is a world where Muslim empire(s) have overrun the Christian portions of Europe. Why would they stop there? Even if they did, why wouldn't the Norse fall to the same political, economic, and cultural pressures of OTL?

 

[Mr_Fanboy]

Why would Norse paganism survive? This is a world where Muslim empire(s) have overrun the Christian portions of Europe. Why would they stop there? Even if they did, why wouldn't the Norse fall to the same political, economic, and cultural pressures of OTL?

I was just considering the possibility that, in a world where Europe is largely Muslim but a cluster of Christian states remain in OTL northern and northeastern France, the Low Countries, the Alps, the British Isles, and roughly the area of the OTL Holy Roman Empire in 1789 (I think that the Franks could very well lose Aquitaine to the forces of Islam in the long term, but they would probably survive as a coherent state further away from the Mediterranean), the Norse might resist converting to either Abrahamic religion. The Baltic would already be an area of competition between Christian Germans and Muslim Slavs.

As a historical analogy, consider how the Khazars decided to adopt Judaism to avoid committing to either Christianity or Islam.

 

[Kerney]

I did so in my follow up. I was just stating that getting to this point ran roughshod over lots of rather large bumps.

Gotcha, you Ninja'd me rl distracted me from noticing right away.

Why would Norse paganism survive? This is a world where Muslim empire(s) have overrun the Christian portions of Europe. Why would they stop there? Even if they did, why wouldn't the Norse fall to the same political, economic, and cultural pressures of OTL?

First off, the OP mentioned it so I said I liked it.

As for why/how, he Islam was the largest faith by a wide margin, not a universal faith.

How Norse Paganism could survive, I could see a Christian remnant, say a rump HRE, being not militarily strong enough to threaten their Norse trading partners or offer enough of a military threat for conquest (and this aspect was important) or train the missionaries to go north yet also creating local trading partners/allies to shelter Norse Pagan areas from conquest/cultural domination in an enemy of my enemy is my friend sort of way.

 

[Nivek]

How Norse Paganism could survive, I could see a Christian remnant, say a rump HRE, being not militarily strong enough to threaten their Norse trading partners or offer enough of a military threat for conquest (and this aspect was important) or train the missionaries to go north yet also creating local trading partners/allies to shelter Norse Pagan areas from conquest/cultural domination in an enemy of my enemy is my friend sort of way.

I could see the opposite, the pagans copouting a catholic like christianity for their benefit, catholics belive in a lot of intermediaries, something can be copted out later on by pagans like otl.

 

[Philip]

As a historical analogy, consider how the Khazars decided to adopt Judaism to avoid committing to either Christianity or Islam.

There are at least large and important difference here that ruin that analogy:

• The Khazars did convert. They did not remain pagan. Using them as an analogy for surviving paganism is greatly flawed.
• The Khazars were able to split the difference between two powerful and wealthy choices. ITTL, there is no such balance. I think an analogy to the Hindu kingdoms in Indonesia is more useful than the Khazars.

the Norse might resist converting to either Abrahamic religion. The Baltic would already be an area of competition between Christian Germans and Muslim Slavs.

These Muslim Slavs will bring trade ties to all of Asia and the prestige of the largest empire on earth. The Christian Germans will not be able to compete economically or politically with the Slavs. Islam will follow trade up the Volga and into Scandinavia.

I think the differences between axial and non-axial religions is overplayed, but it might be relevant here as well.

 

[Kerney]

There are at least large and important difference here that ruin that analogy:

• The Khazars did convert. They did not remain pagan. Using them as an analogy for surviving paganism is greatly flawed.
• The Khazars were able to split the difference between two powerful and wealthy choices. ITTL, there is no such balance. I think an analogy to the Hindu kingdoms in Indonesia is more useful than the Khazars.

The Lithuanians didn't convert until the 14th century and the Sami didn't convert until the 18th.

The Sami were considered too far north to bother with in addition to being a bunch of savages not worth bothering with, something that might apply to atl Norse. The Lithuanians didn't convert for centuries and like the Khazars, played both sides Orthodox Russians and Catholic Poles/Crusaders against each other, very much like the Khazars.

Also, by saying I liked the idea of Norse Paganism surviving, I didn't mean to hijack the thread. I think the wider implications should be considered.

 

[Nephi]

It would probably look a lot like Christianity only with a bigger focus on Muhammad than Jesus.


The Bible forbids pork shellfish all the same things the Quran does, basically the Quran doesn't have Paul but that's another story.

It's probably a really similar world Europe is still incredibly secular it's just that Mecca and Media are international cities.

And the Saudis are not here at all, Wabi Islam has been reduced to a cult which is a single family that pickets soldiers funerals.

 

[LostInNewDelhi]

After Byzantium, the Umayyads could probably move right on to Italy, or at least traditional Byzantine centers like Ravenna. Byzantium was capable enough at harrying the Lombards, the Umayyads could splinter it into its constituent duchies easily.

One thing about the Umayyads is that despite their favoritism towards Arabs, this was only a practical policy in places like the Levant/Egypt that were being transformed by new Arab towns and agricultural colonies. Outside those areas, even in "core lands" like Persia, even ambitious governors like Hajjaj b. Yusuf had to govern through a class of native landowners (dehqans) who collaborated with the Caliphate but retained their own resources and rights to use them. These evolved into the Iranian dynasties like the Tahirids, Saffarids, Samanids, whatever. In Armenia, the Umayyad overlordship wasn't too different from the Sassanid one before it, and the Armenian princes underscored the point by switching between the Byzantines and Umayyads when it suited them, and conducting their own initiatives in the meantime. The Umayyad and Abbasid periods were, if anything, the incubator for the Bagrationi kingdom and its Artsuni contemporary. So even in this scenario where the Umayyads take Constantinople, Greek notables in Anatolia/Thrace will still be... well, notable. They will collaborate with the new lords of Constantinople in the short term, but plan for the long and allocate resources accordingly. If they don't convert, then it'll be possible and perhaps easy for them to break away while the Umayyads are dealing with the Abbasids.

If they do convert, I don't think we should expect anything particularly "Christian" about their Islam. It'll perhaps be "Greek"-- the Greek nobles would almost definitely use Greek among themselves and in their courts, and patronize its usage in literature or the markets. In fact, the Caliphate will have to face the question early on of whether to continue using the language in its own ministries in Syria and Egypt, and whether this should be considered a stopgap or if other languages, and other scripts, can be just as legitimately "Islamic" as Arabic and its own widely propagated script. (I don't have any evidence for this but personally, I think Arabic dodged having its script supremacy challenged by Persian because the Aramaic-derived scripts used by the Sasanids were also abjads that didn't spell vowels explicitly; spelling in either script worked very similarly and the Arabic script was an improvement in some ways.) And Greek philosophy and theology may influence eschatology, studies on the nature of Prophethood, where/what exactly Jesus is if he's not dead and not the Son of God, and other esoteric (but consequential, when it comes to deriving rules and laws) questions which there isn't a firm opinion yet. But it's not as though there's anything fundamentally "Zoroastrian" about Shiism (well, not counting folk traditions in the Pamirs with holy candles and the like), just as there's nothing particularly Germanic about Gothic Arianism. New traditions only build on the old when its advantageous/practical, like the Buddhist accomodation with East Asian traditional religion. In this case, the Greeks may end up being heterodox, but heterodoxy is only useful insofar as it gives space to articulate dissent or recommend reform while still being within the dominant tradition and enjoying all the advantages that confers. If your heterodoxy gets so out of hand that people start to ask whether you're within the tradition at all... well now you've ended up like the Druze or Alawites, maligned and isolated. You overdid heterodoxy and lost its advantages.

So the Islam of the Mediterranean may well use Greek devotional poems (perhaps delivered in a style similar to Agni Parthene, etc.), have a tradition of local saints and shrine sites, be accompanied by a continuing openness to classical learning... in other words, be peripherally Christian or have a Christian aesthetic. Jesus may be believed to have some special role to play in the End Times, even more special than he already is (I think the current mainstream-Sunni idea is that he'll appear alongside the Mahdi, because he technically never died as God took him into heaven for safekeeping? Seems like a very convoluted way to avoid conceding to the Resurrection, but I guess there's precedents like the Night Journey for God bringing people up to chill with him despite physical constraints). But Jesus won't be the Son, and icons would probably be banned. In fact it may be Jesus and icons that recede the most from public consciousness as Islam becomes well established and local students start holding their own people to proper standards, as those would be the most obvious signs of "creeping Christianity" guiding the faithful away from the right path.

One interesting possibility is that, following the example of the pagans of Harran or the Iraqi Mandaeans, groups throughout Anatolia start claiming to be "Sabians"/"keepers of the laws of the Prophet Noah/John/whatever" so they can be declared People of the Book and left alone whenever the Caliphate's on high alert about Christian subversion... and so Sabianism goes from being a typo to an actual religion :^)

These Muslim Slavs will bring trade ties to all of Asia and the prestige of the largest empire on earth. The Christian Germans will not be able to compete economically or politically with the Slavs. Islam will follow trade up the Volga and into Scandinavia.

Agreed, and in fact the Germans may end up not going Christian... or not entirely. If the Franks are crushed early then realms like Bavaria, Saxony, etc. remain autonomous and free to drop their paganism/vague Christianity for something more profitable. But even if they don't, a place as close and significant to Scandinavia as Russia going Muslim (and absent Byzantium, it likely will) is going to get Sweden at the very least to consider the options.

 

[Nivek]

eing a typo to an actual religion :^)

Sabians are monotheist without prophet...but seems either they converted or dissapared, as no one have found a sabian...yet.

(I think the current mainstream-Sunni idea is that he'll appear alongside the Mahdi, because he technically never died as God took him into heaven for safekeeping? Seems like a very convoluted way to avoid conceding to the Resurrection, but I guess there's precedents like the Night Journey for God bringing people up to chill with him despite physical constraints).

Allah/God Bring Back Issa/Jesus, the mission was...aborted, was not a sucess nor a failure, just delayed....dunno, there weird things.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

Implications in brief:

1. Icons, artistic renditions and so forth will be limited, at least in comparison to otl. Iconoclasm followed the Islamic invasions even without overt conquest of Byzantium and more than otl lands. In such a timeline, we can imagine, more iconoclastic undertones in society in general.

2. Umayyad prestige is raised enormously, however they will likewise become ever more overextended. Assuming the Umayyad realm rules France, Anatolia, Greece and Italy, this behemoth will be wallowing under immense weight. We may suspect that the empire remains strong for a time, namely there will be no Abbasid revolution, if the Umayyad legitimacy remains so high; however, the realms, may drift away from Damascus rapidly, especially in the east, as the Umayyad transition their interest ever more to the west.

3. Varied cultural changes, namely the relative decline in prestige of Latin, Greek and Germanic tongues within Europe. Even should these tongues persist and remain dominant, as in Iran, the prestige would drop just as Pahlavi and Persian did. Other cultural practices would also come into vogue in Europe:

-Circumcision of males certainly, though, there may be some drift regarding this. Technically, Islamic law prescribes circumcision upon all male children, however, it does not nullify one's religion and likewise, it is not necessarily required for adults and if said adult fears it. Ultimately, the legal prescription is that it is better for a person to be not circumcised and believe in Allah and follow the religion, than to be fearful of the circumcision and hence avoid Islam.

Certainly this is the opinion that I prefer; that circumcision is generally prescribed for one who is young-baby, however, it is not required of adult men. There are other opinions on the matter,, which are in the minority, that claim that circumcision is required even of adults, for them to be Muslim. I would say that this is the weaker position. Despite this, we may assume certainly that the circumcision would be far, far more common in Europe than otl.

-Eating and drinking habits would change. Some intoxicants might remain common, such as beers, however wine will decrease in importance. As I understand the function of beers is that these can and were used as meal replacements and were of less intoxicant values than what is seen today? If this is so, I cannot help but see that Islamic legal scholars in this atl would make exceptions for Muslims residing in environments that benefit or hold customs of drinking beers as meals and sustenance.

-Legal changes, certainly there is no Medieval feudalism, civil law, canonical law and so forth, Sharia will generally replace all of the major legal systems. whilst, European custom law would remain, as it did within most of the Islamic world, that being law not mandated by state edict but by general societal opinion and prejudice. Pashtunwali for instance in Afghanistan is an example of this.

-Many more cultural implications than these, such as how one eats with utensils, what one is permitted to eat and dress codes (for instance, European men would be advised to not do the taboo of wearing clothing that goes past the ankle) and things such as cosmetics (such as, In Islamic law generally, one is not permitted to dye the hairs any color except red-ginger [on account of Muhammad's {SAW} prescription and in emulation him {having red hair}]).

4. Varied Islamic divergent sects would become emboldened.... Khawarij-Shurha for instance, would find fertile ground in Europe, we could presume.


Forgive the relatively short response, my time is limited.

 

[LostInNewDelhi]

Sabians are monotheist without prophet...but seems either they converted or dissapared, as no one have found a sabian...yet.

Yeah, but it could be an identifiable body of people here that at least claim the name, or claim a specific Prophet. I think the concept of there being other Prophets (even if one's the last) might be exploited heavily. Maybe there could be a tradition in Roman Islam of identifying different prophets with different virtuous qualities, like one in particular that they're really renowned for. I think there's already a tradition associating Idris with studiousness. Maybe Jesus can be identified with selfless love. I think that's the way you could get a veneration of Jesus that differs from the Muslim norm, appeals to Christians, but doesn't question the finality/authority of Islam.

Even with a smashing victory at a Tours analogue, the Umayyads were at the end of their rope logistically. I also doubt that missionaries will just "eventually convert these counties ".

Ah, but where one rope ends another begins. If the Umayyads convert a local people (Berbers, Turks) then even after they leave the locals can found Islamic polities of their own. The Avars, Bulgars, and South-Slavs themselves are all options.

If this is so, I cannot help but see that Islamic legal scholars in this atl would make exceptions for Muslims residing in environments that benefit or hold customs of drinking beers as meals and sustenance.

This may actually end up being the main driver of regional change-- jurists living out on the frontier, possibly close with frontier lords, letting local conditions influence their judgement. But this could backfire and kick off a purist movement. "Innovation" will either be a much less or much more serious accusation than it is OTL.

4. Varied Islamic divergent sects would become emboldened.... Khawarij-Shurha for instance, would find fertile ground in Europe, we could presume.

Another possible driver of change. The Shiites holed up in the Khorasani mountains, and from there sent out missionaries to the Qizilbash. The Alps could be a real factory of heterodoxy, and potentially more consequential to developments in North Italy, France, and Germany than the distant Levant and Egypt.

 

[Nivek]

Another possible driver of change. The Shiites holed up in the Khorasani mountains, and from there came the missionaries to the Qizilbash. The Alps could be a real factory of heterodoxy, and potentially more consequential to developments in North Italy, France, and Germany than the distant Levant and Egypt.

I always joke that have the Umayyads have won both Tours and first Constantinople, the Chrisitian(specially orthodox one, but catholic could be) become the ITTL Shia as shia might try influence more in the fringes of europe and balkans than the fertile crescent(and ali wish was to be send to hispania or anatolia acording some sunni traditions), he would have been welcomed at tours) and would be a very unique animal(or as you call it, heterodoxy, he, orthodx-heterodox

 

[Jürgen]

Honestly it hard to say whether Norse Paganism would survive, while the Frankish threat and need to trade with them was a factor, it was also a pragmatic way to simply centralize power for the crown. I lean toward that the Scandinavians at very least will convert to Christianity. The next thing, there will be no Christian Emperor, the Christian Church in Northern Europe will be churches not a church, in union with each other but backing a unifying authority, which means the secular rulers will have a lot of power over them.

As for the border between Islam and Christianity I would say that the Carpathian basin would the northern most possible reach of the Islamic world in Europe. Of course that depend on a lot of factors, I personally have my doubt we will see much peaceful conversion to Islam in Europe. It doesn’t really benefit the Slavs and Germanics much. Islamic rules are impractical to their way of life and Islam lack the benefit the Christian clergy gives to converted states. Of course little benefits doesn’t mean none, states which lies close to Constantinople may convert either because they serve as mercenaries, they’re bribed or simply to avoid being conquered.

Of course a major question is how the tax base of Islamic Byzantium would work.

 

[Mr_Fanboy]

I guess that in this timeline Christianity could very well eventually come to be seen as a largely Germanic religion, with Slavs, speakers of Romance languages, and most other Europeans largely converting to Islam over the following centuries. I wonder what that would mean for Christianity. Of course, places like Greece and Italy will certainly have large Christian populations for a long time to come in the same way that places such as Lebanon and Syria do in our timeline today. Perhaps Italy looks something like Lebanon - roughly 30% of the population is orthodox Muslim, roughly 30% are Orthodox Christian, roughly 30% belong to some denomination specific to this timeline that has strong Muslim and Christian influences, and the rest follow smaller religions such as Judaism.

But in any case, folks are discussing the implications of a Muslim Europe, and this is fascinating, but I am curious as to what a Muslim world looks like. I posited a scenario where Islam is more successful in places such as China and India, so what would that mean for those areas and what impact would that have on the wider religion? How do the Arab, Persian, Greek, Roman, Slavic, Indian, Chinese, Tibetan, Mongolian, and Japanese varieties of Islam interact with one another in the long run on both a political and theological level?