In the absence of Muhammad, a Christian hegemony?

Good question. I'd think that without a sudden quick decline of the ERE, as per rise of Islam, the Empire would remain a hodge-podge of competing Christian doctrines as would areas outside of Roman control, in the Persian lands. There is a lot to be said for the existential threat of Islam forcing Western and Eastern Christianity to become a lot less tolerant of dissent

Ah, but by the late Lombard period, you already saw the Pope declaring himself the ruler of Rome and its environs. Although the papacy might remain weaker with a strong ERE, i really don't see it not becoming the dominant religious force in Western Europe. There might well be challangers, and it may not be as strong, but Rome will still be dominant.
If nothing else, you may see a *Charlemagne figure emerge who decides to use the pope the same way the emperor uses the patriarch.
 
In the absence of Islam I'd see Christianity moving eastward at a slower pace than OTL Islam but still being able to supplant and, more important to its spread, co-opt many of the other religions. Id see ritual and custom being loosened in areas where missionaries are trying to proselytize just to gain converts much like the Northern Europeans converted. I can also see several more 'original' branches of Christianity arising and then some form of Protestant movements when newer converted areas and empires decide paying tribute or even just lip service to Rome / Constantinople or X becomes tiresome.

Islam's biggest strength in its spread was its simplicity in the 5 tenants as well as being the 'religion of choice' for many of the strongest warlords and tyrants of the time.

Christianity's biggest strength is its ability to co-opt native religions and traditions and then consolidate on its core orthodoxies.
 
In short, I think Islam was something of a perfect storm, unlikely to be matched in all particulars in any other time and place.

Where and when else would an analogous religion be likely to spring up? Perhaps the heady brew of Christian/Buddhist/Zoroastrian/pagan Central Asia?
 
Not necessarily at all. A PoD that early would have huge demographic consequences for India, and as stated, a lot of this rests on what Central Asia tribes convert to, how the Persians end up and what religion traders from East Africa/South Arabia have. Prior to the 1100s-1600s, the Indian population had a large amount of Buddhists (comparable in % to its modern Islamic population). Unless similar religious cleansing happens as it did during this period to replace it, that minority is like to endure. The old Muslim populations in Sindh and the Malabar Coast came from the Arab invasions themselves and traders. Perhaps if those are both Christian it will spread in the region, but it is likely that the Arab Invasions would be quite changed from OTL and there's no guarantees Arab traders will be Muslim (it is in fact, possible they will end up influenced by Dharmic faiths).

India I know very little about, but this seems to assume that the Christian states (if one may use the term) east of the ERE would develop like they did OTL as Muslim ones, and be as successful.
 
Christianity would go on to control much of the world except for East and South East Asia.

Zorastinianism was on the decline, the Persian Empires most important province (mesopotamia) was already christian before islam.

I think there would be much more "heresies" in control of countries. (since most heresies liked not being persecuted in the Calpihate then converted generations later

The myth of the Mesopotamian Christian majority is an annoying one. At most, there was a plurality, divided between Nestorians and Orthodox Christians. Zoroastrianism is fragile, though. Without state support it would slowly wither. Don't expect Christianity to take root, though. Any new religion adopted by the population will be a reactionary one. I doubt the Christian rulers will act like the Muslim ones and will have a weaker powerbase.
 
The myth of the Mesopotamian Christian majority is an annoying one. At most, there was a plurality, divided between Nestorians and Orthodox Christians. Zoroastrianism is fragile, though. Without state support it would slowly wither. Don't expect Christianity to take root, though. Any new religion adopted by the population will be a reactionary one. I doubt the Christian rulers will act like the Muslim ones and will have a weaker powerbase.

I wonder what do you mean with "reactionary" in this context. I have some trouble in guessing what makes Islam more "reactionary" than Christianity, for instance.
 
I wonder what do you mean with "reactionary" in this context. I have some trouble in guessing what makes Islam more "reactionary" than Christianity, for instance.

Erm, I meant that the population would have a strongly theological and negative reaction to any christian occupation.
 
One effect of No Islam - The Christian Kingdoms of the Sudan survive, Meaning Axum thrives. This leads to more Christian penetration of Africa, in the First Millennium.
This is where the more outlandish types would come from, as Christian practice adapted to, & Adopted African tribal Beliefs.
 
Coptic majority in Egypt, the copts in Sudan(?) survives and Coptic church(es) expend... The same way, the Ethiopian church blossom even more, convert - or maintain presence in Somalia, Erythrea and around, maybe converts in *Yemen* due to the ancestral links between both nations?
 
I was exploring this concept in my TL... and I came up with the idea that, in the absence of Islam, a new, more vibrant version of Zoroastrianism develops in response to Christianity's inroads in the region. However, like Christianity eventually did, it escapes state control and develops on its own, picking up Gnostic (and even some Christian) influences.

Fact is, the Middle East was a giant melting pot of various religious beliefs, and, while far from inevitable... it seems reasonably likely that if Islam is butterflied away, something else might take its place. Not necessarily a similar religion, and not necessarily at a similar time, but still, you could see another offshoot of Judaism (not necessarily one influenced by Christianity), or perhaps a variant of Zoroastrianism, or in a more far-fetched scenario, maybe you even see traders bring in Buddhist ideas. The area produced a lot of strange, half-mystical beliefs. In the absence of Islam, it's my bet that something else would eventually appear.
 
I'd think Arabia* might well convert to (West) Syrian Orthodox Christianity, or perhaps with their own spin on it.

Actually, I thought a Coptic Yemen might be possible as well. (Damn thought Ninjas...)




*Well, at least western Arabia. The east might convert to whatever one is most popular in Persia, probably the Assyrian Church.
 
I'd think Arabia* might well convert to (West) Syrian Orthodox Christianity, or perhaps with their own spin on it.

Actually, I thought a Coptic Yemen might be possible as well. (Damn thought Ninjas...)




*Well, at least western Arabia. The east might convert to whatever one is most popular in Persia, probably the Assyrian Church.

The assyrian church is moe popular than the Iranian Christian Church? Not during the Sassanids.
 
The assyrian church is moe popular than the Iranian Christian Church? Not during the Sassanids.

I thought that the Christians in Iran during this period were mostly Assyrians/East Syrian Rite...

Ah, after reading up some more, I realised that there was a bit of confusion on my part.

Rasm brasm too many churches to keep track of...
 
One effect of No Islam - The Christian Kingdoms of the Sudan survive, Meaning Axum thrives. This leads to more Christian penetration of Africa, in the First Millennium.
This is where the more outlandish types would come from, as Christian practice adapted to, & Adopted African tribal Beliefs.

Perhaps this butterflies eventual European colonization of Africa due to efforts by Ethiopians and others to proselytize throughout the continent, resulting in greater contact and crosspolination within that continent.
 
Top