Islam Nonexistant - What Religious Effects?
- Thread starter SavageDays
- Start date
With an Eastern Empire remaining whole and relatively unthreatened, might not that knowledge and technology remain? Without so much pressure to defend itself in the East, the empire might be able to retake and pacify large areas of the old western empire, bringing stability there where that tech and science might be kept and advanced upon.
Thoughts?
Hashasheen
Banned
A primitive one, seeing as it was Islamic science and work that returned Roman advances to European nations after the Spanish Reconquista. I'm guessing a three way struggle between China, the Persians/Parthians and the Byzantine Empires
Hashasheen
Banned
considerin they had to face the Persians before the Arabs came along, would they expand back into Europe?
THat would depend on the turn the cultural development of Sassanid Persia and Byzantium take. All the knowledge was there for anyone in the region. What the Arabs did was take an active interest at a time the Byzantines and Sryiac Christians did not.
They were only kept by the Arabs because the Arabs destroyed the Roman Empire which had been keeping them previously.
But the Roman Empire didn't take an interest in them. The contribution of the Arabs was not that they took over custody of the books. Around 800-1000, the Arab world saw something broadly similar to the 'manuscript hunt' that western Europe saw in the 1400s. Scholars deliberately went to monasteries and libraries in search of buried treasure to translate and publish. We can't know for sure that a similar thing wouldn't have happened in a Roman East, but it's not a given. Secular literacy enjoyed a status in the Arab world that it wouldn't regain in Christian states until the 15th century.
Xen
Banned
As I laid between sleep and wake last night trying to think of how to get Zoroastrianism to survive in Persia, I had a thought of Muslims being conquered by a stronger Persian Empire.
Somethings I forsee
1) The Persians are very likely to conquer Egypt and the Orient, there is no reason for them not too, this is a very important route on the Silk Road, and Persia would love to control it. Persians can use their religion as a reason for conquest, stranger things have happened.
Egyptian reaction to Persian conquest will be indifferent. Egyptians weren't happy under Byzantine rule, nor would they be overly thrilled by the Persians. They're simply trading one distant ruler for another.
2) The Pope will call for a Great Crusade against Persia to reclaim the Holy Land. Will these Crusades work? Will they last?
3) North Africa will remain Christian, and be much closer to Europe politically and culturally. Can you imagine the King of France marrying the daughter of the King of Egypt?
4) Arianism was not dead when Islam came into the picture, but it had been dying a slow death since Belasarius conquered Carthage for Justinian. This was before the time of Islam, so unless the POD is somewhere in this timeframe, then I do not see much difference.
5) What effect would no Islam have on the Great Schism? Could it butterfly the Great Schism away altogether?
6) The Turks are still likely to come west, they could convert to Zoroastrianism or even Christianity.
7) Without Islam there would be no Spain or Portugal, which means there would be a very,very different New World when it is discovered. British South America? Egyptian Mexico? Byzantine Cuba?
Somethings I forsee
1) The Persians are very likely to conquer Egypt and the Orient, there is no reason for them not too, this is a very important route on the Silk Road, and Persia would love to control it. Persians can use their religion as a reason for conquest, stranger things have happened.
Egyptian reaction to Persian conquest will be indifferent. Egyptians weren't happy under Byzantine rule, nor would they be overly thrilled by the Persians. They're simply trading one distant ruler for another.
2) The Pope will call for a Great Crusade against Persia to reclaim the Holy Land. Will these Crusades work? Will they last?
3) North Africa will remain Christian, and be much closer to Europe politically and culturally. Can you imagine the King of France marrying the daughter of the King of Egypt?
4) Arianism was not dead when Islam came into the picture, but it had been dying a slow death since Belasarius conquered Carthage for Justinian. This was before the time of Islam, so unless the POD is somewhere in this timeframe, then I do not see much difference.
5) What effect would no Islam have on the Great Schism? Could it butterfly the Great Schism away altogether?
6) The Turks are still likely to come west, they could convert to Zoroastrianism or even Christianity.
7) Without Islam there would be no Spain or Portugal, which means there would be a very,very different New World when it is discovered. British South America? Egyptian Mexico? Byzantine Cuba?
There really is no reason for them not to. The Sassanians saw themselves as the hewirs to the Achaemenids, so Egypt was theirs anyway as far as they were concerned. Also, they had it once - until Heraclius took it back. It might be easiest to say that Heraclius falls off his horse somehow and the Persians keep everythiong from Antioch to Cyrene the first time round.
It is very unlikely that in a world without the Muslim conquest, you'd get the papacy evolving as OTL or the concept of crusading emerging. My bet is more power in the hands of the episcopate and eigenkirchen, no concentration of administrative authority in Rome and Italy staying in the Byzantine ambit, but that's pretty much TOOMA.
Now, THAT is a cool idea. France would look very different, of course, but still - waykewl.
Very likely, in fact. At the heart of the Great Schism lies the decision by the papacy to become its own power center and operate its own empire. Byzantium had to go through some spectacularly bad times for that to happen. You could still get a similar situation but with a second Latin patriarchate (Carthage) in the game and no reason for the Romans to be perpetually watching their backs, my guess is they'll stay more involved in their West, which means they can guarantee the safety of Rome and enforce loyalty in return.
I would like Christianity better, but imagine Manichaean Turks... If it worked for the Tocharians, why not the Seljuqs?
There wouldn't be any of the European nations we know without Islam and the papacy. America's discovery and settlement will depend on how you draft the history from now on.
To by quite honest, I don't think that the majority of the Kurds even were Zoroastrian around this time. There were a few other Iranian peoples in the area (like the Deylamites, who lived in what's now southern Iranian Azerbaijan) who weren't converted to Zoroastrianism until a few centuries before the rise of Islam
I see you're completely ignoring the Sassanids here...
Not only did the Sassanids aggressively promote Zoroastrianism, they were also very determined to root out Buddhism.
At they were pretty successful at it too - around IIRC 600 AD, Buddhism flourished in Soghdiana, but by the beginning of the 8th century, Zoroastrianism had become the dominant religion in Soghdiana, and a contemporary Chinese Buddhist pilgrim mentioned that there was only one functioning Buddhist temple in all of Samarkand (at the time, the largest Soghdian city), and that there was only one monk in that temple.
For comparison: pilgrims who came about a century earlier, mentioned the presence of various temples and hundreds of monks.
..
In other words: Buddhism propably won't spread westwards ITTL either, except that that will be thanks to a Zoroastrian block instead of an Islamic block.
IIRC there were still a few Arian counts in remote places around this time, but an Arian revival is indeed definitely out of the question.
Nah, the works and knowledge from the Classic period could, and propably would, still be preserved in Europe - a strong tradition of classic learning still existed in Spain at the time.
However, things that won't reach Western Europe quite as easily ITTL, are works, knowledge and innovations from Mesopotamia, Persia and India
Without Islam, it'll be *a lot* harder to get stuff like Indian numerals, Persian medicine, and other stuff like that into western Europe.
Weren't the Tocharians a Buddhist Indo-European people?
But anyway, there actually were Manichean Turks IOTL - the Uyghurs converted to Manicheism.
I'm not sure wether the conversion of the Uyghurs happened before or shortly after the rise of Islam, but we could certainly see something like this happen ITTL.
As for the possebilities of Christianity and Zoroastrianism: Nestorian Christianity was already gaining converts among the Turks around this time, and it's likely to be more successful among the Turks than Zoroastrianism.
That said, there's a good chance that Turks that are under strong Persian influence end up converting to Zoroastrianism, in much the same way as, say, the OTL Seljuks converted to Islam (which they did under the influence of the Persian Samanids).
..
As for another possible religious development: how about a partially Indianized Arabia?
There was some Indian influence on the Arabian Peninsula IOTL, and there was lots of trade between India and the Arabian Peninsula, so the Indianization of at least a few parts and/or kingdoms on the Arabian Peninsula should definitely be a possebility...
Xen
Banned
Some excellent things being mentioned here, such as the Uighurs converting to Manichean. Perhaps the Uighurs become a powerful force the could prevent Russia's growth beyond the Urals? A Manichean Khanate in Central Asia would be very intriguing.
As for the Kurds they were not mostly Zoroastrian at anytime in their history as far as I recall, before they were converted to Islam, a majority of Kurds were followers of Yazdanism, there's still a minority of Kurds that continue to follow that religion.
Looking else where there won't be other religions to develop either, Sikhism for instance. No Druze, and No Baha'i, not to mention we wouldn't use Arabic numerals, we will likely use Roman Numerals.
The Taj Mahal if it still exists will be very, very different.
Another thought struck me as I drove home from work today, where I'm sure many of us can agree a future Persian invasion of the Orient and Egypt is likely, and the Christians are most likely going to respond with a crusade, what if the Persians believe the Christians to be too fanatical to be able to hold onto Palestine much longer, instead they create a vassal state of someone they believe to be just as fanatical over the land, the Jews.
As for the Kurds they were not mostly Zoroastrian at anytime in their history as far as I recall, before they were converted to Islam, a majority of Kurds were followers of Yazdanism, there's still a minority of Kurds that continue to follow that religion.
Looking else where there won't be other religions to develop either, Sikhism for instance. No Druze, and No Baha'i, not to mention we wouldn't use Arabic numerals, we will likely use Roman Numerals.
The Taj Mahal if it still exists will be very, very different.
Another thought struck me as I drove home from work today, where I'm sure many of us can agree a future Persian invasion of the Orient and Egypt is likely, and the Christians are most likely going to respond with a crusade, what if the Persians believe the Christians to be too fanatical to be able to hold onto Palestine much longer, instead they create a vassal state of someone they believe to be just as fanatical over the land, the Jews.
And, of course, there were also crusades against non-muslims, for example the crusades against the heretics (Hussites, Cathars...), meaning that a crusade against a renascent Arian nation in the east, or even a war against the growing Coptic sect (which would most likely spread into the Levant as well, since IIRC it spread out from Egypt) isn't entirely unlikely. Then there are the crusades against the baltic pagans, which doesn't bode well for any nation or culture that remains polytheistic on Europe's doorstep.
You seem to be completely underestimating butterfly effects here. Without Muslim invasion to deliberately weaken Byzantine Empire as much as OTL, who knows what would had happened in Italy. Conquest of Spain by the Moors contributed quite greatly for the formation of Crusade Paradigmas, too....
Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
Banned
I'm not sure if the Lombards were still Arian by that point, but they were back in Muhammad's time.
Arabic numerals were actually Indian.
As for the Crusades, forget about it. It was a very different Europe that made them possible.
The Crusades may not take the same form, nor would they have the same causes, but they will most likely be there in some capacity. Although it's true that the rise of Islam likely contributed very heavily to the environment which eventually led to crusades, I doubt that Christianity's reaction to Zoroastarianism would be any better than their reaction to Islam OTL, after all, Zoroastarians were fervent in their attempts to convert conquered people (basing this off an earlier post in the thread, not entirely certain), and this could easily provoke a nasty reaction from Europe/Christendom.
There are also the religious wars within europe proper: crusades against any remaining polytheistic nation (baltic pagans) or any heretic movements (eg. cathars and hussites).
There are also the religious wars within europe proper: crusades against any remaining polytheistic nation (baltic pagans) or any heretic movements (eg. cathars and hussites).