Islam to the West, Christianity to the East

This one just hit me over the weekend, so I figured I'd put it out there.

Is there any possible POD where the spheres of Islamic and Christian influence are changed?
 
The big problem is that Islam originated in the East, so how does it get to the West if the East remains Christian?

Hm... is it reasonable to have the Islamic empires conquer Egypt and North Africa but not Palestine, or at least have the Byzantines retake Palestine fairly quickly? Also, no Islamic conquest of the Sassanids (perhaps you need to get rid of that huge Byzantine-Persian War or lessen it so they aren't as weak)... And then have a brief period of Islamic dominance in the Mediterranean where everyone gets crushed, Muslims take over in France, Italy, in Germany, but then a resurgence in Byzantine sea power leads to them retaking Egypt (where a large percentage of the population remained Christian fairly late in the conquest era, so becoming re-Christianized doesn't seem unreasonable) and North Africa (and maybe Italy, but that's just because I like Christians of some sort holding Rome :p) while Islamic kingdoms continue to thrive in Spain, France, and Germany and spread upwards to the pagan Norse... (Islamo-Vikings? But pork could be an issue)

Of course, even in this rather strange scenario you have the issue of Arabia... I doubt the Byzantines or the Persians could conquer the whole peninsula, maybe the coasts...
 
I was thinking of this a few months back.

The only thing I could come up with is that Iberia remains in Islam's hands. So the Reconquista fails. Islam pushes further north each decade, forcing Christians to move north and east. Eventually the Poles, Lithuanians, or some Balkan state starts to make headway into. Maybe the slow influx of Christians into the Balkans gives the Byzantine Empire a reprieve. One of these nations slowly starts moving back into Anatolia after taking out the Ghazi emirates.

After taking France, Islam conquers the Netherlands and many more flee to the British Isles or further east. Byzantine slowly moves into the Arabian Peninsula, but cannot get past Siani because of stern Mameluk opposition.

The renewed movement of the Byzantine Empire was good for Georgia, allowing it to extend its zenith into the late 15th. Working with the Byzantine Empire they took land that would be part of the Safavids (OTL).

Venice takes an opportunistic chance and setts up trading posts in southern Arabia. The Catholic Church sends missions along with the traders. This is only possible because the Lombardy refugees help bolster Tuscany and Venice keeping Islam to Western Europe.

Earlier on the Mongolian Empire moved into Northern Europe, this time never moving into the middle east. The Hordes are stopped by TTL version of Germany which had become a vassal state of Al-Andalus (or other western Islamic nation). Conversion to Islam is promoted.

The Mongols move finally into the middle east. Georgia and the Byzantines stop them. Many Mongols are slowly converted to Christianity in the territories they were able to conquer. Many Christian states develop in these areas.

+++++++++++++++++
That was about was I had for an initial idea. Never tried to see if it was workable or not, since I got busy writing a grant.
 
Oh i like this Idea eventually youll end up with Budhist Persia Orthodox Christian Byzantines who own everything down to Egypt up to the Persian Border. And some Islamic Caliphate in Europe :)
 
Well, I can think of a couple of possible alternatives, though perhaps very unlikely.

1. There is a Persian equivalent to St. Paul. Somehow this Paulist equivalent plants the seeds amongst the Zoastrian and Jewish communities of Persia that results in the Persians ultimately converting en masse to Christianity in the 4th or early 5th century. With a Christian Persia, perhaps, the Eastern Empire and Persia don't exhaust their military force. The Islamic Arabs, unable to make much headway against the the heartland of the two great Christian empires, instead, fly across North Africa and smash into Spain even earlier than they do in OTL. The Muslims march into Gaul 50 years before Charles Martel and go on to conquer most of Western Europe save perhaps the British Isles and the Scandinavia. Christianity goes on to establish itself in Russia as in OTL, and it gains increasing influence in Central Asia and the Sub-Continent.

2. The Moors win at Tours. The Frankish Empire and much of Western Europe fall to Muslim conquest. While Byzantium can't turn to the West for aid as it did in the 11th century (i.e. the Crusades), it cant be weakened by the later Crusades. Further, perhaps as the one strong remaining Christian State, it becomes a rallying point that allows it to stabilize its borders. Eastern Europe is converted as in OTL but there is renewed zeal to spread Christianity Eastward in Russia. Ultimately Christianity outflanks the Muslims in the East. Ok, this latter scenario is pretty unlikely, but hey, its a thought.

Basically, it is hard to come up with plausible scenarios where Western Europe falls to Islam without the Byzantine empire also falling (being it would essentially under pressure from both sides.).

--
Bill
 
2. The Moors win at Tours. The Frankish Empire and much of Western Europe fall to Muslim conquest. While Byzantium can't turn to the West for aid as it did in the 11th century (i.e. the Crusades), it cant be weakened by the later Crusades. Further, perhaps as the one strong remaining Christian State, it becomes a rallying point that allows it to stabilize its borders. Eastern Europe is converted as in OTL but there is renewed zeal to spread Christianity Eastward in Russia. Ultimately Christianity outflanks the Muslims in the East. Ok, this latter scenario is pretty unlikely, but hey, its a thought.

If you believe in the "Great Man" theory, this is actually a pretty plausible one. All you need to do is insert a couple of destructive influences into the Middle East around 660-750, so that at the same time that Islam is on the march in North Africa, it is collapsing into civil war at home. During that era, Islam has only been in existence for about 100 years, so its roots are not deep. Persia could rise again; many in Armenia and Syria would still view the Romans as saviors. Meanwhile, half a world away, Ziyad is invading Hispania...
 
If you believe in the "Great Man" theory, this is actually a pretty plausible one. All you need to do is insert a couple of destructive influences into the Middle East around 660-750, so that at the same time that Islam is on the march in North Africa, it is collapsing into civil war at home. During that era, Islam has only been in existence for about 100 years, so its roots are not deep. Persia could rise again; many in Armenia and Syria would still view the Romans as saviors. Meanwhile, half a world away, Ziyad is invading Hispania...

I am not a proponent of what one would call the classical Great Man theory. I would say however that given the right events, great men can have a disproportionate impact on the course of history.

However, now that I look at the history a bit more closely. If the battle of Tours had been won, perhaps the Caliphate of Cordoba would have been longer lasting. And if we assume that the Abbasid Caliphate was a bit less stable and that the Caliphate was subject to much more civil war than it was, the progress of Islam to the East might have been much less successful. I wonder how history would have turned out had the Turks been converted to Christianity?

So lets just imagine for a moment Europe in 1100.

The Cordoba Caliphate has extended its reach through most of the old Western Empire. Gaul and Italy are dominated by Muslims. Islam has made strong incursions into Germany (or have conquered it outright). Anglo Saxon England remains strongly under the influence of Scandinavia, and the British Isles as a whole represent the last bastion of independent Christianity in the West (Even the Cordoba Caliphate can't beat the sea mobility of the Norse).

The Successors to the Abbasids have traded power several times but as a result have been stopped from advancing into the Byzantine heartland, and in fact Jerusalem was reconquered by the Byzantines in the late 700s.
The Turks have been more influenced by the Zoastrian Persians and the Orthodox Christians than the Muslims (who have had little direct contact with them). Ultimately, large numbers of Turks convert to Christianity. They are now pressing hard against the borders of the Persian Empire and maybe the Byzantine Empire to the North.. but they are a challenge for another day....

--
Bill
 
IIRC, that is the basic premise of the "Submission" timeline, from SHWI. Muhammad is born a hundred years later, as a Viking.

Personally, I think it starts getting a bit contrived if we start assuming that certain people are born in a different place and time than they actually were (other than valid ones that would be involved with legitimate movements of the parents...).

If we want Muhammad in a different place, then he should start in the same place and move there. A Norse Muhammad, who would have had no exposure to Semitic language and thought probably would not have founded a religion that bore much likeness to Islam of OTL, even if an Angel of God told him what to say.

--
Bill
 
Awhile back, I wrote a "Muslim Europe, Christian Middle East" TL that began with the fall of Constantinople to the Avars and Persians and ended with Nestorian Khanates conquering Mecca, provoking calls for Jihad among the Caliphates and Emirates of conquered Franjistan...
 
Top