Islam-wank # 4 - Muslims conquer Ethiopia by 800 AD

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Seems extremely unlikely.

It's not very far from Arabia or Egypt. There could be discomfort with having a Christian state too close to Mecca. It's closer than many places the Muslims did conquer.

Admittedly, I don't know much of anything about Ethiopia's stability or lack thereof during these centuries.
 
Ethiopia would not be subject to a Muslim conquest, they were allies of the early Ummah. This is highly implausible, you should pick a different place.
 
I'd add the caveat that 800 is too early but it could definitely still happen at some point, with a sufficient number of butterflies.

Ethiopia isn't "close" to Mecca in the traditional sense though, and isn't particularly a threat.
 
Ethiopia would not be subject to a Muslim conquest, they were allies of the early Ummah. This is highly implausible, you should pick a different place.

That does not defend them. Jihad upon those of Aksum and the interior known as Ethiopia, were permissible, regardless of the reign of al-Najashi (ruler who took in the companione of Muhammad). Further, jihad was conducted upon the disorganized states of the Ethiopian highland, however, it was primarily for loot. The issue with total conquest is the difficulties of logistics and retention of such land.

Hills, mountains and a large population lessen the likelihood. To make matters harder, Nubia remains unconquered.

Is Nubia conquered before or after this?
 
Several centuries after, I believe. No way that Ethiopia gets conquered though - raiding as you say is the only probable outcome. Logistics are too implausible, assuming the bulk of Islamic strength is still focused northwards.
 
That does not defend them. Jihad upon those of Aksum and the interior known as Ethiopia, were permissible, regardless of the reign of al-Najashi (ruler who took in the companione of Muhammad). Further, jihad was conducted upon the disorganized states of the Ethiopian highland, however, it was primarily for loot. The issue with total conquest is the difficulties of logistics and retention of such land.

Hills, mountains and a large population lessen the likelihood. To make matters harder, Nubia remains unconquered.

Is Nubia conquered before or after this?

Were these jihads launched from the Arabian peninsular and the Caliphate proper or were they conducted by converted pastoralists and later settled Islamic states in the Horn?

Several centuries after, I believe. No way that Ethiopia gets conquered though - raiding as you say is the only probable outcome. Logistics are too implausible, assuming the bulk of Islamic strength is still focused northwards.

I don't necessarily think so, Aksum collapsed and the main highlands were divided between many small Christian, Jewish and pagan polities for a long time. It wasn't untill the Solomonids that the Abbysinian state really started expanding outwards. If you have an earlier conversion of pastoralists like the Beja or Afar you could see conquests earlier on. Or possibly have the various Muslim states that were established such as Ifat, Waj and Dawaro consolidate into a stronger central state and undertake a conquest of the Christian highlands, a reverse of what happened in real life. But I think 800 ce is too early.
 
@yanitza Some of both in this case. Arab legends prior to Islam speak of incursions and trade with the states of 'Ethiopia' wherein the Arab was the master. This concept continued into the Islamic period and did not cease and was strongly held during the Abbasid period. I believe the issue here with a total conquest of Aksum and the interior of Ethiopia, is the time limit. Certainly, Islamic states could conquer the region by say 1200, however, 800 is very early. The Umayyad period covered a relatively short period and its borders had by 767, failed to fully contain the limits to the East, much less conquer the entirety of Ethiopia. For instance, Afghanistan had yet to be conquered until the 860-880s, Ethiopia would be even more difficult to conquer fully.

However, let me give a possible scenario. 745, Yemeni raiders from the Umayyad dominion gather a modest army of Mujahadeen and instead of venturing to the existing fringes of dar al-Islam, they cross the Red Sea to make a gamble in the land of Assab or the coast of Aksum. This army of Yemeni warriors, are able to gain many key victories and create a statelet and dependency of the Umayyad Caliphate, say it is called the Emirate al-Assabiyya or Emirate al-Sudaniyya. This attracts a small number of muhjahid every so often to conduct wars and raids into the region. By the Abbasid period, this state continues to provide slaves and also is bolstered by converts in the Horn of Africa. Thus, through the Abbasid period, the region becomes a minor area of influence, wherein, they receive slaves by force, tribute and trade. However, this will increase the need for a reaction by the interior states of Ethiopia, who will become much more mobilized and sooner in terms of military force. Confederations of Christian and Traditionalists will possibly form to combat the seeming invasion and some states will accept Abbasid dominion and nominally practice Islam. So, if this scenario holds deep into the Abbasid period and other Abbasid calamities are averted, a clear line of soldiers will move to the region and the Abbasid will exert minor influence, thus in say 1100, the majority of Ethiopia could be ruled by Muslim states either under the Abbasid hegemony directly or so influenced, as to be dependent upon trade and goodwill of the hegemony.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
What's a more reasonable date than 800 AD then?

And could it result in no Christian kingdom of consequence raising its head at all over the last thousand years in Ethiopia?
 
Last edited:
Top