Islamic Europe AHQ

Recently i have been reading a whole lot about early Islam and am potentially interested in doing a TL with a very interesting, very dramatic, POD.

During the very beginning of Islam, the first Caliphate, now known as the Rashidun caliphate, spread very rapidly throughout Asia, North Africa, and up into Iberia.

They preyed off the weekend Byzantine and Sassanid empires, but payed little mind to conquering much of Byzantium besides small pockets of the middle east.

My question is, what if Islam ignored the N. African coast and focused on the European portion of the med. sea.

This could easily be done due to how over extended Byzantium was at this time, i just don't know a good POD

I feel like this could be interesting because Christianity would either die out, or hold on to a few small eastern and northern enclaves, countries of entirely new identities than those from OTL could appear after the eventual collapse of the Islamic Empire!

Thoughts?
 

Cueg

Banned
This is a bit flawed in its premise. The Rashidun couldn't take Constantinople because it was impossible without mastery of the Aegean. This could only be done with the conquest of areas with a maritime tradition. Egypt, Syria, North Africa, ect. In my opinion, I think they went for Constantinople as soon as they could have.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Constantinople_(717–718)

Had they won the siege, the gate to Southern Europe would be open. People will then argue that it wouldn't amount to much and then mention something about logistics and distance. I respectfully disagree with that assertion because its ignoring a crucial and fundamental factor; the armies of the Caliphate were still very much in plunder mode. They will expand in the direction of wealth. Up to the Danube and through Italy. This would have a profound effect on early Christianity. If the Siege of Constantinople is the POD, this would butterfly the Battle of Tours. If the Carolingians are destroyed or weakened considerably, the rest of what was then Catholic Europe (there wasn't much) would undoubtedly convert over time. Even without direct conquest, too much influence would be exerted in what would, with the aforementioned, be a vacuum.
 
This is a bit flawed in its premise. The Rashidun couldn't take Constantinople because it was impossible without mastery of the Aegean. This could only be done with the conquest of areas with a maritime tradition. Egypt, Syria, North Africa, ect. In my opinion, I think they went for Constantinople as soon as they could have.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Constantinople_(717–718)

Had they won the siege, the gate to Southern Europe would be open. People will then argue that it wouldn't amount to much and then mention something about logistics and distance. I respectfully disagree with that assertion because its ignoring a crucial and fundamental factor; the armies of the Caliphate were still very much in plunder mode. They will expand in the direction of wealth. Up to the Danube and through Italy. This would have a profound effect on early Christianity. If the Siege of Constantinople is the POD, this would butterfly the Battle of Tours. If the Carolingians are destroyed or weakened considerably, the rest of what was then Catholic Europe (there wasn't much) would undoubtedly convert over time. Even without direct conquest, too much influence would be exerted in what would, with the aforementioned, be a vacuum.

So then it is plausible if i can find a valid way to have them win the siege of Constantinople? Just have them take more land from Anatolia, and then have them take Constantinople in a future war?
 
Yeah, this could be done I believe, but it would be much more likely with Cueg's PoD. Neat idea, though, even a victory at Tours is, of course, still the alternate historian's wet dream when it comes to Muslim conquests in Europe. ;)
 

Cueg

Banned
So then it is plausible if i can find a valid way to have them win the siege of Constantinople? Just have them take more land from Anatolia, and then have them take Constantinople in a future war?

Well, not exactly. Taking more of Anatolia isn't possible without taking Constantinople. The Byzantines had enough power on the other side Aegean to force any power, be it the Caliphate or polity that exists after its inevitable fragmentation, to garrison and fortify the area to an absurd degree relative to its worth. The Turks spent centuries grinding them down to the city itself. For the Caliphate to conquer the land, they MUST conquer the Queen of Cities. After that, the only organized institutional polity/entity is the Catholic Pope. With a conquest of the Balkans, the removal of the Pope from the throne of Saint Peter is inevitable. A conquest of Italy would naturally follow a conquest of Constantinople, and it would be ALOT easier.
 
Well, not exactly. Taking more of Anatolia isn't possible without taking Constantinople. The Byzantines had enough power on the other side Aegean to force any power, be it the Caliphate or polity that exists after its inevitable fragmentation, to garrison and fortify the area to an absurd degree relative to its worth. The Turks spent centuries grinding them down to the city itself. For the Caliphate to conquer the land, they MUST conquer the Queen of Cities. After that, the only organized institutional polity/entity is the Catholic Pope. With a conquest of the Balkans, the removal of the Pope from the throne of Saint Peter is inevitable. A conquest of Italy would naturally follow a conquest of Constantinople, and it would be ALOT easier.

Would a reach around the black sea be a viable way of getting to Constantinople?
 
Remember this Islamic can not conquer Costantinople without this two things: 1) the need to have naval power because Costantinople can be taken only from sea
2) the need something who had effect like the OTL 4th Crusade in Costantinople (aka a full civil war with big involvement of foreigns and the loss of the most people who knew the secret of the Greek Fire aka the ruling elite of Costantinople).

Until Costantinople has the Greek fire you can not take her without being invited (like the Franks/Latins were during the Fourth Crusade) and you need to remember who the Byzantine Costantinople was an (almost) inespugnable city also without the Greek fire being heavily fortified (the city's massive double walls covered the land side and all the three sea sides including the harbor itself who was accessible only througt a fortified gate) so is unlikely who the Caliphate can take Costantinople before the OTL date (and at that date also without the loss of the Greek Fire)
 
Would a reach around the black sea be a viable way of getting to Constantinople?


This isn't a video game, there is no strategic reason during the days of the Khilafah to expand into the nomad steppe fighting through the mountainous Caucus in some attempt to meet up with Byzantium on the other side. However, an alliance could be made with a horde on the other side such as the Pechengs or Magyr, basically a Sassanid-Avar alliance part 2.
 
First of all there are some mistakes in the post.

1. It was not the Rashidun who conquered Iberia, that title goes to Tariq bin Zayyid of the Umayyad Khilafah. I do not know if you are willing to have the Umayyad or want the Rashidun to conquer Southern Europe? It has to be one or the other, by the Abbasid all possibility of an Islamic Europe was gone, as in from being dominated by Arab Khilafah (except maybe a Fatimid Italy, which would be interesting).

2. The Umayyads and Rashidun did not only focus on "pockets of the Middle East" they went after Byzantium with all they had, giving it no time to breath, they just couldn't fully defeat Byzantium, like they could to the Sassanids. Examples of this are the constant invasions of islands during the Umayyad period many of which would stay in Dar al-Islam for 200 years after. Part of the difficulty the Khilafah had was that they couldn't hold onto Armenia and Anatolia and thus had to invade up from the Aegean, making a decisive sea battle the main factor in whether the Khilafah was victorious or not. This as I have said only gets harder when you realize that there is a serious time limit, between a possible Fitnah between the Ummah which would delay invasion and at the same time giving Byzantium time to recover and retake the Eastern Mediterranean.
 
So then would a simple Umayyad victory at the battle of tours be a more viable, albeit cliche, option?



Not necessarily, it would help, but the biggest obstacle in taking all of Europe for Dar al-Islam is Byzantium. Thus it's conquest is 100% necessary, if it is taken, then Europe being conquered, is plausible. An invasion just via France wouldn't be sufficient enough in my opinion to hold. Further, there are many different events that must happen or would help in allowing the Khilafah to conquer Europe.

1. The Basque convert en masse to Islam. This would give the Khilafah a naval presence in the north facilitating trade and allowing for a conquest of Ireland/Britain.

2. Victory at Tours and at subsequent battles in France. Then slowly convert the populace, give incentives to natives, thus avoiding Khawarij influence.

3. A complete conquest of Byzantium removing a major western threat. Then assimilate into the Balkans and quickly the Slavic populace will begin to convert to Islam as well, it is possible groups like the Magyr convert.

Then the harder problem is to keep the Ummah together in the Arab world, avoiding religious revolts and ethnic conflict. I do not know how these problems would be stopped, I feel that it is possible to get Islam to dominate Europe but not necessarily the Khilafah ruling Europe and the Middle East simultaneously.

Basically, a conquest and Islamization of France and the Balkans will allow for Islam to become the hegemony of Europe and force Christianity to the fringes of Europe and other places in Asia.
 
So let's say I decided to not conquer ALL of Europe as the Umayyad, but I do have them take large portions of Francia, Sicily, and some of south-central Europe, having them ignore the Balkans and Eastern Europe and Scandinavia along with the British isles. Due to the over extension the Unayyad dynasty will either eventually succumb to rebels or splinter by choice. (after the majority of the conquered land has been confirmed converted of course :p) this then allows Europe to have an evenly mixed amount of Muslim and Christian countries. The world would develop from there. (if I'm going to make a TL on this it will most likely go to present day and not just focus on Europe) is THIS more plausible?
 
Top