Muslim World: The True Faith Timeline

@Talus I of Dixie excellent update, as always. Minor nitpick,
obviously, this sudden expansion of power it was not disputed, resulting in 756 occurring the outbreak of a revolt by the Warnabi and Drevani.
you mean "was not undisputed"?
Regarding the ore mountains https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ore_Mountains#Economic_history you probably already read that but it appears like the lack of exploitation of some resources there had to do mostly with lack of early settlement and dissconection with trade and you solved both of those problems. Also with the trade come the artisans and the region has potencial for major glass production "From the second half of the 13th century glass manufacturing in the Ore Mountains established itself, but lost its significance with the mining boom. "
 
Heh, we might see the Scandinavians preferring to convert to Muslim rather than Christian because of some similarities they share. Both being traders, promised heaven for dying in glory (also sweet virgins), and opportunities for land and loot for the adventurous (if you're the first to convert that means your neighbors are pagans so...)
Actually I think it's already there, what with the Muslims in this update focused more on trading we might see conversion like in Southeast Asia and Africa. The prophet himself was a trader, as were the Arabians. They certainly have a lot of experience in converting through this way, which might smooth the progress over Europe.
Those "similarities" are mostly the result of flanderization. Taking into account the time period little will change if we change the word muslim with christian. And of the things that make christiany and islam so strong is their ability to manage many contradictory values/narratives to deal with changing political situations and mass wide appeal. Regarding the houri their characterization is so varied and contradictory that they are defined by their narrators basically. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houri Also the haddiths were they come from have yet to be codified and (if real) at the moment are part of oral history. Holy shit, we are centuries away from the haddith codification!
Also as we get into the viking period we should we weary of the ideas we have about the norse that are the result of 19/20th century romanticism. Because that movement is full of bad history and anacronism.
 
you mean "was not undisputed"?
Oh ya, thanks for pointing it out.
Also with the trade come the artisans and the region has potencial for major glass production "From the second half of the 13th century glass manufacturing in the Ore Mountains established itself, but lost its significance with the mining boom. "
About the glass stuff i didn't knew, so thanks! It will be certainly useful.
Regarding the houri their characterization is so varied and contradictory that they are defined by their narrators basically. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houri Also the haddiths were they come from have yet to be codified and (if real) at the moment are part of oral history. Holy shit, we are centuries away from the haddith codification!
Yep, and this will just leave everything more interesting :rolleyes:, with a bigger Dar al-Islam the number of invented hadiths can be increased by the hundreds, maybe thousands depending on how much time takes until the codification TTL. And would be funny the norse muslim believing in the Houri hadith and (just an example) the french muslim taking it as fake.
Also as we get into the viking period we should we weary of the ideas we have about the norse that are the result of 19/20th century romanticism. Because that movement is full of bad history and anacronism
Certainly! I'll be taking a special care about this, tho you may know me, so i'm certainly making a TTL romanticist irony about the norse :p, as spoiler, the vikings wouldn't be viewed as flat-out barbarians by the muslims, just as...crazy bois that we trade with and sometimes fight with, mainly because of first-time impressions.
Well waiting next update buddy
I really can't give a date, but it will not take much time, simply because everything is planned and i'll be home for the next days.
 
Last edited:
Warning! Walltext and lots of wikipedia pastes!
Ok, lets cover the early theological debates and shia branches. Always taking into accounta that we are currently in the 750-800 period. (Covering islamic history this early is always feels weird). I will try to keep this to before the X century. This period is pretty dense with changes and moving parts so to avoid oversights and confusion I would reccomend to thing of the X century as long term and a temporal end goal and keep for later thoughts of later periods.
First, schools of islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) and schools of theology (Aqidah) are too different things but schools of one thing then to align with the other. It appears that while some schools of aaqidah are cross-sectarian and influenced multiple schools of fiqh, a lot of schools of aqidah function as the philosophical base of a particular school of fiqh. Lets cover some terminology first.
Aqidah
"Aqidah is an Islamic term meaning "creed" or "belief". Any religious belief system, or creed, can be considered an example of aqidah. However this term has taken a significant technical usage in Muslim history and theology, denoting those matters over which Muslims hold conviction. The term is usually translated as "theology". Such traditions are divisions orthogonal to sectarian divisions of Islam, and a Mu'tazili may for example, belong to Jafari, Zaidi or even Hanafi school of jurisprudence. One of the earliest systematic theological school to develop, in the mid 8th-century, was Mu'tazila. It emphasized reason and rational thought, positing that the injunctions of God are accessible to rational thought and inquiry and that the Qur'an, albeit the word of God, was created rather than uncreated, which would develop into one of the most contentious questions in Islamic theology.
In the 10th century, the Ash'ari school developed as a response to Mu'tazila, leading to the latter's decline. Ash'ari still taught the use of reason in understanding the Qur'an, but denied the possibility to deduce moral truths by reasoning. This was opposed by the school of Maturidi, which taught that certain moral truths may be found by the use of reason without the aid of revelation.
Another point of contention was the relative position of iman ("faith") vs. taqwa ("piety"). Such schools of theology are summarized under Ilm al-Kalam, or "science of discourse", as opposed to mystical schools who deny that any theological truth may be discovered by means of discourse or reason."

Fiqh
"Fiqh is Islamic jurisprudence.[2] Fiqh is often described as the human understanding of the sharia,[3] that is human understanding of the divine Islamic law as revealed in the Quran and the Sunnah (the teachings and practices of the Islamic prophet Muhammad and His companions). Fiqh expands and develops Shariah through interpretation (ijtihad) of the Quran and Sunnah by Islamic jurists (ulama)[3] and is implemented by the rulings (fatwa) of jurists on questions presented to them. Thus, whereas sharia is considered immutable and infallible by Muslims, fiqh is considered fallible and changeable. Fiqh deals with the observance of rituals, morals and social legislation in Islam as well as political system. In the modern era, there are four prominent schools (madh'hab) of fiqh within Sunni practice, plus two (or three) within Shi'a practice. A person trained in fiqh is known as a faqīh (plural fuqaha).[4]
Figuratively, fiqh means knowledge about Islamic legal rulings from their sources and deriving religious rulings from their sources necessitates the mujtahid (an individual who exercises ijtihad) to have a deep understanding in the different discussions of jurisprudence. A faqīh must look deep down into a matter and not suffice himself with just the apparent meaning, and a person who only knows the appearance of a matter is not qualified as a faqīh.[2]
The studies of fiqh, are traditionally divided into Uṣūl al-fiqh (principles of Islamic jurisprudence, lit. the roots of fiqh), the methods of legal interpretation and analysis; and Furūʿ al-fiqh (lit. the branches of fiqh), the elaboration of rulings on the basis of these principles.[5][6] Furūʿ al-fiqh is the product of the application of Uṣūl al-fiqh and the total product of human efforts at understanding the divine will. A hukm (plural aḥkām) is a particular ruling in a given case."
"
Traditional theory of Islamic jurisprudence recognizes four sources of sharia: the Quran, sunnah (authentic hadith), qiyas (analogical reasoning),[note 1] and ijma (juridical consensus).[8] Different legal schools—of which the most prominent are Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali and Jafari—developed methodologies for deriving sharia rulings from scriptural sources using a process known as ijtihad.[3][4] Traditional jurisprudence (fiqh) distinguishes two principal branches of law, ʿibādāt (rituals) and muʿāmalāt (social relations), which together comprise a wide range of topics.[3][5] Its rulings are concerned with ethical standards as much as with legal norms,[9][10] assigning actions to one of five categories: mandatory, recommended, neutral, abhorred, and prohibited.[3][4][5] Thus, some areas of sharia overlap with the Western notion of law while others correspond more broadly to living life in accordance with God's will.[4]
Classical jurisprudence was elaborated by private religious scholars, largely through legal opinions (fatwas) issued by qualified jurists (muftis). It was historically applied in sharia courts by ruler-appointed judges, who dealt mainly with civil disputes and community affairs.[3][5] Sultanic courts, the police and market inspectors administered criminal justice, which was influenced by sharia but not bound by its rules.[11][5] Non-Muslim (dhimmi) communities had legal autonomy to adjudicate their internal affairs.[4] Over the centuries, Sunni muftis were gradually incorporated into state bureaucracies,[12] and fiqh was complemented by various economic, criminal and administrative laws issued by Muslim rulers.[13] The Ottoman civil code of 1869–1876 was the first partial attempt to codify sharia.[14]"

Madhhab

"A madhhab (Arabic: "way to act") is a school of thought within fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence).

The major Sunni madhhabs are Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali.[1] They emerged in the ninth and tenth centuries CE and by the twelfth century almost all jurists aligned themselves with a particular madhhab.[2] These four schools recognize each other's validity and they have interacted in legal debate over the centuries.[2][1] Rulings of these schools are followed across the Muslim world without exclusive regional restrictions, but they each came to dominate in different parts of the world.[2][1] For example, the Maliki school is predominant in North and West Africa; the Hanafi school in South and Central Asia; the Shafi'i school in East Africa and Southeast Asia; and the Hanbali school in North and Central Arabia.[2][1][3] The first centuries of Islam also witnessed a number of short-lived Sunni madhhabs.[4] The Zahiri school, which is commonly identified as extinct, continues to exert influence over legal thought.[4][1][2] The development of Shia legal schools occurred along the lines of theological differences and resulted in formation of the Twelver, Zaidi and Ismaili madhhabs, whose differences from Sunni legal schools are roughly of the same order as the differences among Sunni schools.[4][3] The Ibadi legal school, distinct from Sunni and Shia madhhabs, is predominant in Oman.[1]

A little History on Madhhabs

"Ancient" schools
According to John Burton, “modern research shows” that fiqh was first “regionally organized” with “considerable disagreement and variety of view”. In the second century of Islam, schools of fiqh were noted for the loyalty of their jurists to the legal practices of their local communities, whether Mecca, Kufa, Basra, Syria, etc.[7] (Egypt's school in Fustat was a branch of Medina's school of law and followed such practices -- up until the end of the 8th century -- as basing verdict on one single witness (not two) and the oath of the claimant. Its principal jurist in the second half of the 8th century was al-Layth b. Sa'd.)[Note 1] Al-Shafi‘i writes that, `every capital of the Muslims is a seat of learning whose people follow the opinion of one of their countrymen in most of his teachings`.[11][12] The "real basis" of legal doctrine in these "ancient schools" was not a body of reports of Muhammad's sayings, doings, silent approval (the ahadith) or even those of his Companions, but the `living tradition` of the school as "expressed in the consensus of the scholars", according to Joseph Schacht.[13]

Al-Shafi‘i and after
It has been asserted that madhahib were consolidated in the 9th and 10th centuries as a means of excluding dogmatic theologians, government officials and non-Sunni sects from religious discourse.[14] Historians have differed regarding the times at which the various schools emerged. One interpretation is that Sunni Islam was initially[when?] split into four groups: the Hanafites, Malikites, Shafi'ites and Zahirites.[15] Later, the Hanbalites and Jarirites developed two more schools; then various dynasties effected the eventual exclusion of the Jarirites;[16] eventually, the Zahirites were also excluded when the Mamluk Sultanate established a total of four independent judicial positions, thus solidifying the Maliki, Hanafi, Shafi'i and Hanbali schools.[14] During the era of the Islamic Gunpowders, the Ottoman Empire reaffirmed the official status of these four schools as a reaction to Shi'ite Persia.[17] Some are of the view that Sunni jurisprudence falls into two groups: Ahl al-Ra'i ("people of opinions", emphasizing scholarly judgment and reason) and Ahl al-Hadith ("people of traditions", emphasizing strict interpretation of scripture).[18]
10th century Shi'ite scholar Ibn al-Nadim named eight groups: Maliki, Hanafi, Shafi'i, Zahiri, Imami Shi'ite, Ahl al-Hadith, Jariri and Kharijite.[16][19] In the 12th century Jariri and Zahiri schools were absorbed by the Shafi'i school.[20] Ibn Khaldun defined only three Sunni madhahib: Hanafi, Zahiri, and one encompassing the Shafi'i, Maliki and Hanbali schools as existing initially,[21][22] noting that by the 14th-century historian the Zahiri school had become extinct,[23][24] only for it to be revived again in parts of the Muslim world by the mid-20th century.[25][26][27]
Historically, the fiqh schools were often in political and academic conflict with one another, vying for favor with the ruling government in order to have their representatives appointed to legislative and especially judiciary positions.[17] Geographer and historian Al-Muqaddasi once satirically categorized competing madhahib with contrasting personal qualities: Hanafites, highly conscious of being hired for official positions, appeared deft, well-informed, devout and prudent; Malikites, dull and obtuse, confined themselves to observance of prophetic tradition; Shafi'ites were shrewd, impatient, understanding and quick-tempered; Zahirites haughty, irritable, loquacious and well-to-do; Shi'ites, entrenched and intractable in old rancor, enjoyed riches and fame; and Hanbalites, anxious to practice what they preached, were charitable and inspiring.[28] While such descriptions were almost assuredly humorous in nature, ancient differences were less to do with actual doctrinal opinions than with maneuvering for adherents and influence.

I was gonna post more but this is really long so I will post the rest later. @Talus I of Dixie I would recomment treating the X and XI centuries as the "long term" of ttl for now, cince this period is quite complex and dense with events. Not only are the major school of thought and sects of islam being formed but also there will be history changing migration of peoples and massive plagues so this period will be difficult to plan so I would recommend leaving aside speculations and plans of later periods to avoid confusion and burnouts.
 
The butterflies will be massive with the islamic School of both theology and jurisprudence, specially when changes start to affect the new Abassadi Caliphate @EnvarKadri . The same the trade routes, for example no via regia and more interconnection both land and sea in Al-Andalus and Faransa and Ukwawhia too, and more sea route with baltic thanks Faransa and Ukhawia efforts
 
The development of Shia legal schools occurred along the lines of theological differences and resulted in formation of the Twelver, Zaidi and Ismaili madhhabs, whose differences from Sunni legal schools are roughly of the same order as the differences among Sunni schools.[4][3]
Good work on the detailed post @EnvarKadri . One suggestion though. Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying, but the differences between the Sunni Mathahib are certainly not as large as the differences between Sunni and Shia Mathahib. This is especially so for the Ismaili sect of Shiism.
 
The Age of Collapse: Chapter 11
Muslim World - The Age of Collapse
Danish Hegemony: The Going Ons of Scandinavia


King Haraldr Hilditǫnn and the Battle of Rosköping (720s-761)
In the mid-8th Century, Denmark and Sweden were under the united reign of King Haraldr [1], a man who managed to conquer from his base in Zealand all of Denmark and Sweden in his early, glory days. By the 740s and 750s he was an old king, but still a competent one, punishing the saxon raiders in campaign and managing his lands in mostly peaceful ways, while periodically leaving to lead raids into Frisia, Slavia and the Rhine, with some of them actually reported by the arabs and bakhyians in the area [2].

Though as he grew older, Haraldr started to stay more in peace, and this ended up permitting nobles from the court to convince his nephew Sigurðr Hringr, who was also his vassal in Sweden, to start plans to remove his uncle from the throne and establish himself as King. Soon Sigurðr established contact with some all-time raiders from the Eistr and Kúrir [3], hiring 5.400 of them as mercenaries to his army, other 3.200 men from the Norwegian Uplands also bolstered Sigurðr's army with additional 11.600 Swedes from his lands.

When Haraldr finally took notice of his nephew's treachery, he rapidly mobilized from his lands 17.400 warriors, also hiring 2.900, 3.640 and 6.550 mercenaries from the Livr, Saxar and Vindr [4] respectively, and rapidly marched into Sweden, acting with such speed that surprised Sigurðr, forcing him to make an all-or-nothing stand at the shores of Lake Roxen, near what later would be called Rosköping [5].

The battle would see Sigurðr adopting the feared Svinfylking formation, but Haraldr was ready for this confrontation, receiving valuable advice from the Saxar about a formation called Umbibrekan or (as would be called later by the norse) Sigurði [6]. With this formation and a great appearance of the saxon cavalry, Haraldr managed to encircle the enemy army and score a victory "which decisive feature was never seen in our lands" [7], with Sigurðr and the majority of the swedish nobles fighting in the battle laying dead on the field, although Haraldr would give them a honourable burial in Uppsala.

After Rosköping, Haraldr made a great tour around Sweden to cement his rule in the region, stripping many nobles from their titles and appointing new ones on their place. After having conducted great offerings at the temple at Uppsala [8], he accordingly paid his mercenaries and rode back to his capital at Hleiðargarðr [9], thinking he was safe from his enemies after having defeated Sigurðr, but he was not.

The Great Invasion or Disaster at Visirum (762-763)
As the Spring came next year, Haraldr would receive reports of another problem, a great raid by the Eistr and Kúrir on Sweden, with its roots probably in the mercenaries that served on Sigurðr's army and escaped back to home. The army of 14.600 men under the command of a Eisti from Eysysla [10] called Fædlya [11] started a major campaign of plunder in Sweden, capturing many as slaves and defeating the petty armies of local nobles, since they didn't have time to establish their power, subsequently, the armies went on to sack Uppsala itself.

In a hurry, Haraldr went on to levy a army of 13.400 men and crossed the Sound to group up with the local soldiers to oppose the invaders, with plus 8.700 warriors joining his army, the Dane rapidly marched north, pushing the raiders to regroup, resulting in the clash of the armies at Visirum [12], where the decisive battle would take place.

Haraldr this time would use the Svinfylking, hoping to rapidly crush the invaders, and although Fædlya didn't know about the Umbibrekan, he had a trick in the sleeve, organizing his men on a phalanx-like formation with the cavalry and some light infantry in the flanks. As the battle started, the danish centre pushed his counterpart back, although with heavy fighting in the process, after the initial shock, Fædlya's centre managed to stand and hold the danes, what passed the initiative to the invaders.

Fædlya soon ordered his flanks to counterattack, putting their fragile danish counterparts into rout without further issue and attacking the danish centre by the flanks, which after a time of resistance ended up crushed too, reportedly after the slaying of Haraldr in the field, giving victory to the invaders.

After the battle, Fædlya turned to another round of general plunder, going as far as Skåne, taking even more people as slaves and even more riches. Just departing after the accession of King Þrándr in Hleiðargarðr, which gave a great ransom in return of the departure of the army, after going back home with all the profit made from the venture, the army would mainly disperse, though Fædlya would still be an extremely important player in the local politics of his land [13].

Ukhawias and King Þrándr hinn Góðr (763-771)
After news of the disaster at Visirum arrived in Hleiðargarðr, Þràndr, the oldest son of Haraldr, managed to succeed him quite smoothly, simply because of Haraldr's successful destruction of opposition in court. Knowing that the campaign was already lost, Þràndr sent an envoy to Fædlya asking for his and his army to go back home in exchange for a big ransom, proposal which Fædlya and his men happily accepted.

After the invasion, Sweden was thoroughly destroyed, and as Þràndr wanted to preserve some of the prestige he had left, he started to act on a great recovery of the treasury, giving permission to the new and strange Meikatr [14] arriving from the west to build trading posts in Kaupmannahǫfn [15], which quickly expanded as the new products that the muslims brought were sought more and more by the locals, specially by the nobles, with that, he started to gain profit with the selling of iron and furs to the new merchants.

With the treasury somewhat manageable, Þràndr reorganized the land in Sweden, appointing new nobles and promoting settlement of depopulated regions, making major investments in the reconstruction of the region, rebuilding Uppsala and its temple and establishing a royal quarter on the city, where a appointed Staðrsjándi [16] would look over the affairs in the region, permitting Þràndr to have a closer eye on the administration.

On Denmark proper, Þràndr also didn't left much to be desired, reinforcing the Danavirki with yet new fortifications ("yet" because it was already reinforced in Haraldr's reign) and investing in the expansion of the centres at Heiðabýr [17] and Ripa [18], giving permission to the muslims of Juzuralqna, Nuteqali and Urekt to build trading posts there, gradually increasing the economic activity of the region, and with it, its prosperity. Major works were also built during this period, including a series of roads in Zealand and Jutland, irrigation canals around the frontier regions and multiple levees in the waterways.

King Þràndr gained immense popularity with his work on rebuilding Sweden and improving Denmark, further legitimizing his reign and dynasty, another particularity was his policy towards the ukhawias, not favoring anyone, just properly punishing those who violated the laws, this potentialized commerce and as consequence potentialized profits, granting large sums of money to the danish treasury.

Because of the "violated the law", things got interesting after the Battle of Blekinge in 768, on which a minathulatian fleet attacked and captured a big bakhyian merchant convoy that was landed at a harbour on the isles and was trading with the locals. This prompted the local jarl to assemble a fleet and pursue the minathulatians that had docked at Kaupmannahǫfn, when the local fleet attacked the minathulatians in a seemingly "unlawful" way, their enemies' garrisons and ships in the town attacked at the same time, with the bakhyians even capturing their post at land.

The minathulatians obviously protested, so Þràndr made a trial between all parties involved, the Jarl soon accused the minathulatians of having captured and bakhyian and norse ships and men, the minathulatian commander argued that Blekinge wasn't like the trading posts and therefore his actions weren't a crime, after this the King asked for a witness of the attack at Blekinge, soon many freed norse sailors spoke their witnesses, ending the trial with the minathulatians having to give reparations to the Jarl and accepting the loss of the captured ships and men.

The Jarl, who was called Særblað, asked the minathulatian prisoners about their homeland, which some of them replied accordingly, this conversation ended with Særblað spreading the word about the rich lands where the Meikatr lived to the people of his jarldom, resulting in the preparations of a fleet to sail towards the west (more specifically, Faransa), which would give the head up for the crazyness, exploration, awesomeness and fuckupness of the Viking Age [19].

The later years of his reign would be majorly peaceful, although at the same time, Særblað successful expedition in Faransa encouraged many to take up arms and sail west as well, specially among the danes. Estonian and Curonian raids on the swedish coast decreased as defenses were built up and made the attacks costly. Þràndr hinn Góðr (tl. Thrande the Good) would naturally die of old age (61) in the winter of 771-772, though the succession wouldn't be as smooth as his, since three contenders were there: His oldest son Ragnarr, his brother Hrœrekr and his third (out of four) son Eysteinn, this dispute would cut short the peace established by the reign of Þràndr, and would decisively settle the future politics of the region.

[1]: As said in the saxon update, he's OTL Harald Wartooth, artistic liberties here bois
[2]: This is my interpretation of raids that OTL were credited to Harald, isn't farfetched to think of pre-viking norse raids that ended up not being documented
[3]: The Estonians and Curonians, respectively, OTL they were fairly present in the Baltic with many raids being documented by the norse, in some ways they were Eastern Vikings
[4]: The Livonians, Saxons and Wends, with the Wends per se being Pomeranians
[5]: Norsholm, Sweden. The etymology is a simple "Roxen Market", pronounced [rɔs'tʃɜːpɪŋ]
[6]: Nothing more than a (very) corrupted version of Hannibal's famous formation in Cannae, the saxon name means literally "Break Around". I know it's ironic but, it isn't named after the defeated, it just means "Victorious", incidentally similar to Sigurðr's name
[7]: Quote from the Danskr Saga, a curious piece of literature written in 9th Century Holmgarðr, that we'll see later ;)
[8]: Archaeology shows that at the very least, Uppsala was a major center in the region, so i don't see why they wouldn't have a temple there. It might not have gold in it, but the temple itself probably existed
[9]: Lejre, Denmark
[10]: Saaremaa
[11]: His name in estonian is Võitleja, meaning "Warrior", being pronounced [vɤjt'leja]. His name in nordic is pronounced as [fɛ̃t'lya]
[12]: Virserum, Sweden
[13]: I assure you this won't be the last time y'll read about him
[14]: "Merchants", coming from Old Occitan Mercater [meɾ'ka'tεr], turning into Old Norse Meikatr [mej'katø]
[15]: Copenhagen. Etymology is "Merchant's Harbour", pronounced [ˡkaupmanːahɒvn]
[16]: Sort of a viceroy (as in authority), but with a role more of an governor, etymology is "Place's Seer"
[17]: Busdorf, Germany. Being OTL Hedeby, pronounced [ˈhejð̩apyˀ]
[18]: Ribe, Denmark. Pronounced [ˈʁiːpæ]
[19]: Remember that i said that Azure's death would bring a lot of instability on Faransa? Well, they'll give a help to that instability
Also, i'll be glad if anyone from here that thinks this TL deserves it, votes on it in the Turtledove's :), but just if you really think it deserves such vote.
@EnvarKadri I'll be replying your usual textwall tomorrow because here it's already late and i have to sleep.
 
Last edited:
Faransa), which would give the head up for the crazyness, exploration, awesomeness and fuckupness of the Viking Age [19].
Ouch and North Faransa with a weaker Navy might suffer..of coure the Ukhawias might help them but that might not make happy the mayurdumus of nystria and barish
 
Warning! Walltext and lots of wikipedia pastes!
Ok, lets cover the early theological debates and shia branches. Always taking into accounta that we are currently in the 750-800 period. (Covering islamic history this early is always feels weird). I will try to keep this to before the X century. This period is pretty dense with changes and moving parts so to avoid oversights and confusion I would reccomend to thing of the X century as long term and a temporal end goal and keep for later thoughts of later periods.
First, schools of islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) and schools of theology (Aqidah) are too different things but schools of one thing then to align with the other. It appears that while some schools of aaqidah are cross-sectarian and influenced multiple schools of fiqh, a lot of schools of aqidah function as the philosophical base of a particular school of fiqh. Lets cover some terminology first.
Aqidah
"Aqidah is an Islamic term meaning "creed" or "belief". Any religious belief system, or creed, can be considered an example of aqidah. However this term has taken a significant technical usage in Muslim history and theology, denoting those matters over which Muslims hold conviction. The term is usually translated as "theology". Such traditions are divisions orthogonal to sectarian divisions of Islam, and a Mu'tazili may for example, belong to Jafari, Zaidi or even Hanafi school of jurisprudence. One of the earliest systematic theological school to develop, in the mid 8th-century, was Mu'tazila. It emphasized reason and rational thought, positing that the injunctions of God are accessible to rational thought and inquiry and that the Qur'an, albeit the word of God, was created rather than uncreated, which would develop into one of the most contentious questions in Islamic theology.
In the 10th century, the Ash'ari school developed as a response to Mu'tazila, leading to the latter's decline. Ash'ari still taught the use of reason in understanding the Qur'an, but denied the possibility to deduce moral truths by reasoning. This was opposed by the school of Maturidi, which taught that certain moral truths may be found by the use of reason without the aid of revelation.
Another point of contention was the relative position of iman ("faith") vs. taqwa ("piety"). Such schools of theology are summarized under Ilm al-Kalam, or "science of discourse", as opposed to mystical schools who deny that any theological truth may be discovered by means of discourse or reason."

Fiqh
"Fiqh is Islamic jurisprudence.[2] Fiqh is often described as the human understanding of the sharia,[3] that is human understanding of the divine Islamic law as revealed in the Quran and the Sunnah (the teachings and practices of the Islamic prophet Muhammad and His companions). Fiqh expands and develops Shariah through interpretation (ijtihad) of the Quran and Sunnah by Islamic jurists (ulama)[3] and is implemented by the rulings (fatwa) of jurists on questions presented to them. Thus, whereas sharia is considered immutable and infallible by Muslims, fiqh is considered fallible and changeable. Fiqh deals with the observance of rituals, morals and social legislation in Islam as well as political system. In the modern era, there are four prominent schools (madh'hab) of fiqh within Sunni practice, plus two (or three) within Shi'a practice. A person trained in fiqh is known as a faqīh (plural fuqaha).[4]
Figuratively, fiqh means knowledge about Islamic legal rulings from their sources and deriving religious rulings from their sources necessitates the mujtahid (an individual who exercises ijtihad) to have a deep understanding in the different discussions of jurisprudence. A faqīh must look deep down into a matter and not suffice himself with just the apparent meaning, and a person who only knows the appearance of a matter is not qualified as a faqīh.[2]
The studies of fiqh, are traditionally divided into Uṣūl al-fiqh (principles of Islamic jurisprudence, lit. the roots of fiqh), the methods of legal interpretation and analysis; and Furūʿ al-fiqh (lit. the branches of fiqh), the elaboration of rulings on the basis of these principles.[5][6] Furūʿ al-fiqh is the product of the application of Uṣūl al-fiqh and the total product of human efforts at understanding the divine will. A hukm (plural aḥkām) is a particular ruling in a given case."
"
Traditional theory of Islamic jurisprudence recognizes four sources of sharia: the Quran, sunnah (authentic hadith), qiyas (analogical reasoning),[note 1] and ijma (juridical consensus).[8] Different legal schools—of which the most prominent are Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali and Jafari—developed methodologies for deriving sharia rulings from scriptural sources using a process known as ijtihad.[3][4] Traditional jurisprudence (fiqh) distinguishes two principal branches of law, ʿibādāt (rituals) and muʿāmalāt (social relations), which together comprise a wide range of topics.[3][5] Its rulings are concerned with ethical standards as much as with legal norms,[9][10] assigning actions to one of five categories: mandatory, recommended, neutral, abhorred, and prohibited.[3][4][5] Thus, some areas of sharia overlap with the Western notion of law while others correspond more broadly to living life in accordance with God's will.[4]
Classical jurisprudence was elaborated by private religious scholars, largely through legal opinions (fatwas) issued by qualified jurists (muftis). It was historically applied in sharia courts by ruler-appointed judges, who dealt mainly with civil disputes and community affairs.[3][5] Sultanic courts, the police and market inspectors administered criminal justice, which was influenced by sharia but not bound by its rules.[11][5] Non-Muslim (dhimmi) communities had legal autonomy to adjudicate their internal affairs.[4] Over the centuries, Sunni muftis were gradually incorporated into state bureaucracies,[12] and fiqh was complemented by various economic, criminal and administrative laws issued by Muslim rulers.[13] The Ottoman civil code of 1869–1876 was the first partial attempt to codify sharia.[14]"

Madhhab

"A madhhab (Arabic: "way to act") is a school of thought within fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence).

The major Sunni madhhabs are Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali.[1] They emerged in the ninth and tenth centuries CE and by the twelfth century almost all jurists aligned themselves with a particular madhhab.[2] These four schools recognize each other's validity and they have interacted in legal debate over the centuries.[2][1] Rulings of these schools are followed across the Muslim world without exclusive regional restrictions, but they each came to dominate in different parts of the world.[2][1] For example, the Maliki school is predominant in North and West Africa; the Hanafi school in South and Central Asia; the Shafi'i school in East Africa and Southeast Asia; and the Hanbali school in North and Central Arabia.[2][1][3] The first centuries of Islam also witnessed a number of short-lived Sunni madhhabs.[4] The Zahiri school, which is commonly identified as extinct, continues to exert influence over legal thought.[4][1][2] The development of Shia legal schools occurred along the lines of theological differences and resulted in formation of the Twelver, Zaidi and Ismaili madhhabs, whose differences from Sunni legal schools are roughly of the same order as the differences among Sunni schools.[4][3] The Ibadi legal school, distinct from Sunni and Shia madhhabs, is predominant in Oman.[1]

A little History on Madhhabs

"Ancient" schools
According to John Burton, “modern research shows” that fiqh was first “regionally organized” with “considerable disagreement and variety of view”. In the second century of Islam, schools of fiqh were noted for the loyalty of their jurists to the legal practices of their local communities, whether Mecca, Kufa, Basra, Syria, etc.[7] (Egypt's school in Fustat was a branch of Medina's school of law and followed such practices -- up until the end of the 8th century -- as basing verdict on one single witness (not two) and the oath of the claimant. Its principal jurist in the second half of the 8th century was al-Layth b. Sa'd.)[Note 1] Al-Shafi‘i writes that, `every capital of the Muslims is a seat of learning whose people follow the opinion of one of their countrymen in most of his teachings`.[11][12] The "real basis" of legal doctrine in these "ancient schools" was not a body of reports of Muhammad's sayings, doings, silent approval (the ahadith) or even those of his Companions, but the `living tradition` of the school as "expressed in the consensus of the scholars", according to Joseph Schacht.[13]

Al-Shafi‘i and after
It has been asserted that madhahib were consolidated in the 9th and 10th centuries as a means of excluding dogmatic theologians, government officials and non-Sunni sects from religious discourse.[14] Historians have differed regarding the times at which the various schools emerged. One interpretation is that Sunni Islam was initially[when?] split into four groups: the Hanafites, Malikites, Shafi'ites and Zahirites.[15] Later, the Hanbalites and Jarirites developed two more schools; then various dynasties effected the eventual exclusion of the Jarirites;[16] eventually, the Zahirites were also excluded when the Mamluk Sultanate established a total of four independent judicial positions, thus solidifying the Maliki, Hanafi, Shafi'i and Hanbali schools.[14] During the era of the Islamic Gunpowders, the Ottoman Empire reaffirmed the official status of these four schools as a reaction to Shi'ite Persia.[17] Some are of the view that Sunni jurisprudence falls into two groups: Ahl al-Ra'i ("people of opinions", emphasizing scholarly judgment and reason) and Ahl al-Hadith ("people of traditions", emphasizing strict interpretation of scripture).[18]
10th century Shi'ite scholar Ibn al-Nadim named eight groups: Maliki, Hanafi, Shafi'i, Zahiri, Imami Shi'ite, Ahl al-Hadith, Jariri and Kharijite.[16][19] In the 12th century Jariri and Zahiri schools were absorbed by the Shafi'i school.[20] Ibn Khaldun defined only three Sunni madhahib: Hanafi, Zahiri, and one encompassing the Shafi'i, Maliki and Hanbali schools as existing initially,[21][22] noting that by the 14th-century historian the Zahiri school had become extinct,[23][24] only for it to be revived again in parts of the Muslim world by the mid-20th century.[25][26][27]
Historically, the fiqh schools were often in political and academic conflict with one another, vying for favor with the ruling government in order to have their representatives appointed to legislative and especially judiciary positions.[17] Geographer and historian Al-Muqaddasi once satirically categorized competing madhahib with contrasting personal qualities: Hanafites, highly conscious of being hired for official positions, appeared deft, well-informed, devout and prudent; Malikites, dull and obtuse, confined themselves to observance of prophetic tradition; Shafi'ites were shrewd, impatient, understanding and quick-tempered; Zahirites haughty, irritable, loquacious and well-to-do; Shi'ites, entrenched and intractable in old rancor, enjoyed riches and fame; and Hanbalites, anxious to practice what they preached, were charitable and inspiring.[28] While such descriptions were almost assuredly humorous in nature, ancient differences were less to do with actual doctrinal opinions than with maneuvering for adherents and influence.

I was gonna post more but this is really long so I will post the rest later. @Talus I of Dixie I would recomment treating the X and XI centuries as the "long term" of ttl for now, cince this period is quite complex and dense with events. Not only are the major school of thought and sects of islam being formed but also there will be history changing migration of peoples and massive plagues so this period will be difficult to plan so I would recommend leaving aside speculations and plans of later periods to avoid confusion and burnouts.
Ya, i really didn't planned much beyond the 10th Century, so i think i won't get much confusion at least for a while. Your text is very useful and i'll be certainly re-reading it for future updates, i don't have much to say simply because it's just a great wall of magnificent and resourceful knowledge. So any questions in specific you can just ask :)
Also @Talus I of Dixie here an extensive map on eurasian and north african trade routes in 11th and 12th centuries:
I already saw this map before, my friend (the guy that helped me with the TL in the start and is making my maps from now on) showed to me, but anyway thanks because i lost the map lol.
Ouch and North Faransa with a weaker Navy might suffer..of coure the Ukhawias might help them but that might not make happy the mayurdumus of nystria and barish
Not so much, because the ukhawias don't exactly like Faransa...So many of them might even help the norse, and anyway, in seawar the norse are considerably better than the muslims.
 
Not so much, because the ukhawias don't exactly like Faransa...So many of them might even help the norse, and anyway, in seawar the norse are considerably better than the muslims.
If that is the way...Faransa like otl FRANKS...will have to deal with the snow pirates the hard way..at blows till heavy calvary is developed to cut those pirate back into sea...and seems those pirate will have to learn when faransa is easy target.. Ukhawias are not... and yeah seems North Faransa and their nobles will have issue with those guys
And Other Question how the Bakhyia will deal with those? OTL netherlands did have viking raids but Bakhyia are far stronger OTL Dutch..meaning more raids in Faransa..ouch
 
Last edited:
@Talus I of Dixie as always good update.
[1]: As said in the saxon update, he's OTL Harald Wartooth, artistic liberties here bois
Don't worry too much about that. This period is quite lacking in historical certainty. Heck the team behind Crusader Kings 2 best mod (Historical Immersion Project) had this to say about the Carolingian POD
Q: Where is the 769 bookmark?

  • SWMH doesn't include the 769 Charlemagne bookmark and likely never will. The lack of reliable historical information for that date prevents the SWMH team from making it significantly more historically accurate, which is the whole purpose of the mod. If you want to play from the 769 start, you'll need to install HIP without SWMH. If you'd like more information about why SWMH made this decision, you can read the forum thread.
You are doing fine.
The reason I felt it was needed for us to read about early islamic schools of thought is because those are the actors of this story and without knowing them is impossible to understand what's going on, not just you as a writer but also us as readers. I had quite some problems getting following what was going on early in the story but after half a day in wikipedia I learned a lot and the story became understandable. It's just "lore" one needs to know. I want to cover later one for one all the existing schools of thought before the XI century. Specially I want to get to batiniyya schools like the Ismailis. I think batin style sects have quite potencial for formation in Europe. Using the levant and the balkans as a model.
 
Seems the European Islamic School would be very unique later on, specially with Bakhyia, Faransa and the diverse Ukhawias... and that is something later on would make the TL very unique
Don't worry too much about that. This period is quite lacking in historical certainty. Heck the team behind Crusader Kings 2 best mod (Historical Immersion Project) had this to say about the Carolingian POD
When the fact and myth start and end is always very messy at times, still the TL is so well done, no problem in that regard
 
So what come NExt? the ERE civil war or Arabia?
Wait a bit for it my little boi, we'll see how things go in the Baltic for a bit (two/three chapters, things will be particularly interesting in Estonia and Poland), after that we'll go to the east. And then go back to the civil war...
 
Wait a bit for it my little boi, we'll see how things go in the Baltic for a bit (two/three chapters, things will be particularly interesting in Estonia and Poland), after that we'll go to the east. And then go back to the civil war...
Very Nice, just remember what we discussed before but seems our Business in North Europe have not ended yet... and those two countries mention would be very nice to see what happen, waiting for those chapter
 
Top