Shia Islam becomes the majority

What if the majority of Muslims around the world were Shiite instead of Sunni?

The obvious question is how does that come to pass? The Fatimids stay on forever? It would have to be either a relatively early POD or else an absurdly powerful late Shia empire. Modern Shia-majority countries (and most of the denser minority areas) are all the result of the Safavid rule.
 
The obvious question is how does that come to pass? The Fatimids stay on forever? It would have to be either a relatively early POD or else an absurdly powerful late Shia empire. Modern Shia-majority countries (and most of the denser minority areas) are all the result of the Safavid rule.

The Fatimids stay on.
 
The Fatimids stay on.
I'd actually argue that this would not be the case: If I remember, the Fatimids never had an aggressive program of conversion, and in fact many of the local agents they put into place in the Maghrib and Ifriqiya seem to have only been nominally Shia, or at least converted back to Sunni later on. Certainly most of the areas they ruled are not areas you would consider core Shia regions today - in fact its believers are heavily concentrated in Mesopotamia, not anywhere the Fatimids ever ruled.
 

ben0628

Banned
I'd actually argue that this would not be the case: If I remember, the Fatimids never had an aggressive program of conversion, and in fact many of the local agents they put into place in the Maghrib and Ifriqiya seem to have only been nominally Shia, or at least converted back to Sunni later on. Certainly most of the areas they ruled are not areas you would consider core Shia regions today - in fact its believers are heavily concentrated in Mesopotamia, not anywhere the Fatimids ever ruled.

Probably that's because the Fatimid Caliphate has been extinct for 800/900 years and those areas have been ruled by Sunnis ever since.
 

ben0628

Banned
Keep in mind that a very significant, if not the majority of Muslims live in Southeast Asia/India/Bangladesh. Perhaps the pod needs to be Asian focused instead of Middle Eastern focused
 
I'd actually argue that this would not be the case: If I remember, the Fatimids never had an aggressive program of conversion, and in fact many of the local agents they put into place in the Maghrib and Ifriqiya seem to have only been nominally Shia, or at least converted back to Sunni later on. Certainly most of the areas they ruled are not areas you would consider core Shia regions today - in fact its believers are heavily concentrated in Mesopotamia, not anywhere the Fatimids ever ruled.

They simply had a different approach. The Fatimids and their war of influence and subversion was more damaging than the forced conversion and ethnic cleansing of the Safavids.
 
They simply had a different approach. The Fatimids and their war of influence and subversion was more damaging than the forced conversion and ethnic cleansing of the Safavids.
But what was the overall impact it had on establishing thier brand of shiism in Egypt and the wider world in which they operated in?

Given that Ismailis are in the minority amongst shia today, was alot of the Fatimid influence just reversed or was it not so effective at conversion.
 
But what was the overall impact it had on establishing thier brand of shiism in Egypt and the wider world in which they operated in?

Given that Ismailis are in the minority amongst shia today, was alot of the Fatimid influence just reversed or was it not so effective at conversion.

It was reversed rapidly due to the successes of the Safavid, which gave Shi'i from across the world, a new model. In fact, Shi'i from across the Islamic World, migrated to the Safavid Empire and added to its growing Shi'i populace and thought. As well, by the time of the Mongol invasion of Kwarezm, much effort had been done to snuff out Fatimid holdouts across the Muslim world, especially in the Sindh, Central Iran, Levant and Egypt. As late as the 1700s, Shi'i influence in central Arabia was predominant and in much of the 1300-1600s, Shi'i remained powerful in Eastern India.

This is not even mentioning the possible and likely effects Ismaili and Nizari Shi'ism had in the success of the conquests of Is'mail al-Safaviyya. We know the Nizari and Ismaili in much of northern Iran had been in hiding acting as Sunni for over two centuries by this point.
 
The point about most Muslims living in South Asia and Indonesia is a good one. The best POD is just for the Delhi/ Mughal Sultans to go Shia.

There are quite a few chances to keep or put the Caliphate in Ali's lineage 600-900 in which case the split develops very differently.
 
Top