Syncretic Muslim/Christian Spain after Reconquista

Hi! I am new in this thread, sorry if I break any rule posting directly... just had this question in my head and I am sure here I can find several answers (even if especulations ;) ) Also, sorry if I write "funny" since english is not my main language.

The background is the Christian kingdoms of current Spain ater conquering muslim territories and joining with the marriage of the Catholic kings. Them and their successors encorauged (and forced) christianisation of all their lands with the Holy Inquisition, the Contrareforma (movement lead by the church to prevent humanistic ideas such as Renaissance and Luteranism spreading in Spain), the expulsion of the Jews and also the mozarabic peoples (by their succesors), etc, etc. Basically working towards impose Catholic religion in all the territories.

Then I started wondering how things would be different if this didn't happen. I imagined a new heresy become hegemonic in a similar way as Lutheranism appeared in Germany, but as a syncretic muslim-christian religion. The, surveying a bit, I found that something similar happened: http://digital.csic.es/handle/10261/110727. Agustín de Ribera was a mozarabic boy condemned by heresy for being a Muhammad profet during the XVI Century, but modern scholars have found that what he professed was in line with most Christians, taking elements of both religions.

Anyway, my point of differentiation starts with Agustin or a similar prophet being followed by Queen Isabel. That starts a tolerance towards mozarabics that soon takes the form of a new religion with elements of both that becomes widely accepted in Castile and Aragon.

There is where a thousand questions arise.

How would this religion be? During previous centuries Muslim countries and culture are regarded as more advanced than medieval europe, with their universities being renowned by their study of science and medicine (al-Khwarazmí in maths, Avicenna in Medicine). This seemed to slowly change or stagnate until today (maybe I have a biased eurocentric point of view, I apollogize it that seems offensive). Europe, in its turn, was moving from obscurantism towards humanism with the renaissance and later luteran reforms which many credit the proliferation of scientifics in germanic countries. However, that didn't influence much Spain because of the mentioned Contrareforma. Would this new religion be more mystical or humanist? How would it impact philosophy and science?

How would the rest of europe and muslim countries react? Would it have any chance to thrive? We know what happened with luteran germany: a long and bloody war that however, due to political shiftings and power balances, allowed the "heretic" luterans become a established and after some time, accepted religion (or at least not prosecuted). How do you think would influence the neighboring countries and shape these two confronted worlds?

I am also curious of wether Christians and Muslims would see it as a new branch of their own religions (like suni, chii, christian or orthodox) or reject it so much and considering it a branch of the other religion.
 
Christianity and Islam are completely different religions. Christians believe that Abraham preferred Isaac over Ishmael, while Muslims believe the opposite is true. Islam focuses on Muhammad being the primary messenger of God (the prophet) while Christianity states that Jesus is the son of God. They both may be Abrahamic but they are completely different religions. Both Christianity and Islam could not stay as one interpretation (Catholic Orthodox Protestant and Sunni Shia Ibadi), let alone combine into one syncretic faith. Eastern religions are much more syncretic in nature than Abrahamic religions.
 

Skallagrim

Banned
I'm not sure how possible this is (or rather: I'm tempted to think that due to great pre-existing animosity it is extremely unlikely even if not literally impossible), but I do think that the idea of Christian-Islamic syncretism arising in an alt-Iberia would be a very interesting development to see explored. Unfortunately, both 'sides' would probably condemn it as treacherous heresy...
 
Interesting. But most likely a very small movement.


Hey, I'm a newcomer on this site. I just started on my first TL a few days back. It's called The Great Commoner: A William Jennings Bryan Presidency. Would you guys mind checking it out? See if its good? Thanks.
 
Christianity and Islam are completely different religions. Christians believe that Abraham preferred Isaac over Ishmael, while Muslims believe the opposite is true. Islam focuses on Muhammad being the primary messenger of God (the prophet) while Christianity states that Jesus is the son of God. They both may be Abrahamic but they are completely different religions. Both Christianity and Islam could not stay as one interpretation (Catholic Orthodox Protestant and Sunni Shia Ibadi), let alone combine into one syncretic faith. Eastern religions are much more syncretic in nature than Abrahamic religions.

This. Abrahamic religions are deeply entrenched in their religious texts, leaving very little room for compromise. You can't expect that islam and christianity to syncretize the same way both religions have done, for example, with other animistic religions around the globe.
Also, I feel that it could be perceived as even worse than having isolated muslim communities in certain cities, i.e Sevilla in Castille and Valencia in Aragon. This would be a direct attack on catholic orthodoxy, somewhat like the reform was, though these syncretizers wouldn't be considered christians, at least by the majority of rulers, believers and most importantly, the Pope.

Shortly said, even if such syncretizers were to appear, I don't see any reason for why Spain would find it advantegeous to allow them to practice their new creed.

How would this religion be? During previous centuries Muslim countries and culture are regarded as more advanced than medieval europe, with their universities being renowned by their study of science and medicine (al-Khwarazmí in maths, Avicenna in Medicine). This seemed to slowly change or stagnate until today (maybe I have a biased eurocentric point of view, I apollogize it that seems offensive). Europe, in its turn, was moving from obscurantism towards humanism with the renaissance and later luteran reforms which many credit the proliferation of scientifics in germanic countries. However, that didn't influence much Spain because of the mentioned Contrareforma. Would this new religion be more mystical or humanist? How would it impact philosophy and science?

It is not only a eurocentric view, but a protestant anglo-germanic one to be precise.
 
Although not impossible something like that exists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoruba_religion#Chrislam
In this case it seems more a mix of Christian and Muslim doctrines with some animism aiming for reconciliation. And as I pointed out something like that started to exist but was aborted by the Inquisition.

They are two different religions and I guess that if syncretism appeared and thrived they would end up as three different religions. About dogma, I doubt most of the believers knew about Isaac or Ishmael, probably but the basic stories and set of values their priest/imam told them. More than core doctrines, I was wondering about core values and how would them shape their culture.

I know devil is in the details, but even Orthodox, Christian, protestant and evangelic religions have huge (sometimes byzantinian) debates about the Holy Trinity or the divinity of Jesus and all are considered Christian.

About differences in Luteran and Catholic religions, there are theories that catholicism encourages obedience (specially to the Church) and lutheranism encourages self-responsability, hence industrial revolution and technological advances thrived more in luteran countries than in catholic ones. I don't know that much about islam, but wonder which kind of behaviour a mix would produce.

I realize I may touch sensibilities here, so sorry if I offended anyone.
 

Skallagrim

Banned
I'd suggest leaving the whole protestantism-versus-catholicism thing out of the whole discussion, as that's not relevant and likely to cause thread derailment. The key question is: how could a syncretic movement arise and gain any traction. Other syncretic movements have been linked to in this thread. I'm not very familiar with them. Is there anything specific about the context in which they arose? Some factor that might have played a part in their success?
 
Having Spanish society accept explicit Islamic doctrine seems near impossible.

A heavily Islamic influences variety of Protestantism like Calvinism seems more possible.
 
About political gain allowing the new religion rise in the ex-al'andalus territories, I don't see an explicit one other than preventing the depopulation and economic loss the mozarabic and jew expulsions caused, so I imagined the disrupting point with Queen Isabel listening to the new doctrines and joining them. She was unlikely to do but, after all, this is alternate history. And from here, what could have happened and how would this shape the world today.

Since I agree embracing explicit Islamic doctrine is even more unlikely, how would Islam influence this new protestantism?

I am far from an expert, but what first comes to mind:

-Tolerance vs the Jews and Christians: Now seems unlikely, but in Al'Andalus, although charged with extra taxes and having other burdens, Jews and Christians were tollerated, so expulsion of other creeds and inquisition would be more unlikely.

-Decentralized religion, pretty much like protestantism.

-Probably isolation from the rest of the christian influence countries, at least for a while. How would it relate with later protestantism?
 
About political gain allowing the new religion rise in the ex-al'andalus territories, I don't see an explicit one other than preventing the depopulation and economic loss the mozarabic and jew expulsions caused, so I imagined the disrupting point with Queen Isabel listening to the new doctrines and joining them. She was unlikely to do but, after all, this is alternate history. And from here, what could have happened and how would this shape the world today.

Since I agree embracing explicit Islamic doctrine is even more unlikely, how would Islam influence this new protestantism?

I am far from an expert, but what first comes to mind:

-Tolerance vs the Jews and Christians: Now seems unlikely, but in Al'Andalus, although charged with extra taxes and having other burdens, Jews and Christians were tollerated, so expulsion of other creeds and inquisition would be more unlikely.

-Decentralized religion, pretty much like protestantism.

-Probably isolation from the rest of the christian influence countries, at least for a while. How would it relate with later protestantism?



Your PODs are too late, Isabel is highly unlikely to accept and have the power to enforce it, which makes it ASB.

Similarly in terms of as a religion you negate the fact that the Muslims in Al Andalus were the minority, hence why they lost the reconquista, as the relied on foreign aid to survive.

Finally Protestantism is highly centralized, unlike what you say, as seen in the various hierarchial national churches.

Similarly you are ignoring facts like, islam not accepting these converts, as they are apostates, linking into the fact that the Berbers were prone to attack Al Andulas.

Overall I dont think this is possible, due to the fact that nothing like this has ever happened, with Chrislam being a modern thing born of various factors not present in pre modern Iberia.

Alt history only works when it stems from counterfactuals, e.g. what would happen if Normans lost at Hastings etc. And i believe this exists outside that and so it cannot be answered well.
 
About political gain allowing the new religion rise in the ex-al'andalus territories, I don't see an explicit one other than preventing the depopulation and economic loss the mozarabic and jew expulsions caused, so I imagined the disrupting point with Queen Isabel listening to the new doctrines and joining them. She was unlikely to do but, after all, this is alternate history. And from here, what could have happened and how would this shape the world today.

Since I agree embracing explicit Islamic doctrine is even more unlikely, how would Islam influence this new protestantism?

I am far from an expert, but what first comes to mind:

-Tolerance vs the Jews and Christians: Now seems unlikely, but in Al'Andalus, although charged with extra taxes and having other burdens, Jews and Christians were tollerated, so expulsion of other creeds and inquisition would be more unlikely.

-Decentralized religion, pretty much like protestantism.

-Probably isolation from the rest of the christian influence countries, at least for a while. How would it relate with later protestantism?

There were few Christians to be tolerated at many instances during al-Andalus. It would seem the case, that there were almost none left in the Islamic sections after the Almohad and most had likely long been converted to Islam through the normal means of Islamic conversion; sharia. In some ways, it may be said that the reaction by the monarchs of Isabella and Fernando, was one of revenge.
 
Your PODs are too late, Isabel is highly unlikely to accept and have the power to enforce it, which makes it ASB.

Similarly in terms of as a religion you negate the fact that the Muslims in Al Andalus were the minority, hence why they lost the reconquista, as the relied on foreign aid to survive.

Finally Protestantism is highly centralized, unlike what you say, as seen in the various hierarchial national churches.

Similarly you are ignoring facts like, islam not accepting these converts, as they are apostates, linking into the fact that the Berbers were prone to attack Al Andulas.

Overall I dont think this is possible, due to the fact that nothing like this has ever happened, with Chrislam being a modern thing born of various factors not present in pre modern Iberia.

Alt history only works when it stems from counterfactuals, e.g. what would happen if Normans lost at Hastings etc. And i believe this exists outside that and so it cannot be answered well.

To my knowledge converted Muslim iberians made up the majority eventually in al Andalus.

Also Protestantism is centralised in the fact it has leadership and clergy (except quakers) but it is far less centralised than day the catholic or orthodox churches, just look at the divisions between reformed, Anglican,Methodist, Lutheran the list goes on and on.
 
To my knowledge converted Muslim iberians made up the majority eventually in al Andalus.

Also Protestantism is centralised in the fact it has leadership and clergy (except quakers) but it is far less centralised than day the catholic or orthodox churches, just look at the divisions between reformed, Anglican,Methodist, Lutheran the list goes on and on.


The point about demographics is debatable, as it varied from area to area, and is coupled with the fact that it accounts for the loss in land, by the Arabic Kingdoms.

However as a Christian living in the UK, the CoFE was/is highly centralised, however lax in doctrine, which is an important distinction. The protestant National Churches essentially exist to act as government enforcers, and little else.
 
However as a Christian living in the UK, the CoFE was/is highly centralised, however lax in doctrine, which is an important distinction. The protestant National Churches essentially exist to act as government enforcers, and little else.

You didn't state that the Church of England was centralised but that Protestantism as a whole was, just look at all the denominations of Protestant just in the uk; Methodist, Calvinist, Presbyterian, Lutheran... these organisations have totally separate hierarchies, and this is just Protestantism within the uk!

An Iberian form of Protestantism is doubtful to be as centralised as the Church of England because it would require a massive breakdown in royal power for it to be achieved. In a break up of Spain scenario I could see multiple different strains of thought emerging.
 
There were few Christians to be tolerated at many instances during al-Andalus. It would seem the case, that there were almost none left in the Islamic sections after the Almohad and most had likely long been converted to Islam through the normal means of Islamic conversion; sharia. In some ways, it may be said that the reaction by the monarchs of Isabella and Fernando, was one of revenge.
What I never get is the geographic meaning of this, the Almohads controlled something like this at their peak:

almohads.jpg
Does this mean there was a Muslim majority all over the place? if yes what happened to them during the 1200-1500 period? As far as I know there were no large scale expulsion and most of the areas became majority Christian by 1490(with major Muslim minorities in Valencia and Murcia, minor ones in Saragoza and southern Andalusia), did they convert en-masse back to Christianity? Did they all migrate to Granada or Maghreb(seems unlikely to me)?
 
What I never get is the geographic meaning of this, the Almohads controlled something like this at their peak:

almohads.jpg
Does this mean there was a Muslim majority all over the place? if yes what happened to them during the 1200-1500 period? As far as I know there were no large scale expulsion and most of the areas became majority Christian by 1490(with major Muslim minorities in Valencia and Murcia, minor ones in Saragoza and southern Andalusia), did they convert en-masse back to Christianity? Did they all migrate to Granada or Maghreb(seems unlikely to me)?

I am not exactly sure, however I was under the impression that most of al-Andalus far before the Almohads, was already Muslim, by way of sharia. The Almohads, from what I gather, was most stringent in their forced conversions of Jews. There may have been too few Christians to even forcibly convert.

I would assume many did convert en mass to Christianity and others would have fled south into other Islamic realms.
 
There were Christian populations in the Maghreb, as well as native Jews. There were also significant Mozarabic groups in Al-Andalus (Arabized Christians), though they had waned significantly since the Ta'ifa period and earlier, along with Jews of course. Period evidence seems to indicate that by the start of the Almohads or at-least by the mid-point of the Almoravids the demographic ratio between Christians in Al-Andalus and Muslims had sharply tilted in the favor of the muslims.

Now, at the start of the Almohad period it is obvious there was clear religious coexistence in Al-Andalus between Christians, Jews and Muslims. Certainly it was not the fairytale land of peace and fraternity some make Al-Andalus out to be, but I would emphatically argue that the religious situation in Al-Andalus was more tolerant certainly than Christian Castile to the north, even after the Almoravids and the Taifa period. It should be said that even before the Almohads religious attitudes were hardening significantly against Christians. Didn't stop Christians from serving in the government and army though, for both the Almohads and Almoravids.

Once the Almohads took power there is some controversy about the extent of their religious persecutions, but the general consensus seems to be that they firstly basically exterminated the Christian population in the Maghreb (read: forced conversion, exile or outright execution), and they severely decimated the Mozarabs, many of whom fled to Toledo. Jews were treated even more harshly, and they mostly fled to Egypt and the Levant. The Almohads can be largely held responsible for the final death-knell of the native Christian and Jewish population of Al-Andalus, at-least that is my opinion in the matter. Almohad religious policies are still a matter of contention in Islamic studies.

The reason that those areas were majority Christian later on was that they were both converted ('converted') and expelled. Before the expulsion of the Moriscos (occurring in waves through the 16th and 17th centuries, most significantly the 1609 expulsion) there was significant conversion of the native Islamic population to Christianity but it is very likely the large majority were just Christian on paper - they were still culturally Islamic Andalusian through and through. After the expulsions they ended up in the Maghreb, where Andalusian exiles actually played large parts in local politics and regional development later on. Andalusia was repopulated by Christians from other parts of Spain later on, hence roughly its current ethnic makeup.

The closest to syncretism between Islam and Christianity I have seen in Al-Andalus has been either aspects of Mozarabic Christianity (they were arabic speaking Christians living in a Islamic society), or the adoption of certain Almohad political methods by Christian powers, and since the Almohads were a absolutely theocratic state so that is religious syncretism in a sense.

From a Almohad perspective, there is no way whatsoever that there could be syncretism between Islam and Christianity, and that rules out all the post-Almohad Berber dynasties as well since they derived their theology largely from Almohad models. Any attempts at syncretism would have to likely come before the Berber dynasties (Almoravids and beyond), and it would be most likely among the Mozarabs. That is my two dinars anways.
 
Last edited:
There were Christian populations in the Maghreb, as well as native Jews. There were also significant Mozarabic groups in Al-Andalus (Arabized Christians), though they had waned significantly since the Ta'ifa period and earlier, along with Jews of course. Period evidence seems to indicate that by the start of the Almohads or at-least by the mid-point of the Almoravids the demographic ratio between Christians in Al-Andalus and Muslims had sharply tilted in the favor of the muslims.
Everytime I hear this, I can't help but indicate the fact that the borders of those states kept on changing so even without conversion, the more the border territories were annexed by Christians, the more the remaining areas would have a bigger % of Muslims.
Now, at the start of the Almohad period it is obvious there was clear religious coexistence in Al-Andalus between Christians, Jews and Muslims. Certainly it was not the fairytale land of peace and fraternity some make Al-Andalus out to be, but I would emphatically argue that the religious situation in Al-Andalus was more tolerant certainly than Christian Castile to the north, even after the Almoravids and the Taifa period. It should be said that even before the Almohads religious attitudes were hardening significantly against Christians. Didn't stop Christians from serving in the government and army though, for both the Almohads and Almoravids.
Actually Castille was during this period more tolerant than the Muslim Berber states as Jews and Christians fled north as the persecution started, not sure you could say it's less or more tolerant than Al-Andalus, as the real persecution started after 1250 or so and Castille didn't have that many minorities to persecute/tolerate anyways until the Caliphate fell.

Once the Almohads took power there is some controversy about the extent of their religious persecutions, but the general consensus seems to be that they firstly basically exterminated the Christian population in the Maghreb (read: forced conversion, exile or outright execution), and they severely decimated the Mozarabs, many of whom fled to Toledo. Jews were treated even more harshly. The Almohads can be largely held responsible for the final death-knell of the native Christian and Jewish population of Al-Andalus, at-least that is my opinion in the matter. Almohad religious policies are still a matter of contention in Islamic studies.
Granada had Jews though, how can they not be considered natives? And I would reiterate the same point I made above, can we really say all the area owned by the Almohads in 1150 had NO christian in them? Not even underground ones?

The reason that those areas were majority Christian later on was that they were both converted ('converted') and expelled. Before the expulsion of the Moriscos (occurring in waves through the 16th and 17th centuries, most significantly the 1609 expulsion) there was significant conversion of the native Islamic population to Christianity but it is very likely the large majority were just Christian on paper - they were still culturally Islamic Andalusian through and through. After the expulsions they ended up in the Maghreb, where Andalusian exiles actually played large parts in local politics and regional development later on. Andalusia was repopulated by Christians from other parts of Spain later on, hence roughly its current ethnic makeup.
Again, expulsion and persecution started mostly after Granada fell, but by then Valencia even was majority Christian, are we to believe that million of muslims were either massacred, expelled or emigrated when there is no account of that? To me it would seem that a on the other side there would have been many "Muslim on paper", I really wouldn't find unlikely that people that were forcibly converted would manage to hold to their belief for a century or a half considering the Berber dynasty didn't last that long.
 
Top