What are the short-term and long-term consequences of Islam never being founded? What becomes of the Roman and Sassanid Empires?
The Consequences of a World Without Islam?
- Thread starter Huehuecoyotl
- Start date
Sassanid still falls, Byzantium stabilizes in a minimized state in Anatolia and Greece. Egypt, Berbers remain their own society. The orthodox church is centralized in Constantinople. Arabia is a have-not region, Ethiopia remains as an Ethiopian Orthodox Church (Axum survives?). Visigoths continue with an unstable control of Spain. Eventually Byzantium loses Italy and Sicily. Hinduism in the Indus and Northern India are unchallenged.
One question; what effects would it have on the north/south divide in India? This is the only thing I think is really unpredictable.
One question; what effects would it have on the north/south divide in India? This is the only thing I think is really unpredictable.
Really? Is it inevitable that the Byzantines would loose the Levant and Egypt, i n a No Islam world? I file this under one of the irritating Pre 1900 Alternate History cliches.
How are they in decline? Yes, they've just finished a long and exhausting war, but that's not the same thing.
Probably something from India, if something is imported. Maybe whatever develops in Arabia instead - there's no reason the Arabs will be clueless and pagan forever.
Flocculencio
Donor
Guys, the East Indies were Hindu-Buddhist for over a thousand years before Islam arrived.
Flocculencio
Donor
Not much. The North South divide is far more cultural and economic than religious. Westerners tend to see it as a straight Hindu-Muslim divide but it really isn't. There are a lot of Muslims in South India too but Islam developed in a different context there which is why there isn't nearly as much sectarian strife.
Is there any reason that would change in a no-Islam world? Or rather, is there any obvious reason?
Flocculencio
Donor
Nope. Hinduism and Buddhism spread there long before Islam arose (or Christianity for that matter)
A POD that destroys Islam would greatly retard the advancement of science. The Muslim world created a forum for cultural exchange that stretched from China to the Maghreb, and allowed Islamic people to gain knowledge of mathematics (from India) chemistry (from Egypt) and printing (from China). They used and advanced this knowledge (for example, Algebra) and transmitted it to Europe. Europeans built on this knowledge and created modern science.
Without Islam, there is no single force that has the power to learn and synthesize such a wide range of knowledge, which means that such revolutionary inventions such as the printing press would be delayed for centuries. I don't think Christianity could do it, short of a single Christian sect teaming up with a military force to conquer the length of Eurasia without splitting into dozens of competing sects that declare the others heretics.
Without Islam, there is no single force that has the power to learn and synthesize such a wide range of knowledge, which means that such revolutionary inventions such as the printing press would be delayed for centuries. I don't think Christianity could do it, short of a single Christian sect teaming up with a military force to conquer the length of Eurasia without splitting into dozens of competing sects that declare the others heretics.
Kaptin Kurk
Banned
It seems likely that some form of Christianity or Judiasm would give impetus to the Arabs, although it also seems likely that it would be distinctly 'Arabic' in character and considereded something different from European Judiasm and Chrstianity.
I'm not sure. If the Muslims weren't there then there would be some other civilisation between the West and the East taking advantage of the trading routes and picking up on this knowledge. The Persians probably. Plus the Age of Discovery was before the scientific revolution. If ideas didn't move across Western Asia, than they would via the sea as Portuguese and Dutch ships sail to India and the Far East.
Complete butterfly of feudalism as we know it. It's an undirect consequence of, but to resume feudalism is due to the constitution of the Carolingian Empire that is due to the Arabo-Islamic influence.
You'll have an actual european culture more united than OTL, critically between Latins and Byzantium.
You'll have an actual european culture more united than OTL, critically between Latins and Byzantium.
I think that the ERE would maintain its southern fringe, Egypt was still the bread basket of the Empire. I also think that they would expand into Mesopotamia and into Arminia.
There would be several Romance speaking countries and maybe a Vandalic and punic speaking one. in western Europe the Franks might have spread as far as they did. Politically I think it would look more like Angle Saxon England. Also I Christianity would have spread much more slowly and what did spread would much more likely by the Irish kind.
There would be several Romance speaking countries and maybe a Vandalic and punic speaking one. in western Europe the Franks might have spread as far as they did. Politically I think it would look more like Angle Saxon England. Also I Christianity would have spread much more slowly and what did spread would much more likely by the Irish kind.
The Arabs will surge forward in any case, with or without Islam: it is a matter of growing population and the weakness of the combo ERE/Persia. What might change is that instead of a Caliphate the lands overrun by the Arabs (at least Egypt, Sirya and Mesopotamia) will fracture very early. Quite likely the Arabs will adopt the monophisite version of Christianity,which would make easier torule in the Levant and Egypt. I'm not sure if the Iranian highlands will be taken too, and in such a case the Arab conquerors might find it politically attractive to convert to Zoroastrianism.
I'm also quite convinced that the Berbers will overrun western North Africa, and they may (or may not) try forays in Iberia.
This is the short term, say upto late 7th century. From here, it might go in a lot of different ways (including a resurgence of ERE and Persia, which is quite possible but far from assured).
There will be a cultural and religious vacuum in central Asia, which has to be filled in a way or another: maybe a three-way competition (2 christian sects plus the buddhists) or even a 4-way, if Zoroastrianism prospers.
Indonesia, Philippines, and most of Indo-china will remain culturally (and religiously) Indian.
East Africa might be interesting: missionaries from Monophisite Levant and merchants from India.
The Mediterranean will continue to play a role of facilitating commerce andcontacts north-south (even if it is quite likely that piracy will be a major drawback).
Egypt might end up as the big gainer of TTL (but probably not: most likely Egypt will end up being even more inward-looking).
I'm also quite convinced that the Berbers will overrun western North Africa, and they may (or may not) try forays in Iberia.
This is the short term, say upto late 7th century. From here, it might go in a lot of different ways (including a resurgence of ERE and Persia, which is quite possible but far from assured).
There will be a cultural and religious vacuum in central Asia, which has to be filled in a way or another: maybe a three-way competition (2 christian sects plus the buddhists) or even a 4-way, if Zoroastrianism prospers.
Indonesia, Philippines, and most of Indo-china will remain culturally (and religiously) Indian.
East Africa might be interesting: missionaries from Monophisite Levant and merchants from India.
The Mediterranean will continue to play a role of facilitating commerce andcontacts north-south (even if it is quite likely that piracy will be a major drawback).
Egypt might end up as the big gainer of TTL (but probably not: most likely Egypt will end up being even more inward-looking).
scholar
Banned
Persia was already doing this, bridging east and west and taking technology from both.