The Ruins of Mecca

Islam, according to its believers, was founded by the prophet Muhammed after the angel Gabriel recited to Muhammed the Quran. However, preaching early on caused a lot of hostility with Meccan tribes. He and his followers attempted to flee to Medina in 622 AD. However, hostile Meccan tribes murdered Muhammed in 622. His followers in Medina regrouped and, after nine years of warfare, in a nearly uncontested battle, took Mecca and destroyed its pagan idols. By 634 AD, the Arab peninsula was unified under Islam. However, the Ummah was split over who should become the caliph of Islam. The people who believed that Abu Talib should become caliph became known as Talibids and the people who believed Abu Bakr should become caliph became known as Bakrites. For ten years, a devastating civil war raged in Arabia until Abu Bakr became leader of the Islamic Caliphate and the first of the Bakrite Dynasty. The weakened caliphate was unable to launch successful invasions in both the ruins of the Sassanid Empire and the Byzantine Empire.
 
Islam hardly could rise if Muhammad is assassinated on 622. Islam was just forming. Muhammad was so notable on early stages of Islam that his early death would ruin everything. There couldn't be Islam or leastly it is very different as OTL Islam.
 
Can't really see Islam kicking off with Muhammad getting murdered before the conquests.

Islam hardly could rise if Muhammad is assassinated on 622. Islam was just forming. Muhammad was so notable on early stages of Islam that his early death would ruin everything. There couldn't be Islam or leastly it is very different as OTL Islam.

Agreed. Islam probably doesn't survive for very long if Mohammad is murdered. The only reason Christianity survived the death of Jesus is because He resurected and because He out right stated that He would be put to death. Mohammad made no such claims. If he dies too early, then the Arabs take it as a sign that he is not God's prophet.
 
Agreed. Islam probably doesn't survive for very long if Mohammad is murdered. The only reason Christianity survived the death of Jesus is because He resurected and because He out right stated that He would be put to death. Mohammad made no such claims. If he dies too early, then the Arabs take it as a sign that he is not God's prophet.

Actually, Christianity survived the death of Jesus because he was killed towards the end of his ministry and because he had his 12 (11 after Judas killed himself) apostles who could lead the rest of his followers and because he appointed a successor in Peter.

Even then, it still probably would have remained a sect of Judaism if it wasn't for Paul of Tarsis spreading the message to gentiles without the need to convert to Judaism first.

That said, in 622 if Muhammad was killed it would probably butterfly away Islam as it was so early in his preaching and formation of Islam. If it survived it would be incredibly different due to whoever took the reins formulating/compiling/receiving the doctrine being someone other than Muhammad and thus would invariably be a very different religion.
 

Redhand

Banned
Actually, Christianity survived the death of Jesus because he was killed towards the end of his ministry and because he had his 12 (11 after Judas killed himself) apostles who could lead the rest of his followers and because he appointed a successor in Peter.

Even then, it still probably would have remained a sect of Judaism if it wasn't for Paul of Tarsis spreading the message to gentiles without the need to convert to Judaism first.

That said, in 622 if Muhammad was killed it would probably butterfly away Islam as it was so early in his preaching and formation of Islam. If it survived it would be incredibly different due to whoever took the reins formulating/compiling/receiving the doctrine being someone other than Muhammad and thus would invariably be a very different religion.

The timeframe of the initial strikes was crucial. The Byzantines were exhauseted after fighting the Sassanids off and got extremely unlucky at Yarmouk. The Sassanids were just as exhausted and going through internal tumult. If the invasions happened just a few years later, they might have toppled the Sassanids but probably not taken the Levant and Egypt. Internal Arab squabbling could bring this about.
 
Agreed. Islam probably doesn't survive for very long if Mohammad is murdered. The only reason Christianity survived the death of Jesus is because He resurected and because He out right stated that He would be put to death. Mohammad made no such claims. If he dies too early, then the Arabs take it as a sign that he is not God's prophet.

Some religions have been known to retcon aspects of their sacred texts....
Massage the message. Perhaps a Mohammed with some "christ-like" attributes would have appeared in this version of the birth of Islam.
 
The timeframe of the initial strikes was crucial. The Byzantines were exhauseted after fighting the Sassanids off and got extremely unlucky at Yarmouk. The Sassanids were just as exhausted and going through internal tumult. If the invasions happened just a few years later, they might have toppled the Sassanids but probably not taken the Levant and Egypt. Internal Arab squabbling could bring this about.

That's a very good point. While I doubt whether or not this alt-Islam would be able to survive essentially being strangled in the crib with the death of Muhammad, the OP had it so I'll roll with it.

That said, the Byzantine Empire was resilient (it lasted until 1453 in OTL after all), and with the Arab conquests not starting for 10 more years than OTL I'd find it fairly unlikely that they'd do as badly as OTL. For that matter after a 10 year civil war how tired are the alt-Muslims? And would those same 10 years be the breathing room the Sassanids needed or merely delay the inevitable? (Admittedly my knowledge of the Sassanids is weaker than the other two.) If their collapse is delayed, how does that effect the Arab conquests if they are more bloody or difficult?
 
That's a very good point. While I doubt whether or not this alt-Islam would be able to survive essentially being strangled in the crib with the death of Muhammad, the OP had it so I'll roll with it.

That said, the Byzantine Empire was resilient (it lasted until 1453 in OTL after all), and with the Arab conquests not starting for 10 more years than OTL I'd find it fairly unlikely that they'd do as badly as OTL. For that matter after a 10 year civil war how tired are the alt-Muslims? And would those same 10 years be the breathing room the Sassanids needed or merely delay the inevitable? (Admittedly my knowledge of the Sassanids is weaker than the other two.) If their collapse is delayed, how does that effect the Arab conquests if they are more bloody or difficult?

The Sassanids were pretty much doomed after the Byzantine-Sassanid War, which is ironic seeing as they were very strong beforehand. If you avoid that war then the Sassanids are supremely powerful, otherwise they collapse but that doesn't mean Persia has to - another dynasty could take the Sassanid's place.
 

Redhand

Banned
The Sassanids were pretty much doomed after the Byzantine-Sassanid War, which is ironic seeing as they were very strong beforehand. If you avoid that war then the Sassanids are supremely powerful, otherwise they collapse but that doesn't mean Persia has to - another dynasty could take the Sassanid's place.

If the Arabs do not take them out, I could see the Byzantines expanding a bit into Mesopotamia and trying to get Trajan's old short lived gains if the Sassanid state collapses, which it very well might have. Even if the Sassanids were able to get their act together, the first waves of Turkic invasion are not too far off and without Islam to use as an assimilation tool like the Caliphate did in Persia OTL, this would surely topple them.
 
Breakup of the Sassanid Empire

Shahanshah Yazdegerd III came to power when he was only eight. The Sassanid Empire was extremely weak. It was no surprise that he was killed by assassins from the mortal enemy of the Sassanids, the Byzantine Empire in 654. His son, Peroz III, was too young to rule. Aristocrats of the empire ruled as regent. However, it was not long until hinterlands, which were effectively satrapies, declared independence. Peroz III was killed by notable aristocrat Araxava in 661. Araxava was the ruler of a Persia with much of its Mesopotamian lands and Transoxiana having declared independence. The Araxavite Empire was a new low for Persia.
 
A reply

@Lalli, SvoHljott, and others: In OTL, Islam is based around interpretations of the Quran. It is likely that this alt-Islam would also be based around interpretations of the Quran. In addition, the main reason this Islam did not die out was because of the loyalty of Islam's followers to God and the Quran. In OTL, Islam survived because of loyalty to the prophet Muhammed and to the caliph, although eventually loyalty to the caliph died down. Here, Islam is like that post-Abbasid Islam. Separated, with no loyalty to any Mamluk or Ottoman caliph. Islam was fully formed. It was just not the religion of the Arabs yet.
 
ITTL you'll have a "Quranic" Islam, but very few Hadith. Since Hadith come from Mohammed, they are a guide for Quranic interpretation. ITTL you won't have "definitive" interpretations, but rather a greater range of interpretations and the possibility for sooner development of schisms, and perhaps more of them. For an example look at all the Protestant churches.
 
ITTL you'll have a "Quranic" Islam, but very few Hadith. Since Hadith come from Mohammed, they are a guide for Quranic interpretation. ITTL you won't have "definitive" interpretations, but rather a greater range of interpretations and the possibility for sooner development of schisms, and perhaps more of them. For an example look at all the Protestant churches.
Seems plausible to me.
 
Top