Westernized Islamic Maghreb TL (Brainstorming/WI/PC/AHC)

No Banu Hilal migration to the Maghreb is a good start.

This.

Without the Banu Hilal, I suspect the Berber language retains a much greater hold on the region, and Arabic is lessened.

That means the Maghreb countries become more like Iran or Turkey - countries which are still Islamic, but which have their own distinctive languages and cultures.

The next step might be to imagine that the Maghreb countries become Shia instead of Sunni. This might have some interesting and unpredictable historical effects.

Notably, the reason the Banu Hilal were sent west in the first place was because the Maghreb abandoned the Shia faith and turned to Sunni belief, which the Shia Fatimid dynasty in Egypt was unhappy about and decided to punish them.

The Shia faith has some interesting and esoteric branches, including a strong element of Neo-Platonist philosophy. This is particularly marked in the Ismaili sect of Shia Islam. This is the same branch which produced some fascinating offshoots, including perhaps the most famous of all - the deadly Nizari sect, also known as "the Assassins".

There are a world of possibilities, and one can imagine all sorts of unusual and esoteric religious sects evolving within the Shia branch of Islam. An alternative might be that some kind of Sufi belief system emerges in the Maghreb, perhaps under a charismatic teacher, eroding further the influence of the traditional ulemma. A figure such as al Hallaj, or some other spiritual leader, might do nicely.
 
Last edited:
This.

Without the Banu Hilal, I suspect the Berber language retains a much greater hold on the region, and Arabic is lessened.

That means the Maghreb countries become more like Iran or Turkey - countries which are still Islamic, but which have their own distinctive languages and cultures.

The next step might be to imagine that the Maghreb countries become Shia instead of Sunni. This might have some interesting and unpredictable historical effects.

Notably, the reason the Banu Hilal were sent west in the first place was because the Maghreb abandoned the Shia faith and turned to Sunni belief, which the Shia Fatimid dynasty in Egypt was unhappy about and decided to punish them.

The Shia faith has some interesting and esoteric branches, including a strong element of Neo-Platonist philosophy. This is particularly marked in the Ismaili sect of Shia Islam. This is the same branch which produced some fascinating offshoots, including perhaps the most famous of all - the deadly Nizari sect, also known as "the Assassins".

There are a world of possibilities, and one can imagine all sorts of unusual and esoteric religious sects evolving within the Shia branch of Islam. An alternative might be that some kind of Sufi belief system emerges in the Maghreb, perhaps under a charismatic teacher, eroding further the influence of the traditional ulemma. A figure such as al Hallaj, or some other spiritual leader, might do nicely.
Interesting points, however, the migration of the Banu Hilal west is very possibly due to the lack of opportunities in Egypt since if I'm correct there was a famine going on at the time.
 

Lusitania

Donor
I could see a Berber country centered in Marrakesh allying itself to Portugal and together they defeat Arab Fez in 1530s. While north falls to Portuguese. Marrakesh expands and stay nominally allied to Portugal while also developing. Later it helps the Portuguese put down major revolt in North African which results in it then gets majority of north Africa while a weaker Portuguese beset by problems with Dutch retreat to coast. in 1600s Marakesh expands both into Algeria and also starts own colonies. By 1700 defacto independent.
 
These are just some ideas. In summary, God and Satan are brothers who are in a cosmic battle against one another. God has a spiritual universe whilst Satan's material universe is a flawed copy of the former. It is the goal of every human to liberate themselves from the copy and be in the true universe. All of this with Islamic stuff thrown on top with sprinkles of Christianity and Berber paganism.
isnt this not islam anymore? Islam pretty clear on this and any attempt to do this will see neighbouring Islamic powers try and crush this heresy.
 
isnt this not islam anymore? Islam pretty clear on this and any attempt to do this will see neighbouring Islamic powers try and crush this heresy.
I'm going for a branch of Islam which is so heretical that no other muslim recognizes them as Muslim. The concept put forward in that post has been dropped and the sect would instead be less gnostic. Here is where the Berbers are lucky. The Andalusians are too weak and divided to stop the heresy and the Egyptians are the only ones who could really do anything but they will be unlikely to overcome the Berbers (who in this scenario are united under a great general).
 
I could see a Berber country centered in Marrakesh allying itself to Portugal and together they defeat Arab Fez in 1530s. While north falls to Portuguese. Marrakesh expands and stay nominally allied to Portugal while also developing. Later it helps the Portuguese put down major revolt in North African which results in it then gets majority of north Africa while a weaker Portuguese beset by problems with Dutch retreat to coast. in 1600s Marakesh expands both into Algeria and also starts own colonies. By 1700 defacto independent.
Interesting point, however, this TL will have a POD in the mid 11th century.
 
I'm going for a branch of Islam which is so heretical that no other muslim recognizes them as Muslim. The concept put forward in that post has been dropped and the sect would instead be less gnostic. Here is where the Berbers are lucky. The Andalusians are too weak and divided to stop the heresy and the Egyptians are the only ones who could really do anything but they will be unlikely to overcome the Berbers (who in this scenario are united under a great general).
oh sorry, cause this said western islamic berber. shouldn't this just be a berber timeline as it sounds so far it cant be classed as islamic as it doesn't match any core tenants of the religion at all.
 
Very interesting, however I hardly see any berber state emerging at this time, as it would be birdered by Cordoba's Caliphate and Fatimid's Caliphate, both of them would :
-Never accept a rising berber state that deprive them from their mercenaries.
-Fight for the said berber state allegiance.
-Make it a ppriority to eradicate this strange, schiism.
Finally, the social dynamy of Berbers made it nigh impossible for them to survive their founder, we didn't start seeing "Moroccan dynasties" until the almoravids, who were practically alien to tribes fight and defined the area as a political entity (even though it wasn't Morocco), and that was because they were the only one that had the military power to subdue the different tribes, the first "pure" moroccan state were the almohads, who managed to get to power by disgracing the almoravids. For me the best candidate for your TL, would be a Maghreb Centered Fatimids, who could keep relations on stalemate with Cordoba, and Westernize after its fall, if it ever falls.
 
oh sorry, cause this said western islamic berber. shouldn't this just be a berber timeline as it sounds so far it cant be classed as islamic as it doesn't match any core tenants of the religion at all.
The beliefs I proposed have been abandoned after seeing the points put forward by john. Thus the religion will instead be a branch of Shia Islam that would be seen as un-Islamic by other muslims the same way many see the Alawites to be non-Muslim. So I suppose that it would be somewhere between Alawites and Bahai.

Muslim > Heretic > Alawites > Berber sect > Ba'hai > Christianity and Judaisim > Non-Abrahamic religions
 
Very interesting, however I hardly see any berber state emerging at this time, as it would be birdered by Cordoba's Caliphate and Fatimid's Caliphate, both of them would :
-Never accept a rising berber state that deprive them from their mercenaries.
-Fight for the said berber state allegiance.
-Make it a ppriority to eradicate this strange, schiism.
Finally, the social dynamy of Berbers made it nigh impossible for them to survive their founder, we didn't start seeing "Moroccan dynasties" until the almoravids, who were practically alien to tribes fight and defined the area as a political entity (even though it wasn't Morocco), and that was because they were the only one that had the military power to subdue the different tribes, the first "pure" moroccan state were the almohads, who managed to get to power by disgracing the almoravids. For me the best candidate for your TL, would be a Maghreb Centered Fatimids, who could keep relations on stalemate with Cordoba, and Westernize after its fall, if it ever falls.
1. During this period Andalus was going through the Taifa period and the Fatimids were going through some major internal issues.
2. The taifas would likely look for the aid of the Berbers in fighting back the Christians. The Egyptians wouldn't care much for the Berbers as they are busy dealing with their own issues.
3. The taifas would have a choice between weird heretics and Christians. The Fatimids are too busy
4. My goal is to have a powerful first king who begins a centralization of the state under his power. His son and grandson are effective leaders and thus allow the concept of a united Maghreb to survive. Of course, though there will be regional differences between the western half of the Maghreb and the east. Throughout history we usually see a Morocco centered kingdom and a Tunisia centered kingdom with a less powerful kingdom centered in western Algeria and it is my belief that this would translate into regional differences within the Maghreb state the same way in France you have France Proper, Aquitaine and Occitania.

Nevertheless, you do bring up some good points.
 

Lusitania

Donor
1. During this period Andalus was going through the Taifa period and the Fatimids were going through some major internal issues.
2. The taifas would likely look for the aid of the Berbers in fighting back the Christians. The Egyptians wouldn't care much for the Berbers as they are busy dealing with their own issues.
3. The taifas would have a choice between weird heretics and Christians. The Fatimids are too busy
4. My goal is to have a powerful first king who begins a centralization of the state under his power. His son and grandson are effective leaders and thus allow the concept of a united Maghreb to survive. Of course, though there will be regional differences between the western half of the Maghreb and the east. Throughout history we usually see a Morocco centered kingdom and a Tunisia centered kingdom with a less powerful kingdom centered in western Algeria and it is my belief that this would translate into regional differences within the Maghreb state the same way in France you have France Proper, Aquitaine and Occitania.

Nevertheless, you do bring up some good points.
There was plenty of discord ongoing in North Africa that a Berber nation could arise. Maybe not by themselves but allied with a European country.
 
There was plenty of discord ongoing in North Africa that a Berber nation could arise. Maybe not by themselves but allied with a European country.
I think that calling for the aid of a European nation will actually weaken the movement as now they are working with the Christians who were busy fighting in Andalus with the Muslims.
 

Lusitania

Donor
I think that calling for the aid of a European nation will actually weaken the movement as now they are working with the Christians who were busy fighting in Andalus with the Muslims.
It does not have to ask for help. What I was stating was that if it was fighting Arab government in Fez at same time as Portuguese were it would have a chance of establishing itself. Informal alliances existed all the time. The Portuguese could even provide resources and access to Europe. Then as it grows in both strength and size it could take over most of Fez. Thus allowing it to develop strong enough to challenge Algiers.

It would also need to have frienfly relations with Europeans if it wants to have chance to establish new world colonies.

But otherwise if you plan on trying to establish this country much earlier then it will be attacked by Portugal and Spain as part of the reconquista.
 
It does not have to ask for help. What I was stating was that if it was fighting Arab government in Fez at same time as Portuguese were it would have a chance of establishing itself. Informal alliances existed all the time. The Portuguese could even provide resources and access to Europe. Then as it grows in both strength and size it could take over most of Fez. Thus allowing it to develop strong enough to challenge Algiers.

It would also need to have frienfly relations with Europeans if it wants to have chance to establish new world colonies.

But otherwise if you plan on trying to establish this country much earlier then it will be attacked by Portugal and Spain as part of the reconquista.
Okay, I understand your points, however, the POD is in the 11th century so though your idea is interesting, it won't apply for this.
 

Lusitania

Donor
Okay, I understand your points, however, the POD is in the 11th century so though your idea is interesting, it won't apply for this.
Ok then I find it harder for its implementation. I think if you tie it’s emergence and survival to the losses in the Iberian peninsula which weakened the ruling elites. Having the Arabs being preoccupied with the affairs in the Iberian peninsula might help you survive.
 
1. During this period Andalus was going through the Taifa period and the Fatimids were going through some major internal issues.
2. The taifas would likely look for the aid of the Berbers in fighting back the Christians. The Egyptians wouldn't care much for the Berbers as they are busy dealing with their own issues.
3. The taifas would have a choice between weird heretics and Christians. The Fatimids are too busy
4. My goal is to have a powerful first king who begins a centralization of the state under his power. His son and grandson are effective leaders and thus allow the concept of a united Maghreb to survive. Of course, though there will be regional differences between the western half of the Maghreb and the east. Throughout history we usually see a Morocco centered kingdom and a Tunisia centered kingdom with a less powerful kingdom centered in western Algeria and it is my belief that this would translate into regional differences within the Maghreb state the same way in France you have France Proper, Aquitaine and Occitania.

Nevertheless, you do bring up some good points.
I tought you were speaking of the first decade of the Xth century, were Cordoba was still standing, though the fatimids were gone (my bad), after the first decade, you have to consider that the almoravids are going to pop on at some point, and wathever they found on their way, it will hardly stand, especially if they have Yussef Bin Tachfin, who is arguably the second best military leader in this timeframe and region, the first being El Cid. A new moroccan fight would put up a fight,and could even beat the veileds, but with a warring Morocco, no help to tha taifas, thus the christians could end tge reconquista pretty early. For me the only candidates of a possoble "westernized" Maghreb, are the ancient berber chiefs before Islam, if they convert, or the Almohads if they last some 300 years. Because all the others had an empire stretching vertically, with possoble good allies (Tunis), or vassals(Tlemcen).
 
I tought you were speaking of the first decade of the Xth century, were Cordoba was still standing, though the fatimids were gone (my bad), after the first decade, you have to consider that the almoravids are going to pop on at some point, and wathever they found on their way, it will hardly stand, especially if they have Yussef Bin Tachfin, who is arguably the second best military leader in this timeframe and region, the first being El Cid. A new moroccan fight would put up a fight,and could even beat the veileds, but with a warring Morocco, no help to tha taifas, thus the christians could end tge reconquista pretty early. For me the only candidates of a possoble "westernized" Maghreb, are the ancient berber chiefs before Islam, if they convert, or the Almohads if they last some 300 years. Because all the others had an empire stretching vertically, with possoble good allies (Tunis), or vassals(Tlemcen).

The POD takes place in the 11th century just a few decades after the fall of Cordoba. The movement arises simultaneously with the Almoravids ending with the former coming out on top. I have formerly thought about a POD taking place before the Islamic conquest but I am divided on whether I want a Christian Maghreb or Islamic Maghreb. Maybe I could make a poll and see the opinion of you guys.
 

Lusitania

Donor
The POD takes place in the 11th century just a few decades after the fall of Cordoba. The movement arises simultaneously with the Almoravids ending with the former coming out on top. I have formerly thought about a POD taking place before the Islamic conquest but I am divided on whether I want a Christian Maghreb or Islamic Maghreb. Maybe I could make a poll and see the opinion of you guys.
I always wondered about a Hybrid Magreb, one recognizing both Christ a son of God and then Mohamed as true prophet. Be stuck in middle not accepted by either group.
 
Top