What if 1st (674 ce ) or 2nd (717 ce) Arab siege of Constantinople conquers it ?

If they conquered Constantinople, the Umayyads would get as far as which zone within 25 years

  • Zone 1

    Votes: 15 34.1%
  • Zone 2

    Votes: 11 25.0%
  • Zone 3

    Votes: 5 11.4%
  • Zone 4

    Votes: 3 6.8%
  • Zone 5

    Votes: 2 4.5%
  • Zone 6

    Votes: 8 18.2%

  • Total voters
    44
You speak about arab-Turkic speaking polities emerging in the wake of the conquest but I wander what are the possibilities for a Muslim Greek speaking one to emerge in either Anatolia or the Balkans,/ Aegean. Johns mention of Arab emirates forming in the Peloponnese I think is an interesting concept.

Also I wander whether these former byzantine territories may become havens for dissident movements from the Umayyad caliphate such as shia and kharijites.
 
who are those folk?

From the difficulty and see-saw battling over Anatolia you seem to predict for this scenario, perhaps, in an example of parallel history, Anatolia is only firmly Islamized after Oghuz Turks migrate there a couple centuries later. The Caliphates will likely still be importing Turks, many Turks will probably still be coming to the Mideast as free men. There might not be as much prospect of loot to attract Turkic Ghazis, but as a scene of constant fighting, it's a place for them to go to work.

So maybe by the 1100s we have an Anatolia that is mainly Arabophone in the south and Turcophone in the north, but with a heavy presence of non-Turcophone minorities.

Given probable limits of Caliphate expansion beyond Thrace, and the requirement to politically submit to the Caliph when converting in the first centuries of Islam, when would the prospect of Balkan and Russian and other east European chiefdoms/kingdoms/khanates converting to Islam from the top arise?

In other words, the spread of Islam in southeast Europe would realistically be quite limited by say 800 CE. But by 1000 CE or 1100 CE, how much of Europe might be Muslim?

Well the Turks would certainly not be transported unless certain policies and ideas spread in the Islamic world. The Umayyad for instance, would never due to their particular political affiliation, would not be able to hire and use Turkic Mamluk warriors at the same efficiency as the Abbasid. This thus, lessens the presence of Islam amongst the Turks by massive amounts. The main reason for Islamization of the Turkic peoples under various commanders arriving in the varied Muslim regions, was the Mamluk system which converted Turks to Muslim, who then rose through the ranks rapidly. Within this, Turks were inspired to convert to Islam and the comfort of many of their comrades being Muslim, allowed them to convert fairly easily.

Umayyad are also based from the city of Damascus in Syria and to a great degree, the Mediterranean coastline. It's later counterpart, the Abbasid, were from Baghdad and thus, focused towards the east, which happens to be the source of Turks. Umayyad power is thus not conducive geopolitically toward relations with the Turks. Even in the 740s, the Umayyad had yet to fully gain firm control over Khursan, Afghanistan and Ferghana. The lands east of Iran were especially turbulent and essentially, there was no Umayyad control. Umayyad powers further were humiliated multiple times against the Ferghani and most famously, the Peacock army was defeated resoundingly by the Zunbil in southern Afghanistan. This cut the path toward India for the most part and created a non Muslim wall around the Hindu Kush. The Abbasid arose from this turbulence in the east and gathered a significant force to defeat the Umayyad. However, this may not occur as otl.

Without the Abbasid revolution and the following coup, the situation in the East likely remains similar with only minor improvements. Umayyad success in Europe thus may have the effect of furthering this chaos to the point that other powers may gain significantly. However, who or what power this would be, I am not sure. The Tang are the first possibility, itself has the power to bring Ferghana under its influence or at least as some sort of tribute akin to the Tocharian whom the Ferghani were. There is also the eventual conglomerations of Turkic peoples who may have the opportunity they need to take areas such as Kwarezm which are only nominally Umayyad at this point as is areas such as Nisa.

In a more clear sentence, I am not sure the exact situation occurs, in fact, I am sure, in the East and with the Turks if we have the Umayyad remain the hegemonic power of Islam as opposed to the Eastern oriented Abbasid.

Paulicians were a Manichean Christian sect which was somewhat radical in its belief that Christ was the serpent in the garden of Eden. They further, were fierce warriors of zealous quality. In the VIII century, they were persecuted by the Byzantine authorities, leading to them rebelling and joining forces with the Abbasid armies. Rapidly, the Abbasid army and the Paulicians now fully integrated into the Abbasid army on the Byzantine border, conquered much of Anatolia and were some of the most well used troops and people groups used by the Abbasid wars against Byzantium. Paulicians were especially associated with the famous general Umar al-Aqta, one of the most enigmatic characters of Islamic historical fiction. Umar al-Aqta and his diverse force of Arabs and Paulicians were defeated at the famous battle of Lalakoan, which was the beginning of the turning tide between Byzantium and the Abbasid hegemony. Umar al-Aqta was slayed at the battle and the Paulicians were essentially crippled from that point on. They are considered the root of the Albigensians in southern France and Bogomils of the Balkans.
 
You speak about arab-Turkic speaking polities emerging in the wake of the conquest but I wander what are the possibilities for a Muslim Greek speaking one to emerge in either Anatolia or the Balkans,/ Aegean. Johns mention of Arab emirates forming in the Peloponnese I think is an interesting concept.

Also I wander whether these former byzantine territories may become havens for dissident movements from the Umayyad caliphate such as shia and kharijites.

If Anatolia becomes heavily Muslim, it would mimic Iran in my opinion. That is, Arabic court language for a certain amount of time then slowly Greek seeping itself back into the administration. This is assuming the entire region becomes Islamized as Iran did. However, with the Umayyad, this may be reversed, with Iran more or less non Muslim and Anatolia becoming primarily Muslim with a large Christian minority.

A Peloponnese Emirate will rapidly become Greek speaking form my estimates. The lack of direct Dimashqi control will lend itself to relying upon locals for most bureaucracy. Thus, an Islamic-Greek emirate essentially.

They most certainly will become havens for such dissidents. As will the 'barbarian' lands to the north. Anywhere on the fringes of the Umayyad, they will exist. The greater the chaos and trauma, the more rapid they grow amongst their populaces respectively. Syncretic systems is also extremely plausible, which lends itself well to the Shi'i in particular.
 
would an Ummayyad conquest of Constantinople and parts of the Byzantine Empire necessarily prevent the Abbasid revolution? It would confer a certain quite a bit of prestige on the dynasty but would it solve many of the problems of the Umayyads that were utilised by the Abbasids to gain support. I imagine the Umayyads would be even stretched with Anatolia and parts of the Balkans under their control it might leave them more prone to the Abbasid movement or perhaps another rebellion. An influx of Muslims converts if this did occur would likely face the same issues as those in Khurasan and Persia, added with the potential for religious dissidents in these areas could provide an area for foment.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
@John7755 يوحنا I was not assuming perpetual Umayyads, and assumed something like the Abbasids as a successor. Thus I appreciate Yanitza's question here.

But I also agree, if it is the Umayyad's remaining in power under their original system, they will suffer from the limitations you describe.
 
Last edited:

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
What is the likelihood of the Bulgars and Slavs and Magyars becoming Christian eventually, or remaining pagan perpetually, in this scenario?
 
Top