What would the world have looked like if there had been no Islam? It seems likely that the idea of Europe would have been much less important, if people had heard about it at all. Probably the countries north of the Mediterranean would have had closer ties to North Africa and the Middle East than to Northern Europe. Maybe even the Byzantine Empire would have managed to continue Justinians reconquest of the Roman Empire, or at least large parts of it. What do you think?
What if there was no Islam?
- Thread starter Eivind
- Start date
Most obvious thing is that we would have fully Christianised Africa and Levanti would remain Christian. Probably Arabia too will be christianised. Persia would stay as Zoroastrist nation. And this have of course very dramatic affect for Southern Asia. And even European culture would be extremely different.
Shortly: World would be totally unrecognsible.
Shortly: World would be totally unrecognsible.
It's a dinasour-sized butterfly.
There were many previous threads dealing with it, and the most recent one I can recall is this.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=310805
There were many previous threads dealing with it, and the most recent one I can recall is this.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=310805
Last edited:
Big big changes.
At least we don't have ISIS acting as Monsters.
That aside Spain probably remains united under the Visigoths. North Africa also stays Christian and well the butterflies are so much it's crazy and such world would be alien to us.
At least we don't have ISIS acting as Monsters.
That aside Spain probably remains united under the Visigoths. North Africa also stays Christian and well the butterflies are so much it's crazy and such world would be alien to us.
...and of course there couldn't possibly be any other extremist group to replace them
ISIS are about as representative and consequential of Islam as North Korea. Without Islam, something else would fill up the void and spark a group just as destructive.
No without Islam CHristianity would have been able to spread more and secure itself.
In Africa there is not going to be a new religion
In the ME Christianity will take over
In Scandanavia Chrisitianity will beat paganism
In Russia if the Mongols stay in power, but that's stil going to be isolated to the Mongol empire
In Asia its Buddhism VS Hinduism
I get the sense that it actually was pretty spontaneous, in that the Arabs capitalized on the long-running conflict between the Byzantines and the Sasanian Empire to strike at a time when both were exhausted.
RousseauX
Donor
Why?
Christianity's hold east of Jerusalem was always pretty fragile, actually before Islam the Sassanids suppressed Christians and there wasn't much the Romans/Byzantines could do about it. Further East Christianity is even more vulnerable and there isn't all that much stopping pagan steppe people from destroying it.
To answer an earlier post - there was before Islam jewish, christian and 'monotheist' tribes and peoples in Arabia(s), so maybe one group take the headspot....
One thing that will change is culture and agriculture of places like hispanic peninsula, Sicilia and southern Itally.. the 'moors' brought things like oranges there.
One thing that will change is culture and agriculture of places like hispanic peninsula, Sicilia and southern Itally.. the 'moors' brought things like oranges there.
PhoenicianLegacy
Banned
Sorry if I sound non-PC to the perspective of many of you, but generally speaking, whereas Christianity so much damage over the past 2000 years, Islam's introduction into the world was just salt in the wound.
Even in the present day where Christendom has all but come to its senses, Islam has not changed a bit. In a older thread I attempted, I made a statement about terrorism but then someone gave me a warning with the same old message that Islam is a religion of peace and that it doesn't equal terrorism. Sadly, I am openly skeptical about that notion. In the end, it all comes down to how one interprets the Koran or the biography of Mohammed.
Historically, The man Mohammed himself was a ruthless, narcissistic and vile human being on par with the likes of Hitler and Ghengis Khan. He was a mass murderer, war criminal, pillager, rapist and a madman.
Even in the present day where Christendom has all but come to its senses, Islam has not changed a bit. In a older thread I attempted, I made a statement about terrorism but then someone gave me a warning with the same old message that Islam is a religion of peace and that it doesn't equal terrorism. Sadly, I am openly skeptical about that notion. In the end, it all comes down to how one interprets the Koran or the biography of Mohammed.
Historically, The man Mohammed himself was a ruthless, narcissistic and vile human being on par with the likes of Hitler and Ghengis Khan. He was a mass murderer, war criminal, pillager, rapist and a madman.
Last edited:
Yes, as far as I understand there was in fact a lot of disagreement about what was real Christianity. For instance, the Ebonites rejected Jesus divinity and insisted on the necessity of following Jewish law and rites. Thus, they rejected Paul. The Arians accepted Paul, but did not accept the divinity of Jesus. The Nestorians viewed the human and divine persons of Christ as separate. I have not totally understood the implications of this, but it seems likewhile the Arians were sort of Semi-Ebonites while the Nestorians were a kind of Semi-Arians, as they emphasised the human aspects of Jesus. As far as I remember the Nestorians were strong in the Levant.
RousseauX
Donor
Do you think Muslims are inherently violent?
If so, what do you think the solution is?
btw, plz respond quickly you are gonna get kicked pretty soon.
PhoenicianLegacy
Banned
No human being (which includes Muslims) is inherently violent unless there's a serious problem. The problem is NOT the people, it's just the influence of how certain people interpret Islam. Like every group of people, I acknowledge that their IS both good and bad Muslims.
Anyway, do you plan on booting me off permanently? If so, my most sincerest apologies if you may have taken my post the wrong way. I just hope you gentleman can find it in your hearts to forgive me and allow me just one more chance and I promise to not make any Islam-related remarks again.
Ignorance and bigotry aside, apparently some people think the world would be happy-shiny-go-lucky place with no Islam, but I disagree.
Without the threat of Islamic conquest and encroachment to unite various Christian polities and shore up support for the Mother Church, you would see a much, much, much more fractured Christendom. Without a rallying point around a common enemy, many disputes would go unresolved and yet many more would emerge.
You'd see a lot of extinct Christian probably sects survive ITTL and probably a lot more heretical movements in Europe. I don't believe for a second the Catholic church would enjoy the same success ITTL it enjoyed in OTL.
Then there is the whole point where a lot of scientific progress would be lost without Muslim scholars translating existing works and expanding on them and creating new work as well.
With no Ottoman conquest of Constantinople and thus no exodus of Rhomans to Italy, the Renaissance would be butterflied away.
Without the threat of Islamic conquest and encroachment to unite various Christian polities and shore up support for the Mother Church, you would see a much, much, much more fractured Christendom. Without a rallying point around a common enemy, many disputes would go unresolved and yet many more would emerge.
You'd see a lot of extinct Christian probably sects survive ITTL and probably a lot more heretical movements in Europe. I don't believe for a second the Catholic church would enjoy the same success ITTL it enjoyed in OTL.
Then there is the whole point where a lot of scientific progress would be lost without Muslim scholars translating existing works and expanding on them and creating new work as well.
With no Ottoman conquest of Constantinople and thus no exodus of Rhomans to Italy, the Renaissance would be butterflied away.
RousseauX
Donor
I'm like a mod so it's not like I can do it either way.
But look, in the 20th century, you've had plenty of genocides way worse than what ISIS did in Iraq right now or 9/11. See for instance, Pol Pot's Cambodia (killed ~25% of the country in like 4-5 years), or the Rwanda Genocide (500,000 dead within like 5 month in a 90%+ christian country). Does that mean there's a serious problem with Christianity or left-wing ideologies in general?
PhoenicianLegacy
Banned
I am aware of that. You should also consider researching the kind of man Mohammed was in real life from a historical perspective and the early spread of Islam up until the Crusades to see if it sounds any different. All of what we've seen since 2001 is arguably an extension of what was first unleashed 1400 years ago. Assuming you refuse to believe me, I shall offer you an article that relies on historical evidence : http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/History.htm
Just incase you happen to be turned off by the source of the link and proclaim every sentence you read as hate-mongering, Religionofpeace also has this mandatory mini-article to offer : http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Statement-on-Muslims.htm which reflects the reality I acknowledge.
Allow me to quote a sample :
Islam is an ideology - a set of ideas. It is not defined by what any Muslim wants it to be, but by what it is. No ideology is above critique.
Muslims are individuals. We passionately believe that no Muslim should be harmed, harassed, stereotyped or treated any differently anywhere in the world solely on account of their status as a Muslim.
As an ideology, Islam is not necessarily entitled to equal respect and acceptance. Ideas do not carry equal moral weight. The feelings or number of those who believe does not make the idea true or good. Bad ideas can and should be challenged.
I shall leave the rest of you to analyze.
Last edited:
RousseauX
Donor
I'm well aware of history, but frankly we can debate on who was worse christians or muslims circa 600-1200 AD all we want without coming to a resolution.
But if genocidal urges seems to manifest in Islam as well as Christianity as well as secular left-wing ideology and right-wing ideologies, all within the past 40-50 years, how does that make Islam uniquely problematic?
Yeah, because it's not like Muslim rule was defined by unprecedented religious tolerance and scientific innovation, right?