WI/AHC: Christian Maghreb by 1000

How can we have a Christian Maghreb ruled by Christian Berbers by 1000 before the Banu Hilal migrations and rise of the Almoravids and Almohads of OTL.

I myself thought of an idea where the Great Berber Revolt goes better with Andalus falling to the Berber rebels and Kairouan being seized and thus the rest of Tunisia and Tripolitania by the rebelling Berbers who establish a loose confederation that breaks down in a generation due to religious differences. In the following violence, coastal Christian Berbers manage to rise to the top and establish their predominance over the Maghreb.

What do you guys think?
 
Egypt either being defended better by ERE or managing to become more autonomous (becoming a de-facto vassal state instead of a province), not suffering anywhere near as much the Byzantine war pains, resulting in no Muslim conquest of Roman Egypt ... not exactly the most inspirational but a cheap one :p
 
Egypt either being defended better by ERE or managing to become more autonomous (becoming a de-facto vassal state instead of a province), not suffering anywhere near as much the Byzantine war pains, resulting in no Muslim conquest of Roman Egypt ... not exactly the most inspirational but a cheap one :p
That would be the easiest way but that'd very possibly cause a collapse of much of Islam's influence further down the line which is not something I'm looking for. Maybe the Muslims are unable to seize anything in Egypt beyond Africa
 
This is what would've happened OTL. During the early 7th century, most Berbers (including the rulers of the Romano-Berber states like Altava) were Christian to some degree or another, and the accounts of Jewish or pagan Berbers were probably in some continuum of syncretic religion with the Christian Berbers. It isn't hard to imagine Catholic Berbers forming the muscle to evict the Caliphate, and then imposing their will on the Exarch in Carthage. A Berber "Charles Martel" is easy to imagine.

As a whole though, it's likely heresy will split the Berbers, since it isn't hard to imagine a Christian version of the Barghawata faith. But it's possible that the need to stay in the good graces of the Pope in Rome forces these Romano-Berbers to suppress heretical beliefs. They'll likely be very important for the development of the western Church as the Romano-Berber states organise and the economy of North Africa recovers. No doubt another figure on the level of Cyprian or Augustine will emerge in African Christianity.

That would be the easiest way but that'd very possibly cause a collapse of much of Islam's influence further down the line which is not something I'm looking for. Maybe the Muslims are unable to seize anything in Egypt beyond Africa
Recall the difficulty in the Caliphate's conquest of the Maghreb, a lot of which is because of geography. The Gulf of Syrte is rough sailing, and coast is basically desert--in Roman times only a series of villages existed there. It isn't hard for the Caliphate's rule to stop at Cyrenaica, while in Tripolitania and westwards, Romano-Berber states develop as a response to this.
 
Romans avoid their last war with Persia and thus prevent their Middle Eastern losses. I can't think of something more easier for Christianity to survive. Or the Arab Armies need to retreat immediately afterwards to Egypt while the local Berbers set up a new State in the Power Vacuum.
 
This is what would've happened OTL. During the early 7th century, most Berbers (including the rulers of the Romano-Berber states like Altava) were Christian to some degree or another, and the accounts of Jewish or pagan Berbers were probably in some continuum of syncretic religion with the Christian Berbers. It isn't hard to imagine Catholic Berbers forming the muscle to evict the Caliphate, and then imposing their will on the Exarch in Carthage. A Berber "Charles Martel" is easy to imagine.

As a whole though, it's likely heresy will split the Berbers, since it isn't hard to imagine a Christian version of the Barghawata faith. But it's possible that the need to stay in the good graces of the Pope in Rome forces these Romano-Berbers to suppress heretical beliefs. They'll likely be very important for the development of the western Church as the Romano-Berber states organise and the economy of North Africa recovers. No doubt another figure on the level of Cyprian or Augustine will emerge in African Christianity.


Recall the difficulty in the Caliphate's conquest of the Maghreb, a lot of which is because of geography. The Gulf of Syrte is rough sailing, and coast is basically desert--in Roman times only a series of villages existed there. It isn't hard for the Caliphate's rule to stop at Cyrenaica, while in Tripolitania and westwards, Romano-Berber states develop as a response to this.

Very interesting points.
 
I've been thinking of five good PODs with vastily different TLs

POD: Repulsion of the Vandals by the Mauro-Romans
Description: The Mauro-Romans repel the Vandals and establish their rule over Africa. Their rule is much more stable and thus they are able to beat back Justinian's campaigns (if they aren't butterflied away). They take up the idea of being the heirs of the Western Roman Empire and become a major naval power at constant odds with the Byzantines. An Islam-esque movement arises in Arabia and the Byzantines lose the Levant and Egypt but the Arabs cannot take Africa from the stable empire there.

POD: Garmul doesn't attack the Byzantines
Description: Since Garmul of the Mauro-Romans doesn't attack the Byzantines, he doesn't turn them into his enemies and thus his kingdom survives. Following Heraclius' rebellion (if this isn't butterflied away), the Mauro-Romans invade Africa tying both Heracliuses down defeating them whilst the Sassanids overrun the Byzantine Empire. Khosrau II becomes a well respected leader and Mohammad is killed before he could unite the Arabs by the Persians in Yemen since there is no reason by them to betray the Sassanids like there was in OTL. Thus we end up with a world with a Sassanid Empire stretching from Anatolia and Egypt to the Indus and in the west is a Mauro-Roman kingdom stretching over Algeria and Africa.

POD: Heraclius flees to Carthage
Description: Heraclius flees to Carthage and the Byzantine Empire falls to the Sassanids. Same as the previous TL except that Heraclius is overthrown by Mauro-Roman nobles who place one of their own in charge claiming to be the Emperors of Rome whilst Heraclid loyalists (or just those against the new king) establish a rival empire in Syracuse.

POD: Kusaila is never killed at Mamma
Description: Kusaila isn't killed at Mamma but still defeated. When Zubayr is killed by Byzantine soldiers in Cyrenaica, he is able to retake Kairouan and avoid a drop in the strength of the Berbers so he stops the Arabs from taking Carthage in 695 killing their commander, Hassan. Another army is sent west a few years later and is defeated finally causing the Arabs to stop attacking the Berbers. Apsimar never becomes emperor and Leontios reigns for longer and keeps a hold on Africa though he has very questionable allies on his border in Africa.

POD: Dihya doesn't implement scorched earth tactics
Description: Dihya doesn't lose the support of settled communities by implementing scorched earth tactics and this helps her defeat Hassan in 703. He is killed in battle and the Arabs stop sending armies west since they are up against 'an evil Jewish witch'. Dihya becomes the head of a tribal confederation and seizes Kairouan and the ruins of Carthage.

What sounds best?
 
I like the later ones that have fewer changes outside N. Africa. Some of the earlier ones have huge ramifications elsewhere. I probably like your POD in the OP the best.
 
I like the later ones that have fewer changes outside N. Africa. Some of the earlier ones have huge ramifications elsewhere. I probably like your POD in the OP the best.
I find it to be one of the more interesting but I doubt it would be possible since the tribes had much more power than the Christian population along the coasts.
 
Recall the difficulty in the Caliphate's conquest of the Maghreb, a lot of which is because of geography. The Gulf of Syrte is rough sailing, and coast is basically desert--in Roman times only a series of villages existed there. It isn't hard for the Caliphate's rule to stop at Cyrenaica, while in Tripolitania and westwards, Romano-Berber states develop as a response to this.

POD: Dihya doesn't implement scorched earth tactics
Description: Dihya doesn't lose the support of settled communities by implementing scorched earth tactics and this helps her defeat Hassan in 703. He is killed in battle and the Arabs stop sending armies west since they are up against 'an evil Jewish witch'. Dihya becomes the head of a tribal confederation and seizes Kairouan and the ruins of Carthage.

Quite like the above ideas, especially if its in tandem with an Byzantium revival (beginning with Basil II living a few more decades and being succeeded by a few competent emperors possibly taking Egypt and the Levant).

Have to wonder though how the Amazigh / Berber states interact with Europe and whether the latter would still be inclined to try and invade/colonize the area.

Also would this scenario potentially allow for Berber Crusaders to aid the Byzantines in invading Egypt, Levant/Mesopotamia and Arabia (with a counter-migration to settle the area or even a reverse Berber analogue of the Banu Hilal)?
 
Quite like the above ideas, especially if its in tandem with an Byzantium revival (beginning with Basil II living a few more decades and being succeeded by a few competent emperors possibly taking Egypt and the Levant).

Have to wonder though how the Amazigh / Berber states interact with Europe and whether the latter would still be inclined to try and invade/colonize the area.

Also would this scenario potentially allow for Berber Crusaders to aid the Byzantines in invading Egypt, Levant/Mesopotamia and Arabia (with a counter-migration to settle the area or even a reverse Berber analogue of the Banu Hilal)?
Basil II would be butterflied away but it isn't impossible for the Byzantines to liberate the Levant and Egypt and if they hold on to the territories long enough, the region would no longer be part of the Islamic World. In regards to the Berbers, OTL the Fatimids seized Egypt with the aid of the Kutama Berbers so there is no reason Berber Crusaders couldn't do the same. However, I assume they wouldn't send much 'colonists' to Egypt with the ones who do move east most likely being pastoralist tribes and urbanites.
 
Basil II would be butterflied away but it isn't impossible for the Byzantines to liberate the Levant and Egypt and if they hold on to the territories long enough, the region would no longer be part of the Islamic World. In regards to the Berbers, OTL the Fatimids seized Egypt with the aid of the Kutama Berbers so there is no reason Berber Crusaders couldn't do the same. However, I assume they wouldn't send much 'colonists' to Egypt with the ones who do move east most likely being pastoralist tribes and urbanites.

I see. Intrigued by the idea of ATL Arabia with Berber tribes (or even Ethiopian migrants crossing into Yemen once more depending on events south of Egypt in this TL) eventually experiencing a similar fate to the OTL Maghreb under the Arabs, though not sure about whether the ATL Berber's would have experienced a similar demographic expansion as the OTL Arabs did.
 
I see. Intrigued by the idea of ATL Arabia with Berber tribes (or even Ethiopian migrants crossing into Yemen once more depending on events south of Egypt in this TL) eventually experiencing a similar fate to the OTL Maghreb under the Arabs, though not sure about whether the ATL Berber's would have experienced a similar demographic expansion as the OTL Arabs did.
There probably wouldn't be a similar demographic expansion but it would be a bit of poetic justice if in this ATL the Arabs call themselves Berbers:coldsweat::coldsweat:
 
Maybe the would-be Caliphate is defeated and Islam is instead incorporated as a tolerated faith in the Byzantine Empire, with the Islamic converts being focused in Europe. Over time, Europe becomes more Islamic over time and the Christians either flee north or south, heading to North Africa and Ethiopia becoming a larger Christian stronghold.
 
The ideal time for this would be before the rise of the Fatimids which put a lot of strength into the area as the base of support for the new Caliph, but also before the rise of Abd Ar Rahmann III who fixed the mess that was al-Andalus, constantly beset by Muwalladun and Berber revolts, as well as the rise of Ibn Hafsun.

Ibn Hafsun converted to Christianity after all and still held onto a big base of support. Perhaps the Berbers of the Maghreb could unite with him and join his rebellion? The Abbasid Caliphate had little to no authority in the region anyways. It wouldn't be crazy that a Berber Revolt could have a syncretic Christian character that over time could develop into being more Catholic.
 
647:
Flavius Gregorius loses at Sufetula, but isn't killed and retreats with his ungodly large Berber horde (c. 150,000) to the Tell Atlases.

648:
Uqba ibn Nafi returns the next year and invades Byzacena, occupying all of the province except for Karthago, but is unable to push into the Tell Atlases

657:
Flavius Gregorius dies of a stroke, and the Arabs push them south into the Inter-Atlas Highlands.

700-800:
The Arabs conquer Hispania, but most aristocrats move there instead of the Maghreb. In 750, as the Abbasids overthrow the Umayyads, the Christian Arab reconquer Mauretania.
 
Top