WI: Non-Christian Proselytising Religions

Around the general time that Christianity was exploding into the Roman Empire, most religions weren't really into the whole missionary thing. This is a big part of why Christianity spread so well.

But it wasn't the only one. I know of two other religions existing in the Roman Empire at this time which did their fair share of proselytising: the Cult of Isis and the Cult of Mithras (which I believe was mostly peddled to soldiers).

How might one of these faiths, or another proselytising faith, have come to predominance in the way Christianity did OTL? What would have been the effects on the history of the Roman Empire, and indeed the world, if one of these faiths had been dominant instead of Christianity?

Awaiting thoughts eagerly :)
 
Lots of religions have been proselytizing, some consistently, some only at certain times.

That said, for the case of Rome, well alot of the Cults (especially the Mystery Cults) we can't really say how they'd develop since not alot is known about them due to their inherent natures, not to say ALL of them were, but yeah.

Incidentally Buddhism has been at various times very proselytizing, so maybe you could have some school/variant develop somewhere in Central Asia or Western India that puts a large emphasis on spreading the teachings of the Buddha ('It is our responsibility to ensure everyone has the chance to attain enlightenment' etc.) and moves West, eventually moving into Rome, where it could be very well received.
 
Actually Judaism was pretty proselytizing at that time IIRC. Much more than today. It mostly didn't try to convert others, but it did attract quite a few non-Hebrews to convert. And even before that, the Hasmonean kings forcibly converted to Judaism en-masse the peoples they conquered.
 
Incidentally Buddhism has been at various times very proselytizing, so maybe you could have some school/variant develop somewhere in Central Asia or Western India that puts a large emphasis on spreading the teachings of the Buddha ('It is our responsibility to ensure everyone has the chance to attain enlightenment' etc.) and moves West, eventually moving into Rome, where it could be very well received.

Would Buddhism have been that popular in Rome, if it had made it there? More than a religion such as 'Isism' or Mithraism?

Actually Judaism was pretty proselytizing at that time IIRC. Much more than today. It mostly didn't try to convert others, but it did attract quite a few non-Hebrews to convert. And even before that, the Hasmonean kings forcibly converted to Judaism en-masse the peoples they conquered.

I can't see the Roman Empire converting to Judaism though. Unless it was a spinoff sect, like Christianity, but that gets close to OTL, and is boring ;)
 
Would Buddhism have been that popular in Rome, if it had made it there? More than a religion such as 'Isism' or Mithraism?

Most likely yes, the thing to remember about most of the Roman Cults is they tended to be sort of exclusive; one of the (if not the) main reasons Christianity became so popular in Rome was because of its spiritual egalitarianism and openness, both things that Buddhism has as well.
 
Lots of religions have been proselytizing, some consistently, some only at certain times.

That said, for the case of Rome, well alot of the Cults (especially the Mystery Cults) we can't really say how they'd develop since not alot is known about them due to their inherent natures, not to say ALL of them were, but yeah.

Incidentally Buddhism has been at various times very proselytizing, so maybe you could have some school/variant develop somewhere in Central Asia or Western India that puts a large emphasis on spreading the teachings of the Buddha ('It is our responsibility to ensure everyone has the chance to attain enlightenment' etc.) and moves West, eventually moving into Rome, where it could be very well received.

There's a difference - you have to ask to be taught for Buddhism. The trick is to go somewhere foreign, radiate peacefulness and light, and when people ask you what's up, you hit 'em with the dharma. There's a bit where the Buddha tells the bhikkus to go forths and live gloriously, but I honestly think he was politely telling them to go away. The HUGE exception is Nichiren, which is VERY eager for converts, but Nichiren is a sect of Buddhism more or less the same way Mormonism is a sect of Christianity (and whey y'all get mad instead of laugh - well, point proven).
 
The problem with Buddhism is that it will have a difficult time arriving in the Middle East in any effective numbers. This is due to the fact that the highly religious Sassanids stood in their way or the Parthians ( less pious but still pious), they made it a priority to sniff out Nuddhism in its east especially whenever Buddhism tryed to creep into the Iranian plateau from Bactria. Also, by this time Buddhism had lost its power in India with the fall of the Maurya, and the rise of Hinduism as we know it challenging Buddhism and bringing India back to the worship of Shiva and such. Therefore Buddhism spread east towards China, were it took on a very missionary character using the Maitreya Buddha as its calling card. Buddhism had a chance during the Seleucid empire, say if Buddhism becomes more prominent in Syria (amongst Greeks) it could then spread to Greece. However I highly doubt a wide middle eastern conversion to happen.

Mystery cults, such as Mithraism really (no offense) are not a match for Christianity at least in their historical position, and would need tweaks to be made into the religion to replace Christianity, which I feel Isis could do, however secret rituals need to be removed. This happened to some of the more fanatical gnostic sects, who practiced basically ritual cults and were easily taken care of by the 200s.

The real contender though is Manichaeism, this religion really was a missionary religion, and spread quite far. It fought for the imperial authority with Christianity for many years, unlike mystery cults which really could not compete with the two religions. Manichaeism however is more or less a Gnostic religion similar to the Bogomils or Cathars, if a blow was dealt to Christianity then Manichaeism could have easily stole its role as the imperial religion. This would be quite interesting, I don't exactly know what effects Manichaeism would have on the populace or the policies of Rome, however I suspect aspects of it will change and Rome will make it seem as if one can fight wars against the forces of darkness like Zurvan, and uphold the light. I could see Rome as having the Manichean cross with the eight steps of Bema or the sun with outgoing Rays as its flag instead of the Chi-Rai.
 
The real contender though is Manichaeism, this religion really was a missionary religion, and spread quite far. It fought for the imperial authority with Christianity for many years, unlike mystery cults which really could not compete with the two religions. Manichaeism however is more or less a Gnostic religion similar to the Bogomils or Cathars, if a blow was dealt to Christianity then Manichaeism could have easily stole its role as the imperial religion. This would be quite interesting, I don't exactly know what effects Manichaeism would have on the populace or the policies of Rome, however I suspect aspects of it will change and Rome will make it seem as if one can fight wars against the forces of darkness like Zurvan, and uphold the light. I could see Rome as having the Manichean cross with the eight steps of Bema or the sun with outgoing Rays as its flag instead of the Chi-Rai.

This seems very plausible, as far as I'm aware of things in this area.

I really am curious as to how this might change Roman society, and also how it might change as it adapted to Roman culture and later spread into neighbouring cultures in Germany etc.

Anybody else got any thoughts?
 
The extent to which the mystery cults of the time could really be called proselytizing is really up to debate. Manicheanism is an interesting contender, certainly, and did spread pretty far and wide. Buddhism would also be an interesting candidate- if only it could get past the Zoroastrians.
 
St Augustine of Hippo was a Manichean Perfect before converting to Christianity. His effect on Christianity overall was immense. He wrote a book called "On Manicheanism" describing how to spot a follower of Mani that set the standard for church conduct towards heretics. It was so influential apostates were referred to as 'Manicheans' rather than heretics before the Albigensian Crusade. It is because of this we have the word Maniac for a crazy person.

Perhaps if St Augustine remains Manichean there would be a larger group surviving in the Mediterranean, with him acting as their version of Paul.
 
St Augustine of Hippo was a Manichean Perfect before converting to Christianity. His effect on Christianity overall was immense. He wrote a book called "On Manicheanism" describing how to spot a follower of Mani that set the standard for church conduct towards heretics. It was so influential apostates were referred to as 'Manicheans' rather than heretics before the Albigensian Crusade. It is because of this we have the word Maniac for a crazy person.

Man, that's some interesting background.

Perhaps if St Augustine remains Manichean there would be a larger group surviving in the Mediterranean, with him acting as their version of Paul.

Where was the centre of population of Manicheanism at this time? Could it have shifted? Might it have caught on among the Germanic tribes with a couple of well-placed missionaries?
 
Well, the Eleusian Mysteries of Demeter and Persephone offered an afterlife to anyone, man, woman, or slave, so maybe something comes about from that?
 
Manicheanism took off mostly around the central asian region. Some of the nomadic steppe peoples converted to it and their belief persisted for some time while their faith was demonised and rooted out throughout Europe.

Perhaps a group of Pechnegs, Magyars or another group may have converted and then brought their faith with some Manichean Prefects to Europe by invading and settling as they usually did at this time.
 
Man, that's some interesting background.



Where was the centre of population of Manicheanism at this time? Could it have shifted? Might it have caught on among the Germanic tribes with a couple of well-placed missionaries?


According to Ibn Al-Nadim, in his book Kitab al-Fihrist, during the reign of caliph Al-Muqtadir (908-932), the headquarters of the religion was in Baghdad. However at this time (800s-900s) most Manichaens lived elsewhere, predominantly in Central Asia and China. However in the time that Manichaeism competed with Christianity, most of its followers resided in the Syriac/Aramaic speaking world (Iraq/Syria). It spread as the books Mani wrote were translated to Coptic and Greek (The Evangelion, The book of Giants, The Treasure of Life, Secrets, The Treatise, Shabuhragan and Ardahang). Also, Manichaeism used the various gnostic gospels such as Thomas, and were preserved by them. Manichaeism, despite being written in Aramaic by a Persian, was essentially a Hellenic religion (like Christianity) with Persian terms and names and a Abrahamic concept of God (oneness of God and such). Manichaeism's best chance is too butterfly away any conversion of the Assyrians or Aramaens to Christianity and proceed to have them become Manichaens, giving the religion dominance in the Syriac world, then having it spread more viraly than otl, especially in Greece and Italy (were it was unable to beat Christianity in otl).
 
Top