AHC: Islamic World
- Thread starter Xnyrax
- Start date
Having Islamic domination of Iberia lasting can actually do this. But it will be easier and most effective to have Islam swallow both Eastern Roman Empire half of France. As to have both Hinduism and Buddhism as runner ups, kinda trickier. I think it would need initial Fatah to be halted at Iraq and doesn't expand further east. There seems to be a remote possibility for that IOTL, since Umar actually wanted to halt at Iraq and spare the rest of Persia, but the Persia refused Caliph's offer for peace. Maybe if Sassanid Empire would crumble immediately after Caliphate captures Iraq.... But down the line, I think it's more likely to see Nestorian invasion of India, which would be kinda cool
EDIT : Wait, >1000AD ? Than the secondary condition for Hindus and Buddhism would be pretty much impossible.
This is the extent of Muslim states in 950 AD. These were technically under the Abbasid Caliphate, but the Abbasids had lost control and were figureheads.
Muslim Mongols overruning Europe to the Rhine could help quite a bit...as for Hindus and Buddhists, they don't have to be more numerous than OTL, just more numberous than the Christians. Note a more successful Chinese Buddhism could easily push the Buddhists over the 1 billion mark.
Bruce
Bruce
Why not move the POD back to the early 8th c., the Umayyad conquest of Iberia, and the Battle of Tours? It's remarkable how far the "Saracens" advanced through Frankish territory. Modern Tours is only about 250 km southwest from Paris.
If the Catholics mounted an early Crusade against Moorish Spain, which failed badly, this could led to an Islamic counter strike against Rome (prehaps from Sardinia).
If Rome fell and the Pope fled to Southern France then Italy could fall to Islam. Unless peace was reached the on going centuries could led to a slow nibbling away of Catholic France, falling piece by piece to Islam. The Pope would have to flee again, either to Paris or into Germany.
Without Spain, Portugal, France and Italy the Catholic faith will not spead outside of Europe (the English generally didn't force their religion down peoples throats).
If Rome fell and the Pope fled to Southern France then Italy could fall to Islam. Unless peace was reached the on going centuries could led to a slow nibbling away of Catholic France, falling piece by piece to Islam. The Pope would have to flee again, either to Paris or into Germany.
Without Spain, Portugal, France and Italy the Catholic faith will not spead outside of Europe (the English generally didn't force their religion down peoples throats).
The Mongolians decimate Europe before they turn their eyes on the middle east, however their leader has a heart attack as in OTL, and the army has to return to Mongolia.
With regards to Hinduism, you could have a more active Chola or Pala dynasty spread Hinduism all over Indonesia, and have them resist Muslim conversion in Indonesia. In addition, Hinduism could become widespread in East Africa during the years of Indian trade in that region. About Buddhism, B_Munro has exactly the right idea. Have a more clearly defined Chinese religion, count it as Buddhist, and you've got yourself a billion Buddhists.
So have someone else do it, or European attempts fail and America written off as not worth the risks and costs.
Europeans are in a much better position to do so than most: even if we keep Islamic Iberia, they almost automatically have to worry about competition from England, France, etc. And if the Chinese/Japanese/etc. preemt them, we have trouble keeping the Buddhists less numberous than the Muslims...
Unlikely, if we get a Europe developing anything like OTL. And any Muslim success will in turn spur European agression and competition...to make Christianity at most the number 4 religion, it strikes me you just have to do something to retard Europe's development.
Bruce
True.
Where are our American experts when we need them?
Spurring European competition doesn't mean that Christian Europeans are successful, particularly if Muslim Spain is something of an Western Ottoman Empire sort of force.
By this time I think Islamization of Indonesia was inevitable, and in part it was because of Cholan invasion of Srivijaya. If you want to have Indonesia that is sufficiently resistance to Islam, I think you have to keep Srivijaya strong, and that would require pre-1000AD.
It seems pretty straightforward to me that an Islamic conversion of most or all of Christian Europe would do very nicely; then Islam can suffer all sorts of setbacks and barriers in India and still come out ahead.
It's a chestnut going back to Toynbee (writing in the 1920s IIRC, one of the earliest volumes of A Study of History) that one mode of failure for Christendom could be that the Norsemen decide they'd rather convert to Islam than Christianity. Or maybe Toynbee never said that; he did IIRC suggest though that Islam could prevail on most of the Continent, with Christianity holding out only in its Celtic form in Ireland and perhaps the British Isles as a whole, with the Vikings going for Celtic Christianity. So that would preserve some Christendom, in another form Toynbee thought would be more culturally compatible with Islam.
So 1000 AD may be too late for that particular scenario.
Anyway I don't understand the assumption that Islam can't simply triumph in Europe; that would certainly put it over the top demographically.
And once Europe is Muslim, why wouldn't we want Europeans to be the ones to expand into the Americas? That would just tip the balance even further in Islam's favor, no matter how poorly they do east of Persia. Leaving plenty of room for Buddhism and Hinduism in India itself plus any territory to the east or southwest they can stake out.
Totally wiping out European Christendom (by gradual conversion over centuries, not by any more violent means!) would certainly open up second place for the Indian religions even if they do lose a lot of ground to Islam.
So, why not? By 1100 AD it might be too late for the Muslims to prevail, but it isn't clear to me 1000 AD is. The Vikings were still raiding then, creating all kinds of mayhem; I forget if the Magyar disruption of central Europe was at that exact same time. So if the Magyars are already Muslim, and the Vikings decide it's the wave of the future and it spites those Christians who have been nagging them for several centuries now, and some misstep in Aquitaine or especial effort from Muslim Iberia moves Islam north into France, the overall collapse of Roman Catholicism might be at hand before that century is out. Then it would be a matter of mopping up Italy and Germany and the Lowlands; Britain might hold out for a while or go under eventually so as not to be isolated.
I certainly can't offer a specific POD--but why this assumption Europe would be immune?
It's a chestnut going back to Toynbee (writing in the 1920s IIRC, one of the earliest volumes of A Study of History) that one mode of failure for Christendom could be that the Norsemen decide they'd rather convert to Islam than Christianity. Or maybe Toynbee never said that; he did IIRC suggest though that Islam could prevail on most of the Continent, with Christianity holding out only in its Celtic form in Ireland and perhaps the British Isles as a whole, with the Vikings going for Celtic Christianity. So that would preserve some Christendom, in another form Toynbee thought would be more culturally compatible with Islam.
So 1000 AD may be too late for that particular scenario.
Anyway I don't understand the assumption that Islam can't simply triumph in Europe; that would certainly put it over the top demographically.
And once Europe is Muslim, why wouldn't we want Europeans to be the ones to expand into the Americas? That would just tip the balance even further in Islam's favor, no matter how poorly they do east of Persia. Leaving plenty of room for Buddhism and Hinduism in India itself plus any territory to the east or southwest they can stake out.
Totally wiping out European Christendom (by gradual conversion over centuries, not by any more violent means!) would certainly open up second place for the Indian religions even if they do lose a lot of ground to Islam.
So, why not? By 1100 AD it might be too late for the Muslims to prevail, but it isn't clear to me 1000 AD is. The Vikings were still raiding then, creating all kinds of mayhem; I forget if the Magyar disruption of central Europe was at that exact same time. So if the Magyars are already Muslim, and the Vikings decide it's the wave of the future and it spites those Christians who have been nagging them for several centuries now, and some misstep in Aquitaine or especial effort from Muslim Iberia moves Islam north into France, the overall collapse of Roman Catholicism might be at hand before that century is out. Then it would be a matter of mopping up Italy and Germany and the Lowlands; Britain might hold out for a while or go under eventually so as not to be isolated.
I certainly can't offer a specific POD--but why this assumption Europe would be immune?
I don't think that's necessarily true. The sources regarding the Islamization of Indonesia are sketchy, but the first large conversions didn't take place until the eleventh century. Srivijaya was still pretty strong at this point; it didn't truly start to go into decline until the twelfth century. I think it's very possible, although not very easy, to prevent Islam appearing in SE Asia much at all with a POD after 1000 AD.