WI: No Islam

[Otto Kretschmer]

A simple PoD: Muhammad is born a girl or not born at all and subsequently Islam is never created.

How does the world look like?

It's possible, even likely, that someone else would have unified the Arabs but without Islam solidifying the Arab identity and language, the Arab conquerors would have simply assimilated into their conquered societies. How plausible is this? Also, there's a claim that the timing of the Arab-Muslim conquests was just perfect, happening right after the Romans and the Sassanids had concluded a devastating war and if the Arab conquests had started just 10-15 years later, the Arabs would have been repelled - true or not?

I tend to disagree with the claim that without Islam there would be no Golden Age of science in the 8th-13th centuries - the movement of papermaking technology would have taken place anyway and there would have been a similar flowering even in the absence of Islam. Again, what do you guys think?



Geopolitically wise?
1. The North Africa would remain Christian, Byzantium might survive or it might not. The Arab Peninsula might be majority Christian, Zoroastrian or be a mix of various religions as it used to be.
2. India would remain Hindu or a mix of Hindu-Buddhist. There might be a minority of Zoroastrians as a remnant of Afghan conqueror dynasties that would be Zoroastrian instead of Muslim.
3. The Malay Peninsula would be Hindu-Buddhist as well.
4. Sub Saharan Africa would be Christian.

Beyond the above, it's hard to say snything specific. The world would be unrecognizable.

[stevep]

Jun 6, 2024 12:55:41 GMT Otto Kretschmer said:

A simple PoD: Muhammad is born a girl or not born at all and subsequently Islam is never created.

How does the world look like?

It's possible, even likely, that someone else would have unified the Arabs but without Islam solidifying the Arab identity and language, the Arab conquerors would have simply assimilated into their conquered societies. How plausible is this? Also, there's a claim that the timing of the Arab-Muslim conquests was just perfect, happening right after the Romans and the Sassanids had concluded a devastating war and if the Arab conquests had started just 10-15 years later, the Arabs would have been repelled - true or not?

I tend to disagree with the claim that without Islam there would be no Golden Age of science in the 8th-13th centuries - the movement of papermaking technology would have taken place anyway and there would have been a similar flowering even in the absence of Islam. Again, what do you guys think?



Geopolitically wise?
1. The North Africa would remain Christian, Byzantium might survive or it might not. The Arab Peninsula might be majority Christian, Zoroastrian or be a mix of various religions as it used to be.
2. India would remain Hindu or a mix of Hindu-Buddhist. There might be a minority of Zoroastrians as a remnant of Afghan conqueror dynasties that would be Zoroastrian instead of Muslim.
3. The Malay Peninsula would be Hindu-Buddhist as well.
4. Sub Saharan Africa would be Christian.

Beyond the above, it's hard to say snything specific. The world would be unrecognizable.

  Interesting idea.  Have read that the circumstances were right for a surge of Arabic tribes out of the peninsula and if a warlord managed to assemble enough of a force when both empires were weakened as OTL then you could have seen similar early conquests of at least bordering areas such as Palestine, Syria and Mesopotamia.  This could lead to other successes, possibly most likely in Egypt where the Byzantines were deeply unpopular even before their return after the period of Persian rule - which lead to high taxes as an exhausted empire sought to rebuild its strength and further discrimination against the Coptic majority after their 'disloyalty' during the war.

  However without a strong unifying faith to maintain cohesion as you say many of the Arabs or at least their descendants are likely to be assimilated into the vastly greater existing settled populations.  There is the option of them falling to disunity but also of a leader selection a strong faith and converting many of his people to it.  Here there would be one option you didn't mention.  Such a leader might take the OTL Khazar option and go for Judaism, which was definitely present to some numbers in Arabia as was Christianity and quite probably Zoroastrian.  This would have the advantage for the Arabs as it did for the Khazars that its not a faith that's greatest centres and authorities are in a rival state, as would be the case if an attempt was made with Zoroastrian or some branch of Christianity.  Furthermore such a lead could at least claim to have had revelations and have successfully 'restored' the capital of the faith, i.e. Jerusalem.

  Such an option would mean great enmity with most Christian states given the historical hostility between the two faiths and also the dispute over control of the holy city of both faiths but it could see at least the Arab heartlands and some of the conquered regions converted and forming a stable base for a lasting state.  Its also likely that possibly Zoroastrian would survive in Persia as its major faith since it and this Arabia would have a mutual hostility with the Byzantine empire.

  It would likely prevent lasting wider conquests as locations such as Egypt are likely not to welcome a Jewish ruler, even if they were as tolerant initially as the early Muslims OTL As such, while its nature could well vary Africa is probably going to be largely Christian in its traditional areas and with a lot of spread south or along the coastlines into the rest of the continent.  If this Arabia develops the sort of merchant and trading culture that Islam did OTL you could see communities established in locations such as E Africa, India and SE Asia but their likely to be significant minorities at most, especially in India as there won't be the capacity for major military invasions.

[Otto Kretschmer]

stevep Do you think there would be a similar Golden Age of science as in OTL Islamic world?

Because I think there would be given the movement of papermaking westward along the Silk Road. Except it might not be an Arab Golden Age but rather a Sassanid or a Sassanid-Byzantine one.

[575]

Jun 6, 2024 12:55:41 GMT Otto Kretschmer said:

A simple PoD: Muhammad is born a girl or not born at all and subsequently Islam is never created.

How does the world look like?

It's possible, even likely, that someone else would have unified the Arabs but without Islam solidifying the Arab identity and language, the Arab conquerors would have simply assimilated into their conquered societies. How plausible is this? Also, there's a claim that the timing of the Arab-Muslim conquests was just perfect, happening right after the Romans and the Sassanids had concluded a devastating war and if the Arab conquests had started just 10-15 years later, the Arabs would have been repelled - true or not?

I tend to disagree with the claim that without Islam there would be no Golden Age of science in the 8th-13th centuries - the movement of papermaking technology would have taken place anyway and there would have been a similar flowering even in the absence of Islam. Again, what do you guys think?



Geopolitically wise?
1. The North Africa would remain Christian, Byzantium might survive or it might not. The Arab Peninsula might be majority Christian, Zoroastrian or be a mix of various religions as it used to be.
2. India would remain Hindu or a mix of Hindu-Buddhist. There might be a minority of Zoroastrians as a remnant of Afghan conqueror dynasties that would be Zoroastrian instead of Muslim.
3. The Malay Peninsula would be Hindu-Buddhist as well.
4. Sub Saharan Africa would be Christian.

Beyond the above, it's hard to say snything specific. The world would be unrecognizable.

There had also been a plague in Sassanid lands which helped the Arabs a lot provided a charismatic leader appear.

The Byzantines sat upon papermaking - papyrus paper - of Egypt so they might just as well benefit from such or having such a Golden Age provided they don't fall to invaders - Arab or Turkish. Its alluded that the Arabs got the Hellenic science papers from Byzantium to work upon. Of course with defeating the Chinese they got the papermaking knowledge but that is actually not a prerequisite if the Byzantines are willing to trade papyrus-paper.

I guess to some degree the Islamic Golden Age depended upon the faith and thus the development of science once the Arabs had settled down from conquest - them or Byzantines or Turks in Persia gets the Golden Age is another thing.

Depending upon which confession such conquerors would adopt there would be changes as stevep outline. Jewish and Arab Israelites!

Obviously the main interesting thing would be the areas as you outlined that wouldn't go for Islam. That would be some different World.

[Otto Kretschmer]

575 The story of the Arabs getting paper from the Chinese after the battle of Talas is actually false... The papermaking technology was moving westward for some time already and it reached the Khorosan in the 700s from where it spread to Baghdad.

Since paper is much cheaper than papyrus or parchment, any society that gets it is almost destined to undergo an intellectual flowering IMO.

[575]

Jun 6, 2024 17:33:39 GMT Otto Kretschmer said:

575 The story of the Arabs getting paper from the Chinese after the battle of Talas is actually false... The papermaking technology was moving westward for some time already and it reached the Khorosan in the 700s from where it spread to Baghdad.

Since paper is much cheaper than papyrus or parchment, any society that gets it is almost destined to undergo an intellectual flowering IMO.

Well I'm unsure about the price of papyrus but parchment outdid both that and paper in price due the working required.

Europe did benefit from cheap papyrus untill the Arab conquest of Egypt and had to switch to parchment due to that.

[Otto Kretschmer]

By the way, Arab Israelites is something that deserves a TL of it's own!

[stevep]

Jun 6, 2024 17:05:51 GMT Otto Kretschmer said:

stevep Do you think there would be a similar Golden Age of science as in OTL Islamic world?

Because I think there would be given the movement of papermaking westward along the Silk Road. Except it might not be an Arab Golden Age but rather a Sassanid or a Sassanid-Byzantine one.

  I don't know enough about the region and its culture to tell, especially since a lot would depend on how this alternative non-Islamic power emerges and how the other two empires interest with it.  Get the impression that the other two empires [Byzantine and Sassanid] were rather conservative socially and politically so it could be more difficult for such a golden age of 'science' and knowledge to take off in either of them but this could prove to be wrong.

  One issue is that I think we're assuming that the Arab state wasn't as militarily successful as OTL Caliphate so it wouldn't have the same resources and also be able to spread information over such a large area and population.  Also in turn a surviving Sassanid and a larger Byzantine empire would probably mean more conflict with the Arabic empire, which could probably reduce its resources and wealth.

  IIRC I read a few years back that one problem with papyrus was that demand was exceeding supply and it was an increasingly rare product which might have been a factor that could impede a papyrus based age of expanded knowledge.  On the other hand an Arab empire that doesn't expand beyond the Levant and Mesopotamia could have a problem even if it got knowledge of paper as it doesn't have a lot of forests to supply wood pulp for such production.  [Although I may be thinking too much about the status of the region today and ~1500 years ago it could be a lot different].