Muhammad had three sons, but they all predeceased him without issue. What if at least one of them survived or had a son before dying?
WI: At least of Muhammad's sons survive?
- Thread starter dannythegreat
- Start date
That's actually a really good question.
It could harm Islam badly if leadership is governed by primogeniture, as simply being a descendant of a great religious leader really doesn't give one ability.
Worse, you could have a multi-way split. Get one tradition saying his son should take over, and another saying his most successful assistant should. (The man could easily have said both things in his lifetime, and since none of his words were ever written down directly, ....)
It could harm Islam badly if leadership is governed by primogeniture, as simply being a descendant of a great religious leader really doesn't give one ability.
Worse, you could have a multi-way split. Get one tradition saying his son should take over, and another saying his most successful assistant should. (The man could easily have said both things in his lifetime, and since none of his words were ever written down directly, ....)
Given how there was a split over "inheritance" of leadership, a son surviving most likely would prevent that as there would be acceptance of the sons' right to lead. This fits with the Arabian culture. with a hereditary leadership of the Muslim world might see some sort of theocratic "kingship". Not having an early Shi'a/Sunni split will certainly make some big differences. As long as a direct line from Mohammed is intact (son to son) I can't see a split in the caliphate, like OTL. Of course once the original line dies out (no sons or none survive to adulthood) the power struggle will be ferocious. You may also see the first son, when he takes power, having his brothers done in like Turkish sultans did. Multiple legal wives as well as concubines makes the line of succession potentially quite murky (see how Saudi Arabia does it for example).
Lunarwolf
Banned
well, if Qasim, he'd be 25-30 years old when Muhammad dies, without a doubt he'd have the unconditional support of Ali and Fatimah's otl supporters, most likely Qasim would have married Aisha, and not Muhammad.
Basically he'd be uncontested since Abu-Bakr wouldn't contest against his grown Son-in-Law.
Ibrahim, the last child of Muhammad would on the other hand be three years old.
Well considering that the kings of Jordan are directly descended from one of Fatima's sons, that could take awhile. fratricide is unlikely in full brother, it's half-brothers with zero filial piety you see that in, also the turkish system was completely stupid for the purposes of filial piety, and arabic custom holds to primogeniture so unless two of the wives give birth on the same day, well the sucession would be fairly clear at least for the first few generations.
Basically he'd be uncontested since Abu-Bakr wouldn't contest against his grown Son-in-Law.
Ibrahim, the last child of Muhammad would on the other hand be three years old.
Well considering that the kings of Jordan are directly descended from one of Fatima's sons, that could take awhile. fratricide is unlikely in full brother, it's half-brothers with zero filial piety you see that in, also the turkish system was completely stupid for the purposes of filial piety, and arabic custom holds to primogeniture so unless two of the wives give birth on the same day, well the sucession would be fairly clear at least for the first few generations.
Last edited: