WI: Muslim West Christian East

first you'd have to get to this point, which would only be done (to my guesstimation) by wanking Nestorian Sassarid (or prehaps Saint Thomas Christians in India), while screwing christian spead in Roman Empire.

The How-to get it to work is very important in figuring out what consevences it would have
 
How would you get this? Where do you draw the boundaries of West and East? And what kinds of Christianity and Islam are you talking about?

Maybe if the Byzantines slow the Muslim advance into Asia Minor, possibly keeping control as far as Syria, but the Muslims still take Spain and this time succeed at Tours, crushing the Frankish Empire (or at least starting its decline).
If they're really lucky, they could take France, and maybe Italy. IDK about Britain, though (maybe the Pope flees there if Rome falls?).

Meanwhile, the Byzantines for some reason start a crusade or something, taking the Caucasus and maybe expanding as far as Persia. Russia will probably go Orthodox as OTL.

If Arabia, especially Mecca and Medina, falls, the European Muslims may start their own "Al-Andalus Islam".
 
Well, even with a Muslim West and a Christian East you'd still have the geographical features associated with Europe and the Middle East: Europe being far away from Asia, lots of navigable rivers and plains to create capital-intensive regions, plenty of opportunity for naval development and easily fragmented into separate states by mountains and other obstacles, etc.

Meanwhile, the Middle East will continue to be an important conduit from China to Europe, but would still suffer from rugged terrain, nomadic raiders, and relatively poor land which requires some degree of capital investment (qanats and the like) to develop properly.

So the geographical imperatives for Muslims to go to find China via sea routes, collapse into competing nation-states, and maybe even develop forms of capitalism still exist; while the imperatives for the Middle Eastern Christians to find alternate naval routes for China would be much reduced.

Ultimately the question boils down to 'what is different between Islam and Christianity in practice', which is kind of a risky topic to be discussing in any case.

My two cents: I don't think Islam in Europe can fuel a scientific revolution, considering that Islam at its core (Koran, hadith) arguably inserts itself into so many more facets of life; and in any case, neither Catholics nor Mainstream Protestants argue that the Bible is the literal word of God, unlike the Koran. All this gives Christianity much more leeway for logical insinuation/rationalization (what would be ijtihad in Islam). An al-Ghazali - somebody who essentially rejected Greek philosophy and logic as being dangerously impious - would have much harder time formulating a rational argument in the Christian world (for one, he can't argue that the Bible gives 'absolute certainty', unlike philosophy).

However, one could argue that if the Muslims entrench themselves in Europe and imbibe the Greek/Roman culture more deeply, their theology would also become more 'Greek-related' and therefore be more open with regards to these aspects of their religion. This is, of course, not to say that Muslims can't be prosperous, colonize or even industrialize in Europe... I just don't see them making the scientific advances that could make their progress approach OTL levels.

As for the Middle Eastern Christians: assuming the Mongols (or some other horde) still come down and wreck everything it's entirely possible for the more fundamentalist forms of Christianity to gain in popularity as a response to this sort of existential crisis. Stagnation seems eminently possible considering that it won't be Christians who discover America in this scenario nor will they likely participate in colonial efforts. Christian-Muslim war would probably become much more likely considering that Christians would own Mecca/Medina and the Muslims would probably want that back.

So in conclusion, a Muslim Europe vs. a Christian Middle East will probably lead to a world that is comparatively less developed than OTL, at least in the scientific field. Europe would still probably be the continent which colonizes the Americas, starts the modern Industrial Revolution, and eventually dominates the world. Of course a lot of what happens would have to be determined by how the Muslims got to Europe and vice versa, but generally speaking I think the outcome would be something like this.
 
I'd think the world would be a very interesting place as the world powers would change drastically. And certain countries on both sides of the fence would actually be better off.
 
I would disagree about the lack of scientific ingenuity. An Islam that wins at Tours could easily see itself focusing on its conquests in the West, which could see Christians flee to the Byzantines (as the user aboved mentioned, perhaps make the push West come at failure to conquer the Byzantines and/or Persians) and voilà. I see little precedent for Christian capture of Arabia, but I wouldn't be surprise if Islam spreads across North Africa and up into Western Europe; while Christianity "begins" in the Germanies and extends down into the Balkans, Anatolia, the Levant, Persia and beyond.
 
The conditions for this to happen are fairly ripe between 700-900 AD; you have a muslim dominated Iberia and a Christian Dominated Anatolia that, if they can regroup and overcome their short-term challenges (Franks, Lombards, Slavs, Bulgars) have significant potential to expand into eventual dominance of their regions. Both areas saw significant prosperity and recovery in this period OTL, so additional success against external threats could entrench them as powers in the region.

Over the longer term, that gives them potential to expand, particularly as their various neighbours start being affected by invasions of their own (Mongols in the East and Vikings in the North). The most likely scenario there is a muslim South/West (Africa, Iberia, Sourthern France, Parts of italy) and a Christian North/East (Balkans, Anatolia, Middle East, Russia, Central Europe, Northern Italy).


Such a division would likely mean greater Islamic exploration of the New World - though the lack of central european manpower and the different culture would radically alter the actual process. You will probably still have European colonial powers from northern Europe (Low Countries/Northern France, Britain, Scandinavia), which will add a whole new dimention to the competition.

How the world would develop scientifically is an interesting question. Muslim science saw great advances during it's golden age, with great respect placed on the assimilation of knowledge from places conquered/traded with and scholars being highly respected. Ideological dogma would still play a limiting role just as it did in Europe otl, but judging by the success of Cordoba and Cairo as centres of learning, some areas of scientific development could speed up.

The preservation of the ERE/Constantinople and the various Black Sea/Aegean/Adriatic trading networks could also inspire its own atl Renessaince, with a Greek rather than Italian flavour. Due to its location at the strength of political/religious/economic links to the Rus principalities, you could well see greater advancement in Eastern Europe than OTL, probably at the expense of Northwestern Europe.

Ultimately these christian states may find themselves "hemmed in" by Muslims to the South and West, which will limit the resources they can bring in and therefore their overall development, though this might be somewhat counteracted by having a leg-up in their "early" development.
 
This also brings up the question of how the ERE deals with the Mongol invasions, and whether or not they even turn Muslim.

As well, if Persia remains muslim, and I don't see the ERE or the Rus' managing to get the Persians baptized, not even Charlemagne style (4,000 Saxons < probably 1M+ of Persians), then Islam will be the dominant religion in the world hands down for the foreseeable future.

Especially if France and/or Germany and/or Italy become the battlefields between Christian and Muslim, which, to put it mildly, would suck for Europe.

Especially if they also convert the Mongols as in OTL.
 
This also brings up the question of how the ERE deals with the Mongol invasions, and whether or not they even turn Muslim.

As well, if Persia remains muslim, and I don't see the ERE or the Rus' managing to get the Persians baptized, not even Charlemagne style (4,000 Saxons < probably 1M+ of Persians), then Islam will be the dominant religion in the world hands down for the foreseeable future.

Especially if France and/or Germany and/or Italy become the battlefields between Christian and Muslim, which, to put it mildly, would suck for Europe.

Especially if they also convert the Mongols as in OTL.

Why did Zoroastrianism not remain dominant OTL? Was it competing too much with Nestorian Christianity to stand against the Islamic wave?
 
I postulated a scenario that had a similar premise a while back for a short story that I was working on. I don't see it as possible for Northern Europe to fall under Islamic rule as that would be far to over extending and there just didn't exist the resources for it.

After an Umayyad victory at the Battle of Toulouse, Aquitaine is solidly in Islamic hands. Even with southern France in the hands of the Caliphate it its unable to conquer the rest of France and is turned back after a defeat by Charles Martel at Tours. With South Western Europe secured Sicily falls sooner than OTL and the Caliphate begins to try and conquer the rest of the Italian peninsula in earnest. For decades Italy is a battlefield as Lombards, Franks, Rhomanians, and Arabs/Berbers battle over the peninsula. The Caliphate captures the city of Rome in 749, which sees the Pope flee to Revenna and then to Venic. In 750, riding the wave of support after conquering much of Italy the Caliph is able to suppress an insurrection by the Kaysanite Shia. Unfortunately the Caliphate is on shaky legs and massively extended when a revolt was launched in 755 by the Khurramites thus beginning the Persian reconquista, and the throwing out of the Islamic Arabs rulers from most of Iran. The Pāpakid Dynasty is founded by Pāpak Khorramdin, who would come to rule over Persia and officially promoted the Khurramites form of neo-Mazdakian Zoroastrianism. Papakid Persia would wage war against the crumbling Caliphate along with its allies Rhomania and the Khazar Khanate. Popular rebellion in Egypt would throw the Caliphate out of the region and was followed by a brief period of Egyptian independence before it was reconquered by Rhomania. The Pāpakid Empire reconquered most of Persia proper but did not conquer heavily Islamized Mesopotamia. The Umayyad Caliphate had since splintered with a second rebellion by the Kaysanites, led Abbasids, capturing Baghdad and proclaiming a new Caliphate. The Umayyad Caliphate would survive in Southern Europe and North Africa. The isolated Caliphates would develop a very unique attributes over the next quarter millennia. In Mesopotamia and Arabia Islam would develop a siege mentality and would become ever more radical in the pursuit of Jihad. Minor Arab states in Mesopotamia and Arabia pledge their loyalty to the Caliph in Baghdad, but the power of the Abbasid Caliph doesn't extend far beyond the Tigris and Euphrates. In the West the Umayyad Caliphate has adopted many European customs; there is no taboo on drinking, religious tolerance has become a necessity, art work depicting images of the prophet has lost its taboo, and the Umayyad Caliphs have come to see themselves not as conquers of southern Europe but as a new Islamic dynasty come to rule over a reconstituted Roman Empire. The Caliphs have even come to adopt the title Imperator. Just as in the Middle East, the direct rule of the Caliph has begun to wax and wane. Much of Northern Italy and Southern France is practically independent either as Christian tributaries of the Caliphate or Islamic Emirates that have pledged fealty to the Caliph. Islam outside of Arabia and South Western Europe and Northern Africa has become kind of a curiosity and has largely disappeared from Central Asia and India. Even in Arabia Islam has begun to slowly dissipate, with Oman officially adopting the same form of neo-Mazdakian Zoroastrianism practiced in Persia and the Axumite Empire having invaded the western coast of Arabia and threatening the Hedjaz.
 

Delvestius

Banned
This also brings up the question of how the ERE deals with the Mongol invasions, and whether or not they even turn Muslim.

As well, if Persia remains muslim, and I don't see the ERE or the Rus' managing to get the Persians baptized, not even Charlemagne style (4,000 Saxons < probably 1M+ of Persians), then Islam will be the dominant religion in the world hands down for the foreseeable future.

Especially if France and/or Germany and/or Italy become the battlefields between Christian and Muslim, which, to put it mildly, would suck for Europe.

Especially if they also convert the Mongols as in OTL.

There were at least a few thousand more Saxons...
 
This is one possibility of what Europe may look like. Credit to the original artist

muslimeruope.png
 
Assuming that Islam is still more or less contiguous to the Arabian peninsula, or at least the Red Sea, could this butterfly - or at least substantually delay and weaken - the age of exploration and colonisation, since there would now be both Christian and Islamic routes into at least the Indian Ocean, which significantly reduces the appeal of westward trips across the Atlantic or around Africa? Certainly, nations on the fringe of the Islamic world would still have motivations, and probably have better ties to WAfrica than Europe of OTL to begin with, but it seems like that would ne the most obvious impact
 
It's hard for me to wrap my mind around an Islam without Mecca. Would that one of the five pillars of the faith be dropped or replaced by another site of pilgrimage ?

BTW, on the image, is it realistic to speak of "Islamic Republics" in 1632?
 
Top