Point of departure--the Emperor Justinian declared Buddhism, not Christianity, to be the religion of the state.
How Will Culture and Society Look in a Buddhist Medieval Europe?
- Thread starter RaptorWolf
- Start date
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/vignette-kung-fu-antipopes.450923/
[ Catholic Church but with pseudo-Buddhist doctrines and very much into martial arts ]
[ Catholic Church but with pseudo-Buddhist doctrines and very much into martial arts ]
Last edited:
Rome was already Christian state already long time before days of Justinian. If he would do that he would lost his throne and possibility his life quickly. No one is going to follow non-Christian emperor.
Given that the Mauryans sent Buddhist delegations to diadochi courts in the third century BC, Europe *could* have gone Buddhist before christ was even born.
??
Uh, what? Such a rude remark needs definitely more explanation.
Otto Kretschmer
Banned
I think he means that in medieval Europe after the fall of Rome the Catholic Church played amajor role in preserving literary works and promoting science. Galileo aside, almost all scientists until well into 17th century were clergymen.
Without end organized Church that would have been no organized monastic movement just individual monasteries with little contact with each other. So something's like the scholastic movement would be impossible in the Buddhism Europe IMO
Last edited:
But that doesn't make sense. Buddhism is also very much a monastic religion with monks that could have fulfilled the same function.
Yes Christian monasteries preserved works, but it did little itself to spread it. Many works were kept under lock and key and remained unknown until outside forces rediscovered them. How this worked is quite accurate described in Eco's "The name of the rose."
In contrast, there are many stories about how Budhist missionaries spread scriptures over great distances.
Otto Kretschmer
Banned
That's interestring I know that I may be wrong
What is sure is that the Catholic Church had a lot of money as people paid large taxes to it, a least some of that money went towards education. Buddhist monasteries would be poorer and would rely on alms to sustain themselves
Last edited:
Faeelin
Banned
Ehh... There's a lot to unpack here.
First, many Buddhist monasteries were incredibly wealthy! There's a reason Chinese Emperors would raid them for money (something familiar to students of European history). They acquired wealth in many of the same ways European ones did.
Second, Catholic "tithes" wouldn't necessarily go to the monasteries.
Otto Kretschmer
Banned
Do you think it would actually be better under Buddhism?
One a wider scale do you guys see stuff that Buddhism would contribute to society that Christianity did not in terms of economic social and political development?
I'm not sure that it would be very different, to be honest.
Buddhism, like all major religions, adapts to the local cultures as much as the cultures adapt to it.
Buddhism, like all major religions, adapts to the local cultures as much as the cultures adapt to it.
Faeelin
Banned
Maybe? Lot of ways for this to go. Just pointing out why your assessment of monasteries isn't correct.
Major differences would be how Buddhism interacts with the various European paganisms- there probably wouldn't be outright replacement in all cases, but i wouldn't assume they'd just smoothly slide in. I have a feeling people like Jupiter and Isis would only feature in Buddhist works in the same way that Vishnu and Shiva do- gods who suffer humiliating defeats to Buddhist rival deities until they are reborn and become Buddhists themselves. They're just too powerful in the claims they make for themselves for an easy submission to Buddhist doctrine.
More minor figures would presumably be more easily incorporated.
I feel like they'd be well received by epicureans, with whom they share a lot more philosophical and organisational traits than groups like the Stoics, who would probably put up stiff resistance and hold out as a distinct philosophical tradition. It'd also be really cool to see Buddhism bring with it a tradition of Sanskrit philosophy so that the Indic and Mediterranean worlds become more like a joint religious continuum- that way the Stoics can link up with Buddhisms indian rivals who much more closely mirror their own views.
Also given how the first printed texts otl were Buddhist scriptures, probably shouldn't underestimate the capacity for innovation.
More minor figures would presumably be more easily incorporated.
I feel like they'd be well received by epicureans, with whom they share a lot more philosophical and organisational traits than groups like the Stoics, who would probably put up stiff resistance and hold out as a distinct philosophical tradition. It'd also be really cool to see Buddhism bring with it a tradition of Sanskrit philosophy so that the Indic and Mediterranean worlds become more like a joint religious continuum- that way the Stoics can link up with Buddhisms indian rivals who much more closely mirror their own views.
Also given how the first printed texts otl were Buddhist scriptures, probably shouldn't underestimate the capacity for innovation.