I've just read in a new book by the famed historian Peter Frankopan, The Earth Transformed: An Untold History, that if there had been a different set of climatological and ecological conditions in the late 620s/early 630s CE (e.g. no volcanic eruption in 626), then the kaghan (Turkic/nomadic-type leader) Ton Yabghu would have been able to make a Mongol-like empire in Asia (including the Middle East), North Africa, and at least some of Europe. This way, Islam and the Arabic language as a spreading force might have been preempted...hence, no Islam except maybe in Arabia as a localized, fringe religion. And where iOTL Arabic is spoken or at least is a liturgical language, there might instead be some Turkic tongue along with Buddhism. Any thoughts?
no Islam...instead, a more widespread Buddhism in the Middle East, North Africa, etc.
- Thread starter dovibear
- Start date
I don't think it'd work like that - In nomad empires like that, while the ruling class might use their own language (at first), for administration, the tendency is to use the language that's used the most for these purposes in a region. For one, the ruling class is in smaller numbers overall, and it's easier for the few to learn the many's language instead of the opposite. It's not until the 19th century (and secular compulsory primary education, plus nationalism) that you start to get states that are sufficiently powerful and far-reaching that they can enforce linguistic conformity upon a majority.
In any case, Arabic had the advantage of being both liturgical and ruling class language in a type of empire that was more stable than a steppe empire would be.
So you won't find just one language having the same range that OTL Arabic does. You'd probably have African Romance, Coptic and Greek on North Africa and Greek, Aramaic and Persian in the Middle East.
Last edited:
Sorry, but it all feels super random.
While obviously Genghis eventually showed such a mega-empire could be done, I doubt the Gokturks were particularly on the cusp of achieving it, especially the Western ones who had an overall more limited access to Chinese technology and expertise. Nor do I see the claim that a volcanic eruption not happening would be particularly useful to steppe nomads; those events tend to disrupt sedentary states far more and without it and the problems brought, there's good chance the Sasanids are stronger and actually resist more - not less - their steppe enemies.
And frankly, a Turkish dynasty hailing from Central Asia - an area that already had Zoroastrian influences - is very likely to adopt Zoroastrianism instead and to be culturally assimilated over time, so I don't think Turkic language or Buddhism are likely consequences of even a successful Gokturk conquest of the Sasanid domains.
While obviously Genghis eventually showed such a mega-empire could be done, I doubt the Gokturks were particularly on the cusp of achieving it, especially the Western ones who had an overall more limited access to Chinese technology and expertise. Nor do I see the claim that a volcanic eruption not happening would be particularly useful to steppe nomads; those events tend to disrupt sedentary states far more and without it and the problems brought, there's good chance the Sasanids are stronger and actually resist more - not less - their steppe enemies.
And frankly, a Turkish dynasty hailing from Central Asia - an area that already had Zoroastrian influences - is very likely to adopt Zoroastrianism instead and to be culturally assimilated over time, so I don't think Turkic language or Buddhism are likely consequences of even a successful Gokturk conquest of the Sasanid domains.
Last edited:
The White Huns timeline here on this site is just that except changes start from somewhere between 400-500 AD with the Hepthalites choosing Iran as a place for expansion instead of India. A specific version of Buddhism refered in the timeline as Sogdian Buddhism or Western Buddhism spreads to Iran and Mesopotamia eventually reaching Arabia and kicking out Christianity and preempts Islam.
North Africa in that timeline is Christian though.
North Africa in that timeline is Christian though.
even with out climate change which getting rid of it is already ASB, tension between the tribe had occured before the civil war of 630 was between mostly tong with the support of Nushibi while the dulo and karluks revolted this was a main reason why the the turks did not do any serious attempt to conquer persia during the sassanid civil war for the mega turk empire you most deal with this also the fact the tang are gonna expand and possibly kill or reduce said empire
if they conquer all of persia yeah if they conquer just transoxiana or maybe greater khorosan not so much
While the Turkic dynasty might have emerged from Central Asia, it does not necessarily mean they would uniformly adopt Zoroastrianism. Central Asia was a region of religious and cultural diversity, with various belief systems coexisting, including Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Nestorian Christianity, and local indigenous faiths. The ruling elite's religious preferences might have differed from the broader Central Asian population, and historical examples show that conquerors often tolerated and adopted multiple religions within their domains.
Central Asia had a significant Buddhist presence even before the rise of the Gokturk Empire. Buddhist monasteries, stupas, and communities dotted the region. If the Gokturks conquered the Sasanian domains, they might have encountered and interacted with existing Buddhist communities, leading to the potential spread of Buddhism or cultural exchange between the two regions.
Even if the Gokturk destroy the Sasanids, why would that mean they would expand further? The Parthians started also as a steppe people. Why would the Gokturk do better?
The Gokturks, as a larger and more numerous confederation, might have a demographic advantage over the early Parthians. This numerical strength could give them greater resilience and ability to replenish their armies in the face of losses. They might demonstrate greater adaptability to the cultures and societies of the regions they conquer. If they manage to assimilate local customs and traditions, they could gain the support of their newly acquired subjects and enhance their ability to govern effectively.
Surely, but historically only Islam was really able to convert Persia - and even that took a fair while. I don't see it as very plausible coming from a Buddhist standpoint, though certainly far from ASB.
The success of any religious conversion depends not only on the zeal of the proselytizers but also on the level of tolerance and coexistence prevalent in the region. In this alternate history, the Gokturks might demonstrate a more tolerant attitude towards different religions, allowing Buddhism and other faiths to coexist with Persian Zoroastrianism. Such an environment could lead to the gradual spread of Buddhism through peaceful means.
The post #9 says the Gokturk wil remain Buddhist, but in post #11 you say they wil assimilate local customs and tradition. Is religion not part of that?
Not entirely true. Tolerance in itself will not convert people. Islam in Persia made conversion socialy attractive and certainly in the beginning also very exclusive. You needed a sponsor to convert.
You raise a valid point, and I apologize for any inconsistency in the narrative. Indeed, religion is a crucial aspect of assimilating local customs and traditions. Allow me to clarify,
To maintain stability and govern effectively, the Gokturks might adopt a policy of religious tolerance and syncretism. This means that while Buddhism remains the dominant faith among the ruling elite, they would respect and accommodate the religious practices of the local populations they conquer, including Persian Zoroastrianism. Over time, the Gokturk rulers and their subjects may undergo a process of religious syncretism, where elements of different faiths are blended, leading to the emergence of a distinct and inclusive religious identity that encompasses Buddhist, Zoroastrian, and local beliefs.
While it is true that Islam's spread in Persia involved exclusive incentives and sponsorship, Buddhism, as a different faith, might take a distinct approach in the scenario we are examining. The Gokturk rulers, who are predominantly Buddhist (in TL), could act as religious leaders and patrons of Buddhism. Their position of authority and influence might inspire some among the local populations to embrace Buddhism. The ruling elite's religious identity can have a significant impact on the faith's appeal to the populace.
As mentioned earlier, the Gokturks might adopt a policy of religious tolerance and syncretism, accommodating local customs and traditions, including religious practices. This inclusive approach could make Buddhism more accessible and socially acceptable to a broader range of people. While not as exclusive as Islam's conversion in Persia, Buddhism could still engage in missionary efforts and cultural exchange to promote the faith among the local population. Over time, these efforts might resonate with certain communities and encourage a gradual shift in religious beliefs.
Agreed, climate changes not caused by people are considered ASB material
That said we can analyse what the realistic consequences of this would be... and I agree with above that such vulcanic eruption would be more devastating to the steppe tribes than anything else, I mean it would make them move sure but wouldnt do wonders for their stability
Also like @Kcirtap said White Huns more or less did that and I think they worked better for that than the Gokturks would, though the idea of some kind of Buddhist Super Turkey is very fun