My own WI idea for an Islamic Roman Empire

I was searching around earlier for any threads about an idea for an Islamic Eastern Roman Empire, and I thought up an idea for something like that to happen. I know it's incredibly unlikely and that most realistic outcome of a Byzantine emperor converting to Islam is his execution and replacement, but I just wanna have fun with the idea. Also, I know that the orthodox faith was very closely tied to the Eastern Roman system of government, its ideological justification for its power structure, and Roman identity itself. Imo, this isn't a reason to just say "oh well it couldn't have happened", rather I see it as introducing the question of "how would those things look if things somehow turned out differently?".

So basically, I'm thinking of a POD just after the death of Muhammad (SAW). Perhaps the Riddah Wars are prolonged and more destructive, meanwhile Rome and Persia aren't as destabilised and exhausted by their recent war as they were in OTL. Maybe it just wasn't as destructive and so post-war recovery is made easier.

So essentially, you have a Rashidun Caliphate which doesn't have the same ability to expand militarily as well as a Rome which is better able to prevent or repel such a conflict. I'm thinking that in this TL Abu Bakr lives longer and finally wins the Riddah wars many years after it ended in OTL. There could be a few skirmishes with the Romans as in OTL, but they result in even more decisive defeats than in OTL.

That combined with the exhaustion of Arabia following the Riddah Wars leads to Abu Bakr forgetting about any ideas of conquest and instead focuses on expanding the soft power of the Caliphate and dominating trade. He also takes inspiration from the Christian concept of organised missionary work as well as the letters that the Prophet sent out to the most influential people of the time, and creates a similar institution which sends the most knowledgeable of the Muslims convert to non-Muslim nations of the world.

In the Roman Empire, these Arabian missionaries who were now arriving with the caravans seemed like just another heretical Christian sect, and so they faced persecution by the secular and religious authorities. Despite this, they gain some popularity as this was also a time with many Christian heresies all around the cities of the Eastern Mediterranean.

At first, only the Arab tribes within the Roman Empire converted, tribes like the Ghassanids in the Levant and the Bedouins of the Sinai. But eventually more people from the towns and villages of the Levant and Egypt as the influence of the Arab merchants who the missionaries accompanied grew, and Islam started to become popular among merchants and artisans from these regions and beyond to the cities along the Anatolian coast and most importantly, Constantinople.

As Islam's popularity grows and more is known about its theology, especially in relation to the belief in the divinity of Christ, it becomes seen as an extreme heresy and state persecution grows more and more. This doesn't however do much to stop its spread, as missionaries come with trade caravans and so are difficult to target without cutting off all Red Sea/Indian Ocean trade, and converts begin to hide their faith. It continues to spread among the merchants of empire's cities, and it also finds much appeal among the poor and the enslaved due to stories like that of the sahabi Bilal ibn Rabbah. Another group that takes interest are soldiers, who are attracted to the Islamic concepts of jihad and martyrdom. This also makes efforts at persecution more difficult, with instances of soldiers outright refusing to carry it out.

One convert from the military in particular would prove to be very important to the history of Islam in the Roman Empire in this TL. A high ranking general in the Roman army, a man who leads multiple legions, a magister militum. He first hears of Islam from murmurs among his men while they are stationed in Alexandria, but he pays it no mind. However, one day while he is in a busy market, he encounters an Arabian caravan bringing incense from the Horn of Africa. Among the merchants, slaves, and guards of the caravan is an elderly man reciting verses of the Quran. The Roman general is intruiged, he sits near the old man to listen. He doesn't understand the Arabic verses but he is entranced by it. When the elder finishes reciting, the Roman asks what it was and the elder began explaining. Over the next few weeks the Roman returned to the elder everyday to talk with him, and eventually the Roman general converts to Islam in secret as well as taking the elder into his service.

As it turns out, the elder was a companion of the Prophet and had memorised the whole Quran. Over the next few years the elderly sahabi teaches the Roman general more about Islam while also putting an emphasis on Jesus and the apostles and he grows more and more firm in his belief in Islam, which in his eyes is simply the true Christian church. Finally, when the Emperor begins a renewed and even more brutal persecution of Muslim converts, the general had seen enough and in a scene reminiscent of the Milvian Bridge, he marched his army on the capital with the word "Allahu Akbar" written on the shields of men in both Greek and Arabic.

The general's coup succeeds, and he is crowned Emperor of Rome by the elderly sahabi who is also named as the Patriarch of Constantinople. The new Emperor officially legalises Islam and makes it the state religion. Of course, this leads to a civil war, but the Muslim Emperor narrowly wins after a 2 year campaign against a rival general backed by the remaining orthodox clergy based in Syria and Anatolia.

I might make another post detailing how Islam integrates into the church structure as well as the relationship between the Roman state and the Caliphate. But for now, what do yall think of my TL?
 
Last edited:
Interested, but wasn't christianity legalize in the 300 ce by Constantine? So already there wouldn't be persecution on Christians, but those on heretical or foreign religions.
 
Who's who and when is now?
I want to clarify who is who in my TL as well as when things are taking place. Some are historical figures others are characters I made up.

Timeline
- The POD is in the year 632 AD, with the Riddah wars lasting until 637 AD, going on for 5 years rather than just 1.
- Abu Bakr lives 10 years longer than IOTL, dying in 644 rather than 634. During the 7 years between the end of the Riddah Wars and Abu Bakr's death, the Caliph abandons any aspirations to conquer parts of Rome or Persia. Instead he focuses on maintaining stability in Arabia, and he organises Arabian trade and the caravans and merchants all across the peninsula, which had been in decline because of the more destructive Riddah Wars, in order to dominate the trade networks from the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea to Persia and the Mediterranean.
- It is also during this 7 year period between 637 and 644 after the Riddah Wars that Abu Bakr established the Caliphate's system of organised state sponsored missionaries. This missionary system was made to be symbiotic with the organised network of merchants and caravans with missionaries travelling to far away places with caravan companies.
- These missionaries have their most initial success in the Roman Empire mostly because of the influence of Arab merchants within the Roman Empire, Arab tribes living in Roman borders, and proximity, being the easiest place besides Persia for a missionary to go.
- After Abu Bakr's death, Umar becomes the second Caliph. Since IOTL he was killed by a Persian slave and in this ATL Persia hasn't been conquered, he lives longer. But since he's already an elderly man by the time he is appointed as the Caliph in 644, he dies just 2 years later in 646. He maintains the policies of Abu Bakr.
- After Umar's death in 646, Uthman becomes Caliph. Under his rule, the money entering Arabia from trade went from a good amount to a LOT, Arabian trade routes go far and wide. The efforts of missionaries from Arabia are also paying off, especially in the Roman Empire, where many merchants, artisans, soldiers, and slaves etc convert. However, like in OTL, Uthman gives many positions to members of his tribe. Many who want Ali to be the Caliph are upset with this, believing that Uthman is just enriching his tribe. Two groups of rogue Ali supporters from Roman Egypt and Sassanid Mesopotamia go to Medina to protest Uthman. Things turn violent, and the rogue Ali supporters kill Uthman in 656.
- Before Uthman died however, in 651 is when the Roman general who converted takes over the empire. I'll go into more detail about the relationship between the newly Islamic regime in the Roman Empire with the Caliphate in Arabia in another post, but basically they have a good relationship. The Romans have developed a tendency in favour of Ali over the years of missionary work since 637, but the Roman Syria has become a hotbed of Umayyad supporters, especially among the Ghassanids and other Arab tribes of Syria. The new Muslim Emperor condemns the killing of Uthman but doesn't go after the killers in accordance with Ali, the Emperor hopes it will appease both sides
- Ali becomes the Caliph after Uthman's death in 656, things play out much like in OTL except Muawiya isn't the governor of Syria but rather leads an army of Arab tribes and some Roman supporters while Ali is backed by the Emperor's armies as well AD Arab tribes from Sinai and Mesopotamia.

Names
- The Roman general who converts to Islam is named Michael of Alexandria, a member of a noble family with origins in Italy and Constantinople but living in Egypt. Due to his good connections and his feats during the war with the Sassanids he has become a magister militum.
- The Emperor who gets overthrown by Emperor Michael in 651 was Constans II.
- The Sahabi working as a missionary in Egypt that Michael of Alexandria meets is Qays ibn Sa'd which is why the Emperor Michael is loyal to Ali both in fighting Muawiya but also in making peace with him and his supporters.
 
Interested, but wasn't christianity legalize in the 300 ce by Constantine? So already there wouldn't be persecution on Christians, but those on heretical or foreign religions.
Yes. The Romans in this TL see Islam as an especially heretical sect of Christians, which is why they are persecuted by the Roman state and the church authorities.
 
I have a simpler POD.

Muhammad lives in Damascus, not Mecca. His family moves there early in his life, or he gets married there on a caravan trip. His clan is from Mecca and he visits Mecca, but identifies with Damascus. This doesn't change what is revealed to him, it just happens at Damascus and not Mecca.

This still does change Islam considerably, so maybe this should be its own POD. The prophecies are the same. This Mohammad has no reason to go to Medina, and does not get involved in clan politics. He has no reason to get involved with the Kaaba or the status of Mecca as a pilgrimage site. This version of Islam might still feature a pilgrimage obligation, but its to Jerusalem, which is also the location where prayers are directed.

However, in this version of Islam, Jesus is still a prophet and not divine. He survives execution as a heretic, because I don't think at this time the Eastern Romans were doing that. There is a good question of whether this version of "Islam" just gets folded into Monophysite Christianity. Another question is what effect the Persian conquest of Syria has on Mohammad's career and the development of the religion.

If Mohammad or his successors are successful in converting the East Roman elite, such as Heraclios, to this version of Islam. there is a good chance that this just becomes known as "Christianity" in the Eastern Roman empire. The western churches would probably reject it, but the issues would be so serious that the split would be considered to be into two religions, and not two churches as IOTL. The religion of the western churches could start being called something different than "Christianity", maybe "Trinitarianism".

This POD changes the development of Islam and Christianity, but it doesn't require many convoluted changes to get there. Another effect is that though the Sassanians might well be replaced by an Arab dynasty in that part of the world, the new dynasty wouldn't necessarily convert to whatever Mohammad's religion wind up being called.
 
So what happens with Persia in your TL?
They'll play a bigger role soon. Basically, missionary work is also happening in Iraq and they're competing with the Nestorians who are favoured by the Sassanian state. Iraq already had a very large Arab population during the 7th century, so the missionaries are more successful with them than they are with the Assyrians and other Aramaic speaking groups in Mesopotamia. Suppression of Islam is more successful in the Sassasian Empire but it still has some success.
 
If Mohammad or his successors are successful in converting the East Roman elite, such as Heraclios, to this version of Islam. there is a good chance that this just becomes known as "Christianity" in the Eastern Roman empire. The western churches would probably reject it, but the issues would be so serious that the split would be considered to be into two religions, and not two churches as IOTL. The religion of the western churches could start being called something different than "Christianity", maybe "Trinitarianism".
I love that idea for a POD. Putting the Prophet in the Roman Empire would make a lot more natural for it to become popular within Rome. But I think the most interesting aspect you bring up is one I touched on a tiny bit in my initial post. The distinction of Islam and Christianity would be very different as in the eyes of this alternate Roman society, it would be an evolution of Christian doctrine which evolved from Jewish. Muslims ourselves consider Islam to be a continuation from the Jewish prophets to Christ then to Muhammad (SAW), and that already present belief would definitely play a role in how its viewed, and subsequently how the political nature of the prophet or the caliphs would work. Surely if an emperor converts during the time before the prophet's death, the prophet would have a great degree of political power, but I wonder if subsequent emperors would be so willing to submit to whoever succeeds the prophet in leadership over the Muslim community than they would the prophet himself.
 
The Council of Chalcedon defined most of the doctrines of catholic and orthodox christianity, and precluded further prophecy. Changing that might also work better as a POD.

Mohammad is accepted as a prophet by eastern Christians, including the East Roman elite. The problem here is that his life would still change, and this would still involve him spending more time in Syria instead of Arabia. I think Jerusalem instead of Mecca would still become the center for prayers and pilgrimage. And western Christians would probably still break away and remain trinitarian. So I think you still wind up with much the same situation as in my earlier post.

I envisage a changed Hadith, not a change Koran. So even if there are Koranic verses on the importance of Mecca, the early Muslims ITTL would not have heard of Mecca or understood its importance, and just re-interpret them.
 
I love that idea for a POD. Putting the Prophet in the Roman Empire would make a lot more natural for it to become popular within Rome. But I think the most interesting aspect you bring up is one I touched on a tiny bit in my initial post. The distinction of Islam and Christianity would be very different as in the eyes of this alternate Roman society, it would be an evolution of Christian doctrine which evolved from Jewish. Muslims ourselves consider Islam to be a continuation from the Jewish prophets to Christ then to Muhammad (SAW), and that already present belief would definitely play a role in how its viewed, and subsequently how the political nature of the prophet or the caliphs would work. Surely if an emperor converts during the time before the prophet's death, the prophet would have a great degree of political power, but I wonder if subsequent emperors would be so willing to submit to whoever succeeds the prophet in leadership over the Muslim community than they would the prophet himself.
I think one change would be with the institution of the Caliphate.

The Quaraysh are just not that important ITTL. Some members of the clan would be with Mohammad in Syria. However, the branches that resisted IOTL stay in Mecca and don't convert. Later on, missionaries could arrive in Mecca and convert the Quraysh, but they don't have the role they did in the formation of Islam. There is no political community that forms in Medina.

This means there is no need for a "successor" in this version of Islam. This would butterfly away any recognizable version of Shiism.

A distinction between Christianity and Islam is that, before the 18th century and secularization, Islamic states would adopt Islamic law, while Christian churches were governed by ecclesiastical bureaucracy appointed by Christian rulers. This was due to the early history of the religions and how they got established politically. There is a chance Muhammad winds up as a bishop ITTL. If not his associates would be bishops.

I think a clue to how things would have turned out would be the Ottoman Empire. Except there is no title of Caliph for the Sultan to claim. But the Emperor in Constantinople would preside over a sort of religious bureaucracy. Saffavid Iran might be another example. Essentially a Christian ecclesiastical organization with Muslim beliefs.
 
Top