Jacod loft, i did who cares about islam after all? I honestly think the world would be better without islam One way or another we would have find a way to the Americas
There was likely a North African Romance language. In this timeline, it would probably survive. Same goes for Dalmatian, a Romance language from what was Yugoslavia.
they have found evidence of that North African language too. Dlamatian survived until the 19th Century. The closely related Istrian language still survives, but only has a few hundred speakers left
@tofrie yes, I know. There was a Romance language that died out in the late 19th Century called Dalamation, which is not closely related to the language spoken by the ancient Dalmation people conquered by the Romans
I don't think so as the berbers are proud people who fought off all invaders especially thode in the west with the terrain advantageof moubtains. Arabisation of the maghreb only started in the 14th century basically because of internal berber confederation problems (zenata masmouda and sanhaja) who couldn't agree who to rule over them and prefered those who clailed to be arab to rule over them so no confederation imposes its will on the other. It's one of the main reasons the Almoravid and almohad empires fell. Maybe tunisia could be partially romanised but i don't see Morocco or algeria speaking romance languages
Suleiman The magnificent We’re talking about a mod for an alternate history game. No one cares if muslims treat women like broodmares, it’s just going to lead to overpopulation in countries that are already dealing with ecological stress.
One beef I have: his assessment of Zoroastrianism. Zoroastrianism had a thousand year run as the state religion of Persia, going back to the days of Cyrus the Great. The religion is actually still around today, with largest representation in the Parsi community of India. Parsis are known for their charity, to the point where some of the largest charities in India are actually Zoroastrian run. While I'm still researching it, it seems to be based around being cool to each other (Good thoughts, good words, good deeds is a credo that I've heard), such as with Cyrus freeing the Jews from Babylonian captivity, something that was unheard of for the age.
Religious minorities often contribute an uncharacteristically large amount to their host society. For example I noticed in Tajikistan how many services the Ismaili Shias offered. I think it's partly because those minorities don't want to anger their host countries.
@Aditya Kumar Pandey it's not muslims as a whole. American Lebanese people are a great contribution to the country. It's war-torn refugees that make problems. And those refugees come from countries that were mostly ruined by the countries they're trying to get into. So I say it's fair.
Yes, I have to agree with that. The west and other countries would have become secular democracies much sooner. Belief in higher powers and their crooked priests.held humanity back.
2:42 I love how he mentions that the Byzantines suffered the most, yet the Sassanian Empire was conquered completely. At least the Byzantines still had land, unlike the Persians who lost their land and religion.
Prins van Oranje i dont know what research you did but thosr muslims that killed around 200 people are far right wings, groups lile al qaeda , ISIS, etc are all right wing groups, the reason why they get so much media attention is because they are not christian.
Mauricio Toscano even if they're rightwing as you stated it doesn't matter they claim Island to be a religion of peace but that's a silly joke. Bdw there're 12 Muslim countries you can be killed or imprisoned only because you happen to be homosexual or lesbian. This is what you're defending? Stop being ignorant and do your research fam.
Vandal well all religions are pretty stupid, but region or countries under conservative rule seem to be heading that way, look at Texas and america, pretty ironic when u mention that.
It would be a nice timeline: -No persecution for Zoroastrians -Persia remains Zoroastrian -Sassanids are succeded by another persian dynasty until they get conquered by turks/mongols -Byzantium is much stronger , and still holds the near east -Visigoths would last longer (i wish the vandals held north africa but well , can't argue with Belisarrius and Justinian) -Ethiopia would have a better trade/culture relation with the felow christian states through Byzantine Egypt. -And in our timeline : No economic migrants/war on terror etc (or worst case scenario another sect/religion takes its place)
Blitzkrieg America will still go after the middle east tho, they need resources whatsoever, maybe messing up the population and region there once more. Poor zoroastrians 😶 And there would be an abundance of jews
The Europeans began the Age of Discovery so they could find a quicker route to East Asian markets, without having to pass through routes conquered by the Muslims, like Constantinople. The absence of this drive for a better route, would certainly delay important European discoveries in the Atlantic.
Good point. Economics really drives History. But Italy also had a Monopoly on trade with the East. And before refrigeration, the way to keep meat good was to smother it in spices like Pepper, which came from the east. The demand for Spices would still be there, even if Islam was not. Italian Sailors like Johan Cabotino (John Cabot), Christoforo Columbo (Christopher Columbus) and Giovanni Verazzano sailed for England, Spain and France, respectively, and not Venice or Naples, since Italy had no use for Sailors who wanted to sail West-- the Italian Kingdoms such as Venice and Naples had a lucrative lock on trade with Asia.
The wan't for another rout wasn't because of them being Muslims it was because of tax. The Age of exploration would have happened anyhow probably at the same time if not slightly earlier.
If Western Africa was catholic then that could see a massive decrease in the duration of the slave trade with abolitionism especially in Catholic states
I dont think you really understand, people wanted to have serfs, but no1 wanted to be a serf in the new world, so they just enslaved a bunch of black people. Someone would justify it to fund their new castles.
Actually, without the ottomans blocking or taxing trade to east Asia, the Europeans would have no reason to go out exploring, they were just trying to find alternative trade routes and stumbled onto the new world. Not to mention they might or might not have the right mindset for colonization, Anything is possible.
Actually the vikings discovered it before Columbus and could settle there. Plus The Byzantine empire was orthodox and the catholics would still want another route to asia and find the Americas.
The turks would more likely follow Nestorian Christianity, especially when you consider that the Sassanids were on a trend towards Nestorianism. This could in fact set a stage for Orthodox-Nestorian wars in the future.
But what about the Church of the East (Nestorian) which was based in Ctesiphon and was supported by the Sassanids? The Assyrians, as well as sedentary Arabs of Mesopotamia practiced this confession, which by the way still exists as a big religion in Kerala 😉
@@leanderbarreto6523 The Church of the East was even called the Persian Church by the Greeks (Byzantines) - it had missions as far as China and Mongolia, the latter were partly converted; even some Mongolian elites around Kublai Khan were followers of this denomination, and yeah, the Kerala Christians still use the Classical Syriac as a liturgical language.
Central Asia was not mainly Buddhist. They were mainly Zoroastrian but later on many converted to Buddhism, so some where Zoroastrians and some buddhist. But their native religion was Zoroastrianism since Zarathustra was also from Central Asia (Bactria, modern day Afghanistan).
Mahmut Kerem Biçer I am talking about Southern Central Asia, like Afghanistan(Bactria), Tajikistan and South Uzbekistan (Sogdia) and parts of Turkmenistan(Khwarazm). The north and rest followed other Pagan beliefs like Tengrism but later many converted to Buddhism.
@@a_bone_in_the_ocean2276 bruh, i agree with you partially. In that all ideologies and ideas should be allowed to be explored for each individual. It seems worth it even with its faults. But talking of actual tangible stuff, restrictions make sense.
Henry VIII was very pro catholic prior to his change, even writing pamphlets supporting the pope and denouncing the protestant reformation, so I don't think he would allow a protestant mercantile class.
@@martychisnall He did, but only when the pope stood in the way of him getting an heir. It's much the same with even people like Martin Luther who were staunch catholics until one single event convinced them that the papacy in Rome wasn't as infallible as catholic doctrine at the time said that it was. For Martin Luther it was visiting Rome and seeing them selling indulgences. For Henry, it was realising that his wife wasn't able to give him an heir and that Rome refused to let him get a new one. This is a very important thing for a King to think about because if you don't have an heir... you may get a civil war. Or if you don't have an heir but you designate a successor that the rest of Europe doesn't like... you may get a devastating continent wide war between multiple powers. So this is something critical to Kingcraft. Before this, Henry VIII saw no reason that there was anything wrong with Catholicism, then comes this and Henry goes "Does the Pope want England to fall into civil war without a proper heir? The fuck's this?! Is he retarded!?" and thus his mind completely changed on the papacy.
@@moritamikamikara3879 One of the biggest lies about Protestantism is that Martin Luther decided to found it because of the degeneracy of the clergy. That was not the reason. It was a doctrinal matter, Martin Luther was an extremely scrupulous man, very afraid of hell, and to end his despair, he began to formulate a doctrine that would fit his desires. This is where the principles of Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura really come from. That's why at the end of his life he had no more problem saying: "Whenever the devil harasses you thus, seek the company of men, or drink more, or joke and talk nonsense, or do some other merry thing. Sometimes we must drink more, sport, recreate ourselves, aye, and even sin a little to spite the devil, so that we leave him no place for troubling our consciences with trifles. We are conquered if we try too conscientiously not to sin at all. So when the devil says to you, “Do not drink,” answer him, “I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to.” One must always do what Satan forbids. What other cause do you think that I have for drinking so much strong drink, talking so freely and making merry so often, except that I wish to mock and harass the devil who is wont to mock and harass me. Would that I could contrive some great sin to spite the devil, that he might understand that I would not even then acknowledge it and that I was conscious of no sin whatever. We, whom the devil thus seeks to annoy, should remove the whole Decalogue from our hearts and minds."
Mortar Main Clasher 4:34 an nisa or something it says this "Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand."
I’d argue that, from a bird’s eye historical perspective, Islam was a net-benefit for the Middle East and North Africa. First, it united the nomadic Arab tribes under a state and brought the Middle East into the axial age of religion. Also, the religion encouraged trade in its empire which lead to prosperity in the region. Following this was the Islamic Golden Age, where there were countless scientific and mathematical advancements as well as works of literature. Lastly, compared to the pagan religion the came before, Islam had an emphasis on economic justice and discouraged ethnic prejudice. I’m not saying this to be politically correct, I’m saying this as someone who Iikes history where there’s a lot of trade and writing. If you don’t believe me, here’s a video from ‘Kings and Generals’ about the Islamic Golden Age: ruclips.net/video/9M5wyH4kNZE/видео.html
you forget that a lot of Islamic "discoveries" was just stolen knowledge from Byzantines, from Great Library of Alexandria and the library of Babylon, islam contributed nothing but plagiarism, rape and conquest
One thing I would point out is that the European Age of Exploration began due to the Ottomans blocking off access to the spice trade. It's possible that Byzantium may have done the same thing if given the chance, but without the block on that trade, there would likely have been no strong financial incentive to risk life and significant capital to sail off into the west with no idea what was out there. Hell, even with the financial incentive of the spice trade Columbus has a hell of a job convincing anyone to invest in his idea.
I think it would have been better if both Europe and mena where United by one religion whether that be Christianity or Islam, I think the effect would be similar.
It's a misunderstanding that the Arabs were nomadic peoples, there were Arab nomads but they were not the majority. The majority were settled in pastoral, semi-sedentary, communities. The Islamic armies were lead by the Ghassanids and the Lakmids, who had previously been hired by the Byzantines to defend the border. With these tribes not being paid, they began to raid Roman territory again.
My tribe wouldn't have been forced to fight Islam for 1400 years and Byzantine empire would still be around so we would have its back and my tribe would be the 3rd largest in Arabia
Actually I think the culture of Spain would’ve remained pretty much the same, as the kingdoms of the north were not part of the Umayyad caliphate while the southern region (especially southern parts of Andalusia) was more influenced by Islamic culture. Basically the only real difference would be that Andalusian culture would look more Castilian, and Spanish wouldn’t have words with Arabic roots. In Spain, like Italy, the southern regions were the most heavily influenced by Islamic culture. With all due respect they are both equally “European”. When people think of Spanish culture, they usually think of stuff that’s uniquely Andalusian (flamenco, Gypsies, Islamic architecture, bullfighting, and hot Mediterranean climate). Despite all this, Spain would’ve probably still been a cultural epicenter for Europe.
Agreed. It would have become a great power before some form of unification. Constantinople would have fall the same so America would have been discovered either way, maybe later.
@@nightraven2975 Irans Islamic population has dropped to 32% and the country is in absolute protest and revolution for freedom, soon the Shah of Iran and the land of Persia shall be returned to glory!
So, the world would be a much better place, the Roman Empire might still be around in some form, Zoroastrianism would probably be more than just a tiny sliver of Parsis and a few thousand others, Buddhism (a very peaceful religion) would be more widespread, Ethiopia would be more developed, and there would be no Islamic terrorism. Islamic innovations would have been discovered by the Eastern Roman Empire instead. They stole most of their knowledge from the Greeks anyway.
🙄 the Roman empire was falling apart long before Islam was a thing. Europe would still have had a dark age and violent wars as Christianity still tried to convert the world through violent conquest.
@@saberzer094 there is no such thing as the dark ages Also when they say Rome they are referring to east Rome ( byzatines ) With them the middle East would be a better place
@@azimy9388 oh no "The Christians absolutely recked havoc all over Europe way before Islam was even a thing" eh yes but not all of the barberians where chirstian t"han the mindless Christians claiming that 3=1. In what world does 3=1. I’m asking the trinitarians!" the belive is that god is 1 olds, but three coeternal consubstantial persons by your logic: Does water defeat math when it can be one substance but in three different forms? Do I defeat math when I buy a 4 in 1 pen? goint to "the spirtual" a man is made of mind body and soul so is he one or 3? well by the muslims logic the human is 3 not 1 half this comment section dropped out of college first year because they couldn’t understand crap." yet iam still studying bio engeiring wierd i thougth i would have droped out have chirstians comitted atrocities? yes a lot of them like every single relgion in this planet even secular forces have but if all relgions have comiitedd atrocites then are all relgions bad? no , it depends on their fundaments the fundametns of chirstianty budishim and many eastern relgions are very peacefull i cant say the same thing for islam for example the crusaders did terrible things did jesus or his apostoles comand or do similar things? no isis does terrible things did muhamed and the early muslims comand or do similar things' yes not every single action but many
Imagine a Iran not run by mullahs, a more stable Afghanistan and an India not faced with intense repression and an end of their Golden Age. Countries like Indonesia would be more cosmopolitan and possibly having living standards close to what China is today. Buddhism would be more widespread. The Balkans would be more stable. No Arab Israeli conflict which at heart is a religious issue. The big winners here are Iran and India.
@@mushe6647 yeah that’s probably true. I care about modernity (not US woke gender fluid version) and the present life. However for you simplicity and living like the prophet might be most important. I had discussion with someone who said he doesn’t care about progress on earth as its “deen” i think he said and that its drop in ocean compared to afterlife where he gets rewarded.
Really Interesting . Europeans being Europeans would improve it to overthrow natives . Natives would have fallen anyway (we brought also lots of plagues there, so natives would have died, just a bit later than our timeline .
Ivan FascellaA or, if the Natives survived until recently, they would use it themselves and we would have really cool 21st century line battles between Aztecs with lion skins and guns and Europeans.
I believe Mongol invasions could be existed but it would be significantly weaker because Mongol army at the time had many Tengrist Turkic soldiers that really pissed off at Muslims (note that this Muslim, Tengrist dispute contributed to collapse of Seljuk Empire) and not to forget a strong Byzantine presents could likely gave a hard time to Mongols.
The Zoroastrians likely wouldn't have been able to convert Pakistan and Bengal like the Muslims did, I think there would still be a Hindu majority in Bengal, with maybe a 40-60% Zoroastrian presence in the Hindu Kush and Western Punjab. The Zoroastrians did not really convert others very often, and they wouldn't implement Jizya, leaving less incentive for Indians to convert.
The church wouldn't have made it that way even if Galileo had been "permanently defeated." The church was still a major patron of science even after that and would have corrected itself in a short time. Galileo got in trouble because he was a jerk. A brilliant jerk, but he really went out of his way to offend people. You should read his scathing book in which he calls his opponents absolute idiots. The church's mistake wasn't that it opposed science, but that it favored the wrong scientist, favoring Ptolemy over Galileo.
Copernicus and Darwin delayed the publication of their discoveries due to fear of the church. The church was against everything that changed the world view. Clearly, the Church has been an obstacle to science. Islam and Hinduism have also been an obstacle. Other religions I can't say anything about.
@igor lopes He was afraid of being mocked, because his theories contradicted the creation story. He was right, it was not well received. It took a long time before it was widely accepted.
@igor lopes The power of the Church was indirect. If you went against the teachings of the Church, you could be excluded from society. Much like today's cancel culture though more extensive.
yeah i am a Muslim and i was just curious of the Videos and the comment section, i expected most of the comment section to be toxic at Islam and i was right btw your part of the toxicity in this comment section.
Enjoyed it. I was actually wondering about an alternative history in which Arabic history and its consequent influences remain the same but minus Islam. What was Arabic culture like before Islam? Any chance you might do that version sometime?
Braden Wylie During the Islamic Golden Age, they made many advances in math and science. I'm not saying we wouldn't have been able to come to this level of advancement without Islam, but the Golden Age happening when it did made us have computers
India wouldn't be a Country if Islam never existed. When the Mughals declined Britian created the Raj. British India created a sense of unity between Indians in fight for freedom against the British. This United India and created the Modren state of India.
@@rehankhan1778 the Christian’s would have invaded India and killed all Hindus, just like they killed indigenous Americans, Australians and they invaded Africa making black people their slaves, which is ridiculous and no one really gives a damn for some reason. Muslims are much more respectful to everyone
The Middle East was technologically advanced in an era when they were relatively tolerant. These days they are increasingly intolerant which does not bode well for their technological advancements. But then they can always buy anything they want, floating on a sea of oil. The Islamic countries that do not have that advantage may be in trouble.
@Khalid the fuck are you talking about "stalin lead russia into downfall"? You sound so stupid by saying shit like this and you're still arguing, holy shit
@King Wiwuz IV with the same logic that Muslims took science from the bezentine empire i want to tell you that Einstein was an asshole because he built his therory on Isaac Newton laws and Isaac Newton was an ass hole bec he built his therory on Galileo laws ... Duh that is science works
Science-fiction has already 'done this'. I know of at least one author who posited an alternative history where 'Mahmood' and his father were captured by Christians of some sort during a business foray into Palestine, and 'Mahmood' converted and was raised as a Christian. It was posited that he would still be religiously active, becoming a cleric/philosopher/hymn-writer, who would be come so highly regarded that he would be elevated to Sainthood (St. Mahmood!?!) not too long after his death! I never did read the work(s), so I can't say much more. I do recall finding some of the points of 'difference' (in the alternative 'current day') to be in some ways quite bizarre! Perhaps you could track down and read the work(s), and then do (or re-do?) this as an alternate-alternative history, or just give your opinion on why it wasn't feasible enough to justify a 're-do' or producing a 'Part 2'?!
@@damein1483 ... sorry, can't really remember it so well; I *think* it was from a major author, but I'm not even really sure of *that!* (Gotta remember, I didn't actually _read_ the stories - I think it was part of a 3 or 4 part series of books) If you can get in touch with a writer who specializes in 'alternative history', they might be able to tell you.
The one variable is that of the Eastern Roman Empire still being alive. It is likely doing actually pretty well now for itself. It might have lost some land, but overall it should be stable enough to survive into the future. The thing that could cause the New World exploration earlier if something went down between East and West enough so that the Romans decided to cut the others off. Also, Rome sooner or later would start to desire to retake Rome. We seen this spirit in our timeline. Even if they had to wait all the way up until say WW1 or WW2 era. Rome would start looking to Italy for its former home. The Romans not bogged down until the almost mid to late medieval period. The Romans may have conquered more land. Also, if the Romans saw the others setting in the New World. I can see them trying to push to take the land or at least make their own colonies to then take the natives as slaves. The Romans would be like a starving man seeing a steak. They would not just enslave Africa, but all those they came across. The determining factor for Rome is if Rome manages to create better deep sea vessels to match or beat that of the other powers.
The Eastern Roman Empire didn't fall to the conquests of the Islamic Empire. The Arabs ripped away the non-Greek parts but the Greek parts remained solidly Greek and Orthodox for another 800 years. Even the early Turkish invasions were pushed back. It was the combination of invasion from the West, Italo-Normans and Venetians, with the continued pressure of the Turks from the East that ultimately cracked Byzantium.
@@bobwinters5572 I now I am replying a bit late but Egypt was in the process of becoming throughly Greek so in this timeline Egypt would have became Greek
Technologically, the world would be so much further on. As the library’s at Alexandria and Nalanda would be untouched. Also the Middle East would contribute a lot more, intelligently. India and China would have much more contact with Europe. We’d probably be driving flying cars and building a space faring civilisation.
PURDES Not true necessarily. Christianity uniting Europe and the west is what brought us to today. Islam was originally ahead of Christianity but that changed, mostly because of the philosopher religion argument. It wasn’t exactly Christianity that caused the Dark Ages; it was specifically the collapse of Roman authority, but overall, it was necessary.
There are those who say that we lost 1,000 years of science with the destruction of the library. Although I think 1000 years is an exaggeration. The library was destroyed in 3 steps. First by Cesar by mistake. He was worried and regretful of the incident. Then by Christian fundamentalists then totally destroyed by Muslim warlords.
Literally the Islamic golden age, Islam contributed more with the remains of the greeks and roman philosophies instead of leaving it be. We would most likely be behind mathematically a bit alongside science aswell.
@@whw710 Until the 12-13 century, Islam did a lot for science. After that, they changed and saw science more or less as an enemy of Islam, after which they have always lagged behind.
Niklas Molén not really, when did we view science as an enemy? Why the sudden change? The Quran has numerous sayings about education being good. Also the Islamic Golden age started in the 8th century to the 14th.
@@victoryband4102 the Gothic Kingdom in Spain lasted for more than two centuries before Muslim invasión. Reconquest refers to the Gothic Kingdom of Spain, and all the Kings of Castile considered themselves Gothic Kings
I believe that the Indian subcontinent would stay united bc even though the Turks brought Zoroastrianism in this timeline it wouldn’t have spread as rapidly due to the lack of the jizya, it not being as invested in the lives of merchants, it not adapting to Indian culture as much as Sufi Islam did, and the fact that Zoroastrian Turks most likely would respect the Caste System. Edit: Also I could see Helagu leading the Mongols into North Africa and then going south, taking over Africa until the Congo. This occurs because he wouldn’t have stopped in Damascus after his attack on the city due to him never converting to Islam. He could also have attacked the Byzantine Empire instead though, but without heavy artillery I don’t think he would have been as successful as Mehmed II.
Probably not because if it weren't for themuslim arabs the empire of axum (semitic but based on the horn of africa) wouldn't have fallen they were pretty strong and they would've won against the mongols since the tip of territory reached southern coast of Egypt they would've attacked the mongols to help Egypt
What bs is this lol even if they convert to Islam they still have to pay taxes and far more larger than the jizya because they've converted to Islam lol
You're talking out of your ass because Israel itself invented the modern terrorism that we know today in the '40s and 50's. Starting with the bombing of the King David Hotel, The Lavron Affair, the attack on the USS Liberty, the Shatila massacre and on so on...Your assumption of Palestine is ridiculously misguided as a large minority of Palestinian Christians were expelled in 1947 by the Zionists gangs(= Terrorist groups like the Hagganah and Stern Gang) to which many member subsequently were to become Israeli Prime Ministers. Stick to simpler things because this channel is way too complex for your simple and biased mind.
@u wot? Algorithm as a word comes from a truly intelligent Muslim scholar watch this video if you wish to know more: ruclips.net/video/-3QML3tfBNQ/видео.html
No partition of India- India would extend from Afghanistan to Indonesia. With Rich culture and heritage. Largest University would have been in Nalanda, well functional.
The Crusades may still have happened, but against Zoroastrianism instead of against Islam. The Persians taking Jerusalem or threatening Constantinople itself may well have triggered the same response from the Christians in the West.
Liked the video! One thing I am a bit dubious about is the theory that Zoroastrianism would spread. In our history, that religion was notoriously chary of accepting converts; it was more an ethnic religion.
I'm not saying I dislike islam but there is something appealing about that timeline for me, aztec and Incan countries may still being a thing, zoroastrian religion being a dominant one, early colonial expansion by higher civilisations other than europe, a surviving byzantium. All things I really like when playing alternate history games like EU4 or making up my own stories, it is a shame that the muslim renaissance didn't happen but without muslims that is kinda inevitable... Also not having isis is nice.
No muslims support ISIS, period. Some muslims may have sympathies to Al-Qaeda or Taliban for various reasons (one of the chief reasons for Al-Qaeda's success is that it is anti sectarian while ISIS is openly sectarian) but no muslim will ever in their right mind will support ISIS. When ISIS emerged, groups on all sides stopped fighting each other and focused on ISIS. Among them were US-backed Kurds, Iran-backed Shia militias, and Al-Qaeda affiliated Al-Nusra Front all of whom are enemies. If you fought against ISIS, in the middle east you will be haiiled as a hero. ISIS has no sympathies even amongst ultra conservative muslims.
One of the tragedies of the islamic invasion was that it fractured the mediterrannean world. Europe and the north african countries had huge links in culture, religion, economy, all of that was destroyed after the muslims came and the mediterranean became a barrier and war zone.
@@dragonofchaos7843 Lol don't make jokes. Only Persia and Iraq flourished, thanks to the local elite that was well educated, and that predated Islam. In fact after the mongols destroyed Baghdad islam entered a dark age period from which it never recovered. But north africa was one of the richest part of the Roman empire. They tried several times to retake it. But after the islamic conquest it became a poor backwater. Think of all the beautiful monuments, palaces and churches that were built in Europe during the middle ages/renaissance/baroque. Now think of how little of that you find in north africa. A real tragedy.
@@dayros2023 what are you talking about for the first 300 hundred years it was all advancements by Muslims we made the west what it is today from our books our advancements that catapulted them
@C R wars and attacks would still be present in any region in the world but without the rise of islam there wouldnt be any geometry, vaccines, toothbrush,coffee..to name just a few
@C R Not that really because the NOT JUST Chinese Buddhism BUT ALSO the Sassahnids Zoroastrianism would still expand with extension of the rise of the stepp nomads! Which means the war would still happen like the earlier version of schism put into action and the rise of another Berber or turkic empire just not Muslim! OR which means that the Chinese would be another threat as they were also expansion to the west! As the sasannids were now exhausted. And Chinese were known to be powerful and has competent or great emperor in that time!
My girlfriend is yelling over my shoulder that failing to account for the Mongols is a gross oversight, and that the educated status of the surviving Zoroastrian diaspora, e.g. the Parisis suggest they would be open to technological change.
There would be no South Sudan, as it would be unnecessary to create it since Sudan would be a Christian majority country, so in theory Sudan would have turned out kinda okay without Islam. In the Middle East and North Africa, not much drama would have occured there, we would have more Arab Christians and half of them being Zoroastrians so this means majority of the Middle Eastern countries would have been secular, and have warming relations with Israel, but i suspect due to too much US allies in that region, Israel and Persia/Iran would have been non-alligned and would outgrew their friendship with the US as they would probably be fed up with it. I would love to put more but its very tired to write more what changes will happen without this religion.
I would think Sudan culture would likely be quite closer to Greece or Egypt. The ancient Makuria/Nubia pretty much adopted greek and later coptic language and customs in thier kingdom and if Byzantine (Roman) Empire still hold egypt, the influence would be alot.
I think that there would be a divide in terms of technology. Since the Byzantine Empire would still exist, the Renaissance wouldn't happen. The knowledge from Ancient Greece was carried into the Byzantine Empire. This could possibly leave the Byzantines with our technology at present in our timeline there whereas the other Europeans don't have the Renaissance so they would be less technologically advanced.
@Carcinat V but if so they would have adotped much of Byzantine culture and concepts, if even they would want to conquer Constantinople in the first place
Hey Whatifalthist. Here's an idea for a video what if Islam had it's reformation much like Christianity or Judaism did just curious on how that would've gone or if any changes would've came from that.
You guys really don't know the history of Islam at all , please search about what the salafi movement is Also Islam had reformation it was called sufism but the mongols happened with Baghdad and everything went down hell
Before Islam appeared, the Byzantine Emperor Heroclines had defeated the Persians, and the Turkish Tribes from the steps, recently have gotten into wars with Persia themselves, played a role. Given that Zoroaster was the faith of their enemy, Persia, I doubt they would convert. The Turks, being allies of the Byzantines and close to Buddhism, would see both take off, depending on the location of the Particular tribe and leaders involved. Much as how the Franks, Goths and so on became Christians. Speaking of Christians, the Pope in Rome did not claim the title of 'Pope' as exclusive to him until the 8th century, and as a result of Islam's advance. Hence, the Pentarchy (Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandra and Jerusalem) would continue to rule as a group. Charles Martel 'the Hammer' would not be coronated 'Emperor' either, as the Pope would not need Frankish help to halt Islamic Advance into France. No Crowning of a 2nd Emperor in the west means its likely to be no Holy Roman Empire to contend with in Central Europe. Even in this timeline, Protestants made agreements with Orthodoxy, and this is going to have that much more weight in this timeline as the Patriarch of Constantinople provides a strong counterweight, along with the Emperor and his armies, to the Patriarch of Rome. The last has been seen in History. 8th century Bulgarians were seeing the Roman see try to convert them to Christianity though French Monks, who required them to learn Latin. The leaders in the Baulkins, both Slave and Bulgarian, sent embarrasses to Constantinople, who dispatched Cyril and his brother. Cyril, unlike the French monks, converted the Bible into the native language and gave them a written form of their language, which has become known as 'old Church Slavic' today. This helped bring the slaves into Eastern Christianity, and I could see the same happen for protestants Only instead of a German Prince defending Martin Luthar, its a Roman Armey & the Patriarch of Constantinople. One last note on Religion that would be important is the role of the Patriarchs from Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. They okayed a role in how the Christian church played out, more in the east then the west, but they had a great deal of influence in their own right. No Islamic Invasion of these cities means that role will continue. What that influence will be is a major role Christian belief.
The Middle East today would be like a sweltering version of Italy or Greece with beautiful churches, museums, lovely squares with fountains, cafe culture and sophisticated living instead of the soulless and shabby architecture of Arab cities along with the repressive, corrupt and backward culture we see there today.
That only applies to Mediterranean countries. Sand states like Saudi Arabia would have its cities (Riyadh and Jeddah) already resembling something like Shanghai or Dubai for that record.
Here's an idea: "What if the Mongol Khakhan Mongke hadn't died in 1260, leaving Ilkhan Hulagu in Mesopotamia and the bulk of the Mongol armies with him? Would the Mongols have then beaten the Mamluks in Syria and then gone on to sweep across North Africa?"
Highly doubtful that the European explorations would still happen. Some scholars state that the Portuguese chose to circumnavigate Africa to avoid paying high trade taxes to Muslim nations who controlled the routes between Europa and Asia. Without this incentive, there would be little reason for exploring alternate routes. Secondly, the Red Sea would be open to European sailors.
It may be true it would save millions of natives from numerous continents from colonialism but with the price of technological advancement made by the Europeans. But people would still be more adventurous as times go by and eventually would lead to the discovery of the new world
what if Alexander the Great hadn't die so young? would he have gone West? Would his planned expedition in Arabia had prevented islam from being existed?
No. That will not happen, Because the Romans launched a campaign of reconnaissance and conquest in the Arabian Peninsula, but soon realized that there was no point in that. Because the Arabian Peninsula does not contain anything important for this reason, most empires such as the Romans and Persians avoided the invasion of the Arabian Peninsula because there is no point in controlling this region
@PURDES "Invented Slavery" Considering Slavery existed 4000 years before Jesus was born in Mesopotamia that is completely impossible. Jesus never had slaves. Compare that to Mohammad, who had hundreds of them. Guns were invented by the Chinese (who were Confucian). Do you even know what you are talking about anymore? Besides, the Ottomans helped spread guns to Europe, that's why they were called a gunpowder empire. The first drug was Hashish, first cultivated and taken by the Feyadeen, a MUSLIM Order.
@PURDES The most racist religion was invented by Mohammad, who called Blacks "Raisinheads", who had hundreds of Black Slaves, and who laid the foundation for such scholars as Ibn Battuta, who called Black People a naturally primitive race that deserves enslavement.
"Technology being less advanced" Actually, that was mainly Christianity's problem, and the Muslims "acquiring" Byzantine/Indian science only made them look more advanced by comparison for a while. And we all know Islam is pretty super-strict on any science that happens to contradict the Quran. One would not expect if Zoroastrianism (or any other alternative such as the one you mentioned about mesopotamians) would have gone the same "acquire Byzantine tech" to advance themselves past Christianity, and/or have the same restrictions against science that the Abrahamic faiths had
- Half of the world's knowledge wouldn't have been burned down. - Many people would still have foreskins. - South Asia would be much more peaceful and prosperous.
TO CRITICISM ON THIS VIDEO 1- Zoroastrianism has been a major religions for Iranian/Persians empires for centuries from the Achaemenid to the Sassanid witch is almost one thousand year so yeah it’s did last long enough for us to actually know about them 2- during the Sassanian period many universities and libraries were established for example There was a major school, called the Grand School, in the capital. In the beginning, only 50 students were allowed to study at the Grand School. In less than 100 years, enrollment at the Grand School was over 30,000 students., one of most famous one was the Academy of Gundishapur, founded by Khosrau I in a.d.550 offered education and training in medicine, philosophy, theology and science. But focus.on medicine here were the famous ancient Persian Borzuya learned medicine According to The Cambridge ,it was the most important medical center of the ancient world during the 6th and 7th centuries. as for technology the full heavy iron cavalry was created by Parthian first human animation frame by frame was created by the Sassanian and Qanat (Water Supply System) by the Achaemenid So we actually know what did Zoroastrians view the technologies sciences and philosophy but you ether lack the knowledge of their history or you simply ignore it.
I think that your analysis doesn't do Heraclius justice. He pretty thoroughly trounced the Persians, rendering them almost a client state by the time he was done. Given a generation or two of peace, I would not be surprised to see Armenia permanently attached to Rome and the empire's borders being pushed all the way across Mesopotamia, with political inroads into the Persian successor states that would result from the civil wars in Persia absent the Muslim conquests. Lacking a strong enemy in the south and east, Rome would be able to spend its energy on reinforcing Italy, Spain, and Africa, probably resulting in a far stronger hold in both Italy and Spain. There are potent natural barriers separating both Iberia and Italy from the rest of Europe, making it likely that the Franks would still manage to establish their kingdoms, but making it likely that Rome could hold the peninsulas. Britain still had a sympathetic population that was at war with the Angle-Saxon invaders. Given a stable east and south, and given firm borders at the Alps, it would not be unlikely that an ambitious emperor in the same vein as Justinian might send a naval expedition to Wales to assist the British in retaking their island from the invaders. The Norse would run into much stronger resistance as a consequence.
@@3dbee47 Predicting a world without Islam would be just the same as it is today. The west would still be that recognized, America would still be discovered, but the only significant difference on this world without Islam is ofcourse geopolitics and how would society looks like. We wouldn't have Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Muslim Brotherhood and Wahabbism, and the world would be much modern and partially peaceful. But there would still be wars but the course of it would be different probably. The golden age might still occur largely because of Persians and not Muslims.
There would have been war between the Visigothic Spain and Frankish empires. The Franks and Germans sponsored reconquista to avoid muslim conquest but without muslims the Christian visigoths would have been a rival for the HRE rather than several small allied kingdoms. Portugal would have not sailed around Africa and Spain would have not sent Columbus since there would be silk road. There would be a different european identity because the idea of Europe came about a contraposition of Christianity against Islam.
seeing you have the Imperial Russian Flag on your logo i can tell your an eastern orthodox slav that obviously hates the ottomans and Muslims so thats why you think what you think.
Anyone else watch this video just to read the comments?
jacob loft yeah me
Jacod loft, i did who cares about islam after all?
I honestly think the world would be better without islam
One way or another we would have find a way to the Americas
jacob loft Me :)
Saguntum-Iberian-Greek Konstantinopoli AGREEEES
jacob loft me
There was likely a North African Romance language. In this timeline, it would probably survive. Same goes for Dalmatian, a Romance language from what was Yugoslavia.
@@portelm3137 the romans didn't defend dalmatia because they were fighting the arabs
they have found evidence of that North African language too. Dlamatian survived until the 19th Century. The closely related Istrian language still survives, but only has a few hundred speakers left
@tofrie there was a Romance language of the same name lasted for hundred of years, but was eventually wiped out by the Slavs
@tofrie yes, I know. There was a Romance language that died out in the late 19th Century called Dalamation, which is not closely related to the language spoken by the ancient Dalmation people conquered by the Romans
I don't think so as the berbers are proud people who fought off all invaders especially thode in the west with the terrain advantageof moubtains.
Arabisation of the maghreb only started in the 14th century basically because of internal berber confederation problems (zenata masmouda and sanhaja) who couldn't agree who to rule over them and prefered those who clailed to be arab to rule over them so no confederation imposes its will on the other.
It's one of the main reasons the Almoravid and almohad empires fell.
Maybe tunisia could be partially romanised but i don't see Morocco or algeria speaking romance languages
this sounds like a great scenario for a really good eu4 mod
It already exists. It’s called the fall of islam. Granted, it still exists in Arabia, but to a far smaller degree
@@Chase1493
Yes that's why Islam will be the biggest religion in world in 30-40 years 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Suleiman The magnificent We’re talking about a mod for an alternate history game. No one cares if muslims treat women like broodmares, it’s just going to lead to overpopulation in countries that are already dealing with ecological stress.
@@Chase1493
Probably it will make Europe a EUROPISTAN
No a ck2 mod
I bet you thought my comments wouldn't appear in older videos, but you'd be wrong!
*WHAT IF JAPAN BECAME CATHOLIC IN THE 16TH CENTURY?*
NO ANIME😭😭😭😭
@@instantinople3796 Catholic anime
@@zakuro8532 oh mein gott
@@zakuro8532 I want know the "sweet" Catholic yanderes (・～・)
17th
One beef I have: his assessment of Zoroastrianism. Zoroastrianism had a thousand year run as the state religion of Persia, going back to the days of Cyrus the Great. The religion is actually still around today, with largest representation in the Parsi community of India. Parsis are known for their charity, to the point where some of the largest charities in India are actually Zoroastrian run. While I'm still researching it, it seems to be based around being cool to each other (Good thoughts, good words, good deeds is a credo that I've heard), such as with Cyrus freeing the Jews from Babylonian captivity, something that was unheard of for the age.
Religious minorities often contribute an uncharacteristically large amount to their host society. For example I noticed in Tajikistan how many services the Ismaili Shias offered. I think it's partly because those minorities don't want to anger their host countries.
@@sobitasadullah4517 unless the minorities are Muslims
@@m1951-j2u most clever anti-islamic joke
@Aditya Kumar Pandey it's not muslims as a whole. American Lebanese people are a great contribution to the country. It's war-torn refugees that make problems. And those refugees come from countries that were mostly ruined by the countries they're trying to get into. So I say it's fair.
@@sobitasadullah4517 most of the lebanese in america are non-muslim 🤔not a coincidence, i fear.
The Comment Section:
%86 The World Would be a better place
%13 The Same Thing As Above, But Saying it differently.
%1 other Comments
Yes, I have to agree with that. The west and other countries would have become secular democracies much sooner. Belief in higher powers and their crooked priests.held humanity back.
What percent obscenities?
Racist
Toprak Yilmaz You would be VERY right ! (About the first )
Where is the lie tho?
"I'm tired of writing these introductions that no one reads. So I didn't."
LOL
From the thumbnail it looked like "What if Pakistan never existed?"
There would be no so sorry anime
Lol yes
@@harrydix lmao
You're right
There is still Iran, Jemen, Afghanistan, Libia, Syria, Iraq, etc. etc
2:42 I love how he mentions that the Byzantines suffered the most, yet the Sassanian Empire was conquered completely. At least the Byzantines still had land, unlike the Persians who lost their land and religion.
@Metsarebuff 22 Ah, I didn't catch that before. Maybe cuz someone yelled when he said that in my house, idk.
@@spaghettimeatballs6352
that because Kisra Emperor of Persia had no respect for prophet Mohammed PBUH, unlike Caesar of Romans,
@@sm-yo6pt Caesar wasn't ever emperor during that time, the emperor was Heraclius. Also, the Persian Emperor was Khosrau 2
@@spaghettimeatballs6352 he means Kisra, Kisra is Arabic names for Khosrow, the king of Persians
@@sm-yo6pt piss be upon him
I'm sure most people didn't even watch the video
ikr
hazzmati well you know right wings, hate research and when show research, they just deny it.
Prins van Oranje i dont know what research you did but thosr muslims that killed around 200 people are far right wings, groups lile al qaeda , ISIS, etc are all right wing groups, the reason why they get so much media attention is because they are not christian.
Mauricio Toscano even if they're rightwing as you stated it doesn't matter they claim Island to be a religion of peace but that's a silly joke. Bdw there're 12 Muslim countries you can be killed or imprisoned only because you happen to be homosexual or lesbian. This is what you're defending? Stop being ignorant and do your research fam.
Vandal well all religions are pretty stupid, but region or countries under conservative rule seem to be heading that way, look at Texas and america, pretty ironic when u mention that.
It would be a nice timeline:
-No persecution for Zoroastrians
-Persia remains Zoroastrian
-Sassanids are succeded by another persian dynasty until they get conquered by turks/mongols
-Byzantium is much stronger , and still holds the near east
-Visigoths would last longer (i wish the vandals held north africa but well , can't argue with Belisarrius and Justinian)
-Ethiopia would have a better trade/culture relation with the felow christian states through Byzantine Egypt.
-And in our timeline : No economic migrants/war on terror etc (or worst case scenario another sect/religion takes its place)
Blitzkrieg
America will still go after the middle east tho, they need resources whatsoever, maybe messing up the population and region there once more.
Poor zoroastrians 😶
And there would be an abundance of jews
"Poor zoroastrians 😶" poor lads , they get screwed in any timeline .
"And there would be an abundance of jews" so potential higher iq worldwide
Blitzkrieg no economic migrants? lmao what
you are familiar with the term aren't you ?
Blitzkrieg economic migrants are vital to any country without massive populations like China or India.
The Europeans began the Age of Discovery so they could find a quicker route to East Asian markets, without having to pass through routes conquered by the Muslims, like Constantinople. The absence of this drive for a better route, would certainly delay important European discoveries in the Atlantic.
Good point. Economics really drives History.
But Italy also had a Monopoly on trade with the East. And before refrigeration, the way to keep meat good was to smother it in spices like Pepper, which came from the east. The demand for Spices would still be there, even if Islam was not.
Italian Sailors like Johan Cabotino (John Cabot), Christoforo Columbo (Christopher Columbus) and Giovanni Verazzano sailed for England, Spain and France, respectively, and not Venice or Naples, since Italy had no use for Sailors who wanted to sail West-- the Italian Kingdoms such as Venice and Naples had a lucrative lock on trade with Asia.
The wan't for another rout wasn't because of them being Muslims it was because of tax. The Age of exploration would have happened anyhow probably at the same time if not slightly earlier.
Yeah, but now the byzantines were blocking them, and the catholics would not want to make the orthodox stronger at that time.
Actually all major knowledge that Europe discovered was stolen from Arabia research the Golden age of Islam for more details
Jason Peters Um, no?
If Western Africa was catholic then that could see a massive decrease in the duration of the slave trade with abolitionism especially in Catholic states
Why?
I dont think you really understand, people wanted to have serfs, but no1 wanted to be a serf in the new world, so they just enslaved a bunch of black people. Someone would justify it to fund their new castles.
@@checker297 probably not on the scale of our time though.
Lucasfamdec 315 why?
@@mobeenkhan824 it just would depend on the social climate and the timing for the discovery of America.
Actually, without the ottomans blocking or taxing trade to east Asia, the Europeans would have no reason to go out exploring, they were just trying to find alternative trade routes and stumbled onto the new world. Not to mention they might or might not have the right mindset for colonization, Anything is possible.
That's not exactly the reason. In fact Portugal and Spain never had the opportunity to trade to Asia through the Middle East, with or without Islam.
America And Australia won't be discovered
Actually the vikings discovered it before Columbus and could settle there. Plus The Byzantine empire was orthodox and the catholics would still want another route to asia and find the Americas.
So the massacre of the native Americans is the fault of Islam?😂😂
This is a common misconception. Look online a bit and you’ll see it debunked 100 times over.
The turks would more likely follow Nestorian Christianity, especially when you consider that the Sassanids were on a trend towards Nestorianism.
This could in fact set a stage for Orthodox-Nestorian wars in the future.
Or trengi faith
Tengrism is pre axial age, and nomadic, so probably not
@@somatia350 but trengis were mostly turks
Hamza Abusalim that...doesnt matter...pre axial age religions are beaten by Axial age ones
@@somatia350 How does this disprove his comment? Jerk.
But what about the Church of the East (Nestorian) which was based in Ctesiphon and was supported by the Sassanids?
The Assyrians, as well as sedentary Arabs of Mesopotamia practiced this confession, which by the way still exists as a big religion in Kerala 😉
I didn't know that
@@leanderbarreto6523 The Church of the East was even called the Persian Church by the Greeks (Byzantines) - it had missions as far as China and Mongolia, the latter were partly converted; even some Mongolian elites around Kublai Khan were followers of this denomination, and yeah, the Kerala Christians still use the Classical Syriac as a liturgical language.
This comment section is so edgy
Let me get my popcorn
I always knew you were a libtard, Stingy.
Jacob P. Bro you just posted cringe,
!you are going to lose subscriber!
gimmie some pls
@@jacobp.2024 my guy, being islamiphobic isn't a good thing.
Here it is
🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿
Central Asia was not mainly Buddhist. They were mainly Zoroastrian but later on many converted to Buddhism, so some where Zoroastrians and some buddhist. But their native religion was Zoroastrianism since Zarathustra was also from Central Asia (Bactria, modern day Afghanistan).
Mahmut Kerem Biçer I am talking about Southern Central Asia, like Afghanistan(Bactria), Tajikistan and South Uzbekistan (Sogdia) and parts of Turkmenistan(Khwarazm). The north and rest followed other Pagan beliefs like Tengrism but later many converted to Buddhism.
SchienbeinFC Tengrism is not Pagan.
@@CataciousAmogusevic Whatever, it doesn't change my statement about Zoroastrianism in Central Asia.
@@CataciousAmogusevic lol of course Tengrism is pagan what are you talking about lan
@The God Of Manga r u a chutiya or just pretending or be one
The world would've been a much better place
false
@@Azooooooooooooz You are the false, you typical nerd GeoTuber in the comments.
@@P1utiaboth of you and the guy above you are flooding the replays >:c
@@mohammed44_ Ehem its not only me you Muslim nerd
@@P1utia do you have anything of value to add to the world, if not, be gone
I feel like even watching this video could get me kicked out of uni lol
True
Thats a problem in your society you should be allowed to watch and say whatever you want i hate to even have to specify this tbh but im a muslim.
God that pfp is cursed
@@a_bone_in_the_ocean2276 bruh, i agree with you partially. In that all ideologies and ideas should be allowed to be explored for each individual. It seems worth it even with its faults. But talking of actual tangible stuff, restrictions make sense.
@@Ashish-yo8ci ofcourse it has its limitations but in this case its just stupid
Just try "Fall of Islam" mod in Europa Universalis 4
I've been wanting to try that out for a bit.
Is there one for ck2?
i already have a save game in extended timeline where islam failed to expand from arabia
Ohhh boiii!!! I'm downloading it!!!
this is much better than alternate history hub. much more interesting. great job
What a peaceful and uncontroversial thought
Constantinople would still be standing. Constantine XI... what a dude. Too bad it had to come to that.
Henry VIII was very pro catholic prior to his change, even writing pamphlets supporting the pope and denouncing the protestant reformation, so I don't think he would allow a protestant mercantile class.
You know he broke off from the Pope and turned England Protestant right? He despised Catholicism.
@@martychisnall He did, but only when the pope stood in the way of him getting an heir.
It's much the same with even people like Martin Luther who were staunch catholics until one single event convinced them that the papacy in Rome wasn't as infallible as catholic doctrine at the time said that it was. For Martin Luther it was visiting Rome and seeing them selling indulgences.
For Henry, it was realising that his wife wasn't able to give him an heir and that Rome refused to let him get a new one.
This is a very important thing for a King to think about because if you don't have an heir... you may get a civil war.
Or if you don't have an heir but you designate a successor that the rest of Europe doesn't like... you may get a devastating continent wide war between multiple powers. So this is something critical to Kingcraft.
Before this, Henry VIII saw no reason that there was anything wrong with Catholicism, then comes this and Henry goes "Does the Pope want England to fall into civil war without a proper heir? The fuck's this?! Is he retarded!?" and thus his mind completely changed on the papacy.
@@moritamikamikara3879 just convert to constitutional monarchy... LMAO
@@moritamikamikara3879 One of the biggest lies about Protestantism is that Martin Luther decided to found it because of the degeneracy of the clergy. That was not the reason. It was a doctrinal matter, Martin Luther was an extremely scrupulous man, very afraid of hell, and to end his despair, he began to formulate a doctrine that would fit his desires. This is where the principles of Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura really come from.
That's why at the end of his life he had no more problem saying:
"Whenever the devil harasses you thus, seek the company of men, or drink more, or joke and talk nonsense, or do some other merry thing. Sometimes we must drink more, sport, recreate ourselves, aye, and even sin a little to spite the devil, so that we leave him no place for troubling our consciences with trifles. We are conquered if we try too conscientiously not to sin at all. So when the devil says to you, “Do not drink,” answer him, “I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to.” One must always do what Satan forbids. What other cause do you think that I have for drinking so much strong drink, talking so freely and making merry so often, except that I wish to mock and harass the devil who is wont to mock and harass me. Would that I could contrive some great sin to spite the devil, that he might understand that I would not even then acknowledge it and that I was conscious of no sin whatever. We, whom the devil thus seeks to annoy, should remove the whole Decalogue from our hearts and minds."
For the "Religion of Peace" we'd actually have a lot more world peace if it left.
GrandRomanReich Ja!
Me Er No man that's fake Quran. Wrong translation, bad interpretation.
Me Er can u tell me its chapter?
Mortar Main Clasher 4:34 an nisa or something it says this "Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand."
Yavuz Ekim Bovkır very nice no true scotsman
If Islam didn’t exist, this video would have not existed
Jew Spotted. Not how science works lmao.
@@hans2129-o9v So what if I am a jew? Are you being anti-semetic?
I’d argue that, from a bird’s eye historical perspective, Islam was a net-benefit for the Middle East and North Africa.
First, it united the nomadic Arab tribes under a state and brought the Middle East into the axial age of religion. Also, the religion encouraged trade in its empire which lead to prosperity in the region. Following this was the Islamic Golden Age, where there were countless scientific and mathematical advancements as well as works of literature. Lastly, compared to the pagan religion the came before, Islam had an emphasis on economic justice and discouraged ethnic prejudice.
I’m not saying this to be politically correct, I’m saying this as someone who Iikes history where there’s a lot of trade and writing.
If you don’t believe me, here’s a video from ‘Kings and Generals’ about the Islamic Golden Age: ruclips.net/video/9M5wyH4kNZE/видео.html
Y'all I found the only comment with actual solid reason behind it
Deserves more upvotes tbh lmao
Evan Thank you!
They all don't know about Islamic Golden age and consider Islam as a barbaric religion.
Yes I saw,that and I agree
you forget that a lot of Islamic "discoveries" was just stolen knowledge from Byzantines, from Great Library of Alexandria and the library of Babylon, islam contributed nothing but plagiarism, rape and conquest
One thing I would point out is that the European Age of Exploration began due to the Ottomans blocking off access to the spice trade. It's possible that Byzantium may have done the same thing if given the chance, but without the block on that trade, there would likely have been no strong financial incentive to risk life and significant capital to sail off into the west with no idea what was out there.
Hell, even with the financial incentive of the spice trade Columbus has a hell of a job convincing anyone to invest in his idea.
What if Islam never existed? Stop, you're giving me wet dreams... lol
Gay
Same here fuck islam cancer it should be banned for ever
Yes another cancer westerner who knows nothing beyond American controlled media.
ALLAH
I think it would have been better if both Europe and mena where United by one religion whether that be Christianity or Islam, I think the effect would be similar.
No Islam,No Terrorism and No rape
It's a misunderstanding that the Arabs were nomadic peoples, there were Arab nomads but they were not the majority. The majority were settled in pastoral, semi-sedentary, communities. The Islamic armies were lead by the Ghassanids and the Lakmids, who had previously been hired by the Byzantines to defend the border. With these tribes not being paid, they began to raid Roman territory again.
#IslamIsTheProblem
The world would be perfect in every way.
You probably living in bubble since you have zero knowledge about the history of the world in pre Islamic era
Sorry man , that would have been if the mongols never existed
Not really since liberalism would be more common
if by that you mean: not having soap (or later), hospital's (or later), ice cream cone's (or later)...
muslim's invented a lot of thing's.
@@AzoooooooooooozLol, a cringe GeoTuber in this comment.
Americans in 1776: We like religious freedom!!!!!
Americans after 2001:
iraq later👁👄👁
Macrons wet dream.
@@brandonye2569 when you think saddam was religious
@@mrpeanut6267 his a commie dumb leader but his idiot kept peace
@@brandonye2569wdym
My tribe wouldn't have been forced to fight Islam for 1400 years and Byzantine empire would still be around so we would have its back and my tribe would be the 3rd largest in Arabia
Richthofen Friedrich what tribe?
Wakanda.
F B probably a Zoroastrian/Pagan tribe.
Lakhamids?
@PURDES no they didnt but they declined the offer and some skirmishes happend
Actually I think the culture of Spain would’ve remained pretty much the same, as the kingdoms of the north were not part of the Umayyad caliphate while the southern region (especially southern parts of Andalusia) was more influenced by Islamic culture. Basically the only real difference would be that Andalusian culture would look more Castilian, and Spanish wouldn’t have words with Arabic roots. In Spain, like Italy, the southern regions were the most heavily influenced by Islamic culture. With all due respect they are both equally “European”. When people think of Spanish culture, they usually think of stuff that’s uniquely Andalusian (flamenco, Gypsies, Islamic architecture, bullfighting, and hot Mediterranean climate). Despite all this, Spain would’ve probably still been a cultural epicenter for Europe.
Agreed. It would have become a great power before some form of unification. Constantinople would have fall the same so America would have been discovered either way, maybe later.
You can't just take away 700 year of influence.
Not only south part , but central parts also as well
So it would be not the same .It would not Spain , but Visitigothic kingdom
As a Persian I wished that this was true
You will be invaded by Christians instead
And didn't Persia flourished during the Abbasid rule
@@thedstorm8922 Don't forget about the hundreds of successful years Persia had without Islam.
True mate rip sasaniad presia 235 ad 650 ad 😞😞😞
I love Perisa, I love learning about your pre-islamic empires. It's sad to see has happaned to your (former) wonderful region and people.
@@nightraven2975 Irans Islamic population has dropped to 32% and the country is in absolute protest and revolution for freedom, soon the Shah of Iran and the land of Persia shall be returned to glory!
Nobody:
People who have a crusader as their avatar: Uumm yoou mean what if heaven was on earth
@Erik the Red #FreeConstantinopol
Ironically, the crusaders wouldn't be crusaders without people against whom to crusade
@@lxi9648
Sassanids??
More slav/baltic crusades
@@shadowguardian3612 Crusades in sub-saharan africa?
So, the world would be a much better place, the Roman Empire might still be around in some form, Zoroastrianism would probably be more than just a tiny sliver of Parsis and a few thousand others, Buddhism (a very peaceful religion) would be more widespread, Ethiopia would be more developed, and there would be no Islamic terrorism. Islamic innovations would have been discovered by the Eastern Roman Empire instead. They stole most of their knowledge from the Greeks anyway.
Buddhism ist not Always very peaceful .... What about The Rohingya massacre
🙄 the Roman empire was falling apart long before Islam was a thing. Europe would still have had a dark age and violent wars as Christianity still tried to convert the world through violent conquest.
@@hammou1312 Deserve it.
@@saberzer094 there is no such thing as the dark ages
Also when they say Rome they are referring to east Rome ( byzatines )
With them the middle East would be a better place
@@azimy9388 oh no
"The Christians absolutely recked havoc all over Europe way before Islam was even a thing" eh yes but not all of the barberians where chirstian
t"han the mindless Christians claiming that 3=1. In what world does 3=1. I’m asking the trinitarians!"
the belive is that god is 1 olds, but three coeternal consubstantial persons
by your logic:
Does water defeat math when it can be one substance but in three different forms?
Do I defeat math when I buy a 4 in 1 pen?
goint to "the spirtual" a man is made of mind body and soul so is he one or 3?
well by the muslims logic the human is 3 not 1
half this comment section dropped out of college first year because they couldn’t understand crap."
yet iam still studying bio engeiring wierd i thougth i would have droped out
have chirstians comitted atrocities? yes a lot of them like every single relgion in this planet even secular forces have
but if all relgions have comiitedd atrocites then are all relgions bad? no , it depends on their fundaments
the fundametns of chirstianty budishim and many eastern relgions are very peacefull
i cant say the same thing for islam
for example the crusaders did terrible things did jesus or his apostoles comand or do similar things? no
isis does terrible things did muhamed and the early muslims comand or do similar things' yes not every single action but many
We indonesians just want watch the drama for a far(literally)
Same
Same but malaysian!
Wdym
Imagine a Iran not run by mullahs, a more stable Afghanistan and an India not faced with intense repression and an end of their Golden Age. Countries like Indonesia would be more cosmopolitan and possibly having living standards close to what China is today. Buddhism would be more widespread. The Balkans would be more stable. No Arab Israeli conflict which at heart is a religious issue. The big winners here are Iran and India.
cope
@@mushe6647 cope, with a lack of progress? Cause of your faith? Sure.
@@rohanindra6401 ur idea of progress is different than my idea of progress so yeah
@@mushe6647 yeah that’s probably true. I care about modernity (not US woke gender fluid version) and the present life. However for you simplicity and living like the prophet might be most important. I had discussion with someone who said he doesn’t care about progress on earth as its “deen” i think he said and that its drop in ocean compared to afterlife where he gets rewarded.
@@mushe6647 your idea of "progress" means as much to the world as Hitler's idea of "civilization"
Get out
what if gun powder was a new world invention and only entered the old world after the Columbia exchange?
Really Interesting . Europeans being Europeans would improve it to overthrow natives . Natives would have fallen anyway (we brought also lots of plagues there, so natives would have died, just a bit later than our timeline .
Ivan FascellaA or, if the Natives survived until recently, they would use it themselves and we would have really cool 21st century line battles between Aztecs with lion skins and guns and Europeans.
I believe Mongol invasions could be existed but it would be significantly weaker because Mongol army at the time had many Tengrist Turkic soldiers that really pissed off at Muslims (note that this Muslim, Tengrist dispute contributed to collapse of Seljuk Empire) and not to forget a strong Byzantine presents could likely gave a hard time to Mongols.
Comments are gonna be pretty.
*petty
The Zoroastrians likely wouldn't have been able to convert Pakistan and Bengal like the Muslims did, I think there would still be a Hindu majority in Bengal, with maybe a 40-60% Zoroastrian presence in the Hindu Kush and Western Punjab. The Zoroastrians did not really convert others very often, and they wouldn't implement Jizya, leaving less incentive for Indians to convert.
Zoroastrians dont accept converts so probably 100 percent would be hindu
The church wouldn't have made it that way even if Galileo had been "permanently defeated." The church was still a major patron of science even after that and would have corrected itself in a short time. Galileo got in trouble because he was a jerk. A brilliant jerk, but he really went out of his way to offend people. You should read his scathing book in which he calls his opponents absolute idiots. The church's mistake wasn't that it opposed science, but that it favored the wrong scientist, favoring Ptolemy over Galileo.
Copernicus and Darwin delayed the publication of their discoveries due to fear of the church. The church was against everything that changed the world view. Clearly, the Church has been an obstacle to science. Islam and Hinduism have also been an obstacle. Other religions I can't say anything about.
@@niklasmolen4753 Most science comes from the Catholic Church so idk what you're bragging about lol
@@niklasmolen4753 past black death, schism and reformation. Prior to that it actually supported it
@igor lopes He was afraid of being mocked, because his theories contradicted the creation story. He was right, it was not well received. It took a long time before it was widely accepted.
@igor lopes The power of the Church was indirect. If you went against the teachings of the Church, you could be excluded from society. Much like today's cancel culture though more extensive.
I've yet to find a comment of someone announcing a Holy Jihad via them reporting this video
LOL
yeah i am a Muslim and i was just curious of the Videos and the comment section, i expected most of the comment section to be toxic at Islam and i was right btw your part of the toxicity in this comment section.
I can't stand all these Muslims taking inventions made by Greeks and trying to pin them off as their own. How demeaning
Im sorry but the amount of things made by muslims that are discredited are much more
I waited for such comments
Like what?
What Greeks invetions that Muslims pin them off as their own
I don't even want to see the comment section
Same, I can't handle the toxicity, though it's more like I'm exhausted of it, can't find a good comment section except for lofi.
@@luckyabdurrahman1085y are they so toxic
Enjoyed it. I was actually wondering about an alternative history in which Arabic history and its consequent influences remain the same but minus Islam. What was Arabic culture like before Islam? Any chance you might do that version sometime?
They buried their infant daughters alive.
@@bilalbaig8586 😶really?
@@ssm7593 Yes. Men during the Pre-Islamic Arabia were viewed as superior and more favorably than women and slaves.
@@daddyinthestreetsenpaiinth9250 Men were always considered superior
@@ssm7593 but they were ESPECIALLY considered superior in islamic cultures...
the world would be a much better and safer place
You wouldn't even have your computer to voice your uneducated opinion on, so no the world wouldn't be a better place without Islam.
Wolf why is that? I'm not trying to be an ass I'm just genuinely interested why.
Braden Wylie During the Islamic Golden Age, they made many advances in math and science. I'm not saying we wouldn't have been able to come to this level of advancement without Islam, but the Golden Age happening when it did made us have computers
Surperian cool. Thanks
+Wolf Muslim spotted
My nation India wouldn’t have been partitioned into 2 states. Hinduism and other Indic religions like Buddhism would have flourished throughout Asia.
Really nigga.
India wouldn't be a Country if Islam never existed. When the Mughals declined Britian created the Raj. British India created a sense of unity between Indians in fight for freedom against the British. This United India and created the Modren state of India.
Not only 2 afghanistan indonesia thailand
@@amongussus9779 go and search maurya empire gupta empire chola empire then which existed long before islam afghanistan to bangladesh was india
@@rehankhan1778 the Christian’s would have invaded India and killed all Hindus, just like they killed indigenous Americans, Australians and they invaded Africa making black people their slaves, which is ridiculous and no one really gives a damn for some reason. Muslims are much more respectful to everyone
I wish I could live in this time line where islam never existed
But you don't deal with it
ruclips.net/video/-5K7r8DDM24/видео.html
Only our desperate wishes explain our unsatisfied situation with historical facts that shaped our crumbling present
Well islam has always existed, The real Jews and Christians are Muslims during the time of Moses and Jesus
*Edgy Atheists think for even edgier comments*
That's all they can do, be edgy in their gaming chairs and be keyboard warriors. Their brains are rotten and God has blinded their hearts.
@@hamzashinwary4215 ruclips.net/video/-5K7r8DDM24/видео.html
@@hamzashinwary4215 why would a benevolent god do that? sounds like a right dickhead
@@hamzashinwary4215 that god sounds like a devil but a little bit better
@@hamzashinwary4215 What religion are you?
Best fucking world ever. So wish it would happen.
lol shit you gay ass atheist mouth
MukK Vlogs A very intelligent observation!
Weeaboo Karwan thats not a "fun fact", fyi.
Erik Karlsson Ah, I understand.
Username checks out.
golden age Islamic fashion is very nice from the architecture to the fabulous beards.
You can still have the beards today
Yes, the beards were excellent
@@فهميكتاني eh Egypt done it 7000bc
What if Northern Ireland became its own country
Or was reunited?
It would just be a third world shit hole like it pretty much is today.
@@lastwolflord why?
What if the non-avian dinosaurs survived the K-Pg mass extinction in Australia?
Then the Australian country wouldn't exist
Your comment😂 Dirty Liberal
Grant Scarboro Emu war but worse.
The Middle East was technologically advanced in an era when they were relatively tolerant. These days they are increasingly intolerant which does not bode well for their technological advancements. But then they can always buy anything they want, floating on a sea of oil. The Islamic countries that do not have that advantage may be in trouble.
Without UK and USA plumming oil in Arabia then UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, and rest of oil countries would be shitholes
@Khalid the fuck are you talking about "stalin lead russia into downfall"? You sound so stupid by saying shit like this and you're still arguing, holy shit
@King Wiwuz IV with the same logic that Muslims took science from the bezentine empire i want to tell you that Einstein was an asshole because he built his therory on Isaac Newton laws and Isaac Newton was an ass hole bec he built his therory on Galileo laws ...
Duh that is science works
@@oceanman9559 no Stalin was so great that from his greatness 40 million people died in the ussr
@حج turkey tolerant what a joke
what if the red sea and the mediterranean were connected
David Jeong they are...
No they're not
The Suez Canal in Egypt?
naturally connected, not from man-made canals
muda122 no, not before the 20th century
Science-fiction has already 'done this'. I know of at least one author who posited an
alternative history where 'Mahmood' and his father were captured by Christians
of some sort during a business foray into Palestine, and 'Mahmood' converted
and was raised as a Christian. It was posited that he would still be religiously
active, becoming a cleric/philosopher/hymn-writer, who would be come so highly
regarded that he would be elevated to Sainthood (St. Mahmood!?!) not too long
after his death! I never did read the work(s), so I can't say much more. I do recall
finding some of the points of 'difference' (in the alternative 'current day') to be in
some ways quite bizarre!
Perhaps you could track down and read the work(s), and then do (or re-do?) this as
an alternate-alternative history, or just give your opinion on why it wasn't feasible
enough to justify a 're-do' or producing a 'Part 2'?!
Can you name this science fiction please
@@damein1483 ... sorry, can't really remember it so well; I *think* it was from a major author, but I'm not even really sure of *that!* (Gotta remember, I didn't actually _read_ the stories - I think it was part of a 3 or 4 part series of books) If you can get in touch with a writer who specializes in 'alternative history', they might be able to tell you.
@@damein1483 he might be referring to agents of the byzantium.
@@ephennell4ever you are referring to agents of byzantium right?
@@yeahthatstheguy44 - that sounds like it might be right, but can't say for sure.
The one variable is that of the Eastern Roman Empire still being alive. It is likely doing actually pretty well now for itself. It might have lost some land, but overall it should be stable enough to survive into the future. The thing that could cause the New World exploration earlier if something went down between East and West enough so that the Romans decided to cut the others off. Also, Rome sooner or later would start to desire to retake Rome. We seen this spirit in our timeline. Even if they had to wait all the way up until say WW1 or WW2 era. Rome would start looking to Italy for its former home. The Romans not bogged down until the almost mid to late medieval period. The Romans may have conquered more land. Also, if the Romans saw the others setting in the New World. I can see them trying to push to take the land or at least make their own colonies to then take the natives as slaves. The Romans would be like a starving man seeing a steak. They would not just enslave Africa, but all those they came across. The determining factor for Rome is if Rome manages to create better deep sea vessels to match or beat that of the other powers.
The Eastern Roman Empire didn't fall to the conquests of the Islamic Empire. The Arabs ripped away the non-Greek parts but the Greek parts remained solidly Greek and Orthodox for another 800 years. Even the early Turkish invasions were pushed back. It was the combination of invasion from the West, Italo-Normans and Venetians, with the continued pressure of the Turks from the East that ultimately cracked Byzantium.
@@bobwinters5572 I now I am replying a bit late but Egypt was in the process of becoming throughly Greek so in this timeline Egypt would have became Greek
The mongols would have destroyed it like they did with Baghdad
Technologically, the world would be so much further on. As the library’s at Alexandria and Nalanda would be untouched. Also the Middle East would contribute a lot more, intelligently. India and China would have much more contact with Europe.
We’d probably be driving flying cars and building a space faring civilisation.
PURDES Not true necessarily. Christianity uniting Europe and the west is what brought us to today. Islam was originally ahead of Christianity but that changed, mostly because of the philosopher religion argument. It wasn’t exactly Christianity that caused the Dark Ages; it was specifically the collapse of Roman authority, but overall, it was necessary.
There are those who say that we lost 1,000 years of science with the destruction of the library. Although I think 1000 years is an exaggeration.
The library was destroyed in 3 steps. First by Cesar by mistake. He was worried and regretful of the incident. Then by Christian fundamentalists then totally destroyed by Muslim warlords.
Literally the Islamic golden age, Islam contributed more with the remains of the greeks and roman philosophies instead of leaving it be. We would most likely be behind mathematically a bit alongside science aswell.
@@whw710
Until the 12-13 century, Islam did a lot for science. After that, they changed and saw science more or less as an enemy of Islam, after which they have always lagged behind.
Niklas Molén not really, when did we view science as an enemy? Why the sudden change? The Quran has numerous sayings about education being good. Also the Islamic Golden age started in the 8th century to the 14th.
In Spain, the Gothic Kingdom, which was already two centuries old when Muslims arrived, would have continued
eww
@@victoryband4102 the Gothic Kingdom in Spain lasted for more than two centuries before Muslim invasión. Reconquest refers to the Gothic Kingdom of Spain, and all the Kings of Castile considered themselves Gothic Kings
@@ahoraya1047weren't the goths kinda of a minority in Hispania?
I believe that the Indian subcontinent would stay united bc even though the Turks brought Zoroastrianism in this timeline it wouldn’t have spread as rapidly due to the lack of the jizya, it not being as invested in the lives of merchants, it not adapting to Indian culture as much as Sufi Islam did, and the fact that Zoroastrian Turks most likely would respect the Caste System.
Edit: Also I could see Helagu leading the Mongols into North Africa and then going south, taking over Africa until the Congo. This occurs because he wouldn’t have stopped in Damascus after his attack on the city due to him never converting to Islam. He could also have attacked the Byzantine Empire instead though, but without heavy artillery I don’t think he would have been as successful as Mehmed II.
Probably not because if it weren't for themuslim arabs the empire of axum (semitic but based on the horn of africa) wouldn't have fallen they were pretty strong and they would've won against the mongols since the tip of territory reached southern coast of Egypt they would've attacked the mongols to help Egypt
What bs is this lol even if they convert to Islam they still have to pay taxes and far more larger than the jizya because they've converted to Islam lol
The world it become a better place.
No ISIS
No racist
No Israeli-Palestinan confict
AND no more terrorism!
Racism will still be there ... other terrorist groups would come, the age of enlightenment wouldn't happen that early.
You're talking out of your ass because Israel itself invented the modern terrorism that we know today in the '40s and 50's. Starting with the bombing of the King David Hotel, The Lavron Affair, the attack on the USS Liberty, the Shatila massacre and on so on...Your assumption of Palestine is ridiculously misguided as a large minority of Palestinian Christians were expelled in 1947 by the Zionists gangs(= Terrorist groups like the Hagganah and Stern Gang) to which many member subsequently were to become Israeli Prime Ministers. Stick to simpler things because this channel is way too complex for your simple and biased mind.
No church bombings
@@deutan4390 There would still be age of enlightenment earlier, it was inevitable due to many factors
I don't see downsides
Cretium you wouldn’t even have a computer or exist so stfu
Algebra. algorithm. Medicine ??
@u wot? Algorithm as a word comes from a truly intelligent Muslim scholar watch this video if you wish to know more: ruclips.net/video/-3QML3tfBNQ/видео.html
@u wot? nope
@u wot? Have a great day
No partition of India- India would extend from Afghanistan to Indonesia.
With Rich culture and heritage.
Largest University would have been in Nalanda, well functional.
PFFFF HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
It would be less violent, assuming the British occupation still happens the same way.
No India would be only up to Burma, and Indonesia and Afghanistan wont be part of it, mainly because of colonization and cultural barriers.
people just came to say world would be a better place tbh but hey, I like your video man.
The Crusades may still have happened, but against Zoroastrianism instead of against Islam. The Persians taking Jerusalem or threatening Constantinople itself may well have triggered the same response from the Christians in the West.
Liked the video! One thing I am a bit dubious about is the theory that Zoroastrianism would spread. In our history, that religion was notoriously chary of accepting converts; it was more an ethnic religion.
If Islam never existed, I'd probably be christan.
Obviously you would be christian had this religion never exist.
What are u now
@@Bell_plejdo568p Muslim.
Or Buddhist ? Because it was the first missionary religion
@@satyamindnectar7052 I live in macedonia, it's mainly dominated by christians.
I'm not saying I dislike islam but there is something appealing about that timeline for me, aztec and Incan countries may still being a thing, zoroastrian religion being a dominant one, early colonial expansion by higher civilisations other than europe, a surviving byzantium. All things I really like when playing alternate history games like EU4 or making up my own stories, it is a shame that the muslim renaissance didn't happen but without muslims that is kinda inevitable... Also not having isis is nice.
Your timeline is half correct, can i explain my vision to you ?
Of, course
but having another type of Isis
www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/hiers-of-heraclius-a-no-islam-timeline.469583/
here is an alternate timline
No muslims support ISIS, period. Some muslims may have sympathies to Al-Qaeda or Taliban for various reasons (one of the chief reasons for Al-Qaeda's success is that it is anti sectarian while ISIS is openly sectarian) but no muslim will ever in their right mind will support ISIS.
When ISIS emerged, groups on all sides stopped fighting each other and focused on ISIS. Among them were US-backed Kurds, Iran-backed Shia militias, and Al-Qaeda affiliated Al-Nusra Front all of whom are enemies. If you fought against ISIS, in the middle east you will be haiiled as a hero. ISIS has no sympathies even amongst ultra conservative muslims.
One of the tragedies of the islamic invasion was that it fractured the mediterrannean world. Europe and the north african countries had huge links in culture, religion, economy, all of that was destroyed after the muslims came and the mediterranean became a barrier and war zone.
The Muslims made the Middle East the most advanced civilization when Islam rose
@@dragonofchaos7843 Lol don't make jokes. Only Persia and Iraq flourished, thanks to the local elite that was well educated, and that predated Islam. In fact after the mongols destroyed Baghdad islam entered a dark age period from which it never recovered. But north africa was one of the richest part of the Roman empire. They tried several times to retake it. But after the islamic conquest it became a poor backwater. Think of all the beautiful monuments, palaces and churches that were built in Europe during the middle ages/renaissance/baroque. Now think of how little of that you find in north africa. A real tragedy.
@@dayros2023 what are you talking about for the first 300 hundred years it was all advancements by Muslims we made the west what it is today from our books our advancements that catapulted them
@@dayros2023 be grateful for islam
@@dayros2023 it wasn’t Persian only it was Arabs it was many people your so ignorant about the history of Islam maybe do some academic research
"What is it, more Sassanids?"
"Worse."
- Roman Emperor Heraclius & Constantinople
Hinduism could've possibly spread even further
Hinduism didn't have the concept of conversion at that time
@C R wars and attacks would still be present in any region in the world but without the rise of islam there wouldnt be any geometry, vaccines, toothbrush,coffee..to name just a few
@C R Not that really because the NOT JUST Chinese Buddhism BUT ALSO the Sassahnids Zoroastrianism would still expand with extension of the rise of the stepp nomads!
Which means the war would still happen like the earlier version of schism put into action and the rise of another Berber or turkic empire just not Muslim!
OR which means that the Chinese would be another threat as they were also expansion to the west! As the sasannids were now exhausted. And Chinese were known to be powerful and has competent or great emperor in that time!
My girlfriend is yelling over my shoulder that failing to account for the Mongols is a gross oversight, and that the educated status of the surviving Zoroastrian diaspora, e.g. the Parisis suggest they would be open to technological change.
There would be no South Sudan, as it would be unnecessary to create it since Sudan would be a Christian majority country, so in theory Sudan would have turned out kinda okay without Islam. In the Middle East and North Africa, not much drama would have occured there, we would have more Arab Christians and half of them being Zoroastrians so this means majority of the Middle Eastern countries would have been secular, and have warming relations with Israel, but i suspect due to too much US allies in that region, Israel and Persia/Iran would have been non-alligned and would outgrew their friendship with the US as they would probably be fed up with it. I would love to put more but its very tired to write more what changes will happen without this religion.
I would think Sudan culture would likely be quite closer to Greece or Egypt. The ancient Makuria/Nubia pretty much adopted greek and later coptic language and customs in thier kingdom and if Byzantine (Roman) Empire still hold egypt, the influence would be alot.
😂😂😂😂
I think that there would be a divide in terms of technology. Since the Byzantine Empire would still exist, the Renaissance wouldn't happen. The knowledge from Ancient Greece was carried into the Byzantine Empire. This could possibly leave the Byzantines with our technology at present in our timeline there whereas the other Europeans don't have the Renaissance so they would be less technologically advanced.
Nope, a technological gap to that extent on the same continent is almost impossible unless something like colonization is happening
Oh boy the comment section's gonna be great...
That would be fucking awesome
JadeWarrior666 don't be consumed by hatred.
Be humane
That would be the best thing ever to happen to the human race of all possible times
Imagine a modern day Byzantine empire.
It would still fall anyways
@@Мустафаиракский-я8шmaybe but grece would be much bigger.
@Carcinat V but if so they would have adotped much of Byzantine culture and concepts, if even they would want to conquer Constantinople in the first place
@@shadowguardian3612 hell ya 😢😢😢
Hey Whatifalthist. Here's an idea for a video what if Islam had it's reformation much like Christianity or Judaism did just curious on how that would've gone or if any changes would've came from that.
You guys really don't know the history of Islam at all , please search about what the salafi movement is
Also Islam had reformation it was called sufism but the mongols happened with Baghdad and everything went down hell
@@lucyadam9128what ur aging isn’t true
The problems in the Muslim world isn’t because of Islam it’s because of the west and if ur reglihion need reformation
Before Islam appeared, the Byzantine Emperor Heroclines had defeated the Persians, and the Turkish Tribes from the steps, recently have gotten into wars with Persia themselves, played a role. Given that Zoroaster was the faith of their enemy, Persia, I doubt they would convert. The Turks, being allies of the Byzantines and close to Buddhism, would see both take off, depending on the location of the Particular tribe and leaders involved. Much as how the Franks, Goths and so on became Christians.
Speaking of Christians, the Pope in Rome did not claim the title of 'Pope' as exclusive to him until the 8th century, and as a result of Islam's advance. Hence, the Pentarchy (Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandra and Jerusalem) would continue to rule as a group. Charles Martel 'the Hammer' would not be coronated 'Emperor' either, as the Pope would not need Frankish help to halt Islamic Advance into France. No Crowning of a 2nd Emperor in the west means its likely to be no Holy Roman Empire to contend with in Central Europe.
Even in this timeline, Protestants made agreements with Orthodoxy, and this is going to have that much more weight in this timeline as the Patriarch of Constantinople provides a strong counterweight, along with the Emperor and his armies, to the Patriarch of Rome.
The last has been seen in History. 8th century Bulgarians were seeing the Roman see try to convert them to Christianity though French Monks, who required them to learn Latin. The leaders in the Baulkins, both Slave and Bulgarian, sent embarrasses to Constantinople, who dispatched Cyril and his brother. Cyril, unlike the French monks, converted the Bible into the native language and gave them a written form of their language, which has become known as 'old Church Slavic' today. This helped bring the slaves into Eastern Christianity, and I could see the same happen for protestants Only instead of a German Prince defending Martin Luthar, its a Roman Armey & the Patriarch of Constantinople.
One last note on Religion that would be important is the role of the Patriarchs from Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. They okayed a role in how the Christian church played out, more in the east then the west, but they had a great deal of influence in their own right. No Islamic Invasion of these cities means that role will continue. What that influence will be is a major role Christian belief.
The Middle East today would be like a sweltering version of Italy or Greece with beautiful churches, museums, lovely squares with fountains, cafe culture and sophisticated living instead of the soulless and shabby architecture of Arab cities along with the repressive, corrupt and backward culture we see there today.
Who Put these Dictators other than the European Colonists?
That only applies to Mediterranean countries. Sand states like Saudi Arabia would have its cities (Riyadh and Jeddah) already resembling something like Shanghai or Dubai for that record.
you have clearly never been to, say, syria
Here's an idea:
"What if the Mongol Khakhan Mongke hadn't died in 1260, leaving Ilkhan Hulagu in Mesopotamia and the bulk of the Mongol armies with him? Would the Mongols have then beaten the Mamluks in Syria and then gone on to sweep across North Africa?"
No , the Mongols were already reducing their numbers in Syria before the death of the Khan and Berke Khan would still attack Hulagu
Do you think the Egyptians could've revolted against the Byzantines supporting the Coptic Pope instead of the Ecumenical Patriarch?
Yes but they would have reunited. The Muslims encouraged hostility between the Copts and the Byzantines.
Highly doubtful that the European explorations would still happen. Some scholars state that the Portuguese chose to circumnavigate Africa to avoid paying high trade taxes to Muslim nations who controlled the routes between Europa and Asia. Without this incentive, there would be little reason for exploring alternate routes. Secondly, the Red Sea would be open to European sailors.
It may be true it would save millions of natives from numerous continents from colonialism but with the price of technological advancement made by the Europeans.
But people would still be more adventurous as times go by and eventually would lead to the discovery of the new world
what if Alexander the Great hadn't die so young? would he have gone West? Would his planned expedition in Arabia had prevented islam from being existed?
No. That will not happen, Because the Romans launched a campaign of reconnaissance and conquest in the Arabian Peninsula, but soon realized that there was no point in that. Because the Arabian Peninsula does not contain anything important for this reason, most empires such as the Romans and Persians avoided the invasion of the Arabian Peninsula because there is no point in controlling this region
@@hornerfarah2282 true its a shithole
Simple a better world
@PURDES how so?
@PURDES nah all religion shouldn't exist it just make science progress slower
@PURDES "Invented Slavery" Considering Slavery existed 4000 years before Jesus was born in Mesopotamia that is completely impossible. Jesus never had slaves. Compare that to Mohammad, who had hundreds of them.
Guns were invented by the Chinese (who were Confucian). Do you even know what you are talking about anymore? Besides, the Ottomans helped spread guns to Europe, that's why they were called a gunpowder empire.
The first drug was Hashish, first cultivated and taken by the Feyadeen, a MUSLIM Order.
@PURDES The most racist religion was invented by Mohammad, who called Blacks "Raisinheads", who had hundreds of Black Slaves, and who laid the foundation for such scholars as Ibn Battuta, who called Black People a naturally primitive race that deserves enslavement.
@PURDES ruclips.net/video/tZxH4QYLRQY/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/0s2TRPtUJ8Q/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/XIjPPRf0YZk/видео.html
"Technology being less advanced" Actually, that was mainly Christianity's problem, and the Muslims "acquiring" Byzantine/Indian science only made them look more advanced by comparison for a while. And we all know Islam is pretty super-strict on any science that happens to contradict the Quran. One would not expect if Zoroastrianism (or any other alternative such as the one you mentioned about mesopotamians) would have gone the same "acquire Byzantine tech" to advance themselves past Christianity, and/or have the same restrictions against science that the Abrahamic faiths had
ruclips.net/video/-5K7r8DDM24/видео.html
Islam was created by the Al Bani and Britain, modern Islam as we know it
- Half of the world's knowledge wouldn't have been burned down.
- Many people would still have foreskins.
- South Asia would be much more peaceful and prosperous.
- india would have been far better and wouldn't have been divided in pakistan and lather Bangladesh
TO CRITICISM ON THIS VIDEO
1- Zoroastrianism has been a major religions for Iranian/Persians empires for centuries from the Achaemenid to the Sassanid witch is almost one thousand year so yeah it’s did last long enough for us to actually know about them
2- during the Sassanian period many universities and libraries were established for example There was a major school, called the Grand School, in the capital. In the beginning, only 50 students were allowed to study at the Grand School. In less than 100 years, enrollment at the Grand School was over 30,000 students., one of most famous one was the Academy of Gundishapur, founded by Khosrau I in a.d.550 offered education and training in medicine, philosophy, theology and science. But focus.on medicine here were the famous ancient Persian Borzuya learned medicine According to The Cambridge ,it was the most important medical center of the ancient world during the 6th and 7th centuries. as for technology the full heavy iron cavalry was created by Parthian first human animation frame by frame was created by the Sassanian and Qanat (Water Supply System) by the Achaemenid So we actually know what did Zoroastrians view the technologies sciences and philosophy but you ether lack the knowledge of their history or you simply ignore it.
I think that your analysis doesn't do Heraclius justice. He pretty thoroughly trounced the Persians, rendering them almost a client state by the time he was done. Given a generation or two of peace, I would not be surprised to see Armenia permanently attached to Rome and the empire's borders being pushed all the way across Mesopotamia, with political inroads into the Persian successor states that would result from the civil wars in Persia absent the Muslim conquests.
Lacking a strong enemy in the south and east, Rome would be able to spend its energy on reinforcing Italy, Spain, and Africa, probably resulting in a far stronger hold in both Italy and Spain. There are potent natural barriers separating both Iberia and Italy from the rest of Europe, making it likely that the Franks would still manage to establish their kingdoms, but making it likely that Rome could hold the peninsulas.
Britain still had a sympathetic population that was at war with the Angle-Saxon invaders. Given a stable east and south, and given firm borders at the Alps, it would not be unlikely that an ambitious emperor in the same vein as Justinian might send a naval expedition to Wales to assist the British in retaking their island from the invaders. The Norse would run into much stronger resistance as a consequence.
www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/at-islam-and-the-arab-invsasions-never-happen.469583/#post-19083262
This might interest you
The World Trade Center would still be there.
It’s possible it may have never existed, it’s hard to predict
@@3dbee47 Predicting a world without Islam would be just the same as it is today. The west would still be that recognized, America would still be discovered, but the only significant difference on this world without Islam is ofcourse geopolitics and how would society looks like. We wouldn't have Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Muslim Brotherhood and Wahabbism, and the world would be much modern and partially peaceful. But there would still be wars but the course of it would be different probably. The golden age might still occur largely because of Persians and not Muslims.
The Zoroastrians will destroy it because they hate Christianity
@@USS_297Or the Jews and Atheists would still blow it up for the same reason
There would have been war between the Visigothic Spain and Frankish empires. The Franks and Germans sponsored reconquista to avoid muslim conquest but without muslims the Christian visigoths would have been a rival for the HRE rather than several small allied kingdoms.
Portugal would have not sailed around Africa and Spain would have not sent Columbus since there would be silk road.
There would be a different european identity because the idea of Europe came about a contraposition of Christianity against Islam.
There would still be someone discovering America, some of the kingdoms became perhaps more distant and with the final straw being the Mongol conquest.
I'll take three of these timelines, just to be sure.
i really like this is a lot better than our modern time
seeing you have the Imperial Russian Flag on your logo i can tell your an eastern orthodox slav that obviously hates the ottomans and Muslims so thats why you think what you think.