What if Armenia was converted into a Muslim country in the past and persisted as a Muslim nation into the present day? Would the Armenian Genocide still have occurred? How could this have affected history, culture, demographics, languages, international relations, politics, religious matters, art, etc?
What if Armenia was Muslim Today?
- Thread starter Cultivation Emperor
- Start date
Dude butterflies, a Muslim Armenia means Georgia is when under more pressure also that leave the ere with an enemy on the border since Rashidun era
Slow your roll a bit. You've posted seven or eight threads TODAY, all of them open ended discissions.
Let's wee what sort of discussions you gotten going before strafing the Board with even more. Kay?
If it becomes Muslim under Ottoman rule, then there is no Armenian genocide and Azeris and Armenians have better relationship though they probably still have conflicts.
If they become Muslim there also exists possibility of them becoming assimilated
I dont think that that's unfortunately that easy religion as we have seen has never served as a block to many war's among nations that share same religion and even some time's language
Albanians and Bosnians are also Muslim but they're not assimilated or look at how diverse is Georgia despite having the same religion.
They would hate each other less, but I don't think either that it would be enough to prevent conflict between the two.
I am not so sure that Armenian converting to Islam would keep history completely same.
But that Armenians are Muslims not mean that them have much happier fate with Ottomans assuming that OE begins such politics against Muslims. Perhaps not genocide but still very strong assimilation politics unless Armenians are not completely turkified. And check how modern Turkey treats Kurds and previously I checked most of them are Muslims.
And about Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict it is just nationalism and territorial dispute not religion so Armenians being same faith wouldn't change that. If religion would be such effective peacemaker there would be now pretty effectively world peace.
But that Armenians are Muslims not mean that them have much happier fate with Ottomans assuming that OE begins such politics against Muslims. Perhaps not genocide but still very strong assimilation politics unless Armenians are not completely turkified. And check how modern Turkey treats Kurds and previously I checked most of them are Muslims.
And about Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict it is just nationalism and territorial dispute not religion so Armenians being same faith wouldn't change that. If religion would be such effective peacemaker there would be now pretty effectively world peace.
Albanians and Bosnians were always on the empire's borderlands and their identity was not as tied to religion as Armenians
Bosnians were also something of heretics. Most of population of Georgia is orthdox adjara had been annexed and converted by the turks but now orthdoxy has returned to the importance. The Armenians were always their own different church and didn't intermingle with the Georgians nor did azeris nor were two of these groups close to power
Meanwhile Armenians in ottoman empire had quite significant economic power
Indeed now it would be conflict for land and not religion as well as land
Both Albania and Bosnia were lost before the creation of modern Turkish nationalism. Both groups were counted as Turks and to some degree counted themselves as Turks.
The Armenian Genocide likely would not have occured.
There were Armenian converts to Islam duding the course of the Ottoman Empire. During the OTL genocide, the descedants of those converts were completely bypassed.
As such, Northeastern Turkey remains a bastion of Armenian culture.
I can forsee, though, a movement equivalent to Kurdish separatism in the secular Turkey, and just general resistance to Turkification.
There were Armenian converts to Islam duding the course of the Ottoman Empire. During the OTL genocide, the descedants of those converts were completely bypassed.
As such, Northeastern Turkey remains a bastion of Armenian culture.
I can forsee, though, a movement equivalent to Kurdish separatism in the secular Turkey, and just general resistance to Turkification.
Armenian Muslims would just be a competing group to the Kurds. It’s unlikely to create any significant pressure on the Georgians as it really don’t change the geopolitical situation of them. Of course the bigger effect is the Islamic world and the Ottoman Empire losing a significant source of revenue and replace them with an another group of highlanders. So who replace Armenians ad mercantile groups in eastern Anatolia, northern Persia and Russia, the Greeks or the Assyrians? The Greeks could be interesting because of their greater integration with Europe.
I Highly doubt the Armenians being Muslim would change their fate much. The ottomans were under the young turks who are were a ultranationalist supremacy group that advocated turkish blood and culture over the many non-turks. They made hostile inroads with the Albanians and started state back atrocities on arabs. Religion doesn't negate the likelihood of a genocide. For example, the germans went on murdering lots polish people even though both were Christians
Now their fate might change a bit as there flimsy reasons to get genocide was due to perceive disloyalty and collaboration with the russians even though much of the leaders sucked at warfare, and they wanted to blame someone. Similarly to the german with the jews. However, racist groups will always found a thing to blame a failure with some out-group.
Now their fate might change a bit as there flimsy reasons to get genocide was due to perceive disloyalty and collaboration with the russians even though much of the leaders sucked at warfare, and they wanted to blame someone. Similarly to the german with the jews. However, racist groups will always found a thing to blame a failure with some out-group.
Catholics versus Protestants. A good comparison would be Sunni vs Shia. And in both cases this difference generated atrocities. Not to mention different ethnicities with a history of disputes. No different from what happened with the Ottomans. Now a correct comparison would be Germans killing Danes or Dutch (both Protestant groups. Like turks killing arabs both sunni).
Last edited:
Yeah pretty much. Just having both groups be of similar or exact sects of the religion doesn't stop racist groups from making up things to justify their hate.
I just hate when people think Muslims are somehow a monolith that all think and act the same. When in fact there exist many different cultures, languages and ethnicities that makes people unique and different.
ideologies of supremacy are ancient things in Islam (and basically the entire world). Andalus that people keep talking about a paradise of tolerance was a clusterfuck of ethnic disputes between Arabs, Berbers and Muladi (Islamic Iberians).
Maybe this comes primarily from the idea of the caliphate and how long Europe dealt with the Turks being the only relevant Islamic figure. There is racism and inequality of course. But in my country, for example, the general term for Muslims is Turk. With Arabic and Turk being basically the same thing.