I remember an Old Ayn Rand book called Anthem. In it, the use of personal names and even pronouns was taboo, and everything was referred to in collective terms. I, Me, My, and so on just wasn't allowed in the lexicon. It all became We, Us, and Our.

In your society they could adhere to similar rules under the idea that the collective is far more important than the individual. The genesis of this might be the result of some sort of isolation and long term, existential threat.

When asked whodunnit, the answer would always be "they did it", as the thought of personal identifiers would be somewhat alien.

It would take something fairly radical to cause even a small group of humans to shed personal identity in the first place, but build it up over time, with tradition, and you might get something sustainable in relative isolation.

Maybe you could have each community allow one individual to interact with the rest of the world, and that one individual would take a name. Make the interaction with the rest of the world be perceived as a bad or difficult duty. Necessary, but not something that people would seek for individual gain.

The hardest thing is that you are making humans act in a way that is kind of contrary to millions of years of evolution. When you have an individual advantage, you get to pass along genes. That is a tough drive to overcome.

Edit: Given the setting of around the 10th century Caliphate, it would have to be a small tribe on the very edge of the Caliphate or empire. The more remote, the better. A part of the problem is that the religious texts are going to be using personal pronouns and names. The history as taught by those key texts shapes a heck of a lot. Your isolated tribe is only going to pay lip service, if anything at all, to that dominant faith. They might say, God is Great and bow in the direction they believe Mecca is during prayer, but the rest is going to be so much drivel.

I remember an Old Ayn Rand book called Anthem. In it, the use of personal names and even pronouns was taboo, and everything was referred to in collective terms. I, Me, My, and so on just wasn't allowed in the lexicon. It all became We, Us, and Our.

In your society they could adhere to similar rules under the idea that the collective is far more important than the individual. The genesis of this might be the result of some sort of isolation and long term, existential threat.

When asked whodunnit, the answer would always be "they did it", as the thought of personal identifiers would be somewhat alien.

It would take something fairly radical to cause even a small group of humans to shed personal identity in the first place, but build it up over time, with tradition, and you might get something sustainable in relative isolation.

Maybe you could have each community allow one individual to interact with the rest of the world, and that one individual would take a name. Make the interaction with the rest of the world be perceived as a bad or difficult duty. Necessary, but not something that people would seek for individual gain.

The hardest thing is that you are making humans act in a way that is kind of contrary to millions of years of evolution. When you have an individual advantage, you get to pass along genes. That is a tough drive to overcome.

Given the setting of around the 10^th century Caliphate, it would have to be a small tribe on the very edge of the Caliphate or empire. The more remote, the better. A part of the problem is that the religious texts are going to be using personal pronouns and names. The history as taught by those key texts shapes a heck of a lot. Your isolated tribe is only going to pay lip service, if anything at all, to that dominant faith. They might say, God is Great and bow in the direction they believe Mecca is during prayer, but the rest is going to be so much drivel.

I remember an Old Ayn Rand book called Anthem. In it, the use of personal names and even pronouns was taboo, and everything was referred to in collective terms. I, Me, My, and so on just wasn't allowed in the lexicon. It all became We, Us, and Our.

In your society they could adhere to similar rules under the idea that the collective is far more important than the individual. The genesis of this might be the result of some sort of isolation and long term, existential threat.

When asked whodunnit, the answer would always be "they did it", as the thought of personal identifiers would be somewhat alien.

It would take something fairly radical to cause even a small group of humans to shed personal identity in the first place, but build it up over time, with tradition, and you might get something sustainable in relative isolation.

Maybe you could have each community allow one individual to interact with the rest of the world, and that one individual would take a name. Make the interaction with the rest of the world be perceived as a bad or difficult duty. Necessary, but not something that people would seek for individual gain.

The hardest thing is that you are making humans act in a way that is kind of contrary to millions of years of evolution. When you have an individual advantage, you get to pass along genes. That is a tough drive to overcome.

I remember an Old Ayn Rand book called Anthem. In it, the use of personal names and even pronouns was taboo, and everything was referred to in collective terms. I, Me, My, and so on just wasn't allowed in the lexicon. It all became We, Us, and Our.

In your society they could adhere to similar rules under the idea that the collective is far more important than the individual. The genesis of this might be the result of some sort of isolation and long term, existential threat.

When asked whodunnit, the answer would always be "they did it", as the thought of personal identifiers would be somewhat alien.

It would take something fairly radical to cause even a small group of humans to shed personal identity in the first place, but build it up over time, with tradition, and you might get something sustainable in relative isolation.

Maybe you could have each community allow one individual to interact with the rest of the world, and that one individual would take a name. Make the interaction with the rest of the world be perceived as a bad or difficult duty. Necessary, but not something that people would seek for individual gain.

The hardest thing is that you are making humans act in a way that is kind of contrary to millions of years of evolution. When you have an individual advantage, you get to pass along genes. That is a tough drive to overcome.

Edit: Given the setting of around the 10th century Caliphate, it would have to be a small tribe on the very edge of the Caliphate or empire. The more remote, the better. A part of the problem is that the religious texts are going to be using personal pronouns and names. The history as taught by those key texts shapes a heck of a lot. Your isolated tribe is only going to pay lip service, if anything at all, to that dominant faith. They might say, God is Great and bow in the direction they believe Mecca is during prayer, but the rest is going to be so much drivel.