Note: There were a couple of mistakes for some cities such as Kufa and Baghdad which are incorrectly located (maybe for other cities too). Also I could've used a different paint scheme for the Visigoths but it is whatever.
Man the Byzantines, every other state or empire would have collapsed immediately, but they managed to counterattack for a time and even defend the homeland during their 20 years anarchy, truly fascinatin, and also inflict the heaviest loss in Muslim or at least caliphal history
rashidun never lost to the romans, not a single battle (while fighting more than 30 battles and the sassanids at the same time) , while being heavily ouytnumbered and out equipped in every battle (litteraly every battle), they were just truely superior in every war
@@fishconnoisseur yes bcs of corruption and false premises, the caliphate"s were larger too and more diverse then byzantine empire if the byzantines would be as big as they was then they wouldve collapsed too
@@TheSphee131 Considering that the Caliphate was weakened by that time + the catastrophic effect that the loss of their western lands would have, yeah, I don't think that the Romans would lose the Eastern Provinces quickly tbf.
@freshrussianmeat3890 Rome wasn't even the capital of the Roman Empire at the late Roman Empire, Greek was the second most spoken language of the empire for most of it's history and they beated back the Muslims many times, it was the "Roman" church who destroyed the empire in the 4th Crusade, letting the remains rot and making them food for the Ottoman Turks
Is it though like they were a massive empire and in almost every battle out numbered the arabs who fought both persia and Byzantium at the same time...
@@faarisjaber Yeah they were powerful still. But at the time of the Ummayyads the persians had been oblitarated already and the romans were pretty battered. Plus they had lost most of their territory. The Ummayyads prepared huge offencives for years and were pushed out by the romans.
@@faarisjaber yes bro u r right the rashidun were really legendary, I mean in recorded history you wont find better in term of feat and amazing conquests, people keep bringing the "sassanid and romans where exhausted after civil war blah blah blah..." argument, but they really don't know what they are talking about, Rashidun were really something exceptionnal, outnumbered in all battles, about 97% win rate while being outnumbered, not trained for big campaigns, no good equipment, difficult logistics... They started with legendary difficulty, they managed to do legendary victory.
Mauretania was added to the Byzantine empire around 590, reconnecting Tingitania(of the two Spains) to Africa. Also, the Rashudins/Umayyads didn't just conquer and annex the whole Sahara desert upon conquering Egypt and Africa. Expansion south was gradual over the following centuries. There were many tribal kingdoms and confederations, some were at times clients, at times enemies, etc.
@@reubenmatthews5615 Why formalize an alliance if the countries were already forced to fight against the same enemy? Islam would have destroyed them regardless of whether an alliance had been concluded or not. Nothing would change
I have some simple observations. During the third caliph Uthman, the Arabs occupied the Greek island of Rhodes and parts of Sicily, but they quickly withdrew from it
Fantastic work. When a person sees how many times war ravaged these lands and the intensity in which they occured, its easy to see how the ancient infrastructure and populations, that is the accrued development from Roman times were devestated. Truly these wars are when the ancient world ended.
@@Mo-hi9hw Eastern Romans never identified themselves as "Byzantines". They are called like that because their capital, Constantinople used to have the name of "Byzantium". Eastern Romans refer themselves to "Romans"
Byzantine Arab war winner: Arab victory: Levant,North Africa(Egypt is north africa) and sicily Byzantine Victory:Anatolia,Cyprus,ItalyCrete and caucasus ( possibly north Syria)
Rashidun Caliphate also conquered greek islands, Sicily(south italy) and sucessfully raided in spain in 650s. Then withdrew it after murder of Caliph Usman. Also *Siege* *of* *Contantinopole* *(655)*
Look how the Roman Empire resisted. Anyone else would have fallen dead! This video proves that this state cannot be called “Byzantium”. This proves that there was no Byzantium, it was a state with absolutely Roman genetics. And if you consider that it was Islam that turned this empire into 90% of the coastline mediterranean seas, into a local country the size of Turkey, then you can go crazy. The fantastic great Roman Empire was reduced to small borders precisely by Islam. And in one breath. This is simply incredible, but it is an absolute fact.
Bro, enough with this "because of exhaustion so that's why they lost"..... Literally all empires fight always and never heard of this argument except when Arabs attack..... They are two super powers of the time and they put forward dozens of thousands of armies and constantly almost always putting forward twice if not more the amount of soldiers of Arabs and yet these two super powers lost even though they have the numbers, the technology, the supposedly "advanced tactics". A loss is a loss and Arabs did what all others across history failed, which is bring down two super powers to their knees with very little resources while sassanids and romans had vast resources to tap into. Just accept the defeat instead of trying to find really silly excuses.....
The historical borders... canceled like that. Stunning video as always Kamasick, from the animation to the music used. Speaking about musics, what's the name of the first one you used?
There were no large-scale battles as described in the Islamic tradition it's likely that there were small-scale battles and skirmishes which then led to a peaceful transition of power to the new arab nomadic Beduin tribal rulers who were not centralized as described in the standard Islamic narrative. The Byzantines were not interested in controlling the areas of Egypt, the Levant and the fertile crescent and the Sassanid empire was collapsing because of civil war and exhaustion so the Byzantines gave these regions to the nomadic Beduin arab tribal rulers who were not Muslims as Islam as a distinct religion as we know it came after the Abbasids took power before that there were just heretical Christian sects and other groups that existed no religion called Islam existed and no prophet named Muhammad Ibn Abdullah.
sorry that I'm a bit oblivious but what is the nation in blue that controls most of the balkans and parts of Greece? Is it some nomadic tribe or something? Thanks :)
The great Roman Empire held out for a very long time. The arabs got only lucky that the Byzantine-Sassanid war drained both empires. It is because they held out so long that Christiandom is most prevalent today.
that's kinda cope even though they were exhausted they outnumbered the arabs in almost every battle and not to mention the arabs also had their own civil war.
@@monarchxy2 Christians literally Idolize a Cross 💀 Zoroastrians literally Idolize Fire ☠️ We Muslims Literally Use the "Cube" as a Direction of Prayer ⚰️
The romans didn´t lose because of exhaustion - in fact the romans were in their prime shape with reinforced borders and a battlehardened veteran army under competent and experienced generals. The romans lost because the muslims were better and more maneuverable. The roman heavy cataphracts couldnt cope with arab light cavalry speed and morale. You made an entire video and didnt mention anything but excuses for why romans lost. But i guess the saying is true that losers bring excuses while winners bring results.
@@vf7058 Please go back and study the battles of that particular war, and you will realize that neither the persian or byzantine army wasnt exhausted. There is nothing called "exhausted" in war - what does it mean? The muslims had also fought the war against the quraish and the ridda war for 20 years before that war, werent they exhausted? A state doesnt work like a human body, therefore the exhausted "analogy" is invalid and more of an excuse by historians to give a cheap explanation to why the world was opened to islam.
@@nazeem8680 You can't compare last roman-persian war to the arab wars. Persians and Romans fought a total war for two decades. War exhaustion was enormous. Even basic lifetime items like currency of the era are marked by this conflict. Romans had hexagrams, small coins with inscription "May God help the Romans" a symbol of desperate defense against Sassanids. Also Romans did not fully recovered from plagues of the 6th century. Muslims fought on one front while Romans and Persians had warlike neighbors. Plenty of Roman offensive campaigns were halted due to another tribal invasion. Muslims were lucky. With prime Heraclius and Persians Islam would become a local Arabic religion.
@@vf7058 There is nothing called luck. God grants victory to whomever he pleases. Byzantines and Persians were vastly superior in strenght and still they lost. You must realize that all these silly explanations you come up with are cope and excuses and anecdotal evidence. You still cant come up with a definiton of what "exhaustion" in war even means. The arabs were also hid by plague, the arabs had war for 30 years prior aswell, fighting each other and with persians and byzantines in their wars. why were they not exhausted aswell?? there is nothing called exhaustion in international politics. if anything, war gives you military experience and strenghtens your armies and give you experienced commanders. Muslims didnt fight in one front. muslims fought in 3 fronts: persians in the east, byzantines in the west, Khazars to the north. so no, arabs didnt fight in one front.
@@vf7058 Also. maybe you should actually study the battles of this war instead of just looking at this map which doesnt show how big the byzantine armies were (so much for exhaustion when you bring 50k roman soldiers to the battle of yarmouk and battle of ajnadayn??), This exhaustion argument is really popular amongst armchair generals who didnt study the war but only looks at this map and thinks wow! the byzantines didnt even put up a fight....they must be so exhausted". Byzantines are not exhausted if they are able to field 3 field armies to defend syria, and another army to defend egypt, plus garrisoning all the major cities. your argument makes no sense if you actually study the war.
@@TheIronChancellor The Byzantines did not invade most of the Levant. They only controlled Antioch and some coastal cities, but the main important cities (Damascus, Homs, Ramla, and Jerusalem) remained under Arab sovereignty, even though they were subjected to some Byzantine raids. The situation was similar to the Arab raids on Anatolia during the era of the Caliphate
Note: There were a couple of mistakes for some cities such as Kufa and Baghdad which are incorrectly located (maybe for other cities too). Also I could've used a different paint scheme for the Visigoths but it is whatever.
Never mind，As long as you can correct your map mistakes.
Also Tarentum, in Italy, is actually Naples. Tarentum it's located near Brundisium.
You also forgot Rshtuni's assaults into Armenia
@@user-nw3kv2qf9oAll the way to Dagestan and Chechnya.
Man the Byzantines, every other state or empire would have collapsed immediately, but they managed to counterattack for a time and even defend the homeland during their 20 years anarchy, truly fascinatin, and also inflict the heaviest loss in Muslim or at least caliphal history
rashidun never lost to the romans, not a single battle (while fighting more than 30 battles and the sassanids at the same time) , while being heavily ouytnumbered and out equipped in every battle (litteraly every battle), they were just truely superior in every war
Yet in the end the byazintens will loose
@@adnan_honest_jihadist5775Byzantium outlived every caliphate except the last one.
@@fishconnoisseur yes bcs of corruption and false premises, the caliphate"s were larger too and more diverse then byzantine empire if the byzantines would be as big as they was then they wouldve collapsed too
the fact that the Roman Empire might have recovered it's eastern lands under Justinian II is just mind-blowing to me
Same it’s insane
Nah I really doubt there was even a chance. Even if they could it would just be reversed soon after.
@@TheSphee131 Considering that the Caliphate was weakened by that time + the catastrophic effect that the loss of their western lands would have, yeah, I don't think that the Romans would lose the Eastern Provinces quickly tbf.
@freshrussianmeat3890 Roman Empire*
@freshrussianmeat3890 Rome wasn't even the capital of the Roman Empire at the late Roman Empire, Greek was the second most spoken language of the empire for most of it's history and they beated back the Muslims many times, it was the "Roman" church who destroyed the empire in the 4th Crusade, letting the remains rot and making them food for the Ottoman Turks
The fact that the romans held out for so long against much bigger empires is impressive tp say the least.
Is it though like they were a massive empire and in almost every battle out numbered the arabs who fought both persia and Byzantium at the same time...
@@faarisjaber Yeah they were powerful still. But at the time of the Ummayyads the persians had been oblitarated already and the romans were pretty battered. Plus they had lost most of their territory. The Ummayyads prepared huge offencives for years and were pushed out by the romans.
@@folkeklarstrom3668 i was referring to the rashidun
@@faarisjaber Oh ok
@@faarisjaber yes bro u r right the rashidun were really legendary, I mean in recorded history you wont find better in term of feat and amazing conquests, people keep bringing the "sassanid and romans where exhausted after civil war blah blah blah..." argument, but they really don't know what they are talking about, Rashidun were really something exceptionnal, outnumbered in all battles, about 97% win rate while being outnumbered, not trained for big campaigns, no good equipment, difficult logistics... They started with legendary difficulty, they managed to do legendary victory.
Umar looks like he’s having the best time in his life :D
Man has the guns pointed to the sky. He just conquered half of Persia & Rome in 10 years. He's celebrating
His title was al Faruq meaning the one who distinguishes the bad and good,according to Muhammad Satan feared Umar
☠️☠️💀🗣️🫸🏴
Muslims did not him
Mauretania was added to the Byzantine empire around 590, reconnecting Tingitania(of the two Spains) to Africa.
Also, the Rashudins/Umayyads didn't just conquer and annex the whole Sahara desert upon conquering Egypt and Africa. Expansion south was gradual over the following centuries. There were many tribal kingdoms and confederations, some were at times clients, at times enemies, etc.
Yea they only toke costal towns in fact the berbers start to spread Islam through trade
Romans generals did not listen to Heraclius and attacked without Sassanid help
An alliance with the Sassanids would have stopped the Arab advance. Who knows, maybe the Romans would have kept control of the Levant and Africa.
The Byzantines and sassanids already tried it together
@@BasedAlaricwell they could wait, not like Arabs could win the war of attrition without a major decisive battle
@@reubenmatthews5615 Why formalize an alliance if the countries were already forced to fight against the same enemy? Islam would have destroyed them regardless of whether an alliance had been concluded or not. Nothing would change
@@reubenmatthews5615no it wouldn’t, they did have an alliance at the battle of Firaz and they still got bent over.
I have some simple observations. During the third caliph Uthman, the Arabs occupied the Greek island of Rhodes and parts of Sicily, but they quickly withdrew from it
The Arabs took the islands, then the Byzantines took them back, then the Arabs took them back and finally the Byzantines took them back
Yeah Rashidun caliphate conquered greek islands and Sicily. And withdrew it after murder of caliph Usman.
Also Siege of Contantinopole (655)
لا
Underrated channel.
True
yes but in reality the slavs didnt capture all of Peloponnesus. Corinthos, Patras, Monveassia. Mani and etc were not taken by the Slav..
@@DCCrisisclips even though I am Greek, I must have known these...
Can you do a video about the Arab military expansion in Persia and Central Asia? The quality of the videos you make is excellent
Honey Mad made two videos about it: Sassanid empire every month,including it's fall, and all the Muslim conquests between 622 and 750.
1:28 it's crazy how there was 4 successive emperors in one year
Died of Edema
Died of tuberculosis
Deposed & mutilated
10 year old boy put on the throne
Year of the 4 Emperors Part 2
@@iDeathMaximuMIIMay These Poor Souls Reqviescat in pace
Fantastic work. When a person sees how many times war ravaged these lands and the intensity in which they occured, its easy to see how the ancient infrastructure and populations, that is the accrued development from Roman times were devestated. Truly these wars are when the ancient world ended.
Very detailed and superb mapping! I have a suggestion with the Visigoths: you should change their color for a brighter one.
Imagine if The Slavs didn’t betray the Roman’s during their counterattack
I never heard of this
you mean byzantines?
@@Mo-hi9hw Eastern Romans never identified themselves as "Byzantines". They are called like that because their capital, Constantinople used to have the name of "Byzantium". Eastern Romans refer themselves to "Romans"
Byzantine Arab war winner:
Arab victory: Levant,North Africa(Egypt is north africa) and sicily
Byzantine Victory:Anatolia,Cyprus,ItalyCrete and caucasus ( possibly north Syria)
What work ! We can appreciate the quality of your map, as well as the rhythm of the video which is pleasant, very nice work 👍
Rashidun Caliphate also conquered greek islands, Sicily(south italy) and sucessfully raided in spain in 650s. Then withdrew it after murder of Caliph Usman.
Also *Siege* *of* *Contantinopole* *(655)*
I highly doubt the Byzantines retook tripolitannia for a while.
Really cool video! I'm impressed! Good job!
Look how the Roman Empire resisted. Anyone else would have fallen dead! This video proves that this state cannot be called “Byzantium”. This proves that there was no Byzantium, it was a state with absolutely Roman genetics. And if you consider that it was Islam that turned this empire into 90% of the coastline mediterranean seas, into a local country the size of Turkey, then you can go crazy. The fantastic great Roman Empire was reduced to small borders precisely by Islam. And in one breath. This is simply incredible, but it is an absolute fact.
It would be great to travel back in time and give to the romans some machine guns.
great job kamasick! I am always impressed by your work and always will. Keep it up!
What a wonderful video！
What would have happened if Arabs had aimed at Lombard Italy?
They'd have to go through France to get there, or Illyricum, then cross the Alps.
They certainly raided the coasts of the rest of Italy, though.
@@histguy101they can go directly from Sicily
@@mahdimehdi445 Then they'd have to conquer Sicily & southern/central Italy first.
@@histguy101 they did btw
Bro, enough with this "because of exhaustion so that's why they lost"..... Literally all empires fight always and never heard of this argument except when Arabs attack..... They are two super powers of the time and they put forward dozens of thousands of armies and constantly almost always putting forward twice if not more the amount of soldiers of Arabs and yet these two super powers lost even though they have the numbers, the technology, the supposedly "advanced tactics". A loss is a loss and Arabs did what all others across history failed, which is bring down two super powers to their knees with very little resources while sassanids and romans had vast resources to tap into. Just accept the defeat instead of trying to find really silly excuses.....
It could be the end at this point yet there were no other empire that refused to die so many times as the Eastern Roman Empire
It was just matter of time of conquest of Constantinople
The historical borders... canceled like that. Stunning video as always Kamasick, from the animation to the music used. Speaking about musics, what's the name of the first one you used?
There were no large-scale battles as described in the Islamic tradition it's likely that there were small-scale battles and skirmishes which then led to a peaceful transition of power to the new arab nomadic Beduin tribal rulers who were not centralized as described in the standard Islamic narrative. The Byzantines were not interested in controlling the areas of Egypt, the Levant and the fertile crescent and the Sassanid empire was collapsing because of civil war and exhaustion so the Byzantines gave these regions to the nomadic Beduin arab tribal rulers who were not Muslims as Islam as a distinct religion as we know it came after the Abbasids took power before that there were just heretical Christian sects and other groups that existed no religion called Islam existed and no prophet named Muhammad Ibn Abdullah.
sorry that I'm a bit oblivious but what is the nation in blue that controls most of the balkans and parts of Greece? Is it some nomadic tribe or something? Thanks :)
This blue color are south slavic tribes.
south slav tribes but it is quite exaggerated though.
What is the Dyrrx next to Dyrrhachium?
Very interesting
Thus genesis 17:20 was fullfilled
Дякуємо за подробне відео 👍
The great Roman Empire held out for a very long time. The arabs got only lucky that the Byzantine-Sassanid war drained both empires. It is because they held out so long that Christiandom is most prevalent today.
that's kinda cope even though they were exhausted they outnumbered the arabs in almost every battle and not to mention the arabs also had their own civil war.
That’s Jesus Christ not Justinian II
The way the Arabs ate them at the same time 🫡
cool
Like
Bulgaria captured Braničevo in c. 805 and Niš in 845
The timeline ends at 719
@@histguy101 so? These areas are presented on map as Bulgarian even if they were captured century later
Did you see how many times the Byzantines won in this video?😂 Also you got the cities from slavs
@@TheIronChancellor I am not even Bulgarian lol
W
Roma victor
So this is were the tyranny began...
Nah, more like where Liberation Began 🗿
@@_SUPREME_ARCHAILECT_OF_MALAYSLiberate who exactly?
@@monarchxy2 Liberation from Idolatry (Trollface)
@@_SUPREME_ARCHAILECT_OF_MALAYS like you weren't idolizing a giant sized box cube? (no disrespect to islam, but let's keep it a bean)
@@monarchxy2
Christians literally Idolize a Cross 💀
Zoroastrians literally Idolize Fire ☠️
We Muslims Literally Use the "Cube" as a Direction of Prayer ⚰️
The romans didn´t lose because of exhaustion - in fact the romans were in their prime shape with reinforced borders and a battlehardened veteran army under competent and experienced generals. The romans lost because the muslims were better and more maneuverable. The roman heavy cataphracts couldnt cope with arab light cavalry speed and morale.
You made an entire video and didnt mention anything but excuses for why romans lost. But i guess the saying is true that losers bring excuses while winners bring results.
Romans and Persians were exhausted.
@@vf7058 Please go back and study the battles of that particular war, and you will realize that neither the persian or byzantine army wasnt exhausted. There is nothing called "exhausted" in war - what does it mean? The muslims had also fought the war against the quraish and the ridda war for 20 years before that war, werent they exhausted? A state doesnt work like a human body, therefore the exhausted "analogy" is invalid and more of an excuse by historians to give a cheap explanation to why the world was opened to islam.
@@nazeem8680 You can't compare last roman-persian war to the arab wars. Persians and Romans fought a total war for two decades. War exhaustion was enormous. Even basic lifetime items like currency of the era are marked by this conflict. Romans had hexagrams, small coins with inscription "May God help the Romans" a symbol of desperate defense against Sassanids. Also Romans did not fully recovered from plagues of the 6th century. Muslims fought on one front while Romans and Persians had warlike neighbors. Plenty of Roman offensive campaigns were halted due to another tribal invasion.
Muslims were lucky. With prime Heraclius and Persians Islam would become a local Arabic religion.
@@vf7058 There is nothing called luck. God grants victory to whomever he pleases. Byzantines and Persians were vastly superior in strenght and still they lost. You must realize that all these silly explanations you come up with are cope and excuses and anecdotal evidence. You still cant come up with a definiton of what "exhaustion" in war even means. The arabs were also hid by plague, the arabs had war for 30 years prior aswell, fighting each other and with persians and byzantines in their wars. why were they not exhausted aswell?? there is nothing called exhaustion in international politics. if anything, war gives you military experience and strenghtens your armies and give you experienced commanders. Muslims didnt fight in one front. muslims fought in 3 fronts: persians in the east, byzantines in the west, Khazars to the north. so no, arabs didnt fight in one front.
@@vf7058 Also. maybe you should actually study the battles of this war instead of just looking at this map which doesnt show how big the byzantine armies were (so much for exhaustion when you bring 50k roman soldiers to the battle of yarmouk and battle of ajnadayn??), This exhaustion argument is really popular amongst armchair generals who didnt study the war but only looks at this map and thinks wow! the byzantines didnt even put up a fight....they must be so exhausted". Byzantines are not exhausted if they are able to field 3 field armies to defend syria, and another army to defend egypt, plus garrisoning all the major cities. your argument makes no sense if you actually study the war.
Ummayad s were the kafirs kafur caliphate
العرب🏴🏴🏴
No, Muslims, the sahabas R.A (who conquered Rome and Persia) identified as muslims before identifying as Arabs
@@Khalid-Ibn-Al-Walidit’s not this or that,they were proud arabs and proud muslims
@@Khalid-Ibn-Al-Walidthey both arab and muslim
@@Khalid-Ibn-Al-WalidJust Say Arab muslim 🤦🏽
where is the counter attack of byzantines?
It happened later l, the Byzantines qonquered many lands, most of the Levant and even campaigning successfully against the Arabs in Egypt
@@TheIronChancellor The Byzantines did not invade most of the Levant. They only controlled Antioch and some coastal cities, but the main important cities (Damascus, Homs, Ramla, and Jerusalem) remained under Arab sovereignty, even though they were subjected to some Byzantine raids.
The situation was similar to the Arab raids on Anatolia during the era of the Caliphate
@@Faisal-pb5gui think he was referring to John i Tzmiskies' campaign.