Hey guys, we started uploading our art to Displate: displate.com/kingsandgenerals/displates?art=5f1a2372ed4c0 These are highly recommended - the quality is great and they will improve any room. Use our link to 30% discount the first week, then 20% discount the rest of the time. We will be uploading new stuff all the time, so bookmark it. Here is the video of the previous episode of this series: ua-cam.com/video/r2cEIDZwG5M/v-deo.html
Hey guys, I'm one of the co-creators of this series and I hope you enjoyed it! Before watching this video, it is recommended to watch our first season of Early Muslim Expansion to get better context. The link is in the description. There are more battles soon to come so stay tuned for more! As always here are TW: Attila mods that we used in this video : - Beginning of the end: Rise of Islam 622AD (WIP) - The Fall of Eagles (Some of the units have been reworked by myself) - Lux un Umbra Preset - Aztec's Graphics Enhancement - Reshade EDIT: Mods added. Best wishes, Malay Archer ڤمانه ملايو
you can kinda imagine the despair of the sassanids, its not like their commanders were incompetent or cowardly, they were simply outplayed at every turn by the arabs
RNGesus bleseth, RNGesus taketh away. The rise of Persian empire wasn't any less shocking. How Korosh(cyrus) 'the barbarian' conquered all the sedented peoples.
I wonder how many of these accounts are completely accurate. Definitely a "history written by the winners" kind of thing. Of course the Muslims ultimately won, but a lot of the details strike me as fictional.
He wasn't much of a hero tough According to AL tabari and ibn khaldun, He massacred civilians in istakhr and ctisephon, enslaved women and children. His river of blood is famous in masscare of istakhr where almost 15000 people got decapitated
the thing is becouse of the late sassanian wars with every one after the battle of ninevah with heracleus it had only 9,000 man left(this is not accounting for the plague that killed at least a thired of the population) if you notice islamic wars are the only battles where the sassanian army was majority infantry showing the soldiers of these wars were just farmars and not real soldiers these battles are just storys(the earliest sources of islamic history we have is at best wroten 201 years after muhammad what do you expect)you look at persian roman wars the persians were almost always out numbered but almost always won so do yourself a favor and stop beliving these storys go look at the tactics and storys of battles like yarmuk and tell me do they make the slightest sense also almost all other battles the arabs have had have been losses so dont compare these storys with real ones
@@arianrezaie4729 arabs destroyed the romans too , and at the ame time during they wars against persia , what saved the romans is their geography otherwise they wouldve been destroyed completely just like persia the weak nation.
@@arianrezaie4729 Arabs destroyed the whole persian empire and maybe that is the reason you can't find a reliable sources to describe the persian point of view btw the arabs history books said that the sassanids were always larger than the arabs Muslims also arabs were fighting on two fronts against the Byzantine in the western north and against the Sassanids in the east and before that arabs fought against each other in the reda wars that killed many of them after Muhammad died many arab tribes left Islam again so if you try to find a silly argument to justify why the Persians lost their empire quickly just rethink again because even the arabs sources mentioned that even they as arabs lost many battles and it was never about numbers it was a complex of many elements .
@@annzsalamov7657 Most civilisations have held strong religious beliefs and armies that included religious zealots, including the vikings and mongols. It's definitely more a case of a harsh life breeding hard people
A new ideology or belief that makes people think that said ideology/belief is worth fighting/dying for, that greatly inspires men to such heights. That helps alot too. ie: Revolutionary France, American war of Independence and Civil war, The Crusades, and in this case Islam.
Salman al-Farsi also recommended a trench be dug around Madinah before 10,000 Meccan and allied forces could attack. Hence it was called the Battle of the Trench, or Al-Khandaq. It saved a lot of lives as only a few foolish horsemen tried to ride through the ditch only to be shot by arrows. Unsurprisingly the Persians used the same trench tactic here.
@@gerardb5220 lol? Keep telling yourself that, zakat money taken form Muslims yearly is way more than jizya money. don't embarrass yourself with dumb lies, that makes you dumb
@@gerardb5220 Wow really 😂 salaries for free?!! Every soldier in every army takes a salary and the kharaj is taxes that goes to the Treasury. I want you to work for free and tell your country not to collect taxes to publicly spend. Wow really so bright
Khalid Ibn Al Walid is one of my favorite of all ancient generals and battle commanders, what a wonder it would be to be able to witness the events of his era. His generosity is what led to his dismissal, but in my opinion it only made him greater. He wasn’t as attached to materialistic things as others were, often greatly rewarding his men.
spread by conquest. that's all i know. but one thing still make me confused.... How can the muslims army can defeat two super power empire (Roman empire and sassanid empire). Tactic? Mental? Skill? Equipment? or this two empire just having their bad day... and having that until their collapse? well i dunno...
Muhammad Zain Bachmid They were partly exhausted by decades of indecisive wars(note the point about extreme taxation in the video) but tactics, mental fortitude and conversions of key people were also in play.
They were outnumbered if you were to believe the only source of this wars, their so called "hadiths",religious stories which are "said" to have been narrated by their religious leaders
@@KAD132 they did have completely different army, with a completely different set of advantages(primary one being the combination of their lifestyle and Arabic horse) and different tactics coming down from them(ironically - very different to those commonly perceived: very little or no special focus on horse archery, for example, which runs directly against common image), all this reinforced by religious zeal and sense of belonging to something larger. It took Byzantines a looong time to find effective antidots against this "basic" army, and Persians never ev even had the chance. By the time Eastern Roman empire got it, however, it was essentially crippled.
Siavash Nikvand well most of medieval sources are unreliable, which is why historians try to use other clues to make judgment. But the early Islamic conquests has corroborating evidence from non-Islamic sources and it’s widely accepted they were outnumbered.
the thing is becouse of the late sassanian wars with every one after the battle of ninevah with heracleus it had only 9,000 man left(this is not accounting for the plague that killed at least a thired of the population) if you notice islamic wars are the only battles where the sassanian army was majority infantry showing the soldiers of these wars were just farmars and not real soldiers these battles are just storys(the earliest sources of islamic history we have is at best wroten 201 years after muhammad what do you expect)you look at persian roman wars the persians were almost always out numbered but almost always won
How can they possibly be defeated when they either march for the victory or martyrdom, these are the men who were humble worshippers by night but by day they were fierce warriors.
Jose Raul Miguens Cruz I was talking about their ethics of war, it is forbidden for a Muslim to flee from the battlefield. “Ima Nasar ow ima Shahadah” so either Victory or Martyrdom.
@Lachlan Allen But the persians were better at war, they had fought long battles with the Romans, what you are missing here is the fact that most of the Muslim Army was volunteer army , people who choose to go to war, and they had a something bigger then themselves to fight for. the defections in the Sassanian ranks had always been in the method of recruitment and the heavy taxes on the general population along with a strict hierarchical society , where as the Muslim army offered them lower taxes and security and a very flexible social hierarchy where equality is ideological rather then based on ethnicity or social stratification. Humans crave nothing more than respect and dignity and many a times its above the love of life itself. Hearts and minds people.. hearts and minds.
Lachlan Allen I’was refering to early Muslims, the 10.000 thousends of saints prophecied in the Bible. Without their Faith which gave them confidence, courage and bravery to bring planning and tactics in the table while engaging in a war with two superpowers of that time and defeating them, we wouldn’t be here today commenting about these events. And he said, The LORD came from Si'nai, and rose up from Se'-ir unto them, he shined forth from mount Pa'-ran [Mecca in Arabic], and he came with ten thousands of saints [the army of the Muslims that liberated Mecca was made of 10.000 men]: from his right hand went a fiery law for them. (The King James Version Bible, Deuteronomy 33:2).
@Abdinassir Abdi Are you admiring the blood sacrifice? A true follower of the way would not glorify such things. Yeshua is coming..sooner than most even believe, who do believe. Seek ye not the things of this world, nor the false teachings of self proclaimed holy men. All who profess the name of Jesus Christ, repent of their sins and are baptized of water and the Holy Ghost shall receive eternity and Life everlasting. Only those who come through the Son shall receive the Father, Only those who are called by the Father shall receive the Son. This is more than what you may take as simple regurgitation of a text you may or may not consider to be false. I would like to have a true conversation, if you are at all interested. If not, Be blessed in the name of Jesus. It is my hope that you take this to heart, even if only for a moment.
@@jeffmorin5867 what blood sacrifice are you talking about, jihad means struggle for the cause of Allah... it could be anything from struggling from poverty, oppression, ailments, the one he meant is struggling in war and spreading Islam, these men came to war fully prepared to die just to spread the message of Islam, no blood sacrifices done as far as everyone's concerned.
@@thewonderingworld9301 Early Christianity, for the first few centuries, was spread more through willing conversion rather than coercion. Later on after the Roman emperors legalized the religion and convert to it did coercion and force of arms become more prevalent in spreading the faith.
@@chedabu A rather weak claim. Most arab commanders were installed as commanders by merit, in other words, they were the best of the best warriors. Much like the mongol commanders installed by genghis.
Sounds like fantasie and propaganda. Like Constantin seeing a cross in the heavens before battle, it's just something written by the victorious elite to glorify themselves and pacify the population with tribalism
@@Solidoaf its true every arab tribe had elite warriors from the elite families, like the bani hanifa tribe and of course the quraysh, in fact the caliph of the time was umar ibn al khattab, possibly the greatest companion of the prophet and the cousin of khalid ibn al walid, he was said to be so tall that it looked like he was in horseback, he was also one of the few literate people in the tribe of quraysh
Very true, usually they give some rich fucker the horses and halfway through he goes "wait I could die, or the king could die and I could just leave.....BYE"
They are know that one of biggest achievement of mankind was to die at battle in the name of God, so that i think - as khalid himself says "you should know that I have come to you with an army of men that love death, as you love life".
Because Muslim commanders were appointed by their sheer talent and were the best worriers in their camps. this is the one reason. there may be other reasons also.
I appreciate the responses, it sounds like the Islamic/Muslim system could be described as highly meritocratic. As with most warrior culture (Vikings or Hun), successful combat and conquest equated to higher social status.
There's a story from the battle of Yarmouk where Khalid told one of the Roman generals that "We love martyrdom more than you love women and wine" dont know how true it is but it's epic!
17:50 *It is fascinating to know how 'Salman The Persian' accepted Islam* The first sixteen years of his life were devoted to studying to become a Zoroastrian magus or priest after which he became the guardian of a fire temple , which was a well-respected job. Three years later in 587 he met a Nestorian Christian group and was impressed by them. Against the wishes of his father, he left his family to join them. [10] [ self-published source ] His family imprisoned him afterwards to prevent him but he escaped. [10] He traveled around the Middle East to discuss his ideas with priests, theologians and scholars in his quest for the truth. [10] During his stay in Syria , he heard of Muhammad , whose coming had been predicted by Salman's last Christian teacher on his deathbed. [5] Afterwards and during his journey to the Arabian Peninsula , he was betrayed and sold to a Jew in Medina . After meeting Muhammad, he recognized the signs that the monk had described to him. He converted to Islam and secured his freedom with the help of Muhammad. Source: Wikipedia
Every single modern scholar belives salman is a few people rolled into one secondly taking a look at our sources its clear that early islamic history is not even slightly accurate
A lot of the credit for these victories should go to Khalid bin al-Waleed, even though he didn't personally command some of the later major battles. He took a bunch of rag-tag bedouin tribal warriors and organized them into standing armies that could stand their ground against Sassanid infantry and at least survive the Roman infantry. His tactics anticipated a lot of Mongol and Turkic style warfare that would prove especially deadly against similar opponents in the future Just a decade ago, the Arab style of warfare was a bunch of bedouins picking up whatever arms and animals they had, performing a raid or two and coming back home before the intense summer or winter began kicking in. Pitched battles were basically a standoff followed by a bunch of duels between opposing tribal leaders who also acted as commanders. Imagine these very men then challenging the might of the Romans and wiping out the Sassanids just 1-2 decades later. It's crazy
It's not crazy, it's the proof of their true belief, islam, islam made them unite, and their vision is to liberate people from worshipping false gods to worship One True God,
Arabs in that time period trained every boy from young age to fight so they can defend their tribes plus they lived in harsh environment and the army were fully mobilozed even the infintry were riding horses or camels and because their new faith they had high morals
@Saf 299 asabiyat, lisaniyat is spreading soo much in Muslims the word which Mohammad Sallahu-alahe-wasalam crushed by his shoe There are very less who say I am Muslim
@Saf 299 it was the military of islam, not the religion itself. indeed a good part of the arab peninsula revolted immediately after mohammad died... and the muslims crushed these revolts mercilessly
@@ahmadsultan4643 if you didn't know even the Arabs tribes who lived in the small towns they send their children with those desert tribes to foster and teach them even Mohammed PBUH is one of those kids
History teacher: “can anyone explain how Early Muslim Expansion happend?” Me: (raises hand) 🤚 History teacher: “anyone else besides Kings And Generals subscribers?”
Black Caesar This isn’t a justification but an explanation. In America we only learn about history that applies to us and the Western Hemisphere. The Arab slave trade didn’t affect America at all while the Atlantic slave trade created the foundations for this country (I’m assuming you’re American too). It’s the same reason why we don’t learn about the Napoleonic Wars or the creation of Germany or Ancient China.
Military commanders of the past: comes forward in a duel putting his life on the line and propably dying in front of his own soldiers. Massive balls. Military "commanders" today: hides in an unknown bunker and sends airstrikes against a bunch of underarmed people thinking he's the real shit. Playstation cowards
This one is great, something about the huge sweeping metropolitan landscape of the multiple interconnected cities of ctessiphon strikes my imagination so hard, it seems so mythical
I even like the name of Persia , Babylon , Ctessiphon. Persians were always advanced people even after their conversation some of the best scientists were Persian
@@troooooper100 Saad: "How are we going to cross the river? The current is too strong and there's enemies on the other side." Dream: "Just DO IT!" Saad: "k" Persians: "Flee, flee, fleeeee!"
@@NeroIML it was not a dream, in Islamic sources he prayed to God and his prayer was excepted. As a Muslim I never heard about him dreaming before this.
Fun fact: during the Hijra there was a certain Bedouin named Suraqah (physically ugly by contemporary accounts) who wanted in on some of the reward for capturing the Prophet & Abu Bakr on their flight to Yathrib (Medina). His horse refused to approach the Prophet when he had reached him (the only one of the pursuers to get that close) and the Prophet promised him that one day he would wear the robes of Khosrau, the Shah at the time. Later on when Ctesiphon was captured, then-Caliph Umar sent for the elderly Suraqah and the imperial regalia captured from the Persians and had the Bedouin put them on as fulfillment of the Prophet’s decree.
@Shawn Lol no. Everyone knows the reason we invaded Iraq was not because of a WMD. I am obviously not talking about the modern era dipshit. Do you really think since the muslims wrote the history of this war, that they wouldn't have lied at all or claimed things that didn't happen?
@@arianrezaie4729 I said probably, i never stated that it was a for sure thing. Your reading skills are pathetic. I believe in logic and facts not myths and legend.
Khalid died in 642, and his tombstone shows a list of over 50 major battles he won. Not only was he unbeaten in combat, Khalid never even lost a skirmish or a duel! It was common for him and his trusted officers to challenge the commanders of enemy armies to a duel before battle. A win would ruin the morale of the opponents. The best military minds of two great empires couldn’t produce a commander or even a soldier to beat this genius.
For those do not know, the Tigris river is something like The Missisippi and crossing it with just horses is a pure miracle if you ask me. Is there any more historical detail on the crossing?
@@sarahhaddad6488 they killed them in the name of allah and for islam to spread to the world. You do know before every battle they would offer their enemies 3 choices. Conversion to islam, paying the jizya ( a tax non muslims have to pay living in muslim lands) or death. I don't see anything wrong with this.
@@mtebid5658 Noise making again. it's always someone else's fault as if the Muslims did not get Soviet's support. Based on research, it's obvious that the Israelis were better strategists and tacticians with a more competent command structure that is based on merit.
Looking forward to reach the invasion of the Iberian Peninsula! This is a subject that, at least here in Portugal, is all so very thinly tought in school: Tariq invaded in 711, the Visigothic Kingdom fell, Reconquista started at Covadonga in 722, the end. There's a lot more to tell about this pivotal event and civilization for the creation of modern Portugal and Spain, so this is (yet another) K&G series I'm absolutely hooked on!!!
@@الكابوس511 certainly, Tariq acted under Musa's command, who in his turn was a governor of the Califate. But he was the 711 invasion's commander, and this wasn't sanctioned by the Calif Walid himself.
@@danielconde13 doesn't matter The important thing is that he is an Umayyad soldier, And he does not do anything except with the permission of Musa ibn Nusayr , The credit goes to the Umayyad Caliphate, not Tariq.
So, Cortez didn't conquered the Aztecs - the credit goes to Castille-Aragon; Vasco da Gama didn't discover the way into India: credit goes to Portugal; Caesar didn't conquer Gaul: after all, it was the Roman Senate. Etc, etc, etc... My friend, we already agreed on facts: he was under Musa's command, who in turn was a governor of the Caliphate. But it's also a fact that Tariq leaded the invasion and the Muslim forces in the Battle of Guadalete, and the initial invasion wasn't even sactioned by the Caliph Walid I. Why does it bother so much to you to state that Tariq invaded the Visigothic Kingdom?
there was no reconquista wars that lasted for 700 years !! it was revisited term used by latter historians to paint the "other" story & "us" vs "them" point of view ! the real reconquista maybe lasted about 50 years or something. it was border normal expansions, from faction to faction, sometimes the Iberians & Emirate of Cordoba are in Peace & sometimes at war, and after 700 years the total existence of Muslims reduced, then expelled.
“God is Most Great, I have been given Persia. By God, I can now see the white palace of Madain;” The prophecy that came true before the eyes of his companions.
This creation, the structure of the universe, The foods, the tongue that tastes, the teeth that grind, the stomach that digests, the excretion of waste, the oxygen, the lungs, the eyes, the libido and many other things, this does not indicate anything. Are you 100% sure that there is no creator? Rivers and seas and the creatures in them and the rain that sows the earth behind them It is very abundant with a lot of fruits Nothing creates anything Are you 100% sure that there is no creator? Go see what religion commands you to worship. One Creator created everything, not three, not more, not less, and not idols, but one Creator. Go and see for yourself, you will only find one religion, then ask about the evidence of the truth of this religion But I will remind you of something you may have forgotten. And I want you to think about it. You are here in this world against your will. Just think a little bit that you are not here. By your own choice. You are here by choice.Choose to be here.He is one and you will go.. The matter is not easy, the matter is great in this existence, because whoever is able to bring you into this world against your will, after death, will either find you in grace and beauty that you have not seen, or torment and fear. which you have not seen.
@@Daylon91 thanks for exposing your ignorance. our reproductive organs originate from the space close to the kidneys. and even when the organs later decent to their places, they still receive blood supply from the same space between the backbone and ribs
Guys, remember, this is the SAME Sassanids who were fighting and winning battles against the Byzantines for centuries. The same Persians who were world leaders. Yet they crumbled against the Muslim army. Never ever think yourself as superiors and boast around to those who are less fortunate than you because it is Allah alone who decides winners and losers. If Almighty Allah wants, you will lose, if Allah wants, you will win. Within moments Allah can change you fate. So don't take pride if you are on the front foot now. Assamalu Walaikum my brothers and sisters.
So what are you saying? Has Allah been willing to let the US, UK, France, Italy, Israel, Netherlands and now India and China kill tens of millions of Muslims for the past 250 years? Please don't preach such absurdities. Allah doesn't help those who don't help themselves.
16:28 As a half persian,I was surprised you know Farsi really well!! 17:59 I like how you show Iranian style calligraphy when a persian speaking farsi rather than regular arab calligraphy. The video overall is quite good! Very immersive with the language. Perhaps, the video maker is Persian or Arab?
If the Islamic caliphate and expansion were not done, it will have the same fate as Christianity. Teachings of Prophet Muhammad will be taken by Romans or Persians to their advantage and completely change the original message of the religion. This is what happened when Christianity fell in hands of Romans. So Islam established its own powerhouse to spread the message unaltered without giving a chance for Persians and Romans.
@@thauthentic dude come on, this is history so let us make it unbiased without any religion. Every religion says it's the right one and cites it's own book as proof and says it's ture because the same book says it is. I have nothing against religion but I'm pretty sure it's for the best to study history with no biases. We dont want more genocides and justification of killing people in the name of "Allah" it's very sad to see such comments cuz that's what the Terrorists say in exclusive documentaries too. They dont find it wrong because they think they do it for god. It's really bad. Have a good day.
@@Ani-13-w8d Don't know what to say to you. Yes, everyone says that their religion is the right religion. So it is upto you and me to find the truth based on evidence and thorough study. That is the whole purpose of life, to know the creator and worship him. You are welcome to disagree with this if you have another worldview. Secondly, yes we should take history as history. In earlier times, war were so common among kingdoms be it for land, kingdom, religion, whatever purpose. Nowadays also it is happening. Wars are not a result of religion, rather it is a human nature to fight against each other for any possible reason. It is said in hadith "If any muslim kills an innocent human, it is as if he has killed the entire humanity". And I'm a muslim and I don't know what belief system you follow.
i cannot believe you are talking about darrar bin al azwar and kaakaa bin amr......my unknown childhood heroes sadly , most arabs will not recognize these names today
My friend even arabia was ethnically mixed with time.... Indian and iranian influence on the east coast, african influence in hijaz and the west. And a great mix in mekka and jeddah due to hajj. All areas are mixed, and many families in lebanon and syria can trace their origin to yemen even before islam, others come from caucasus, central asia, even al andalus when it fell But they all have the same arab culture, with slight differences
What you say is true, but also the opposite happened sometimes. The Levant was largely depopulated because of plagues, earthquakes, and wars. Muslims had to settle tribes from arabia to protect the coast. Like the tannoukhis near beirut. Those tribes with time became what we know as the druze, and some of the maronites. So you see the lines are never clear when it comes to origins. However i do agree that the arabic peninsula was less affected then other areas like the levant.
@@abdullahshah9397 Respectfully, that second paragraph is very not true. I speak Arabic fluently and I've read and listened to a lot of lectures about the history of different Islamic states, over the course of the past ten years. Right of the bat, I can tell you that it makes no sense to throw a blanket statement like you did in your WHOLE second paragraph. Is is true for certain parts at certain times. It would have been ALMOST acceptable if you described the umayyad/rashidun period with that statement :) The least you could do to topic so dense is to focus on a region within a reasonable time frame. Do you truly think Arabs just stayed in the peninsula until the 18th century?? heck they were leaving in droves before islam, why stop? Every hundred to two hundred the peninsula becomes unable to provide enough food and water, and a wave migrates. Sometimes they get lucky and their migration becomes an epic with some crazy exaggerations, see the banu hilal migration. This happened before islam (rabeea/taghlib) and after islam. This happened due to factors mostly unchanged by islam, and where changed, they made migration even easier. Example, Abbasid period of weakness, taghlib's banu hamdan, and their ridicicously insane luck of having al mutannabbi be their ministry of propaganda When syria and southern iraq were conquered, there were already many arabs living there. In syria, it was tanukh, lakhm, jutham, al jafna, and others I cant recall who allmigrated out of yemen in waves, all pre islamic and quite old. The same can be said about the arabs of southern iraq (al munther kings, arch rivals of the ghassan kings of damascus (jillaq). Both were of yemeni origin, and both became christians sometime around 300-400 AD. The area between Iraq and syria (an area we call al jazira; the island, as it lies between the tigres and euphrates) was also already heavily arabized when conquered, and were also christian. They were staunchly christian, and refused to convert. Since they were very pro umayyad, they were basically allowed to live like the rest of the arab tribes who adopted islam, under state protection. Heck they even carried crosses and holy relics on their banners when they fought enemies of the umayyads, like when Umair ibn Al habab was killed. See the story about Akhtal's poetry that caused a distant relative of Umair to commit a massacre straight out of the mongol cookbook. Historians claim he killed 23K people (al bishr clan from taghlib bin wael from rabeea, Akhtal's home boys), but realistically , he probably killed 2-3 K people (a huge amount of people when you consider arab tribe numbers at the time). Apparently the poet who instigated this was actually captured by avenging madlads, but when asked he said he just a slave so they let him go. These jazira arabs were from Rabeea, of Najdi origin. They were fought out of Najd because the two biggest clans within rabeea fought an exhaustive civil war (bakr vs taghlib, basoos war). On the other hand, other places like persia proper (Bilad Faris), egypt, nuba, north africa, and iberia did not have arabs living there when they were conquered. Caliphs had to encourage migrations once the intial wave of expansion died. They even allowed some absolutely ridiculous shenanigans to happen like gathering jizya from berber and visigothic MUSLIMS as an additional tax... The one place arabs did not need encouragement was Khorasan. They just kept coming, and where it not for abu muslim al khorasani, they might be speaking arabic today. So why am I going in to this much detail? to show many examples of areas heavily arabized pre islamic expansion, some that only got arabized much later, some which did and where then de-arabized, and some that were never arabized. Northern Jazira was already called diyar bakr / diyar rabeea (diyar = home of) by the time of islam. In addition to clan/tibe migrations, there was an almost non stop steam of traders and merchants (mostly from Hadramut) spreading islam on the indian and malay coast, and very slowly becoming integrated. While theres a sizable population there now of arab ancestry, the numbers were never high enough to arabize the region. How big does the wave have to be? at least as big as the banu hilal I guess, but I doubt they migrated alone. Al Jabarti has good books about egyption mamluk/ottoman periods iirc. They were easy to get into, mostly motivated by stories about Muhammad Ali and da albanian boyz (very underrated character) and to find out more about my own yemeni ancestors (Hamdan) moved from yemen, to the levant, to upper egypt, and then to sudan. Yes upper Egypt was flooded by nomadic arabs (26 clans, each with many subclans) during that early Alawid period, but there was already a big arab population from streams of newer immigrants and decedents of the orginal waves (see history of al fustaat) in egypt. This is such a dense topic and the more you dive and learn the more questions you will have. So it just saddens me to see huuuge oversimplifications. I wrote this quickly, all of the top of my very tired head, before I pass out, so I hope it all makes sense lol. I will try edit it tomorrow if it sounds too stupid.
Firstly thank you for the great vid Secondly I see alot of arguments about sources and how real and strong Arabs were ofc mobility maybe were their biggest weapon but ppl forget 2 major points: 1- how Arabs lived at that time and pre Islamic time. Unlike Romans and sassanid, Arabs didn't fight for domination Arabs pretty much since their dawn fought themselves out of necessity for survival, some wars that took years and years started over well of waters over cattles, that hardened them made them war like ppl, it's like u take Sparta and do copy past all over Arabia, we also can say that picture when Khalid told the Romans "I brought you men who love death as you love life". 2- the point of moral, there is story at the battle of alahsab, when the Muslim were 3k vs the Makan alliance numbered as high as 10k to sum it up the prophet had vision and when his companions asked him why do you smile he said don't lose faith I see us standing at the high walls of yemen and holding the riches of Persia so at the point of this vid they already had Yemen so can only imagine what Saad was thinking when he was staring at the city, he most have thought that's all been true and all the struggle they been through wasn't for nothing, no wonder they willing to die in battle. Lastly it's shame that no one took the time and effort to translate most of the Arabic sources to English not just this period but the pre Islamic one too their beliefs, myths, Gods, tribes, wars they fought and history it's really rich and fascinating to read wish I had the time and energy to do that and introduce it to the world
Good explanation, however, other factors play a role aswell. There is a saying: 'A great empire is not destroyed from without untill it had destroyed itself from within' You cannot understand the Arab victories over the Persians without taking into account the situation within the Persian empire. The empire was severely weakened by the disastarous wars with the Romans. Lost many competent commanders, soldiers, officers and lost a lot of wealth aswell. Population was heavily taxed during the war(602-628) and so the Shah was very unpopular. Khosrow 2 was deposed and killed and a civil war started. The Arabs found out about this and knew the empire was weak. Thats why they striked in the first place. The Arabs just did the knock out blow to the Persian empire, while the Persians themselves weakened themselves by incompetence. Of crouse the brilliance of commanders such as Khalid Ibn Walleed played a role, aswell as superior strategy and morale from Arabs. However, I seriously doubt if the Arabs wouldv'e toppled the Persian empire would it have been at its strongest, without and war with the Romans, and with plently of wealth and popular support.
@@Siyar612 That did happen in Dhi Qar where Bakr ibn Wa’el and some other tribes of NE Arabia stood up to the persians and annihilated them , the entire persian army or at least a large amount of it was sent to destroy Bakr and enslave their women , and the persians failed , there’s also the battle of Saloot in Oman where Azdi Arabs and a small amount of Arabs from Quda’ah ( Tribe name ) approximately 300 pushed the Persians back out of Oman
Will future videos explore any of the reasons for the Sassanid collapse? The rate at which they are losing, the number of defections and the lack of any sense of leadership, appear to point to some major Empire issues.
If you like there is lots of studies on this matter , check out lectures and papers on this . Info given by this channel lacks crucial information and not very accurate . You can check out that at the end of sassanid empire there were internal struggle , generals and nobles not supporting royal command and rivalry sky rocketed . There are vary speculations and theories . Nobles and generals may have not supported yazdgerd because him and his mother were christian !
@Karim Hassan Gemiey very good points . Yet there are many speculations about this era , even recent archeology and studies . Here are some other points: About persia , there are records of taxing that shows in time of arab rule taxes were higher 6 times that shows economic strife might not helped sassanid fall . Lack of leadership and support for yazdgerd because of his christianity might have beed important. khosrow anoushirvan made significant changes in the empire that made it self sufficient and structurally resistance and this alone might have caused independence from central rule in time of arab invasion , as we see persian coins minted as independent lords in many regions in time of arab invasion that shows not a complete conquest but overthrow of a king .
@@mihandoostan3755 lmao, the only father for al qaeda and adesh is USA, they created their barbaric ideology and radical ideas, supported with weapons and money, Islam has nothing to do with any of these groups, if anyone has anything to do with them it's your secular and liberal corrupt and hypocrite leaders
@@MT_282 indeed the rise of the shiaa Fatimid in the east of algeria among the sanhadja of the houdna the koutam of mount babor and the Kabyle of mount djurdjura signed the end of the kharidji domination of central Maghreb , even if there was some kharidji uprising , ilike the man with a donkey one "thou elhimar" in the chawi region of aouras
@@MT_282 indeed they were ! From those 3 tribes cited above even if the bulk of the force was frome koutama , between 10-20k , and it was followed by a major migration of mainly koutama(and some Kabyle and sanhadja) to Egypt around 100k person , ps from your name I guess your from bordj like me , and it's between bordj Bouira and Béjaïa where those three tribes meet
@@mohbou3924 how did you know, my great great grandad was kicked out of his dads house in bordj than he walked to bejaia as a homeless person and slowly began to make money when he died and his son inherited what he had, my great grandad became a merchant and was quite rich, he also had 4 wives😏🔥
This war was all about faith vs another, not a race vs race. Muslims consisted vastly of both Arabs and Persians, along with races though small in numbers.
I am glad you guys covered this topic as there are less common knowledge known about the fall of Ctesiphon. However, it would be nice if you could cover the apocalyptic war of 602-628 between the Sassanians and Byzantines which was a prelude to this war. Also, it can be good to start a new series on the rise Abbasids too. As always, Kudos to you guys.
@@stehfreejesseah7893 well they also explained the reason for the battle series but yes they did not show the major and minor battles of that time,but mentioned the overall campaign
I think that the Islamic Conquest proved that tactics/strategy/morale are the most important part and true game-changers of any kind of battle of warfare. You have to remember that the Muslims during this time was essentially still a tribal army. The Eastern Roman Empire, as well as the Sassanids, had superior training, organization, much better arms and armor, and more troops than the Muslims. The only advantage that Muslims had was that their fanatical belief in their religion and more important tactical and strategic geniuses as commanders such as Khalid Ibn Al Walid. With those 2 things, they managed to defeat 2 of the most powerful empires in the world at the time.
Khalid Ibn Al Walid was the luck of Muslim State really. Without a brilliant general and likes of him, maybe we wouldnt have that much of a Muslim population today. History is just weird. It shows that role and impact of these few men changed the life today..
The Muslim conquest owes it's victories to the mutual destruction of the Byzantines and the Sassanids. By the time they were done wearing themselves out, only idiots were left in the position of political and military leadership with no champions-- most of the capable men were gone. Contrary to the Islamic sources, the Arabs were knowledgeable and experienced soldiers-- they have been serving as mercenaries to both great empires. The Byzantium was already on its way out already and no longer a great Roman empire due to the activities of the Barbarians and the loss of political unity with the Western Roman hemisphere. Another thing to consider is that the Mohammed of the Quran and Islamic sources is a myth of the Ummayad dynasty. The man who rallied the Arabs under one banner was an enlightened prince of Arab origin familiar with Sassanid politics. He was later given the title Mohammed-- the exalted one. He was an ardent follower of a heretic Jewish sect. His name is Iyas ibn Qabisah.
@@Omegaeon1 quality also plays a lot in that case though. I mean the Islamic expansion have their best quality armies facing off against mostly levied troops. And if the Arab army was indeed largely tribal in nature, then it is no surprise (sure by hindsight proven by various Turkic tribes and the Mongols) they overwhelmed both Sedentary empires by bringing high quality and motivated troops (not to mention the religious zeal).
Please a documentary on beloved Prophet's military and political campaign. There are lot of resources and detail battles of Badr, ohud, khandaq, Tabuk and so on
These battle will be hard to cover because they will spark too many arguments (religious arguments).. And most sources of these battle are one sided and will be hard to present realistically and objectively without falling to a specific narrative
@Karim Hassan Gemiey it was not only the walls that made Constantinople impossible to conquer (it was attacked, many times) but the fact that it was surrounded by sea with the Mediterranean to the south and the Black Sea to the east and north. This made the city impossible to put under siege because it could be easily supplied and reinforced. The Byzantines also employed some mythical innovation called "Greek Fire" to eradicate enemy navies.
The custom back then was to duel your opponent, but the Persians were used to gladiator-style combat with armor and helmets. The Arabs were a blood feud society where duels were common and swordsmanship was a common skill. It would be like a New Yorker challenging a Texan to a shootout- the culture is just too much to contend with
@@gerardb5220 Isn't that typical, Gerard? Why won't a muslim be proud of what their ancestors have worked hard for and conquered. We, in no way, look down on your civilization and neither does our prophet. He even banned us from cursing your gods and/or religions. So, no, it is not "hypocritical"
Fares Ayham is right Gerard! There are only two books we take our facts from and we are not in need to look at the books you mentioned for our complete trust in those two books and the most truthful details they contain.
Please make a video on Battle of Nahawand which is called the "victory of victory" ...Conquest of Ctesiphon was followed by Nahavand which completely routed Sassinids forever. Numan Bin Muqarrin and Tulaiha Bin Khuwaylid were the heroes!
I am unable to understand how Arabs were able to defeat Sassanians time after time, while Arab cavalry was undoubtedly excellent, they couldn't have been better than Persian Cataphracts, and it was cavalry which played the decisive role back then.
Hdye Hdhde yeah back then morale was everything and Islam and Proper Jihad essentially gave the warriors a reservation in Heaven as long as they fight for god so dying wasn’t some horrifying truth, it was a promotion
When you are used to doing battles that always ended with a rout it becomes hard to figure out on the spot how to face extremist zealots on par with modern terrorists just willing to fall on your sword just to stab you in the guts. Same thing happened to the Aztecs, they were used to a mode of warfare that revolved around capturing their enemies alive for sacrifice and had no idea how to react when a superior enemy just slaughtered everyone.
Awesome video! The amount of detail and your presentation of it, is on par with JJ Norwich's series on Byzantine History (the kind of presentation that pulls the listener right in from the start & keeps your interest because you can imagine it happening around you)
@ fact of the matter is early islams conquests can't really be proven, Islam can't even predate Abdal Malik, there's no arcaelogical evidence for Mohammed or Khalid walid, chances are that Arabs conquered the area they conquered as ways to break off the respective empires, Rome and Persia had been in their most deadly war in their history, if they could mount any soldiers it would have been peasants Besides, why is it that he Byzantines never once acknowledged the Arabs as Muslims, but as just monotheistic Christians? Again, true Islam didn't show itself until the time of abdal malik
@ > where does it say in your quran that the bible is corrupted? on the contrary, the quran approves of the christian sources as authentic, congratulations, you have now officially gone against your own "holy" book of course i will disregard most of the things that are in muslim scriptures, you claim to know more about all the prophets than either judaism or christianity when you come about 600 years after christianity... your own prophet who supposedly rode that magical donkey thing is a plagiarism of one of the animals from Zoroastrian, so yeah, I'll definitely take anything from islamic sources with a grain of salt QUESTION! what will we find if we dig through those graves? either a. Nothing because someone probably built it to make profit, just like Mecca or b. Some warlord DISGUISED as a prophet but isn't actually a prophet another point i wanted to point out is that your own "prophet" said to not build a mosque over him and yet look what happened "He (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “When a righteous man died among them, they would build a place of worship over his grave and put those images in it. They are the most evil of mankind before Allaah.” (Al-Bukhaari, 427; Muslim, 528) “The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘May Allaah curse the Jews and the Christians, for they have taken the graves of their Prophets as places of worship.’” ‘Aa’ishah said: “He was warning (the Muslims) against (doing) what they had done.” And she said: “Had it not been for that, the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) would have been made prominent but he was afraid it might be taken (as a) place of worship.” al-Bukhaari (1330) and Muslim (529) yet,The Green Dome, which is supposedly mohameds grave is also a mosque > it would be helpful if you actually pointed some out, I'll get you started, the letter from mohammed to heraclius never existed, it was fabricated by egyptian monks as an attempt to stop muslims from bringing down their church, and besides, you can't actually be serious about some illiterate arabian writing letters of people to convert to his religion when NOBODY historically aknwoledged islam during those times, I repeat again, Byzantines, which survived the arabian invasion never aknowledge the term muslim, or mohamed, but only "monotheistic Christians", the closest we get is "rock worshippers", which might have actually been a common theme in the city of Petra, (there's a great theory that Petra is where "Islam" started, not Mecca since archaeologically didn't exist during mohamed's time) which empires are you talking about? sassanids + byzantine empire barely add up to 2-10% of total landmass (optimistically combined) byzantine empire was slowly getting eaten from behind by lombards in italy and visigoths in spain as well as bulgars at it's backgarden, how does that equate byzantine empire as ruling "half of the world"? more like "half of the world" was AGAINST THEM, same could be said for Sassanids who were politically fighting amongst royal members (that's not a healthy empire who is capable of ruling "half of the world") but you know what? yes, at times they couldn't afford soldiers, but you know what they could afford? Arab mercenaries, during 602-628 both persia and rome hired arabs to fight their battles, to put it bluntly, arabs here had everything to win, especially gold what advanced technology are we talking about? flying ships? rocket launchers? we're talking about ancient times here, not modern times when there's a huge gap in technological advancements between the rich nations and poor nations, at the time, anyone with a sword, and I mean ANYONE with a sword and some basic training was considered a soldier and thus a threat, but I see the muslim propaganda happening here, the common islamic propaganda is that arabs with a bunch of sticks and some horses or camels managed to take on empires who were really powerful and had all resources at hand got beaten by the "will of allah" which is total bullcrap that you were indoctrinated since birth actually quite high,especially if they were close in power,, byzantines and sassanids were quite close in military strengths, to put it in perspective, imagine a tug of war that just never ends, both parties are always flexing their muscles, doing that will get you tired and weary over time, two to perhaps even three generations born to fight literally the same war that would go on from 602 - 628, that's literally a whole load of resources and manpower WASTED AWAY, not to mention both empires were still recovering from Justinian's plague, not sure you're familiar with that, but the damage it did took many years to recover incase you're still not understanding my point, imagine chinese kingdoms throughout the existance of china, it got unified and then broken apart, and then repeat over and over again, when it is broken apart you get these kingdoms that constantly fight each other, how are they getting stronger here? because everytime that happens there's always a new player coming in and invading them, be it, huns or mongols or japanese greek states? sparta was considered one of the most powerful city state and yet it got into a bloody war with Athens which resulted in both economies getting permanently damaged, over the centuries the city states continued to war among themselves making each weaker and economically damaged until you got a new player coming in Roman "republic", so by now you should start to see a pattern here, I hope that your islamic sources don't go far and beyond to state that the Romans and Sassanids were at their peak during mohamed because that's gonna make me puke considering facts point to both sassanids and byzantines being majorly cripped by 630s yes, in theory that's what happens in war for conquest, but this wasn't it,this was a political war, rome ceased to do any conquests after Trajan, and definetly couldn't afford any after Justinian, neither rome or persia could conquer each other, romans had a strategically well placed capital that for almost a millenia couldn't be sacked after so many invasions they could have made a meme out of it Commander: My basileous, Constantinople is being seiged the Emperor: *SIGHS* Here we go again Persians tried and they failed massively thanks to greek fire, and then the Romans decided to fire back, they were going south of Armenia and heading towards the sassanid capital when persians finally decided to make a peace, although Romans would have taken the fight to persian land and likely conquered the capital (historically they did that several times before) they agreed that it would have been better to sue for peace rather than keep wasting resources (that's why roman empire didn't want to conquer persia) they learnt that the hard way when they conquered Mesopotamia in Trajan's time and instantly knew that the resources to upkeep would have been too many to bring any benefit to the empire so Hadrian made the decree that Roman empire shall no longer make any expansions and give away mesopotamia because it would be too costly to upkeep why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that they were very weak at that point? oh wait, you've been indoctrinated since birth, I forgot, but for anyone else who has the attention span to still be reading this comment, imagine germany after WW2, few years prior it had over 75% of the european peninsula under their thumbs, global superpower right? according to the muslim logic, germany should still be mounting a very powerful army in 1947 or 1948... spoiler alert, germany wouldn't have been able to defend itself against any invasion, apply that same logic to both persia and byzantine empires and you can get an easy picture as to how they were conquered that's such a stupid statement, first, Islam means submission, submission to "Allah" not peace, you muslims claim that islam is a religion of peace, but Islam means submission to allah, first and foremost and no, islam doesn't predate mohamed, it barely predates Abdal Malik for that matter, none of the prophets before mohamed are prophets of islam, Abraham never built that kabba which is in Mecca because he never even went further south than egypt
how did Arab beduins with no skills in battle and in knowledge bring the two greatest Empire of that time "Roman Empire and Persian Empire" to its knees , completely capturing and single handily eliminating them with no foreign help!!! Allahu Akbar. Faith is the Answer.
Great Chanel! History Marche and Kings and Generals are one of my best chanels. Please complete this series and if you can kindly make a video on Battle of Firaz! Most importantly, keep up the Great work!
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Hey guys, we started uploading our art to Displate: displate.com/kingsandgenerals/displates?art=5f1a2372ed4c0 These are highly recommended - the quality is great and they will improve any room. Use our link to 30% discount the first week, then 20% discount the rest of the time. We will be uploading new stuff all the time, so bookmark it.
Here is the video of the previous episode of this series: ua-cam.com/video/r2cEIDZwG5M/v-deo.html
make more modern warfare videos
Love U from Pakistan💖👍
we need your vedios in arabic
Videos
We need your videos in arabic
Hey guys, I'm one of the co-creators of this series and I hope you enjoyed it! Before watching this video, it is recommended to watch our first season of Early Muslim Expansion to get better context. The link is in the description. There are more battles soon to come so stay tuned for more!
As always here are TW: Attila mods that we used in this video :
- Beginning of the end: Rise of Islam 622AD (WIP)
- The Fall of Eagles (Some of the units have been reworked by myself)
- Lux un Umbra Preset
- Aztec's Graphics Enhancement
- Reshade
EDIT: Mods added.
Best wishes,
Malay Archer ڤمانه ملايو
Terbaik bro
Oh hell yea dude..
GG...
Always waiting for some good episodes while eating breakfast
Iranian?
Wow, nice man. Looking forward to see the new one.
you can kinda imagine the despair of the sassanids, its not like their commanders were incompetent or cowardly, they were simply outplayed at every turn by the arabs
In wars there winners and losers
RNGesus bleseth, RNGesus taketh away.
The rise of Persian empire wasn't any less shocking.
How Korosh(cyrus) 'the barbarian' conquered all the sedented peoples.
@@Brahmdagh how is Cyrus a barbarian ?
@@natsuusharti8015 idk ask the babylonians etc
I wonder how many of these accounts are completely accurate. Definitely a "history written by the winners" kind of thing. Of course the Muslims ultimately won, but a lot of the details strike me as fictional.
when i heard "Khalid Ibn AL Walid" this battle is already won...
FACTS!
He wasn't in this battle it was Sa'ad ibn abi waqqas
Same here.
💯
He wasn't much of a hero tough
According to AL tabari and ibn khaldun, He massacred civilians in istakhr and ctisephon, enslaved women and children. His river of blood is famous in masscare of istakhr where almost 15000 people got decapitated
Prophet: learn to ride a horse and swimming is recommended skills for you
Sa'ad + army: ride horses while swimming
Nope Umar ib al khatrab said that
@@sofianeamr7398 oh, I think it's sunnah
@@mlc1610 you're right, they're both Sunnah that the Prophet SAW recommended
Based and sunnahpilled
@@sofianeamr7398 yes its Umar - Allah bless him - words
Everybody gangsta untill cavalry run across river
Or when a cockroach flies
You made my day man 😂
*Or the ships starts to walking*
💀
Apparently they swimed 😬
Mongols, arabs, vikings. Never underestimate people born in hardships for they have the strength to achieve victory.
the thing is becouse of the late sassanian wars with every one after the battle of ninevah with heracleus it had only 9,000 man left(this is not accounting for the plague that killed at least a thired of the population) if you notice islamic wars are the only battles where the sassanian army was majority infantry showing the soldiers of these wars were just farmars and not real soldiers these battles are just storys(the earliest sources of islamic history we have is at best wroten 201 years after muhammad what do you expect)you look at persian roman wars the persians were almost always out numbered but almost always won so do yourself a favor and stop beliving these storys go look at the tactics and storys of battles like yarmuk and tell me do they make the slightest sense also almost all other battles the arabs have had have been losses so dont compare these storys with real ones
@@arianrezaie4729 arabs destroyed the romans too , and at the ame time during they wars against persia , what saved the romans is their geography otherwise they wouldve been destroyed completely just like persia the weak nation.
@@arianrezaie4729 Arabs destroyed the whole persian empire and maybe that is the reason you can't find a reliable sources to describe the persian point of view btw the arabs history books said that the sassanids were always larger than the arabs Muslims also arabs were fighting on two fronts against the Byzantine in the western north and against the Sassanids in the east and before that arabs fought against each other in the reda wars that killed many of them after Muhammad died many arab tribes left Islam again so if you try to find a silly argument to justify why the Persians lost their empire quickly just rethink again because even the arabs sources mentioned that even they as arabs lost many battles and it was never about numbers it was a complex of many elements .
@@annzsalamov7657 Most civilisations have held strong religious beliefs and armies that included religious zealots, including the vikings and mongols. It's definitely more a case of a harsh life breeding hard people
A new ideology or belief that makes people think that said ideology/belief is worth fighting/dying for, that greatly inspires men to such heights. That helps alot too.
ie: Revolutionary France, American war of Independence and Civil war, The Crusades, and in this case Islam.
Salman al-Farsi also recommended a trench be dug around Madinah before 10,000 Meccan and allied forces could attack. Hence it was called the Battle of the Trench, or Al-Khandaq. It saved a lot of lives as only a few foolish horsemen tried to ride through the ditch only to be shot by arrows.
Unsurprisingly the Persians used the same trench tactic here.
He was a traitor and the most reprehensible person in iran's history.
@@catboy8137 so was everyone else who accepted Islam because of campasion of Arabs 😂 dude wake up that's wtf logic
@@aestheticheart8855 people embrace Islam for the Islam itself.
And ironically to your statement look up how indonesians became Muslims
@@gerardb5220 lol?
Keep telling yourself that, zakat money taken form Muslims yearly is way more than jizya money.
don't embarrass yourself with dumb lies, that makes you dumb
@@gerardb5220 Wow really 😂 salaries for free?!! Every soldier in every army takes a salary and the kharaj is taxes that goes to the Treasury.
I want you to work for free and tell your country not to collect taxes to publicly spend.
Wow really so bright
Khalid Ibn Al Walid is one of my favorite of all ancient generals and battle commanders, what a wonder it would be to be able to witness the events of his era. His generosity is what led to his dismissal, but in my opinion it only made him greater. He wasn’t as attached to materialistic things as others were, often greatly rewarding his men.
He is earliest Isis jihadi
@@rajeshdevika8827 he want humanity to be guided that's why he was doing what he had done
Please keep continuing the Muslim series I’m learning a lot about early Islam ☪️
spread by conquest. that's all i know. but one thing still make me confused.... How can the muslims army can defeat two super power empire (Roman empire and sassanid empire). Tactic? Mental? Skill? Equipment? or this two empire just having their bad day... and having that until their collapse? well i dunno...
@@muhammadzain8829 cuz they never been togather until Islam came
Muhammad Zain Bachmid They were partly exhausted by decades of indecisive wars(note the point about extreme taxation in the video) but tactics, mental fortitude and conversions of key people were also in play.
@@muhammadzain8829 Because Islam cannot speak to describe it
@@muhammadzain8829 God was on their side
A video on the Rashidun/Umayyad army structure. So we can see how they were winning so many battles whilst outnumbered.
They were outnumbered if you were to believe the only source of this wars, their so called "hadiths",religious stories which are "said" to have been narrated by their religious leaders
they had no special structure or special weapons... Actually their army was quite basic compared to the Parisians or Byzantines
@@KAD132 they did have completely different army, with a completely different set of advantages(primary one being the combination of their lifestyle and Arabic horse) and different tactics coming down from them(ironically - very different to those commonly perceived: very little or no special focus on horse archery, for example, which runs directly against common image), all this reinforced by religious zeal and sense of belonging to something larger.
It took Byzantines a looong time to find effective antidots against this "basic" army, and Persians never ev even had the chance. By the time Eastern Roman empire got it, however, it was essentially crippled.
Siavash Nikvand well most of medieval sources are unreliable, which is why historians try to use other clues to make judgment. But the early Islamic conquests has corroborating evidence from non-Islamic sources and it’s widely accepted they were outnumbered.
the thing is becouse of the late sassanian wars with every one after the battle of ninevah with heracleus it had only 9,000 man left(this is not accounting for the plague that killed at least a thired of the population) if you notice islamic wars are the only battles where the sassanian army was majority infantry showing the soldiers of these wars were just farmars and not real soldiers these battles are just storys(the earliest sources of islamic history we have is at best wroten 201 years after muhammad what do you expect)you look at persian roman wars the persians were almost always out numbered but almost always won
How can they possibly be defeated when they either march for the victory or martyrdom, these are the men who were humble worshippers by night but by day they were fierce warriors.
Jose Raul Miguens Cruz
I was talking about their ethics of war, it is forbidden for a Muslim to flee from the battlefield. “Ima Nasar ow ima Shahadah” so either Victory or Martyrdom.
@Lachlan Allen But the persians were better at war, they had fought long battles with the Romans, what you are missing here is the fact that most of the Muslim Army was volunteer army , people who choose to go to war, and they had a something bigger then themselves to fight for. the defections in the Sassanian ranks had always been in the method of recruitment and the heavy taxes on the general population along with a strict hierarchical society , where as the Muslim army offered them lower taxes and security and a very flexible social hierarchy where equality is ideological rather then based on ethnicity or social stratification. Humans crave nothing more than respect and dignity and many a times its above the love of life itself. Hearts and minds people.. hearts and minds.
Lachlan Allen
I’was refering to early Muslims, the 10.000 thousends of saints prophecied in the Bible.
Without their Faith which gave them confidence, courage and bravery to bring planning and tactics in the table while engaging in a war with two superpowers of that time and defeating them, we wouldn’t be here today commenting about these events.
And he said, The LORD came from Si'nai, and rose up from Se'-ir unto them, he shined forth from mount Pa'-ran [Mecca in Arabic], and he came with ten thousands of saints [the army of the Muslims that liberated Mecca was made of 10.000 men]: from his right hand went a fiery law for them. (The King James Version Bible, Deuteronomy 33:2).
@@FatriMurtezi if its forbidden for a muslim to flee from the battle field why did the flee in the 7 days war or in the war of iraq
They fight to live not to die. Death is not a choise. But if it was the case, then let it be. No proplem. Paradise is thier reward.
I was waiting for this one. And i just re-watched the compilation of part 1 of the early Muslim conquests a week ago so the timing is excellent.
1/3rd of the early Muslim men died on battlefield. And almost 100% of muslim men in that era participated in some battle in their lives.
@Abdinassir Abdi Are you admiring the blood sacrifice? A true follower of the way would not glorify such things. Yeshua is coming..sooner than most even believe, who do believe. Seek ye not the things of this world, nor the false teachings of self proclaimed holy men. All who profess the name of Jesus Christ, repent of their sins and are baptized of water and the Holy Ghost shall receive eternity and Life everlasting. Only those who come through the Son shall receive the Father, Only those who are called by the Father shall receive the Son.
This is more than what you may take as simple regurgitation of a text you may or may not consider to be false. I would like to have a true conversation, if you are at all interested. If not, Be blessed in the name of Jesus. It is my hope that you take this to heart, even if only for a moment.
@@jeffmorin5867 what blood sacrifice are you talking about, jihad means struggle for the cause of Allah... it could be anything from struggling from poverty, oppression, ailments, the one he meant is struggling in war and spreading Islam, these men came to war fully prepared to die just to spread the message of Islam, no blood sacrifices done as far as everyone's concerned.
@@jeffmorin5867 how u think early christianity was... ya traveled the world converting and colonizing and killing💀
@@jeffmorin5867 this person is an example of someone who doesn't know anything about other stuff and blabbering nonsense to justified his words
@@thewonderingworld9301 Early Christianity, for the first few centuries, was spread more through willing conversion rather than coercion. Later on after the Roman emperors legalized the religion and convert to it did coercion and force of arms become more prevalent in spreading the faith.
It’s all fun and games, until your enemy gets your secret killer weapon...
Its all fun and games, until winter in Moscow
@@ukulaylaANDme Tell that to the mongols lol 😂😂🤣
It's all fun and games until the they launched the crusade for the fourth times...
yea, you need roof koreans for ultimate defense stats
It's all fun and games until you hear tree speaking Vietnamese
"il combat you one on one Arabs!"
Arabs: *"you have fallen mistakes to one of the most classic blunders"*
Oldest Arab trick in the book. they are elite duelists and I suspect they had fun while dueling enemy commanders.
The had an elite duelist unit pose as commanders...
@@chedabu A rather weak claim. Most arab commanders were installed as commanders by merit, in other words, they were the best of the best warriors. Much like the mongol commanders installed by genghis.
Sounds like fantasie and propaganda. Like Constantin seeing a cross in the heavens before battle, it's just something written by the victorious elite to glorify themselves and pacify the population with tribalism
@@Solidoaf its true every arab tribe had elite warriors from the elite families, like the bani hanifa tribe and of course the quraysh, in fact the caliph of the time was umar ibn al khattab, possibly the greatest companion of the prophet and the cousin of khalid ibn al walid, he was said to be so tall that it looked like he was in horseback, he was also one of the few literate people in the tribe of quraysh
Zuhra is the cavalry commander everyone needs, it's been a while since I saw a competent cavalry commander
I think he dies after the fall of Ctesiphon
Do you meet many cavalry commanders?
Do you think he is better than Murat napoleons calvary commander
@@mohammedmaster672 THAT'S Adeferent time with different and new strategies
I think it impossible to compare the two commanders
Very true, usually they give some rich fucker the horses and halfway through he goes "wait I could die, or the king could die and I could just leave.....BYE"
Sassanid Commander: "TRIAL BY COMBAT, RIGHT NOW!"
Muslim Commander: "That's not a trial, *that's an execution*!"
Epic for honor bruh moment.
They didn't had Tyrion Lannister with them.
@@RAZOR_1224 I wish they add an arab faction to for honor
FOR HONOR
@@CirosKhan seething Farsī spotted
The Muslim army generals won almost every 1-on-1 engagement. What was their secret/training to accomplish this?
They are know that one of biggest achievement of mankind was to die at battle in the name of God, so that i think - as khalid himself says "you should know that I have come to you with an army of men that love death, as you love life".
Because Muslim commanders were appointed by their sheer talent and were the best worriers in their camps. this is the one reason. there may be other reasons also.
Because they became commanders by merit.. most of them were known warriors before being elected by the Kalif and his generals
I appreciate the responses, it sounds like the Islamic/Muslim system could be described as highly meritocratic. As with most warrior culture (Vikings or Hun), successful combat and conquest equated to higher social status.
It’s mostly due to that they wanted to be killed in battle. How do you fight a enemy that doesn’t fear death?
There's a story from the battle of Yarmouk where Khalid told one of the Roman generals that "We love martyrdom more than you love women and wine" dont know how true it is but it's epic!
It's 110 percent true
Truee
bruh you doubting? Proof is right in front of your eyes
Martyrdom in islam means a place secured in paradise. So makes sense ..
Actually. He said that i will bring you the army who love death the way you love this world/life.
I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR THIS FOR A MILLION YEARS THANKS!
بالفعل انا أيضاً، ننتظر بشدة
منجم التاريخ فعلا لازلت انتظر حلقاتهم عن فتح الاندلس و شمال افريقيا
للاسف تاريخنا العظيم لا يدرس في مدارسنا
17:50 *It is fascinating to know how 'Salman The Persian' accepted Islam*
The first sixteen years of his life were devoted to studying to become a Zoroastrian magus or priest after which he became the guardian of a fire temple , which was a well-respected job. Three years later in 587 he met a Nestorian Christian group and was impressed by them. Against the wishes of his father, he left his family to join them. [10]
[ self-published source ] His family imprisoned him afterwards to prevent him but he escaped. [10]
He traveled around the Middle East to discuss his ideas with priests, theologians and scholars in his quest for the truth. [10] During his stay in
Syria , he heard of Muhammad , whose coming had been predicted by Salman's last Christian teacher on his deathbed. [5] Afterwards and during his journey to the Arabian Peninsula , he was betrayed and sold to a Jew in Medina . After meeting Muhammad, he recognized the signs that the monk had described to him. He converted to Islam and secured his freedom with the help of Muhammad.
Source: Wikipedia
Really convenient conversion
Every single modern scholar belives salman is a few people rolled into one secondly taking a look at our sources its clear that early islamic history is not even slightly accurate
@@chedabu how is it clear that Islamic sources were not accurate? Any more than the western sources?
Thanks brother I just remembered the story I learnt it in my madarasa (islamic schools) learned a lot of sahabah who's name is salman :)
@Jojo Momo He was captured by bandits who made him into a slave.
When Jalinus was killed in single hand combat
Epic BrUH Moment
Bruh sfx heard all around Parthia
A lot of the credit for these victories should go to Khalid bin al-Waleed, even though he didn't personally command some of the later major battles.
He took a bunch of rag-tag bedouin tribal warriors and organized them into standing armies that could stand their ground against Sassanid infantry and at least survive the Roman infantry. His tactics anticipated a lot of Mongol and Turkic style warfare that would prove especially deadly against similar opponents in the future
Just a decade ago, the Arab style of warfare was a bunch of bedouins picking up whatever arms and animals they had, performing a raid or two and coming back home before the intense summer or winter began kicking in. Pitched battles were basically a standoff followed by a bunch of duels between opposing tribal leaders who also acted as commanders.
Imagine these very men then challenging the might of the Romans and wiping out the Sassanids just 1-2 decades later. It's crazy
It's not crazy, it's the proof of their true belief, islam, islam made them unite, and their vision is to liberate people from worshipping false gods to worship One True God,
Arabs in that time period trained every boy from young age to fight so they can defend their tribes plus they lived in harsh environment and the army were fully mobilozed even the infintry were riding horses or camels and because their new faith they had high morals
@Saf 299 asabiyat, lisaniyat is spreading soo much in Muslims the word which Mohammad Sallahu-alahe-wasalam crushed by his shoe
There are very less who say I am Muslim
@Saf 299 it was the military of islam, not the religion itself. indeed a good part of the arab peninsula revolted immediately after mohammad died... and the muslims crushed these revolts mercilessly
@@ahmadsultan4643 if you didn't know even the Arabs tribes who lived in the small towns they send their children with those desert tribes to foster and teach them even Mohammed PBUH is one of those kids
that crossing of the tigris is a logistical masterpiece for the ages
History teacher: “can anyone explain how Early Muslim Expansion happend?”
Me: (raises hand) 🤚
History teacher: “anyone else besides Kings And Generals subscribers?”
Longest in history
@@clifton777lewis6 I mean I don't blame them. Everyone did it at the time why are you shaming arabs alone.
Black Caesar This isn’t a justification but an explanation. In America we only learn about history that applies to us and the Western Hemisphere. The Arab slave trade didn’t affect America at all while the Atlantic slave trade created the foundations for this country (I’m assuming you’re American too). It’s the same reason why we don’t learn about the Napoleonic Wars or the creation of Germany or Ancient China.
@@الياسغالب-خ8ز not trying to shame anyone excuse me if I came off like that.
@@MuhammadUsman-mi4jk all of it is good to hear History is cool. but your definitely right
Imagine what a cavalry charging across a river does to the morale of the other side
Military commanders of the past: comes forward in a duel putting his life on the line and propably dying in front of his own soldiers. Massive balls. Military "commanders" today: hides in an unknown bunker and sends airstrikes against a bunch of underarmed people thinking he's the real shit. Playstation cowards
@Nazrul Islam are you raisul?
Remember these are accounts from the victors.
Yeah it;s called technology,where you can kill as many enemies as you can,while suffering minimal losses,aka war at it's best
@ Technology*
@Nazrul Islam As hey always did
This one is great, something about the huge sweeping metropolitan landscape of the multiple interconnected cities of ctessiphon strikes my imagination so hard, it seems so mythical
I even like the name of Persia , Babylon , Ctessiphon. Persians were always advanced people even after their conversation some of the best scientists were Persian
@@jetli2086 the geography allowed them to be advanced. China and India had great innovators because of their geography.
Sounds like it would be pretty easy to establish a world religion when your commanders all play on god mode.
the muslims are just players against AI in Total war
dude literally had dream telling him yes attack from here.
@@troooooper100 Saad: "How are we going to cross the river? The current is too strong and there's enemies on the other side."
Dream: "Just DO IT!"
Saad: "k"
Persians: "Flee, flee, fleeeee!"
Rather it was the religion which made them potentially successful commanders.
@@NeroIML it was not a dream, in Islamic sources he prayed to God and his prayer was excepted. As a Muslim I never heard about him dreaming before this.
the quality of Kings and Generals vids never dissappoint me
Nie melayu ke?
@@muhammadassadullah6261 yup indonesia precisely
eh ada orang Indonesia juga hehe
@@mohammadrayhan294 ada dong :D
Fun fact: during the Hijra there was a certain Bedouin named Suraqah (physically ugly by contemporary accounts) who wanted in on some of the reward for capturing the Prophet & Abu Bakr on their flight to Yathrib (Medina). His horse refused to approach the Prophet when he had reached him (the only one of the pursuers to get that close) and the Prophet promised him that one day he would wear the robes of Khosrau, the Shah at the time. Later on when Ctesiphon was captured, then-Caliph Umar sent for the elderly Suraqah and the imperial regalia captured from the Persians and had the Bedouin put them on as fulfillment of the Prophet’s decree.
Magnificent
Probably just Islamic propaganda.
@Shawn Lol no. Everyone knows the reason we invaded Iraq was not because of a WMD. I am obviously not talking about the modern era dipshit. Do you really think since the muslims wrote the history of this war, that they wouldn't have lied at all or claimed things that didn't happen?
Can you tell us how many years after this do our sources mention this lie so we can have a good laugh ;)
@@arianrezaie4729 I said probably, i never stated that it was a for sure thing. Your reading skills are pathetic. I believe in logic and facts not myths and legend.
Khalid died in 642, and his tombstone shows a list of over 50 major battles he won. Not only was he unbeaten in combat, Khalid never even lost a skirmish or a duel! It was common for him and his trusted officers to challenge the commanders of enemy armies to a duel before battle. A win would ruin the morale of the opponents. The best military minds of two great empires couldn’t produce a commander or even a soldier to beat this genius.
Everybody Gangsta until the Arabs challenge you to a 1V1
Lol
@@khalildz1552 Muslim Arabs
khalil dz
Dude im talking about Arabia not the Maghreb
@@khalildz1552 they were arabs at that time dude..
1v1 because of the birth of islam and their will to fight, you don’t see that in arabs anymore these days 🤣😂
For those do not know, the Tigris river is something like The Missisippi and crossing it with just horses is a pure miracle if you ask me. Is there any more historical detail on the crossing?
@obsexo zerzual Missisippi is larger but Tigris is one of the major rivers of the world nonetheless.
This series is extremely intense
You guys did an exceptionally amazing work illustrating it!
Gotta love the Prophet's companions, peace be upon them all.
Yeah but they killed so many people...how can they be good when they murdered so many?
@@sarahhaddad6488 How many did they kill? And for what purpose? Shia?
@@sarahhaddad6488 they killed them in the name of allah and for islam to spread to the world. You do know before every battle they would offer their enemies 3 choices. Conversion to islam, paying the jizya ( a tax non muslims have to pay living in muslim lands) or death. I don't see anything wrong with this.
@@sarahhaddad6488 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 nice joke 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@sarahhaddad6488 You can’t call battle murder, literally the anti-thesis of murder, the fact being defending themselves against aggressors only.
I have long been waiting for a new episode of Muslim-Sassanid confrontations. Thanks for this priceless content!
I am MUCH EXCITED for this Second Season of this Series!
@GoodGirlKate i ee you're interested in the Islamic history are you muslim
When will they learn? Never do initiate single combat with the Arabs.
**Laughs in Israel**
@@rishi7629 israel had the west & usa on it is side btw
@@Muhammed552 The difference is, the Arabs united in a single country under one leader and in one of the biggest empire the world have ever seen.
@GoodGirlKate And never wounded or killed Mongol envoys.
@@mtebid5658 Noise making again. it's always someone else's fault as if the Muslims did not get Soviet's support. Based on research, it's obvious that the Israelis were better strategists and tacticians with a more competent command structure that is based on merit.
Thank you guys 💯 🙏🏻
Looking forward to reach the invasion of the Iberian Peninsula! This is a subject that, at least here in Portugal, is all so very thinly tought in school: Tariq invaded in 711, the Visigothic Kingdom fell, Reconquista started at Covadonga in 722, the end.
There's a lot more to tell about this pivotal event and civilization for the creation of modern Portugal and Spain, so this is (yet another) K&G series I'm absolutely hooked on!!!
Tariq did not invade shit, the Umayyads who invaded the Iberian Peninsula, Tariq was just a soldier in the Umayyad Caliphate
.
@@الكابوس511 certainly, Tariq acted under Musa's command, who in his turn was a governor of the Califate.
But he was the 711 invasion's commander, and this wasn't sanctioned by the Calif Walid himself.
@@danielconde13 doesn't matter The important thing is that he is an Umayyad soldier, And he does not do anything except with the permission of Musa ibn Nusayr
, The credit goes to the Umayyad Caliphate, not Tariq.
So, Cortez didn't conquered the Aztecs - the credit goes to Castille-Aragon; Vasco da Gama didn't discover the way into India: credit goes to Portugal; Caesar didn't conquer Gaul: after all, it was the Roman Senate.
Etc, etc, etc...
My friend, we already agreed on facts: he was under Musa's command, who in turn was a governor of the Caliphate. But it's also a fact that Tariq leaded the invasion and the Muslim forces in the Battle of Guadalete, and the initial invasion wasn't even sactioned by the Caliph Walid I. Why does it bother so much to you to state that Tariq invaded the Visigothic Kingdom?
there was no reconquista wars that lasted for 700 years !! it was revisited term used by latter historians to paint the "other" story & "us" vs "them" point of view !
the real reconquista maybe lasted about 50 years or something.
it was border normal expansions, from faction to faction, sometimes the Iberians & Emirate of Cordoba are in Peace & sometimes at war, and after 700 years the total existence of Muslims reduced, then expelled.
“God is Most Great, I have been given Persia. By God, I can now see the white palace of Madain;”
The prophecy that came true before the eyes of his companions.
but now that magnficient city have become a dead city
@@ngaefweh5712 Unfortunately
@@dawoodfaqier9762 if middle east achieve peace again, the Iraqi government and maybe the Iranian government must rebuild it again
@@ngaefweh5712 Well Iranian government destroyed Iraq at first place. How would they build it?
@@dawoodfaqier9762 i say if one day middle east will achieve again
Man that Ctesiphon introduction sent chills down my spine.. well done!!
at what moment of the video?
@@guilhermehx7159 I'm not rewatching it just to provide a stamp sorry. It comes directly before the siege begins I think.
@@guilhermehx7159 8:26
These muslim conquest series are great, cant wait for the next episode
This creation, the structure of the universe,
The foods, the tongue that tastes, the teeth that grind, the stomach that digests, the excretion of waste, the oxygen, the lungs, the eyes, the libido and many other things, this does not indicate anything. Are you 100% sure that there is no creator?
Rivers and seas and the creatures in them and the rain that sows the earth behind them
It is very abundant with a lot of fruits
Nothing creates anything
Are you 100% sure that there is no creator?
Go see what religion commands you to worship. One Creator created everything, not three, not more, not less, and not idols, but one Creator. Go and see for yourself, you will only find one religion, then ask about the evidence of the truth of this religion
But I will remind you of something you may have forgotten. And I want you to think about it. You are here in this world against your will. Just think a little bit that you are not here. By your own choice. You are here by choice.Choose to be here.He is one and you will go.. The matter is not easy, the matter is great in this existence, because whoever is able to bring you into this world against your will, after death, will either find you in grace and beauty that you have not seen, or torment and fear. which you have not seen.
Hey random person scrolling through the comments, have a great day :D
You too friend
Have a great day friend
Thanks!
Thank you!
Thank you, random commenter! You too!
Salman(the Persian) is a member of my family. Prophet Mohamed said
His conversion story is one of my favorites! May Allah be pleased with him ❤
Peace be upon him
Persians are written in every religion
muhammad also said semen comes from in between the backbone and ribs lmao
@@Daylon91 thanks for exposing your ignorance. our reproductive organs originate from the space close to the kidneys. and even when the organs later decent to their places, they still receive blood supply from the same space between the backbone and ribs
Guys, remember, this is the SAME Sassanids who were fighting and winning battles against the Byzantines for centuries. The same Persians who were world leaders. Yet they crumbled against the Muslim army. Never ever think yourself as superiors and boast around to those who are less fortunate than you because it is Allah alone who decides winners and losers. If Almighty Allah wants, you will lose, if Allah wants, you will win. Within moments Allah can change you fate. So don't take pride if you are on the front foot now. Assamalu Walaikum my brothers and sisters.
So what are you saying? Has Allah been willing to let the US, UK, France, Italy, Israel, Netherlands and now India and China kill tens of millions of Muslims for the past 250 years?
Please don't preach such absurdities. Allah doesn't help those who don't help themselves.
@@hectortroy8671 India doesn't kill muslim. There is just a elected political party who hate them. But we are still here.
16:28 As a half persian,I was surprised you know Farsi really well!!
17:59 I like how you show Iranian style calligraphy when a persian speaking farsi rather than regular arab calligraphy.
The video overall is quite good! Very immersive with the language. Perhaps, the video maker is Persian or Arab?
half pers? whats the other half
The video was contributed by Arabs and Persians.
Persian not Farsi. Or do you say Espanol instead of Spanish?
@@rahman9749 Yes bro.
They search. That's what they're good at. There's nothing to be surprised with.
Qa'qa' completed all side missions after saving that guy from drowning
100 % synchronized
Displate is so nice! First time i am thankful for an ad! And of course phenomenal video as always!!!
The Muslims OP ability seems to be that none of their commanders can die in single combat.
T SA *Muslims*
@@Bellasrius TVI muslims
If the Islamic caliphate and expansion were not done, it will have the same fate as Christianity. Teachings of Prophet Muhammad will be taken by Romans or Persians to their advantage and completely change the original message of the religion. This is what happened when Christianity fell in hands of Romans. So Islam established its own powerhouse to spread the message unaltered without giving a chance for Persians and Romans.
@@thauthentic dude come on, this is history so let us make it unbiased without any religion. Every religion says it's the right one and cites it's own book as proof and says it's ture because the same book says it is. I have nothing against religion but I'm pretty sure it's for the best to study history with no biases. We dont want more genocides and justification of killing people in the name of "Allah" it's very sad to see such comments cuz that's what the Terrorists say in exclusive documentaries too. They dont find it wrong because they think they do it for god. It's really bad. Have a good day.
@@Ani-13-w8d Don't know what to say to you. Yes, everyone says that their religion is the right religion. So it is upto you and me to find the truth based on evidence and thorough study. That is the whole purpose of life, to know the creator and worship him. You are welcome to disagree with this if you have another worldview. Secondly, yes we should take history as history. In earlier times, war were so common among kingdoms be it for land, kingdom, religion, whatever purpose. Nowadays also it is happening. Wars are not a result of religion, rather it is a human nature to fight against each other for any possible reason. It is said in hadith "If any muslim kills an innocent human, it is as if he has killed the entire humanity". And I'm a muslim and I don't know what belief system you follow.
i cannot believe you are talking about darrar bin al azwar and kaakaa bin amr......my unknown childhood heroes
sadly , most arabs will not recognize these names today
هذوله الخونه الي ما يذكر ابطال هذي الامة
@@Yassinekamp انته عربي و ما تعرف القعقاع
My friend even arabia was ethnically mixed with time.... Indian and iranian influence on the east coast, african influence in hijaz and the west. And a great mix in mekka and jeddah due to hajj.
All areas are mixed, and many families in lebanon and syria can trace their origin to yemen even before islam, others come from caucasus, central asia, even al andalus when it fell
But they all have the same arab culture, with slight differences
What you say is true, but also the opposite happened sometimes. The Levant was largely depopulated because of plagues, earthquakes, and wars. Muslims had to settle tribes from arabia to protect the coast. Like the tannoukhis near beirut. Those tribes with time became what we know as the druze, and some of the maronites.
So you see the lines are never clear when it comes to origins.
However i do agree that the arabic peninsula was less affected then other areas like the levant.
@@abdullahshah9397 Respectfully, that second paragraph is very not true. I speak Arabic fluently and I've read and listened to a lot of lectures about the history of different Islamic states, over the course of the past ten years. Right of the bat, I can tell you that it makes no sense to throw a blanket statement like you did in your WHOLE second paragraph. Is is true for certain parts at certain times. It would have been ALMOST acceptable if you described the umayyad/rashidun period with that statement :)
The least you could do to topic so dense is to focus on a region within a reasonable time frame. Do you truly think Arabs just stayed in the peninsula until the 18th century?? heck they were leaving in droves before islam, why stop? Every hundred to two hundred the peninsula becomes unable to provide enough food and water, and a wave migrates. Sometimes they get lucky and their migration becomes an epic with some crazy exaggerations, see the banu hilal migration. This happened before islam (rabeea/taghlib) and after islam. This happened due to factors mostly unchanged by islam, and where changed, they made migration even easier. Example, Abbasid period of weakness, taghlib's banu hamdan, and their ridicicously insane luck of having al mutannabbi be their ministry of propaganda
When syria and southern iraq were conquered, there were already many arabs living there. In syria, it was tanukh, lakhm, jutham, al jafna, and others I cant recall who allmigrated out of yemen in waves, all pre islamic and quite old. The same can be said about the arabs of southern iraq (al munther kings, arch rivals of the ghassan kings of damascus (jillaq). Both were of yemeni origin, and both became christians sometime around 300-400 AD.
The area between Iraq and syria (an area we call al jazira; the island, as it lies between the tigres and euphrates) was also already heavily arabized when conquered, and were also christian. They were staunchly christian, and refused to convert. Since they were very pro umayyad, they were basically allowed to live like the rest of the arab tribes who adopted islam, under state protection.
Heck they even carried crosses and holy relics on their banners when they fought enemies of the umayyads, like when Umair ibn Al habab was killed. See the story about Akhtal's poetry that caused a distant relative of Umair to commit a massacre straight out of the mongol cookbook. Historians claim he killed 23K people (al bishr clan from taghlib bin wael from rabeea, Akhtal's home boys), but realistically , he probably killed 2-3 K people (a huge amount of people when you consider arab tribe numbers at the time). Apparently the poet who instigated this was actually captured by avenging madlads, but when asked he said he just a slave so they let him go.
These jazira arabs were from Rabeea, of Najdi origin. They were fought out of Najd because the two biggest clans within rabeea fought an exhaustive civil war (bakr vs taghlib, basoos war).
On the other hand, other places like persia proper (Bilad Faris), egypt, nuba, north africa, and iberia did not have arabs living there when they were conquered. Caliphs had to encourage migrations once the intial wave of expansion died. They even allowed some absolutely ridiculous shenanigans to happen like gathering jizya from berber and visigothic MUSLIMS as an additional tax... The one place arabs did not need encouragement was Khorasan. They just kept coming, and where it not for abu muslim al khorasani, they might be speaking arabic today.
So why am I going in to this much detail? to show many examples of areas heavily arabized pre islamic expansion, some that only got arabized much later, some which did and where then de-arabized, and some that were never arabized. Northern Jazira was already called diyar bakr / diyar rabeea (diyar = home of) by the time of islam.
In addition to clan/tibe migrations, there was an almost non stop steam of traders and merchants (mostly from Hadramut) spreading islam on the indian and malay coast, and very slowly becoming integrated. While theres a sizable population there now of arab ancestry, the numbers were never high enough to arabize the region. How big does the wave have to be? at least as big as the banu hilal I guess, but I doubt they migrated alone.
Al Jabarti has good books about egyption mamluk/ottoman periods iirc. They were easy to get into, mostly motivated by stories about Muhammad Ali and da albanian boyz (very underrated character) and to find out more about my own yemeni ancestors (Hamdan) moved from yemen, to the levant, to upper egypt, and then to sudan. Yes upper Egypt was flooded by nomadic arabs (26 clans, each with many subclans) during that early Alawid period, but there was already a big arab population from streams of newer immigrants and decedents of the orginal waves (see history of al fustaat) in egypt.
This is such a dense topic and the more you dive and learn the more questions you will have. So it just saddens me to see huuuge oversimplifications. I wrote this quickly, all of the top of my very tired head, before I pass out, so I hope it all makes sense lol. I will try edit it tomorrow if it sounds too stupid.
Literally the most valuable Chanel on YT thank you very much for this quality content.
My dude's I always give your videos a thumbs up as soon as I open them, because I know I'm gonna love it.
Firstly thank you for the great vid
Secondly I see alot of arguments about sources and how real and strong Arabs were ofc mobility maybe were their biggest weapon but ppl forget 2 major points:
1- how Arabs lived at that time and pre Islamic time. Unlike Romans and sassanid, Arabs didn't fight for domination Arabs pretty much since their dawn fought themselves out of necessity for survival, some wars that took years and years started over well of waters over cattles, that hardened them made them war like ppl, it's like u take Sparta and do copy past all over Arabia, we also can say that picture when Khalid told the Romans "I brought you men who love death as you love life".
2- the point of moral, there is story at the battle of alahsab, when the Muslim were 3k vs the Makan alliance numbered as high as 10k to sum it up the prophet had vision and when his companions asked him why do you smile he said don't lose faith I see us standing at the high walls of yemen and holding the riches of Persia so at the point of this vid they already had Yemen so can only imagine what Saad was thinking when he was staring at the city, he most have thought that's all been true and all the struggle they been through wasn't for nothing, no wonder they willing to die in battle.
Lastly it's shame that no one took the time and effort to translate most of the Arabic sources to English not just this period but the pre Islamic one too their beliefs, myths, Gods, tribes, wars they fought and history it's really rich and fascinating to read wish I had the time and energy to do that and introduce it to the world
Oh yeah!! Forgive my English it's not that good haha :)
Good explanation, however, other factors play a role aswell. There is a saying: 'A great empire is not destroyed from without untill it had destroyed itself from within' You cannot understand the Arab victories over the Persians without taking into account the situation within the Persian empire. The empire was severely weakened by the disastarous wars with the Romans. Lost many competent commanders, soldiers, officers and lost a lot of wealth aswell. Population was heavily taxed during the war(602-628) and so the Shah was very unpopular. Khosrow 2 was deposed and killed and a civil war started. The Arabs found out about this and knew the empire was weak. Thats why they striked in the first place. The Arabs just did the knock out blow to the Persian empire, while the Persians themselves weakened themselves by incompetence. Of crouse the brilliance of commanders such as Khalid Ibn Walleed played a role, aswell as superior strategy and morale from Arabs. However, I seriously doubt if the Arabs wouldv'e toppled the Persian empire would it have been at its strongest, without and war with the Romans, and with plently of wealth and popular support.
@@Siyar612 That did happen in Dhi Qar where Bakr ibn Wa’el and some other tribes of NE Arabia stood up to the persians and annihilated them , the entire persian army or at least a large amount of it was sent to destroy Bakr and enslave their women , and the persians failed , there’s also the battle of Saloot in Oman where Azdi Arabs and a small amount of Arabs from Quda’ah ( Tribe name ) approximately 300 pushed the Persians back out of Oman
Will future videos explore any of the reasons for the Sassanid collapse? The rate at which they are losing, the number of defections and the lack of any sense of leadership, appear to point to some major Empire issues.
If you like there is lots of studies on this matter , check out lectures and papers on this .
Info given by this channel lacks crucial information and not very accurate .
You can check out that at the end of sassanid empire there were internal struggle , generals and nobles not supporting royal command and rivalry sky rocketed . There are vary speculations and theories .
Nobles and generals may have not supported yazdgerd because him and his mother were christian !
@Karim Hassan Gemiey very good points .
Yet there are many speculations about this era , even recent archeology and studies .
Here are some other points:
About persia , there are records of taxing that shows in time of arab rule taxes were higher 6 times that shows economic strife might not helped sassanid fall . Lack of leadership and support for yazdgerd because of his christianity might have beed important. khosrow anoushirvan made significant changes in the empire that made it self sufficient and structurally resistance and this alone might have caused independence from central rule in time of arab invasion , as we see persian coins minted as independent lords in many regions in time of arab invasion that shows not a complete conquest but overthrow of a king .
These documentaries are very well done. I've enjoyed listening to them and learning about some good old history (:
Khalid ibn al waleed
Alqa'qa' ibn amr attamimi
Sa'ad ibn abi waqas
Legends ✌️✌️☝️☝️☪️
@M Mehdi yes my son the falcon of Quraish himself ☝️☝️😁
@Mehmed Mehdi brother those are companions of the prophet they are the best people
fathers of daesh and al qaeda
@@mihandoostan3755 lmao, the only father for al qaeda and adesh is USA, they created their barbaric ideology and radical ideas, supported with weapons and money, Islam has nothing to do with any of these groups, if anyone has anything to do with them it's your secular and liberal corrupt and hypocrite leaders
@Rdb 1480 wow 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Here have a cookie 🍪
You guys get better every new day, just keep doing the good work and lots of support from Serbia !
Jalinus had all the markings of a great commander. Only the pride of demanding single combat stood in his way.
@@gerardb5220 nope
Interesting point , Rostom's grand son founded an independent Muslim Kingdom in the west of Algeria called the rostemide
Oh yes i think it was then conquered by the uprising of the fatimds in kabyle
@@MT_282 indeed the rise of the shiaa Fatimid in the east of algeria among the sanhadja of the houdna the koutam of mount babor and the Kabyle of mount djurdjura signed the end of the kharidji domination of central Maghreb , even if there was some kharidji uprising , ilike the man with a donkey one "thou elhimar" in the chawi region of aouras
@@mohbou3924 were the fatimid armies that invaded west into egypt and so on, algerian?
@@MT_282 indeed they were ! From those 3 tribes cited above even if the bulk of the force was frome koutama , between 10-20k , and it was followed by a major migration of mainly koutama(and some Kabyle and sanhadja) to Egypt around 100k person , ps from your name I guess your from bordj like me , and it's between bordj Bouira and Béjaïa where those three tribes meet
@@mohbou3924 how did you know, my great great grandad was kicked out of his dads house in bordj than he walked to bejaia as a homeless person and slowly began to make money when he died and his son inherited what he had, my great grandad became a merchant and was quite rich, he also had 4 wives😏🔥
You have to make , the Battle Of NAHAWAND dude , that is the one of the great war in that time
Yes
Definitely
It’s coming for sure, don’t worry
Sassanids - 100,000
Rashiduns-30,000
Imagine in this battle
Arab was 30000
And persian 100000
This war was all about faith vs another, not a race vs race. Muslims consisted vastly of both Arabs and Persians, along with races though small in numbers.
Persians will later dominates the bulk of Islamic Culture & politics, and later the Turks.
@@00Abrams00 Race is not of a great importance,what is important is that they were Muslims
You can not choose your race but you can choose your faith.
@Shadab Khan Mughal
Agreed.
@@17-MASY !! this. Many of the armies after the conquests were full of muslims regardless of ethnic bounding, God first.
As an Arab it's cool 😎 I respect all race were all Muslims
I can't wait to see the Battle of Nahavand also known as the Victory of Victories
I am glad you guys covered this topic as there are less common knowledge known about the fall of Ctesiphon.
However, it would be nice if you could cover the apocalyptic war of 602-628 between the Sassanians and Byzantines which was a prelude to this war.
Also, it can be good to start a new series on the rise Abbasids too.
As always, Kudos to you guys.
There is one about it, you can check this out, although it's a there years old video
They did cover many of those battles.
@@stehfreejesseah7893 did you watch that video
@@stehfreejesseah7893 well they also explained the reason for the battle series but yes they did not show the major and minor battles of that time,but mentioned the overall campaign
I think they have already covered some major conflicts between the two powers but that would also be epic.
I think that the Islamic Conquest proved that tactics/strategy/morale are the most important part and true game-changers of any kind of battle of warfare. You have to remember that the Muslims during this time was essentially still a tribal army. The Eastern Roman Empire, as well as the Sassanids, had superior training, organization, much better arms and armor, and more troops than the Muslims. The only advantage that Muslims had was that their fanatical belief in their religion and more important tactical and strategic geniuses as commanders such as Khalid Ibn Al Walid. With those 2 things, they managed to defeat 2 of the most powerful empires in the world at the time.
Khalid Ibn Al Walid was the luck of Muslim State really. Without a brilliant general and likes of him, maybe we wouldnt have that much of a Muslim population today. History is just weird. It shows that role and impact of these few men changed the life today..
The Muslim conquest owes it's victories to the mutual destruction of the Byzantines and the Sassanids. By the time they were done wearing themselves out, only idiots were left in the position of political and military leadership with no champions-- most of the capable men were gone. Contrary to the Islamic sources, the Arabs were knowledgeable and experienced soldiers-- they have been serving as mercenaries to both great empires. The Byzantium was already on its way out already and no longer a great Roman empire due to the activities of the Barbarians and the loss of political unity with the Western Roman hemisphere.
Another thing to consider is that the Mohammed of the Quran and Islamic sources is a myth of the Ummayad dynasty. The man who rallied the Arabs under one banner was an enlightened prince of Arab origin familiar with Sassanid politics. He was later given the title Mohammed-- the exalted one. He was an ardent follower of a heretic Jewish sect. His name is Iyas ibn Qabisah.
@@thehandofjibreel8756 can i get the sources?
The Hand Of Jibreel
If each time you fill stronger armies and still lose to fewer numbers. Then sorry. Numbers don’t make victories.
@@Omegaeon1 quality also plays a lot in that case though. I mean the Islamic expansion have their best quality armies facing off against mostly levied troops.
And if the Arab army was indeed largely tribal in nature, then it is no surprise (sure by hindsight proven by various Turkic tribes and the Mongols) they overwhelmed both Sedentary empires by bringing high quality and motivated troops (not to mention the religious zeal).
Please a documentary on beloved Prophet's military and political campaign. There are lot of resources and detail battles of Badr, ohud, khandaq, Tabuk and so on
These battle will be hard to cover because they will spark too many arguments (religious arguments)..
And most sources of these battle are one sided and will be hard to present realistically and objectively without falling to a specific narrative
Been waiting on this for awhile keep up the great work
Great video as usual, thanks K&G's
Amazing video, yet I was so sadden when Muslim army captured magnificent city of Ctesiphon.
Any one else addicted to this channel. Got the family to subscribe to this channel 🙌
The second part was soo late, I have to now re-watch the first part
The quality of Kings and Generals' videos is much improved...... Great work
Now this Displate sponsor is something I can get behind! Very nice! I'll be taking advantage of that offer!
"I Always happy to see Your New Video Coming Up, Keep Up The Good Work!! *Peace Brother* ✌😊
@GoodGirlKate Good girl, Katie 😁
The Muslim war machine was just impossible to stop in those days. Their enemies couldn't even win duels against them.
@Karim Hassan Gemiey it was not only the walls that made Constantinople impossible to conquer (it was attacked, many times) but the fact that it was surrounded by sea with the Mediterranean to the south and the Black Sea to the east and north. This made the city impossible to put under siege because it could be easily supplied and reinforced. The Byzantines also employed some mythical innovation called "Greek Fire" to eradicate enemy navies.
12:40 No Persia No, never fight a nomad people in an open area. You never learned this lesson.
The custom back then was to duel your opponent, but the Persians were used to gladiator-style combat with armor and helmets. The Arabs were a blood feud society where duels were common and swordsmanship was a common skill.
It would be like a New Yorker challenging a Texan to a shootout- the culture is just too much to contend with
@@gerardb5220 No Gerard! Some people do like to hear about Fares's religion and don't think he should "keep it to himself and his home".
@@gerardb5220 Isn't that typical, Gerard? Why won't a muslim be proud of what their ancestors have worked hard for and conquered. We, in no way, look down on your civilization and neither does our prophet. He even banned us from cursing your gods and/or religions.
So, no, it is not "hypocritical"
Fares Ayham is right Gerard! There are only two books we take our facts from and we are not in need to look at the books you mentioned for our complete trust in those two books and the most truthful details they contain.
At last... Been waiting for this video for a long time..great video.. Waiting for the sequence
Please make a video on Battle of Nahawand which is called the "victory of victory" ...Conquest of Ctesiphon was followed by Nahavand which completely routed Sassinids forever. Numan Bin Muqarrin and Tulaiha Bin Khuwaylid were the heroes!
I am unable to understand how Arabs were able to defeat Sassanians time after time, while Arab cavalry was undoubtedly excellent, they couldn't have been better than Persian Cataphracts, and it was cavalry which played the decisive role back then.
Hdye Hdhde yeah back then morale was everything and Islam and Proper Jihad essentially gave the warriors a reservation in Heaven as long as they fight for god so dying wasn’t some horrifying truth, it was a promotion
@@a.h.tvideomapping4293 like the vikings
Basically it was WIN-WIN situation for muslim soldiers. You die you go to heaven, or win.
When you are used to doing battles that always ended with a rout it becomes hard to figure out on the spot how to face extremist zealots on par with modern terrorists just willing to fall on your sword just to stab you in the guts. Same thing happened to the Aztecs, they were used to a mode of warfare that revolved around capturing their enemies alive for sacrifice and had no idea how to react when a superior enemy just slaughtered everyone.
Hdye Hdhde one believed in Allah and the other worshipped fire 🔥
Awesome video! The amount of detail and your presentation of it, is on par with JJ Norwich's series on Byzantine History (the kind of presentation that pulls the listener right in from the start & keeps your interest because you can imagine it happening around you)
Fun fact: the arch of Khosrow is still standing until now and you can see it in AL Madain south of Baghdad
Was waiting for this for a long time!
So glad you have remade this series
There is a beautiful scene in Omar TV series (2012) that perfectly depicts these events when the Muslims enter this great city.
Love that scene. It was in episode 28. (At around the 17 : 33 minute mark).
I doubt it shows that they burned its library
@Ologh Beig lol
@Ologh Beig Are you high?
@Ologh Beig Umar was dealt with in the end, Persian soldier took him out in a mosque.
Wait, a season 2?? Yes please and thank you
The victory of the arabs gives me goosebumps so many miracles happened.
Maybe it's meant to be, i mean there is 2 billion muslims right?
Great video I was waiting for it 😊❤
I just wanna say... You guys make amazing content. I love you guys for this, you made my day! 😊
Please does anyone know what Soundtrack plays at the beginning 00:00 ?
I cant find it on Epidemic Sound
@Kings and Generals
May be it is their personal soundtrack
I love old history, it seems so golden and ancient. I would love to live back in BC, where religious events happened at the highest amount.
I stil can't believe i watched all ur videos for free... Hope u have always good day sir...
I love your channels and video! You have a good narrator voice and posted interesting topic very frequent. Keep your good work
My favourite UA-cam channel. Keep up the good work!
I always seeking for early muslim expansion..please give a little qualitative story
As long as you know these are just storys and not reality
@@arianrezaie4729 tell what proof u require ....i will shere it with u.........indeed people are ignorent when they dont want to accept reality
@ fact of the matter is early islams conquests can't really be proven, Islam can't even predate Abdal Malik, there's no arcaelogical evidence for Mohammed or Khalid walid, chances are that Arabs conquered the area they conquered as ways to break off the respective empires, Rome and Persia had been in their most deadly war in their history, if they could mount any soldiers it would have been peasants
Besides, why is it that he Byzantines never once acknowledged the Arabs as Muslims, but as just monotheistic Christians? Again, true Islam didn't show itself until the time of abdal malik
@ > where does it say in your quran that the bible is corrupted? on the contrary, the quran approves of the christian sources as authentic, congratulations, you have now officially gone against your own "holy" book
of course i will disregard most of the things that are in muslim scriptures, you claim to know more about all the prophets than either judaism or christianity when you come about 600 years after christianity... your own prophet who supposedly rode that magical donkey thing is a plagiarism of one of the animals from Zoroastrian, so yeah, I'll definitely take anything from islamic sources with a grain of salt
QUESTION! what will we find if we dig through those graves? either a. Nothing because someone probably built it to make profit, just like Mecca or b. Some warlord DISGUISED as a prophet but isn't actually a prophet
another point i wanted to point out is that your own "prophet" said to not build a mosque over him and yet look what happened
"He (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “When a righteous man died among them, they would build a place of worship over his grave and put those images in it. They are the most evil of mankind before Allaah.” (Al-Bukhaari, 427; Muslim, 528)
“The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘May Allaah curse the Jews and the Christians, for they have taken the graves of their Prophets as places of worship.’” ‘Aa’ishah said: “He was warning (the Muslims) against (doing) what they had done.” And she said: “Had it not been for that, the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) would have been made prominent but he was afraid it might be taken (as a) place of worship.” al-Bukhaari (1330) and Muslim (529)
yet,The Green Dome, which is supposedly mohameds grave is also a mosque
> it would be helpful if you actually pointed some out, I'll get you started, the letter from mohammed to heraclius never existed, it was fabricated by egyptian monks as an attempt to stop muslims from bringing down their church, and besides, you can't actually be serious about some illiterate arabian writing letters of people to convert to his religion when NOBODY historically aknwoledged islam during those times, I repeat again, Byzantines, which survived the arabian invasion never aknowledge the term muslim, or mohamed, but only "monotheistic Christians", the closest we get is "rock worshippers", which might have actually been a common theme in the city of Petra, (there's a great theory that Petra is where "Islam" started, not Mecca since archaeologically didn't exist during mohamed's time)
which empires are you talking about? sassanids + byzantine empire barely add up to 2-10% of total landmass (optimistically combined) byzantine empire was slowly getting eaten from behind by lombards in italy and visigoths in spain as well as bulgars at it's backgarden, how does that equate byzantine empire as ruling "half of the world"? more like "half of the world" was AGAINST THEM, same could be said for Sassanids who were politically fighting amongst royal members (that's not a healthy empire who is capable of ruling "half of the world") but you know what? yes, at times they couldn't afford soldiers, but you know what they could afford? Arab mercenaries, during 602-628 both persia and rome hired arabs to fight their battles, to put it bluntly, arabs here had everything to win, especially gold
what advanced technology are we talking about? flying ships? rocket launchers? we're talking about ancient times here, not modern times when there's a huge gap in technological advancements between the rich nations and poor nations, at the time, anyone with a sword, and I mean ANYONE with a sword and some basic training was considered a soldier and thus a threat, but I see the muslim propaganda happening here, the common islamic propaganda is that arabs with a bunch of sticks and some horses or camels managed to take on empires who were really powerful and had all resources at hand got beaten by the "will of allah" which is total bullcrap that you were indoctrinated since birth
actually quite high,especially if they were close in power,, byzantines and sassanids were quite close in military strengths, to put it in perspective, imagine a tug of war that just never ends, both parties are always flexing their muscles, doing that will get you tired and weary over time, two to perhaps even three generations born to fight literally the same war that would go on from 602 - 628, that's literally a whole load of resources and manpower WASTED AWAY, not to mention both empires were still recovering from Justinian's plague, not sure you're familiar with that, but the damage it did took many years to recover
incase you're still not understanding my point, imagine chinese kingdoms throughout the existance of china, it got unified and then broken apart, and then repeat over and over again, when it is broken apart you get these kingdoms that constantly fight each other, how are they getting stronger here? because everytime that happens there's always a new player coming in and invading them, be it, huns or mongols or japanese
greek states? sparta was considered one of the most powerful city state and yet it got into a bloody war with Athens which resulted in both economies getting permanently damaged, over the centuries the city states continued to war among themselves making each weaker and economically damaged until you got a new player coming in Roman "republic", so by now you should start to see a pattern here, I hope that your islamic sources don't go far and beyond to state that the Romans and Sassanids were at their peak during mohamed because that's gonna make me puke considering facts point to both sassanids and byzantines being majorly cripped by 630s
yes, in theory that's what happens in war for conquest, but this wasn't it,this was a political war, rome ceased to do any conquests after Trajan, and definetly couldn't afford any after Justinian, neither rome or persia could conquer each other, romans had a strategically well placed capital that for almost a millenia couldn't be sacked after so many invasions they could have made a meme out of it
Commander: My basileous, Constantinople is being seiged
the Emperor: *SIGHS* Here we go again
Persians tried and they failed massively thanks to greek fire, and then the Romans decided to fire back, they were going south of Armenia and heading towards the sassanid capital when persians finally decided to make a peace, although Romans would have taken the fight to persian land and likely conquered the capital (historically they did that several times before) they agreed that it would have been better to sue for peace rather than keep wasting resources (that's why roman empire didn't want to conquer persia) they learnt that the hard way when they conquered Mesopotamia in Trajan's time and instantly knew that the resources to upkeep would have been too many to bring any benefit to the empire so Hadrian made the decree that Roman empire shall no longer make any expansions and give away mesopotamia because it would be too costly to upkeep
why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that they were very weak at that point? oh wait, you've been indoctrinated since birth, I forgot, but for anyone else who has the attention span to still be reading this comment, imagine germany after WW2, few years prior it had over 75% of the european peninsula under their thumbs, global superpower right? according to the muslim logic, germany should still be mounting a very powerful army in 1947 or 1948... spoiler alert, germany wouldn't have been able to defend itself against any invasion, apply that same logic to both persia and byzantine empires and you can get an easy picture as to how they were conquered
that's such a stupid statement, first, Islam means submission, submission to "Allah" not peace, you muslims claim that islam is a religion of peace, but Islam means submission to allah, first and foremost and no, islam doesn't predate mohamed, it barely predates Abdal Malik for that matter, none of the prophets before mohamed are prophets of islam, Abraham never built that kabba which is in Mecca because he never even went further south than egypt
i like it everytime different arabic tribe leaders of rashidun commanding the army
Khalid bin al waleed and saad bin abi waqqas from the same tribe prophet tribe named quraysh but from different branches
how did Arab beduins with no skills in battle and in knowledge bring the two greatest Empire of that time "Roman Empire and Persian Empire" to its knees , completely capturing and single handily eliminating them with no foreign help!!! Allahu Akbar. Faith is the Answer.
14:50 narrator's voice : "Not another two days will pass..." but the text shown "not another three days..."
Great Chanel! History Marche and Kings and Generals are one of my best chanels. Please complete this series and if you can kindly make a video on Battle of Firaz!
Most importantly, keep up the Great work!