As always great job! I do not know if this happens to others, but I do not get notified by youtube you posted a new video. Every day I check your channel awaiting for a new masterpiece. Thank you for your work.
@@Klopp2543 all Christians say "standard Islamic narrative". What does Christian doesn't realize is Islam is Christianity. More from the church of Peter or Simon who believe in a physical Christ and not a divine similar to Jehovah witnesses
@@chollocks how? 😂😂😂 How then does the standard Islamic narrative still stand 1500yrs later? No one from the Byzantine or Persian empire found out? A storyteller who spins mumbo jumbo with no single fact destroys it? 😂😂😂😂😂
Wow, this is gorgeous! Great animated maps, a stringent and logical narration, that´s how history is making fun! Phantastic work, great new stuff! Thanks a lot for presenting it to us, Thomas! Keep on delivering, please! This really deserves a bigger audience!
Again brilliant 🤩 series Thomas really enjoying this .. All the battles between the Byzantium’s and Persians have evidence and independent historical sources.. The alleged battles in the Quran and Hadiths “ZERO” evidence for except post Islamic sources.. Then you have to look at the logistics of wars that need men horses camels and supplies.. Even the Arabs couldn’t be in 3 places at once.. ie They couldn’t be fighting for the Byzantium’s and Persians and fighting the Jews and tribes of the Hijaz.. of which there is absolutely no genuine credible historical evidence..
@@slippingsnake Exactly.. I hadn’t actually thought about that aspect.. Anyone living in those harsh conditions would have absolutely zero knowledge of diplomacy or military tactics.. Or even read.. Sure Medina existed but Mecca.. Where absolutely no one wrote about it or went there.. Even though a Roman Army marched past the place and although short on supplies and water and having Arab trackers didn’t go there ..
Excellent. It will be wonderful if the maps area is enlarged to include the west and animated. What had happened in Andalusia is also crucial part that should be included.
SUPERB! This is really an eye-opening revelation. As an Indonesian, I grew up with stories of 15L4M as a religion coming into being in the 7th century. It's quite mindboggling to learn about an alternative POV.
Simply brilliant. A complete and compact historical account of actual history. A huge effort to gather all these facts into a few minutes video. Thank you. Keep up the good work. God bless your work.
Excellent presentation with detail. What are the titles of the books translated in English by Innara Institute, also Thomas how about you putting all this vital information in a book for avid lovers of history. Thanks and keep up the good work.
This is fascinating. All those constant conflicts and wars and deportations brought to life thru genuine historical research that is SO missing in Islam. I’m eager to learn more.
grossartig Thomas, diese etwas ausführlicheren Darstellungen sind es die mir etwas in den Videos von Cira und Pfander gefehlt haben..macht fast Spass Geschichte wiederzuentdecken, besser als in der Schule ;)
I feel so lucky to know German. The so called „Inhara“ German school of Islam studies is currently only available in German. By now the 7th book of the Inhara series is available. Ok, not too easy to read as these are academic books. And therefore also quite expensive. But in every way worth the money. Alexander is connected to Inhara and most of the information he presents is from Inhara. So if you know German, get he books 📚.
I believe that English translation has already been done. The next crucial step will be the the translation of this important work into Arabic. With the guardians of this cult ( Islam) it’s going to be a challenge!
Thanks Alexander for correcting the information. Danke Alexander! War mir nicht bewusst, dass es schon offizielle englische Übersetzungen der Reihe gibt.
Excellent, Thomas, your presentation is unbiased, focused and illuminating. Your analysis is historical and analytical, the main criticism comes from religious zealots who wouldn't accept any evidence that diverges from the orthodox narrative. Please carry on your valuable and important work.
Hey Thomas, if I may, could you please tell more about the origin of the Fatiha Surah in general and the phrase "Sirat al-mustakim" in particular. Thank you
Great presentation Thomas. The new mic is loud and clear. So is the later character of Mohamed of the Hadiths and sunah complete fiction or based on one or more characters?
In principle, I don't have a problem with it. I just don't want my own channel to be drowned out between many copies. I'd therefore request that every video has a link to my channel and the original video. Preferably, I could also add subtitles on here. It would be neat if we could make it as multi-lingual as possible. But as I said, you can also put it up on your channel.
@@TAlexander i will make sure to include the link to the original video on your channel for every video that i take...but as i was saying i would add video explanation for Indian language it would be helpful in reaching many indian audience who dont understand english very well...but i assure that i will have the original link to your every video that i upload...Thanks again.
@@TAlexander I was planning to explain your videos in my language...it wont be through subtitles but explaining in my language so that viewers can follow through step by step process...i would love to work with you if you have any requirements for subtitles in my language...Thanks once again.
A tour de forcé of Middle Eastern history leading up to the rise of Islam that most Westerners are not aware of and have usually just a vague idea. Well done! 👍
Facinating timeline. I'm not 100% confident it's all set in stone and we can say for certain, but there's a lot more evidence for this than the traditional yarn. Thanks for putting this together, will have to rewatch!
Clear and logical precis with graphs. Excellent. Best I have seen since the Ark. Although, didn't just one little "Senor Omeya " sneak off from the nasty Abbassids....?
ask *Werner Heisenberg* (1933 Nobel Price for Reason Quantum-mechanics/the Heisenberg uncertainty principle) he has shown deeper as anyone before in the cup of science and said: _"The first drink from the cup of science makes one atheist; but at the bottom of the cup God awaits."_ or *Max Planck* (1918 Nobel Price in physic/Planck-Time/Planck-length)... Christian both changed the world and are just 2 of many germany 💪
Thank you very much for this presentation which is succinct and clear. It helps greatly in understanding what transpired to bring about Islam. I still have many questions but this has brought a great deal of clarification. I have listened to Dan Gibbons and read where you felt the Petra was not important. But the fact that the qiblas of early mosques all point to Petra is a significant and factual observation. How does the Inarah school account for the qibla directions initially pointing to Petra and then later to Mecca?
great video! please consider finding an arab speaker to read the same script. that would be a quite effective way of spreading this into muslim world. turkish and urdu would be also nice.
@@20july1944 Belongings are personal articles you carry with you to create your appearance. Possessions are what you own or control, a measure of wealth. Say hello to the Valkyrie boys for me.
Greetings Thomas - around 650 or so you mention the Arabs taking over after Heracles dies, you switch from calling them Arabs to Muslims, how did that happen, doesn't that event happen later as you mention at the end of your video?
@@slippingsnake Remember in Lawrence of Arabia that Anthony Quinn as Prince Auda of the Howeitat tells Peter O'Toole he's never heard of "the Arabs" -- that might be a Western imposition.
@@20july1944 no, I don't remember this scene but now you got me going on the Movie: it starts with Lawrence riding a Brough Superior on a narrow road when two boys on bycycles appear in front of him, he tries to avoid them but loses control and dies in the accident... :( However, we have to be aware that this is a european view on a british Character and the historical Background is the arabic Revolt against the Ottoman Empire; So the movie can be a bridge to find interest in the modern history of "Arabia".
If you interpret Muhammed as a name for Jesus, then the second line of the shahada (muslim deceleration of faith) starts to take on a totally different meaning "Muhammad is the Messanger of God" can now be understood as this being a affirmation of faith in a non- divine Jesus. Instead of declaring Jesus as the Son of God, they are insisting he is only the messanger
Thomas, do you think Mu'awiya and the Umayyads were from the pro Roman Arab camp? The war between him an Ali was the former pro Roman Arabs against the pro Persian Arabs (Tayyaye)? Another not on Mel's channel he linked to AJ Deus new paper and it claims the name Umayyads means Sons of Arameans, which would fit with some of your work about the Aramaic/Syriac roots of what later became Islam.
Wow that makes you think but yes as a Muslim I would have to agree muwaiya was based in Syria which was always very pro Roman an ali set up his home base in southern iraq which was an still is heavily influenced by Persia so if makes sense
Whatever his private beliefs were, Mu'awiya quickly prepared the large attack on Constantinople. So he certainly wasn't behaving as a Byzantine ally. Maybe he did so under pressure from the Persian east of his empire, maybe he himself thought it to be prudent. We don't really know.
1 counter argument I have here is that I think a civil war as you have described of civil war over the throne, then civil war over secession would be even more destructive by a concentrated invasion by a single force that could organize to avoid too extreme distruction.
I watching all the episodes and loved it but did you also check the jewish, india, china documents for information because i think you then will even find much more extra details especially about Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman and maybe even more
There's no Abu Bakr , Umar or uthman my dear friend , these are either fictional characters or at best influential people on whom there's characteristics have been imposed
Very interesting content. I just got 2 questions: how was it possible to change the person jesus to muhammad and all the believers accepted it? The second one is why was it necessary to do that? Wir können auch auf deutsch schreiben.😅
On one of the last slides it is stated that "the first true Mosque is being built in Samarra" in 825 CE. This is not commented. What is a "true Mosque" ?
It's the first mosque where we can be sure that it was intended as a Muslim building and not a church. Mainly due to the qibla, it's the first mosque which points to Mecca which indicates that the biography of Muhammad was established by that time.
@@TAlexanderThe use of niches in religious architecture is definitely older than Islam, but a niche in the middle of a long wall facing Mecca or north Arabia is different. There were some churches like the one in Palmyra that was rebuilt with a different orientation and with addition of a mihrab. Such changes appearently took place before 825 CE.
I have a serious question. How can we be told that the Quran was compiled by 652 or at tops 690? I mean if there was no Islam up till 800 & the Quran was written in harmony with the Surah & Hadiths how can everyone just agree to the Quran existing between 659-690? Have scholars missed 100-150 years of Quran's for 1400 years? I just can't believe it. Are there no whole Quran's from before 800? How can everyone have missed this?
There was no Mecca then. There may have been a religous leader known as Mohammed but he wasn’t in Mecca. He may have taught things found in the Qu’ran, but he wasn’t the originator.
Thank you so much for presenting this timeline in this way, outstanding! A quick question; if the The Chronicle of Seert doesn't mention Islam, does that mean that Islam formalised between 825 and 850?
I’d say that it was a gradual process and for the people on the ground, it may not have been easy to see that they were now dealing with something that was different. This is easier to do in hindsight.
Is it very clear when Mohammed /Christ and Mohammed /the war lord are being referred to? With Christ we aren't sure if he was a particular person, mythical or several spliced together holy men etc, couldn't certain references to the later guy be referring to incidents in the life of some of these other characters? And with M2 , does he ever get mixed up with someone like Imru' al- Qais , some of his poetry seems to turn up in the Koran, and aspects of his life sort of fit, he even later had a horrible skin disease so that he was all covered up...perhaps like the way images of M2 are?
I witness accounts do not date the dome of the Rock to 690... I had to be constructed in the 800s 900s by the account of the Monk that wrote about it being in the Eastern southern part of the wall now it's constructed in the southern part.. I would like to know what makes you think the dome of the Rock was built in 690
Nabataeans of Arab were known as master of Star's and deserts in 7th century. They were great worriers and majority of them were followers of Issa ibne Mariyam Rasoolallah pbuh, a break away group of Christianity known as Nastorian christian.
Die kommen aus verschiedenen Quellen...Die Karte von 600 habe ich aus meinem "Dumont Atlas der Weltgeschichte" (aus dem Jahr 2002). Da ist allerdings nur der "dunkle Teil" drin, sprich Gegenden mit Christlicher Mehrheit. Den Rest habe ich nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen hinzugefügt, basierend auf Dokumenten die belegen wo es Christliche Gemeinden gab, dabei vor allem die Liste der Bischofssitze der Kirche des Ostens. Aber es gibt z.B. auch Dokumente zum Oman welche Christliche Aktivitäten dort belegen, etc. Beim Jahr 250 war es etwas schwieriger. Hier gibt es mehr Interpretationsspielraum. Auf Wikipedia gibt es beispielsweise eine (recht ungenaue) Karte zur Verteilung um 325. Das war schonmal ein Anhaltspunkt. Ähnliche Karten habe ich aber auch auf der Seite der Princeton University gefunden. Dort ist aber z.B. jeweils Armenien nicht in der Mehrzahl Christlich während andere Karten Armenien als Christlich führen, dafür nicht Teile die auf der Wikipedia Karte sind. Am Ende habe ich einen groben Mittelwert der verschiedenen Karten genommen welche ich gefunden habe. Die Grundlage hat diese Karte des Jahres 250 gebildet: www.animatedmaps.div.ed.ac.uk/divinity_map/ad112.html Abseits davon ist aber auch in vielen schriftlichen Abhandlungen davon die Rede, dass sich das Christentum zunächst in den Metropolen entlang der Mittelmeerküste ausbreitete (mit Armenien als Ausreißer), insofern passt das alles ganz gut zusammen. Deneben habe ich aber auch hier anderweitig gegengeprüft wo Christen überall attestiert waren. Ich bin z.B. die einzelnen Provinzen Persiens durchgegangen. Aber wie ich im Video bereits gesagt habe, in 250 waren die hellen Flächen nur sehr spärlich mit Christen besiedelt. Aber es gibt dort überall vereinzelte hinweise auf Christen.
What about Battle of the Yarmuk and Battle of al-Qadisiyyah? do you consider them to be fictitious? and are there any mention of them in non-Islamic resources?
I‘d have to check again. It’s bin a while but I seem to remember that there is one Byzantine account of an encounter which sounds like a minor skirmish and which has been interpreted by some to be about the battle of Yarmuk, though there’s nothing in there to identify it. That‘s pretty much it to my knowledge. But as I said, it’s been a while since I looked at this. So maybe I forgot something. But there certainly are no contemporary writers talking about major battles or an outright war, quite the opposite.
The first use of the title Caliph is often been traced to Abd al-Malek, however, it seems like the video is pushing back the use of that title to the time of Al-Mamun more than a century later. Why is that?
Abd al-Malik may have used the title, or he may have used it for Jesus only. Either way, his understanding of that term would have been different from that of later generations. Al-Mamun was the first to bring back the title and use it in a way which is familiar to us today.
@@TAlexander Thank you Thomas! Tom Holland says something like that also when he says that the title of caliph was demoted under the Abbasids from the "Deputy of Allah" to the "Deputy of the Messenger of Allah."
The title Caliph appear on some of the standing caliph coins where khalifat allah appear in parallel with amir al-muminin. These two titles are written on each side of the standing caliph figure. On other standing caliph coins we have abd al-malik together with the title amir al-muminin. Therefore the most obvious interpretation is that khalifat allah is a title of 'Abd al-Malik. Patricia Crone wrote a whole book about the use of the title khalifat allah (deputy of God) and the later version khalifat rasul allah (successor of God's apostle).
There is an event which is important about the emergence of the Quran that you have forgotten in your timeline . Will you find it? That is the question.
I look forward to the next episode when I guess the story of Mecca is highlighted and the story of the conquest of North Africa. That story has always been a mystery to me. How apparently long standing Christian culture succumbs so easily, almost without resistance, to the Arabs.
No, not so easily as you might think , the Berbers of North Africa did resist the initial invasion with military campaigns that was deafted before they accepted the new religion but they kept their language and culture similar situation to the Persians. In Egypt it was a very difficult and grueling process over many centuries, and was accerlated by adopting the Arabic language in the Middle of 11th century , and Christians became a minority in 1400s. There was several revolts by the so called Bashmoureen between 749 to 830 Al- Ma a moun had to finally intervene himself to crush it, and this explains why Christian population in the delta region is so small compared to upper Egypt. The Nuba kingdom remained Christian in Northern Sudan to 1375 until it was crushed by the Mamluks of Egypt. Sorry if I have written too much.
@@drrepair Christian culture of middle east didnt succumb to Arabs as you say in your above comment, The arabs were antitrinitarian christians, so Trinitarian Christians of that area failed to see the threat brewing from arabs at that time, they ignored this threat or couldnt fight arabs to take back their land, remember that Arabs emerged as the single largest group of ethnic people after the Byzantine-Sassanian 602-628 AD war, so i believe that Trinitarian Christians were so weak after this war that they couldnt take control of the middle east, so normally the arab antitrintarians take over the middle east and later cooked up Islam by becoming apostates to Christianity altogether.
@@drrepair I believe that Destruction of Aramaic language from middle east had a major influence in the formation of Islam as they forced arabic on the people there...which made it easy for arabs to cook up islam in arabic language and present it to the people....
The quran is originally a christian preaching book used by the anti-trinitarian christians called nazarenes, they are called "nasara" (نَصَرَ) in the quran, while the trinitarian (orthodox) christians whom they hated are called "mushrikuns" (مشركون) ie "associators" or "polytheists" because they associate Jesus to God (which is "shirk" شِرْك that opposes to Allah's unicity called "tawheed" تَوْحِيدُ )
Black stone is the stone that fell from heaven mentioned in Acts of Apostles, they were placing this stone in the Temple of Artemis in Ephesus and kissing this pagan stone just like the abdools lick this stone these days.
@@fantasia55 could be true that this pagan black stone came from a meterite which arabs thought allah threw it from his heaven, or it could be the same stone of artemis that they were kissing during saint Paul's day.
An empire no a world superpower just collapsed without a fight? How? What of Syria and Egypt which were under the Byzantines? How did 2 vast centuries old empires fall at the same time by chance?
Well, first of all, the Byzantine Empire didn’t fall for another 800 years, which isn’t bad as far as empires go. But regarding your question: The Sassanids and the Byzantines just came out of the medieval equivalent of total war. A total war which lasted 26 years. Both empires were drained of money and soldiers. The Sassanid Empire then descended into a destructive civil war which tore the country apart by tearing the Sassanian-Parthian coalition apart. It fragmented. The fragments eventually fell into Arab hands because Arab tribes fielded the largest military forces within Persia. Initially as mercenaries, eventually they simply took over. In the Byzantine Empire, the situation was different. They came out victorious, but it was a different Empire. During the war, they shed the last vestiges of Antiquity and truly became a medieval state. Heraclius‘ reforms were the key to victory, but it also spelled the end to a large standing army. That couldn’t be financed anymore. Instead, he introduced the new theme-system, part of which was that soldiers were given land instead of money, making them farmers in Asia Minor. Thereby the Byzantine mainlands became independent of grain shipments from Africa. Equally important was that they saved a lot of money on the military. The fact that they couldn’t afford their standing army anymore was what got them into this mess in the first place. Remember that it all started with a military revolt. On the flip side, it meant that the Byzantine Empire could no longer occupy Syria or Egypt. There simply weren’t enough troops that could be deployed far from home. Remember that the soldiers were now farmers, meaning they weren’t mobile. So Heraclius instead tried the old method of employing client kings, giving control of these provinces to the strongest forces in there, which were the Arabs. They got to be independent, In return they would swear fealty to Constantinople, be open for trade and keep their lands safe. Everybody was happy until the Arabs united under Mu’awiya. At that point, the Byzantine plan backfired. Instead of "divide and conquer“, you now had "unite and conquer", but from the other side.
@@TAlexander Constantinople fell after 800yrs but the Byzantines lost Syria,Egypt,north Africa,Armenia and Anatolia all in less than 15yrs. The theme system was as a result of Muslims/Arabs conquest of Syria and Egypt after it lost it's human resources due to its religious animosity,over taxation and near total armies loses. Arabs had never United prior to Islam. Persian and the Byzantine never had forts and other defensive shields on their borders with Arabia. Arabs usually used to raid Persian and Byzantine lands and quickly withdrew to the desert beyond reach. Persians and Byzantine believed the Arabs were barbarian and too divided to invade and only took them serious after they lost majority of their field armies and the Arabs went deep inland and away from the desert. Your assertion that Arabs from the inhospitable deserts were more than the Persian or the Byzantine is laughable. The Persian territory extended all the way to the black sea, to Afghanistan and China and was centuries old. Or the Byzantines who held Africa,Levant,Asia minor,Balkans and some parts of Europe? Both empires also had Arab mercenaries who fought alongside them and Byzantines developed the phylarch system of using Armenian and were auxiliaries living on the frontier to provide a "shield" to counter raiding by the Muslims into the empire.
@@TAlexander James Howard-Johnston, "can only be likened to a human tsunami. Fred Donner writes that the advent of Islam "revolutionized both the ideological bases and the political structures of the Arabian society, giving rise for the first time to a state capable of an expansionist movement."[80] According to Chase F. Robinson, it is likely that Muslim forces were often outnumbered, but, unlike their opponents, they were fast, well coordinated and highly motivate.
First of all, the Byzantines didn't lose Anatolia until the Seldjuks started to bite little pieces off, one by one. All the other lands you talked about were clients by the end of the war with the Sassanids (with the exception of a few strategic forts like in Alexandria). Secondly, the Heraclian reforms started during the war with the Sassanids, most importantly the military reforms. Thirdly, we're not just talking about some Beduins from the Arabian Peninsula who banded together. We're talking about large, civilised groups. There were the Nabataeans, the Ghassanids, the Palmyrans, the Lakhmids, etc. Pretty much all of Iraq was already Arab while being part of the Sassanid kingdom. You had Arab tribes all the way to the eastern Persian borders. This Idea that Arabs come from the Arabian Peninsula is a later development and largely a myth. Yes, there were Arab beduins, but they were not the driving factor here.
@@TAlexander can you cite any nabatean,lakhamid,ghassnid etc who was in any senior position after the conquest or during the conquests? Second what United them? What made them one so as to conquer all Persian and Byzantine lands simultaneously? What broke their tribal bonds and ditch their centuries old vendettas?
I see somethings, first there's some christian in afghanistan, never knew about that, and the second why there's a dark purple spot in the western arabia? Wasn't that part full of Jews( khaibar)? I cannot read that map accurately but i think that's norrh of Medina , why do you think Pharaoh is Khosrou? Why don' t you think about christian in western Arabia?
Good point. I should have included it. The problem is that contemporary sources are extremely scarce. It’s mostly guesswork what happened and largely inconsequential as the Sasanians soon reversed their policy and killed the Jewish leaders (if that’s what really happened). Though given the circumstances, it certainly seems plausible that the Jews would ally themselves with the Sasanians, given the persecutions that were going on. So I should have included it. I guess I was so focused on the bigger picture of the Byzantine-Sasanian war, that I overlooked this episode regarding the Sasanian conquest of Jetusalem.
@@TAlexander Jews reconquering Jerusalem and starting building the Temple cannot be inconsequetial. It is APOCALYPTIC in magnitude and can be just the spark that motivates the Arabs to create a new religion. There are theories that the Masjid Al Haram which the Muslims conquered from the polytheist Meccans is actually the forbidden (haram) Temple that Nehemiah conquered from the trinitarian (associationists) Byzantines.
@@Danielst15lm Well, they didn't build the third temple, so at the end of the day nothing really changed. But of course we're dealing with a lot of Apocalyptic beliefs at that time. Jews, Christians and Arabs were motivated by them. But as I admitted, I should have provided this additional context.
What is the proof that Mu'awiya and Abd al-Malik were Christians? Why are there no crucifixes or other clear Christian symbols in the Dome of the Rock? How are you sure that Muhammad is a title for Jesus originally? A lot of verses of the Qur'an would need to be reinterpreted quite differently if this is all true, no? A video reinterpreting Qur'anic verses in the light of this theory is hopefully forthcoming. :-)
Basically he's saying "Mohamud" is a title for Jesus, not that Jesus's name was Mohamud, and that it was then treated as the name of an Arab alleged prophet.
Mohammad in Arabic means the praised one, the one who deserves our worship. Only Jesus can claim that title. The alleged prophet of Islam misappropriated the title.
Hi Thomas , I observed in your presentation you jump from and Almalk reign to reign of al mamun and you neglected the other Abbasid caliph and their impact on formation and creation of Islam like Harun Alrasheed and Abu Jaafar Almansur . I become to realise that who came before al mamun from Abbasid dynasty were just fiction figure . That’s mean Harun Alrasheed is just a fiction father of almamun and Baghdad did not builded by Abu Jaafar almsnsuur but by some post Sassanid military forces who settled in middle Iraq to keep eye on strategic military route between Iran and Iraq after collapsing of Sassanid empire. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks again.
I did not want to give the impression that the Abbasid rulers were all fictional. I don’t believe that. It’s possible, even likely, that right around the shift of power from the Umayyads to the Abbasids our records aren’t very trustworthy. But I wouldn’t go so far and call all rulers literary inventions. And one thing that is absolutely sure is that there were rulers, something we can’t say for the Rashidun for example. Also, they certainly did play a role in the creation of Islam, but in this presentation, it was not the right place to get into it in more detail. I will touch on that in future videos. The reason why I highlighted al-Mamun is that he marks the all important transitional point of the evolution from an anti-Trinitarian Christianity to Islam. But it’s not like he did it over night, rather he happened to reign when this threshold was reached.
I like your work. But I wonder about one thing: the Sunni/Shia split. Both groups share their belief in Muhammad and in the Quran (essentially the same). So if the whole narrative about Muhammad is false, the split should also be much later.
Yeah I love this guys videos but seems like there’s a bit missing. Im not sure how fast the scholarship is moving but only 2 years ago Fred Donner, probably the most famous and respected revisionist Islamic scholar said if somehow the true story could be fully revealed he wouldn’t be surprised if the traditional Islamic account of things is pretty close to what actually happened. As in he believes in a historical Muhammad as a prophet figure. Obviously though as a university accredited professor he has to be extremely conservative in his pronouncements but this Thomas Alexander seems to be on the more radical side of the debate.
@@HueyPPLong Donner needs to do a lot of catch up and i mean really a lot . But he has SOME kind of a point that the stories of the BATTLES of the SIN are based on real issues. However NOT in the HEJAZ of course where there was absolutely nothing but in Mesopotomia AND a bit more to the north than what Donner vaguely and very tentatively suggested. All the characters need to be sanitized, deAbbassidized and de Ummayasized and certainly deislamized. That is a lot of fictional interpretations of the real facts that will end up in the trash basket..
This had the makings of a decent presentation, but your chronology is an absolute mess. The Dome of the Rock is completed in 691, not 694. The "disappearance" of Mu'awiya is no such thing. He died in 680 and was succeeded by his son, Yazid. You say "around the same time that [Mu'awiya] lost to the Byzantines, Ibn az-Zubayr was pronounced Commander of the Faithful in the east but he is never able to control over much more than southern Persia". This is simply wrong. Ibn az-Zubayr never claimed anything. He began by refusing allegiance to Yazid, and he did not rule "only in a part of Persia" but was allegedly based in Mecca (having moved there from Medina to restore worship at the "House of God"). Wherever one thinks that "Mecca" was at this time, the fact remains that Ibn az-Zubayr was accepted as the Emir al-Mu'minin in most parts of the Arab polity. He is only remembered as a "rebel Caliph" because he lost, and losers don't write the history books. Also, it was his brother Mus'ab who controlled Iraq on behalf of Abdallah. Your next statement that Abd el-Malik succeeded Mu'awiya is equally wrong. Mu'awiyah's son Yazid ruled for three years, followed by Mu'awiyah II for several months, followed by Marwan (less than a year). And THEN, finally, Abd el-Malik claimed to rule from 685, but he was not universally recognised until shortly before his final victory against Ibn az-Zubayr in 692. Also, which are the coins of Abd el-Malik dating to 681? Do you have a documentary source for this? It's important to provide strong documentary backing if you're going to seriously challenge conventional chronologies and/or narratives.
You have accurately reproduced the standard Islamic narrative. However, as I have pointed out before, that narrative cannot be trusted. It is legendary in nature and in contradiction to the evidence on the ground. It has to be taken very carefully. As for the coins, they are exactly an example of this. They are in disagreement with the narrative. Personally, I take hard evidence in form of dates on coins over legends produced centuries after the fact. The standard work on coins from this era and location is: Walker, John. A Catalogue of the Arab-Byzantine and Post-Reform Umaiyad Coins. London, 1956. Therein you will find on pages 32-41 the description of countless of coins, starting in the year 681 AD from the mints in Ba'labakk, Jibrin, Halab, Hims, Sarmin, Amman, Qinnasrin, and Qurus.' They either read "li-Abd Allah Abd al-Malik Amir al-mu'minin" or "Abd Allah Abd al-Malik Amir al-mu'minin"
@@jamescummings7180 , if you think Hadiths are the sole source of information for what was happening in the 7th centuy, you are seriously misinformed. I'm actually well aware of the deficiencies of the Islamic historical tradition, but that doesn't mean that we just get to reconstruct it in any arbitrary fashion that we please. "Filling in the blanks" with purely imaginative scenarios or (as with this video) using erroneous chronologies on the basis of 70-year old data, none of this is a useful contribution to the discipline of history.
Great video. You can make it more historically rigorous by not using the term Byzantine which is completely erroneous and use the historically correct term "Roman" or "Romans". Thanks.
I love sequential historical maps and, although I have yet to view this all, it looks highly promising. Congratulations Thomas.
A lot of important historical information given over both clearly and succinctly. Thank you very much, Thomas!
No comment yet from Jay, but I’m sure he must happy and proud! Amazing work and Revelation, Thomas!
Awesome presentation, Thomas!
As always great job!
I do not know if this happens to others, but I do not get notified by youtube you posted a new video.
Every day I check your channel awaiting for a new masterpiece.
Thank you for your work.
I’m Muslim an I find this very interesting please upload more
well, u shouldnt be one for too long now especially after knowing this. nothing to be proud about really.
@@patroncurrysaint2849 knowing what? Beats me what's against Islam here?
@@Klopp2543 it destroys the Standards Islamic Narrative. No Mohammed.
@@Klopp2543 all Christians say "standard Islamic narrative".
What does Christian doesn't realize is Islam is Christianity. More from the church of Peter or Simon who believe in a physical Christ and not a divine similar to Jehovah witnesses
@@chollocks how? 😂😂😂 How then does the standard Islamic narrative still stand 1500yrs later? No one from the Byzantine or Persian empire found out? A storyteller who spins mumbo jumbo with no single fact destroys it?
😂😂😂😂😂
Maaaan..!!!! This is great & well organised with time line & prove evidence....Thank you for your effort...I like it..!!!
What a lucid description! Thank you for the road map! We just need to dig in to expose all of the SIN misconceptions. Thank you Thomas!
Excellent work Mr Alexander, thank you 🙏
@TheThornbird21 Jewish Nazarenes in the 6-7th centuries. A free book tells a lot of stuff. Give a TEMP email address and I will provide the link.
Wow, this is gorgeous! Great animated maps, a stringent and logical narration, that´s how history is making fun! Phantastic work, great new stuff! Thanks a lot for presenting it to us, Thomas! Keep on delivering, please! This really deserves a bigger audience!
Very well presented in a short time
Again brilliant 🤩 series Thomas really enjoying this .. All the battles between the Byzantium’s and Persians have evidence and independent historical sources..
The alleged battles in the Quran and Hadiths “ZERO” evidence for except post Islamic sources.. Then you have to look at the logistics of wars that need men horses camels and supplies.. Even the Arabs couldn’t be in 3 places at once.. ie They couldn’t be fighting for the Byzantium’s and Persians and fighting the Jews and tribes of the Hijaz.. of which there is absolutely no genuine credible historical evidence..
It’s not zero evidence, contemporary Christian writings state that there was war and the Arabs were victorious
@@TheUnique69able Yes further north but not in the Hijaz region..
@@trevorgriffiths5611 Imagine all these military and diplomatic geniuses coming from a remote place in the Hijaz...
@@slippingsnake Exactly.. I hadn’t actually thought about that aspect.. Anyone living in those harsh conditions would have absolutely zero knowledge of diplomacy or military tactics.. Or even read..
Sure Medina existed but Mecca.. Where absolutely no one wrote about it or went there.. Even though a Roman Army marched past the place and although short on supplies and water and having Arab trackers didn’t go there ..
Byzantines gave up territory without much resistance. It was Persia that faced the full brunt of Arab invasions
Excellent. It will be wonderful if the maps area is enlarged to include the west and animated. What had happened in Andalusia is also crucial part that should be included.
Andalusia is going to be focused on especial, based on his talks with Dr Jay Smith.
Another par excellence piece of work ! So much research data woven into fluid timeline pictographs ! Again TQ so much for sharing 🙏✌👣🌏
SUPERB! This is really an eye-opening revelation. As an Indonesian, I grew up with stories of 15L4M as a religion coming into being in the 7th century. It's quite mindboggling to learn about an alternative POV.
Thanks, Thomas for the detailed presentation - what a gem - there was lots and lots to take in. God bless you and yours
Short, clear and enjoyable
Simply brilliant. A complete and compact historical account of actual history. A huge effort to gather all these facts into a few minutes video. Thank you. Keep up the good work. God bless your work.
Excellent presentation with detail. What are the titles of the books translated in English by Innara Institute, also Thomas how about you putting all this vital information in a book for avid lovers of history. Thanks and keep up the good work.
I'm working on a book where I collect everything in one place...but it's a big project
@@TAlexander Will wait for it and all the very best in your genuine endeavours.
Nice presentation, I understand now your theory.
This is fascinating. All those constant conflicts and wars and deportations brought to life thru genuine historical research that is SO missing in Islam. I’m eager to learn more.
Great stuff as always.
grossartig Thomas, diese etwas ausführlicheren Darstellungen sind es die mir etwas in den Videos von Cira und Pfander gefehlt haben..macht fast Spass Geschichte wiederzuentdecken, besser als in der Schule ;)
Well presented!
I feel so lucky to know German. The so called „Inhara“ German school of Islam studies is currently only available in German. By now the 7th book of the Inhara series is available. Ok, not too easy to read as these are academic books. And therefore also quite expensive. But in every way worth the money. Alexander is connected to Inhara and most of the information he presents is from Inhara. So if you know German, get he books 📚.
Where can I get the books?
I believe that English translation has already been done. The next crucial step will be the the translation of this important work into Arabic. With the guardians of this cult ( Islam) it’s going to be a challenge!
Actually, we're now up to 10 books.
The first two books have been translated. The remaining 8 books are supposed to be translated at some point, but that may take a long time still.
Thanks Alexander for correcting the information.
Danke Alexander! War mir nicht bewusst, dass es schon offizielle englische Übersetzungen der Reihe gibt.
Thank you Thomas for this very informative video. Is there a book published which has all these details?
I'm working on a book. As of now, the information I presented is scattered throughout dozens of books.
Superb work 👏 Thomas.
Well documented and explained.
This is amazing
Hello from Australia
Excellent, Thomas, your presentation is unbiased, focused and illuminating. Your analysis is historical and analytical, the main criticism comes from religious zealots who wouldn't accept any evidence that diverges from the orthodox narrative. Please carry on your valuable and important work.
Thank you Thomas, very enlightening and interesting, looking forward to the next instalment. Bless you brother for all your hard work.
Hey Thomas, if I may, could you please tell more about the origin of the Fatiha Surah in general and the phrase "Sirat al-mustakim" in particular. Thank you
Once again a beautiful explanation of dark side of history of Islam by Thomas! Thank you.
Brilliant work Thomas and the Inarah school. God bless your work and grow it even more to the detriment of the SIN
Great presentation Thomas. The new mic is loud and clear. So is the later character of Mohamed of the Hadiths and sunah complete fiction or based on one or more characters?
Hi Thomas nice video summary 👌👌👌...I want your permission to upload these videos with my native language subtitles on my channel.
In principle, I don't have a problem with it. I just don't want my own channel to be drowned out between many copies. I'd therefore request that every video has a link to my channel and the original video. Preferably, I could also add subtitles on here. It would be neat if we could make it as multi-lingual as possible. But as I said, you can also put it up on your channel.
@@TAlexander i will make sure to include the link to the original video on your channel for every video that i take...but as i was saying i would add video explanation for Indian language it would be helpful in reaching many indian audience who dont understand english very well...but i assure that i will have the original link to your every video that i upload...Thanks again.
@@TAlexander I was planning to explain your videos in my language...it wont be through subtitles but explaining in my language so that viewers can follow through step by step process...i would love to work with you if you have any requirements for subtitles in my language...Thanks once again.
Wonderful effort.Thank you so much Thomas
Looking forward to the next presentation
A tour de forcé of Middle Eastern history leading up to the rise of Islam that most Westerners are not aware of and have usually just a vague idea. Well done! 👍
Facinating timeline. I'm not 100% confident it's all set in stone and we can say for certain, but there's a lot more evidence for this than the traditional yarn.
Thanks for putting this together, will have to rewatch!
It is fascinating how the reality evolved - and unfortunate how the mythology turned to fabrication and darkness.
love this!! Great presentation,
Clear and concise
Amazing marathon of history presentation
Clear and logical precis with graphs. Excellent. Best I have seen since the Ark. Although, didn't just one little "Senor Omeya " sneak off from the nasty Abbassids....?
"...with graphs..."
you've mispelled grapes :)
A german mind investigating. No stones will be left unturned !
ask *Werner Heisenberg* (1933 Nobel Price for Reason Quantum-mechanics/the Heisenberg uncertainty principle) he has shown deeper as anyone before in the cup of science and said:
_"The first drink from the cup of science makes one atheist; but at the bottom of the cup God awaits."_
or
*Max Planck* (1918 Nobel Price in physic/Planck-Time/Planck-length)... Christian
both changed the world and are just 2 of many
germany 💪
Absolute logical! The Dome of the Rock looks like a Byzantine church and not like a mosque.
Great work!
Wonderful presentation.🙏
Thank you very much for this presentation which is succinct and clear. It helps greatly in understanding what transpired to bring about Islam. I still have many questions but this has brought a great deal of clarification. I have listened to Dan Gibbons and read where you felt the Petra was not important. But the fact that the qiblas of early mosques all point to Petra is a significant and factual observation. How does the Inarah school account for the qibla directions initially pointing to Petra and then later to Mecca?
great video! please consider finding an arab speaker to read the same script. that would be a quite effective way of spreading this into muslim world. turkish and urdu would be also nice.
Great detail to timeline deportations and Emprical conflicts up til the Dome of the Rock. And can you show us the inscription from Medina re. Jesus?
I'm not aware of any pictures, but it is documented: gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k9109299p
@@TAlexander merci
An excellent research
Consider replacing "belongings" with "possessions".
I don't understand the distinction
@@20july1944 Belongings are personal articles you carry with you to create your appearance. Possessions are what you own or control, a measure of wealth.
Say hello to the Valkyrie boys for me.
Greetings Thomas - around 650 or so you mention the Arabs taking over after Heracles dies, you switch from calling them Arabs to Muslims, how did that happen, doesn't that event happen later as you mention at the end of your video?
If I said Muslims at that point, it was a slip of the tongue. I don’t think we can speak of Muslims before 800 AD.
@@TAlexander
Question: when did Arabs start calling themself arabs and what united them?
@@slippingsnake Remember in Lawrence of Arabia that Anthony Quinn as Prince Auda of the Howeitat tells Peter O'Toole he's never heard of "the Arabs" -- that might be a Western imposition.
@@20july1944 no, I don't remember this scene but now you got me going on the Movie:
it starts with Lawrence riding a Brough Superior on a narrow road when two boys on bycycles appear in front of him, he tries to avoid them but loses control and dies in the accident... :(
However, we have to be aware that this is a european view on a british Character and the historical Background is the arabic Revolt against the Ottoman Empire; So the movie can be a bridge to find interest in the modern history of "Arabia".
If you interpret Muhammed as a name for Jesus, then the second line of the shahada (muslim deceleration of faith) starts to take on a totally different meaning
"Muhammad is the Messanger of God" can now be understood as this being a affirmation of faith in a non- divine Jesus. Instead of declaring Jesus as the Son of God, they are insisting he is only the messanger
Thomas, do you think Mu'awiya and the Umayyads were from the pro Roman Arab camp? The war between him an Ali was the former pro Roman Arabs against the pro Persian Arabs (Tayyaye)?
Another not on Mel's channel he linked to AJ Deus new paper and it claims the name Umayyads means Sons of Arameans, which would fit with some of your work about the Aramaic/Syriac roots of what later became Islam.
Wow that makes you think but yes as a Muslim I would have to agree muwaiya was based in Syria which was always very pro Roman an ali set up his home base in southern iraq which was an still is heavily influenced by Persia so if makes sense
@@bigbear_therottweiler935
I think the Mu'awiya vs. Ali conflict was really a rehash of the Ghassanid vs. Lahkmid conflict.
Whatever his private beliefs were, Mu'awiya quickly prepared the large attack on Constantinople. So he certainly wasn't behaving as a Byzantine ally. Maybe he did so under pressure from the Persian east of his empire, maybe he himself thought it to be prudent. We don't really know.
@@TAlexander
There are many cases as someone starting as a client and then turning on their benefactor.
Beautiful.
1 counter argument I have here is that I think a civil war as you have described of civil war over the throne, then civil war over secession would be even more destructive by a concentrated invasion by a single force that could organize to avoid too extreme distruction.
What do you mean by original koran? Where is it now? Thanks.
I watching all the episodes and loved it but did you also check the jewish, india, china documents for information because i think you then will even find much more extra details especially about Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman and maybe even more
There's no Abu Bakr , Umar or uthman my dear friend , these are either fictional characters or at best influential people on whom there's characteristics have been imposed
Amazing work Thomas.. What should we make of rock transcriptions of Arabic Callander mentioning a prophet Muhammed?
Very interesting content. I just got 2 questions: how was it possible to change the person jesus to muhammad and all the believers accepted it? The second one is why was it necessary to do that? Wir können auch auf deutsch schreiben.😅
On one of the last slides it is stated that "the first true Mosque is being built in Samarra" in 825 CE. This is not commented. What is a "true Mosque" ?
It's the first mosque where we can be sure that it was intended as a Muslim building and not a church. Mainly due to the qibla, it's the first mosque which points to Mecca which indicates that the biography of Muhammad was established by that time.
@@TAlexander There are buildings with mihrab long before 825 CE. Do you think these buildings were churches?
@@PeterHarremoes Yes, Jews and Jewish Christians had them already in the 3rd century. Particularly in Eastern Syria they seem to have been popular.
@@TAlexander what about the 7th century mosque on the Malabar coast in Kerala...
@@TAlexanderThe use of niches in religious architecture is definitely older than Islam, but a niche in the middle of a long wall facing Mecca or north Arabia is different. There were some churches like the one in Palmyra that was rebuilt with a different orientation and with addition of a mihrab. Such changes appearently took place before 825 CE.
When was the Kaaba in Mecca built? How do you explain the difference between sunnis and Shia? What is Ali?
I have a serious question. How can we be told that the Quran was compiled by 652 or at tops 690? I mean if there was no Islam up till 800 & the Quran was written in harmony with the Surah & Hadiths how can everyone just agree to the Quran existing between 659-690? Have scholars missed 100-150 years of Quran's for 1400 years? I just can't believe it. Are there no whole Quran's from before 800? How can everyone have missed this?
How can you explain the battles of yarmouk and qadissiya?
What would be the main primary sources to read for this period?
Expand the video’s description for sources.
Heraclius was so revered by the Arabs he is referenced the Quran as Dhul Qarnayn (Alexander)
Great video, and dialogue. However, are you saying that there was no Prophet Mohammed? There was no Mecca from which the Arab conquest came?
There was no Mecca then. There may have been a religous leader known as Mohammed but he wasn’t in Mecca. He may have taught things found in the Qu’ran, but he wasn’t the originator.
Thank you so much for presenting this timeline in this way, outstanding!
A quick question; if the The Chronicle of Seert doesn't mention Islam, does that mean that Islam formalised between 825 and 850?
I’d say that it was a gradual process and for the people on the ground, it may not have been easy to see that they were now dealing with something that was different. This is easier to do in hindsight.
@@TAlexander thank you
Is it very clear when Mohammed /Christ and Mohammed /the war lord are being referred to? With Christ we aren't sure if he was a particular person, mythical or several spliced together holy men etc, couldn't certain references to the later guy be referring to incidents in the life of some of these other characters? And with M2 , does he ever get mixed up with someone like Imru' al- Qais , some of his poetry seems to turn up in the Koran, and aspects of his life sort of fit, he even later had a horrible skin disease so that he was all covered up...perhaps like the way images of M2 are?
Seems the oldest reference to the Arabic year is a papyrus from Egypt dated year 20 or 22.
I witness accounts do not date the dome of the Rock to 690...
I had to be constructed in the 800s 900s by the account of the Monk that wrote about it being in the Eastern southern part of the wall now it's constructed in the southern part..
I would like to know what makes you think the dome of the Rock was built in 690
You will. I’ll be releasing a lot of Dome of the Rock videos over the next weeks.
Mind blowing 🤯
Amazing
In this version of history, where do you put the Battle of Yarmouk in context?
If it took place at all, it would have been a minor skirmish. As I said, there's no evidence for a large scale war.
Nabataeans of Arab were known as master of Star's and deserts in 7th century. They were great worriers and majority of them were followers of Issa ibne Mariyam Rasoolallah pbuh, a break away group of Christianity known as Nastorian christian.
Hi Alex, was sind Deine Quellen für die Karten der Glaubens-Verbreitung ? Gib uns dazu doch bitte kurz Bescheid. Danke !
Die kommen aus verschiedenen Quellen...Die Karte von 600 habe ich aus meinem "Dumont Atlas der Weltgeschichte" (aus dem Jahr 2002). Da ist allerdings nur der "dunkle Teil" drin, sprich Gegenden mit Christlicher Mehrheit. Den Rest habe ich nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen hinzugefügt, basierend auf Dokumenten die belegen wo es Christliche Gemeinden gab, dabei vor allem die Liste der Bischofssitze der Kirche des Ostens. Aber es gibt z.B. auch Dokumente zum Oman welche Christliche Aktivitäten dort belegen, etc.
Beim Jahr 250 war es etwas schwieriger. Hier gibt es mehr Interpretationsspielraum. Auf Wikipedia gibt es beispielsweise eine (recht ungenaue) Karte zur Verteilung um 325. Das war schonmal ein Anhaltspunkt. Ähnliche Karten habe ich aber auch auf der Seite der Princeton University gefunden. Dort ist aber z.B. jeweils Armenien nicht in der Mehrzahl Christlich während andere Karten Armenien als Christlich führen, dafür nicht Teile die auf der Wikipedia Karte sind. Am Ende habe ich einen groben Mittelwert der verschiedenen Karten genommen welche ich gefunden habe. Die Grundlage hat diese Karte des Jahres 250 gebildet: www.animatedmaps.div.ed.ac.uk/divinity_map/ad112.html
Abseits davon ist aber auch in vielen schriftlichen Abhandlungen davon die Rede, dass sich das Christentum zunächst in den Metropolen entlang der Mittelmeerküste ausbreitete (mit Armenien als Ausreißer), insofern passt das alles ganz gut zusammen.
Deneben habe ich aber auch hier anderweitig gegengeprüft wo Christen überall attestiert waren. Ich bin z.B. die einzelnen Provinzen Persiens durchgegangen. Aber wie ich im Video bereits gesagt habe, in 250 waren die hellen Flächen nur sehr spärlich mit Christen besiedelt. Aber es gibt dort überall vereinzelte hinweise auf Christen.
@@TAlexander - super ! prompt beantwortet - in bekannt bewährter Thomas-Qualität ! Danke - da kann ich mit arbeiten… :0)
What about Battle of the Yarmuk and Battle of al-Qadisiyyah? do you consider them to be fictitious? and are there any mention of them in non-Islamic resources?
I‘d have to check again. It’s bin a while but I seem to remember that there is one Byzantine account of an encounter which sounds like a minor skirmish and which has been interpreted by some to be about the battle of Yarmuk, though there’s nothing in there to identify it.
That‘s pretty much it to my knowledge.
But as I said, it’s been a while since I looked at this. So maybe I forgot something. But there certainly are no contemporary writers talking about major battles or an outright war, quite the opposite.
Could the speer in the hand of the ruler of the coin not be the holy speer that pierst Christ? We speak here about holy relicts like the head of John.
no, its christian symbolics, not 'anti-chrstian islamic'.
The first use of the title Caliph is often been traced to Abd al-Malek, however, it seems like the video is pushing back the use of that title to the time of Al-Mamun more than a century later. Why is that?
Abd al-Malik may have used the title, or he may have used it for Jesus only. Either way, his understanding of that term would have been different from that of later generations. Al-Mamun was the first to bring back the title and use it in a way which is familiar to us today.
@@TAlexander Thank you Thomas! Tom Holland says something like that also when he says that the title of caliph was demoted under the Abbasids from the "Deputy of Allah" to the "Deputy of the Messenger of Allah."
The title Caliph appear on some of the standing caliph coins where khalifat allah appear in parallel with amir al-muminin. These two titles are written on each side of the standing caliph figure. On other standing caliph coins we have abd al-malik together with the title amir al-muminin. Therefore the most obvious interpretation is that khalifat allah is a title of 'Abd al-Malik. Patricia Crone wrote a whole book about the use of the title khalifat allah (deputy of God) and the later version khalifat rasul allah (successor of God's apostle).
How does this explain the Sunna/Shia Schism?
That came much later.
Incredible
Breathless!
There is an event which is important about the emergence of the Quran that you have forgotten in your timeline . Will you find it? That is the question.
You should write a book consisting of all your research
I look forward to the next episode when I guess the story of Mecca is highlighted and the story of the conquest of North Africa. That story has always been a mystery to me. How apparently long standing Christian culture succumbs so easily, almost without resistance, to the Arabs.
No, not so easily as you might think , the Berbers of North Africa did resist the initial invasion with military campaigns that was deafted before they accepted the new religion but they kept their language and culture similar situation to the Persians.
In Egypt it was a very difficult and grueling process over many centuries, and was accerlated by adopting the Arabic language in the Middle of 11th century , and Christians became a minority in 1400s.
There was several revolts by the so called Bashmoureen between 749 to 830 Al- Ma a moun had to finally intervene himself to crush it, and this explains why Christian population in the delta region is so small compared to upper Egypt.
The Nuba kingdom remained Christian in Northern Sudan to 1375 until it was crushed by the Mamluks of Egypt.
Sorry if I have written too much.
@@atifsabat4211 This was great!
@@drrepair Christian culture of middle east didnt succumb to Arabs as you say in your above comment, The arabs were antitrinitarian christians, so Trinitarian Christians of that area failed to see the threat brewing from arabs at that time, they ignored this threat or couldnt fight arabs to take back their land, remember that Arabs emerged as the single largest group of ethnic people after the Byzantine-Sassanian 602-628 AD war, so i believe that Trinitarian Christians were so weak after this war that they couldnt take control of the middle east, so normally the arab antitrintarians take over the middle east and later cooked up Islam by becoming apostates to Christianity altogether.
@@drrepair I believe that Destruction of Aramaic language from middle east had a major influence in the formation of Islam as they forced arabic on the people there...which made it easy for arabs to cook up islam in arabic language and present it to the people....
@@yakovmatityahu😅 all religion is made up Yahweh received his inheritance from El elyon 😅Deuteronomy 32:8-9
The quran is originally a christian preaching book used by the anti-trinitarian christians called nazarenes, they are called "nasara" (نَصَرَ) in the quran, while the trinitarian (orthodox) christians whom they hated are called "mushrikuns" (مشركون) ie "associators" or "polytheists" because they associate Jesus to God (which is "shirk" شِرْك that opposes to Allah's unicity called "tawheed" تَوْحِيدُ )
Very clear. I've heard all this before but in disjointed form
How does the Black Stone fit into this?
Black stone is the stone that fell from heaven mentioned in Acts of Apostles, they were placing this stone in the Temple of Artemis in Ephesus and kissing this pagan stone just like the abdools lick this stone these days.
@@yakovmatityahu There were many black stones worshipped in the region back then. Meteorites make quite an impact.
@@fantasia55 could be true that this pagan black stone came from a meterite which arabs thought allah threw it from his heaven, or it could be the same stone of artemis that they were kissing during saint Paul's day.
@@yakovmatityahu Acts of the Apostles says the stone "fell down from heaven".
Outstanding Thomas, My thoughts where and what was Muhammad doing at this time? I think I might know!!!
An empire no a world superpower just collapsed without a fight? How?
What of Syria and Egypt which were under the Byzantines?
How did 2 vast centuries old empires fall at the same time by chance?
Well, first of all, the Byzantine Empire didn’t fall for another 800 years, which isn’t bad as far as empires go.
But regarding your question: The Sassanids and the Byzantines just came out of the medieval equivalent of total war. A total war which lasted 26 years. Both empires were drained of money and soldiers.
The Sassanid Empire then descended into a destructive civil war which tore the country apart by tearing the Sassanian-Parthian coalition apart. It fragmented. The fragments eventually fell into Arab hands because Arab tribes fielded the largest military forces within Persia. Initially as mercenaries, eventually they simply took over.
In the Byzantine Empire, the situation was different. They came out victorious, but it was a different Empire. During the war, they shed the last vestiges of Antiquity and truly became a medieval state. Heraclius‘ reforms were the key to victory, but it also spelled the end to a large standing army. That couldn’t be financed anymore. Instead, he introduced the new theme-system, part of which was that soldiers were given land instead of money, making them farmers in Asia Minor. Thereby the Byzantine mainlands became independent of grain shipments from Africa. Equally important was that they saved a lot of money on the military. The fact that they couldn’t afford their standing army anymore was what got them into this mess in the first place. Remember that it all started with a military revolt.
On the flip side, it meant that the Byzantine Empire could no longer occupy Syria or Egypt. There simply weren’t enough troops that could be deployed far from home. Remember that the soldiers were now farmers, meaning they weren’t mobile. So Heraclius instead tried the old method of employing client kings, giving control of these provinces to the strongest forces in there, which were the Arabs. They got to be independent, In return they would swear fealty to Constantinople, be open for trade and keep their lands safe. Everybody was happy until the Arabs united under Mu’awiya. At that point, the Byzantine plan backfired. Instead of "divide and conquer“, you now had "unite and conquer", but from the other side.
@@TAlexander Constantinople fell after 800yrs but the Byzantines lost Syria,Egypt,north Africa,Armenia and Anatolia all in less than 15yrs.
The theme system was as a result of Muslims/Arabs conquest of Syria and Egypt after it lost it's human resources due to its religious animosity,over taxation and near total armies loses.
Arabs had never United prior to Islam. Persian and the Byzantine never had forts and other defensive shields on their borders with Arabia.
Arabs usually used to raid Persian and Byzantine lands and quickly withdrew to the desert beyond reach.
Persians and Byzantine believed the Arabs were barbarian and too divided to invade and only took them serious after they lost majority of their field armies and the Arabs went deep inland and away from the desert.
Your assertion that Arabs from the inhospitable deserts were more than the Persian or the Byzantine is laughable. The Persian territory extended all the way to the black sea, to Afghanistan and China and was centuries old. Or the Byzantines who held Africa,Levant,Asia minor,Balkans and some parts of Europe?
Both empires also had Arab mercenaries who fought alongside them and Byzantines developed the phylarch system of using Armenian and were auxiliaries living on the frontier to provide a "shield" to counter raiding by the Muslims into the empire.
@@TAlexander James Howard-Johnston, "can only be likened to a human tsunami.
Fred Donner writes that the advent of Islam "revolutionized both the ideological bases and the political structures of the Arabian society, giving rise for the first time to a state capable of an expansionist movement."[80] According to Chase F. Robinson, it is likely that Muslim forces were often outnumbered, but, unlike their opponents, they were fast, well coordinated and highly motivate.
First of all, the Byzantines didn't lose Anatolia until the Seldjuks started to bite little pieces off, one by one. All the other lands you talked about were clients by the end of the war with the Sassanids (with the exception of a few strategic forts like in Alexandria).
Secondly, the Heraclian reforms started during the war with the Sassanids, most importantly the military reforms.
Thirdly, we're not just talking about some Beduins from the Arabian Peninsula who banded together. We're talking about large, civilised groups. There were the Nabataeans, the Ghassanids, the Palmyrans, the Lakhmids, etc. Pretty much all of Iraq was already Arab while being part of the Sassanid kingdom. You had Arab tribes all the way to the eastern Persian borders.
This Idea that Arabs come from the Arabian Peninsula is a later development and largely a myth. Yes, there were Arab beduins, but they were not the driving factor here.
@@TAlexander can you cite any nabatean,lakhamid,ghassnid etc who was in any senior position after the conquest or during the conquests?
Second what United them? What made them one so as to conquer all Persian and Byzantine lands simultaneously? What broke their tribal bonds and ditch their centuries old vendettas?
I see somethings, first there's some christian in afghanistan, never knew about that, and the second why there's a dark purple spot in the western arabia? Wasn't that part full of Jews( khaibar)? I cannot read that map accurately but i think that's norrh of Medina , why do you think Pharaoh is Khosrou? Why don' t you think about christian in western Arabia?
Thomas, how can you talk about this time period and not mention Nehemiah Ben Hushiel's conquest of Jerusalem and rebuilding the temple!?
Good point. I should have included it. The problem is that contemporary sources are extremely scarce. It’s mostly guesswork what happened and largely inconsequential as the Sasanians soon reversed their policy and killed the Jewish leaders (if that’s what really happened).
Though given the circumstances, it certainly seems plausible that the Jews would ally themselves with the Sasanians, given the persecutions that were going on. So I should have included it.
I guess I was so focused on the bigger picture of the Byzantine-Sasanian war, that I overlooked this episode regarding the Sasanian conquest of Jetusalem.
@@TAlexander
Jews reconquering Jerusalem and starting building the Temple cannot be inconsequetial.
It is APOCALYPTIC in magnitude and can be just the spark that motivates the Arabs to create a new religion.
There are theories that the Masjid Al Haram which the Muslims conquered from the polytheist Meccans is actually the forbidden (haram) Temple that Nehemiah conquered from the trinitarian (associationists) Byzantines.
@@Danielst15lm Well, they didn't build the third temple, so at the end of the day nothing really changed. But of course we're dealing with a lot of Apocalyptic beliefs at that time. Jews, Christians and Arabs were motivated by them.
But as I admitted, I should have provided this additional context.
What is the proof that Mu'awiya and Abd al-Malik were Christians? Why are there no crucifixes or other clear Christian symbols in the Dome of the Rock? How are you sure that Muhammad is a title for Jesus originally?
A lot of verses of the Qur'an would need to be reinterpreted quite differently if this is all true, no? A video reinterpreting Qur'anic verses in the light of this theory is hopefully forthcoming. :-)
So...Muhammed is Jesus? How? can anyone explain..
Basically he's saying "Mohamud" is a title for Jesus, not that Jesus's name was Mohamud, and that it was then treated as the name of an Arab alleged prophet.
Mohammad in Arabic means the praised one, the one who deserves our worship. Only Jesus can claim that title. The alleged prophet of Islam misappropriated the title.
It seems like they were a certain type Christian, an antitrinitarian or heretics at that..
I know that Muslims must reject Jesus being called Muhammed. But I wonder what arguments they give against this
Hi Thomas , I observed in your presentation you jump from and Almalk reign to reign of al mamun and you neglected the other Abbasid caliph and their impact on formation and creation of Islam like Harun Alrasheed and Abu Jaafar Almansur . I become to realise that who came before al mamun from Abbasid dynasty were just fiction figure . That’s mean Harun Alrasheed is just a fiction father of almamun and Baghdad did not builded by Abu Jaafar almsnsuur but by some post Sassanid military forces who settled in middle Iraq to keep eye on strategic military route between Iran and Iraq after collapsing of Sassanid empire. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks again.
I did not want to give the impression that the Abbasid rulers were all fictional. I don’t believe that. It’s possible, even likely, that right around the shift of power from the Umayyads to the Abbasids our records aren’t very trustworthy. But I wouldn’t go so far and call all rulers literary inventions. And one thing that is absolutely sure is that there were rulers, something we can’t say for the Rashidun for example.
Also, they certainly did play a role in the creation of Islam, but in this presentation, it was not the right place to get into it in more detail. I will touch on that in future videos.
The reason why I highlighted al-Mamun is that he marks the all important transitional point of the evolution from an anti-Trinitarian Christianity to Islam. But it’s not like he did it over night, rather he happened to reign when this threshold was reached.
I like your work. But I wonder about one thing: the Sunni/Shia split. Both groups share their belief in Muhammad and in the Quran (essentially the same). So if the whole narrative about Muhammad is false, the split should also be much later.
Yeah I love this guys videos but seems like there’s a bit missing. Im not sure how fast the scholarship is moving but only 2 years ago Fred Donner, probably the most famous and respected revisionist Islamic scholar said if somehow the true story could be fully revealed he wouldn’t be surprised if the traditional Islamic account of things is pretty close to what actually happened. As in he believes in a historical Muhammad as a prophet figure. Obviously though as a university accredited professor he has to be extremely conservative in his pronouncements but this Thomas Alexander seems to be on the more radical side of the debate.
@Siraj Haq no, that 'mohammed' is a christian. ;)
@@HueyPPLong Donner needs to do a lot of catch up and i mean really a lot . But he has SOME kind of a point that the stories of the BATTLES of the SIN are based on real issues. However NOT in the HEJAZ of course where there was absolutely nothing but in Mesopotomia AND a bit more to the north than what Donner vaguely and very tentatively suggested. All the characters need to be sanitized, deAbbassidized and de Ummayasized and certainly deislamized. That is a lot of fictional interpretations of the real facts that will end up in the trash basket..
This had the makings of a decent presentation, but your chronology is an absolute mess. The Dome of the Rock is completed in 691, not 694. The "disappearance" of Mu'awiya is no such thing. He died in 680 and was succeeded by his son, Yazid. You say "around the same time that [Mu'awiya] lost to the Byzantines, Ibn az-Zubayr was pronounced Commander of the Faithful in the east but he is never able to control over much more than southern Persia". This is simply wrong. Ibn az-Zubayr never claimed anything. He began by refusing allegiance to Yazid, and he did not rule "only in a part of Persia" but was allegedly based in Mecca (having moved there from Medina to restore worship at the "House of God"). Wherever one thinks that "Mecca" was at this time, the fact remains that Ibn az-Zubayr was accepted as the Emir al-Mu'minin in most parts of the Arab polity. He is only remembered as a "rebel Caliph" because he lost, and losers don't write the history books. Also, it was his brother Mus'ab who controlled Iraq on behalf of Abdallah.
Your next statement that Abd el-Malik succeeded Mu'awiya is equally wrong. Mu'awiyah's son Yazid ruled for three years, followed by Mu'awiyah II for several months, followed by Marwan (less than a year). And THEN, finally, Abd el-Malik claimed to rule from 685, but he was not universally recognised until shortly before his final victory against Ibn az-Zubayr in 692.
Also, which are the coins of Abd el-Malik dating to 681? Do you have a documentary source for this? It's important to provide strong documentary backing if you're going to seriously challenge conventional chronologies and/or narratives.
You have accurately reproduced the standard Islamic narrative. However, as I have pointed out before, that narrative cannot be trusted. It is legendary in nature and in contradiction to the evidence on the ground. It has to be taken very carefully.
As for the coins, they are exactly an example of this. They are in disagreement with the narrative. Personally, I take hard evidence in form of dates on coins over legends produced centuries after the fact.
The standard work on coins from this era and location is:
Walker, John. A Catalogue of the Arab-Byzantine and Post-Reform Umaiyad Coins. London, 1956.
Therein you will find on pages 32-41 the description of countless of coins, starting in the year 681 AD from the mints in Ba'labakk, Jibrin, Halab, Hims, Sarmin, Amman, Qinnasrin, and Qurus.'
They either read "li-Abd Allah Abd al-Malik Amir al-mu'minin" or "Abd Allah Abd al-Malik Amir al-mu'minin"
You are taken your argument from the hadiths that dosen't work here, this why what you are saying is unidentifiable.
@@jamescummings7180 , if you think Hadiths are the sole source of information for what was happening in the 7th centuy, you are seriously misinformed. I'm actually well aware of the deficiencies of the Islamic historical tradition, but that doesn't mean that we just get to reconstruct it in any arbitrary fashion that we please. "Filling in the blanks" with purely imaginative scenarios or (as with this video) using erroneous chronologies on the basis of 70-year old data, none of this is a useful contribution to the discipline of history.
Great video. You can make it more historically rigorous by not using the term Byzantine which is completely erroneous and use the historically correct term "Roman" or "Romans". Thanks.