We, the Arabs, began to conquer the world and took control. Glory be to God, glory be to the ancestors of Saudi Arabia in the Arabian Peninsula, from Indonesia to Spain. The Berbers, the Muslim knights, are a people whom God honored with Islam 🇸🇦 🇲🇦
As a kid in late primary / early high school I was a huge roman history buff (yes i was a nerd...) - im only 7 min into the video so far o I don't know if this is addressed but: As far as I am aware there were Roman Legions present in Egypt at this point of time that were originally established in the late republic / early empire - so the Arab expansion into Egypt likely marked the beginning of the end of the oldest Legions in the Empire
As we all know, one of the most important factors that determine the outcome of wars is morale and not leaving the battlefield. Of course, the political situations in Eastern Rome are important. I think the real question is, how and with what motivation did these people achieve this, while all the armies of the period trembled against the Persians and Romans? Assalamualaikum brothers and sisters.
How did they fucked up so hard just build a wall at the cross road between sina and Egypt there problem fixed remember the arabs need a navy at that they didn't have any
Lmao nice sneaking the byzantine sassanid war which has nothing to do with the arab conquests as a way to make it seem like the arabs conquered when the byzantines were weak as a way to downplay the conquest
Every history geek who deep-dive into history with an impartial perspective will realize that the ottoman military was vastly overrated. In almost all early crucial Balkan conflicts, ottomans had more men, supplies, and gunpowder than their rivals. When the odds were equal or they faced up more equal grade enemy, the ottomans were utterly broken and decisively defeated. Gjergj Kastrioti, one of the most prominent ottoman ass-kickers in history, had a 24-1 win/loss ratio against the ottomans. Besides, Kastrioti's army was vastly outnumbered (most of the time 10 to 1), largely consisting of militia and volunteers. Ironically, Gjergj Kastrioti was enslaved and trained by ottomans. Yet he was a far better soldier&leader than any other ottoman sultan&pasha in history. After all, he was a proud Christian. The ottomans may have enslaved his body, but they had never enslaved his soul. Not only the ottoman Balkan invasion, this situation also applies to subsequent battles that took place in the following centuries. In the Battle of Ankara (1402),Mongolian descendant Tamerlane inflicted significant casualties on the ottoman while imprisoning the ottoman sultan. At the beginning of the battle, both belligerents exchanged letters, and Tamerlane humiliated the ottoman sultan more than once. Let's take a look at the siege of Constantinople, for example. Ottomans deployed more than 100,000 men plus giant cannons forged by Hungarian engineer Orban that have been unique and never seen that age. On the other side, the city defenders had barely 10,000 and were out of livestock and munitions. Despite that, the siege took 50 days and the ottomans lost half of their armies. Just do some research. Since when did mehmed, "the so-called conqueror" who annexed Constantinople, win which battle while the odds were against him? He always got the numbers, cannons, and manpower. :) The ottomans first confrontations with the colonial powers also ended up with military disasters. Battle of Gulf Oman 1554 decisive Portuguese victory, ottomans lost all their ships, ottoman admiral fleed like a chicken and Battle of Cape Corvo 1613 (It was a crushing Spanish victory, a vast amount of ottomans taken prisoner by the Spanish) Ottoman-Portuguese conflicts (1538-1560) also resulted in Portuguese victories. Prince Eugene of Savoy from Habsburg dynasty was another notable ottoman crusher in history. His achievements against ottomans were pretty impressive. Battle of Zenta 1697 andBattle of Petrovaradin are simple examples of how he brought down ottomans.(During these battles, Eugene had 20,000 men, and ottomans had more than 100,000 men. After that battle, no other ottoman sultan dared to lead military campaigns. Literally, the ottomans came to the negotiation table while on their knees (Treaty of Karlowitz 1699) and bowed to the Habsburg terms. The ottomans so-called predecessors, the seljuk turks, had no difference in that subject. They were also defeated and humiliated in countless wars like ottomans while holding tactical&numerical superiority. The Battle of Lake of Antioch 1098, Battle of Sarmin 115, The Battle of Didgori 1121, Battle of Iconium 1190, Battle of Kosedag 1243 etc. Moreover, this Turkic faction was just a bad copy of the Mongols in terms of warfare. The only thing they did was implement cowardly hit-and-run horse archery tactics, nothing more. Since I referred to seljuk turks, I'd like to refer to some misinformation about it that is spreading around the internet. :) The factual crusades conducted by Catholic factions were regarding the Holy Lands, Jerusalem, and Levant states and ignited by the Pope .This means the other prevention attempts to repel muslim invaders from Balkan territory should not be defined as a crusade like Nicopolis and Varna. (the ignorant turkish brats are speaking about these all the time.) Here's a quote from a historian to bring clarity to that topic. " I've seen constant misconceptions on the internet that the goal of the Crusades was “to prevent Muslim expansion into Western Europe” or something. This is not so. The First Crusade's stated aim was to aid Eastern Christians, primarily the Greek Orthodox Byzantine Empire. After the First Crusade, the subsequent Crusades aimed to preserve Roman Catholic rule in the Holy Land, especially Jerusalem. This was the stated goal of the Crusades and since the last vestige of Roman Catholic rule in the Holy Land fell in 1291, which is why people say the Crusades failed. This is also wrong, The first, third, and sixth crusades succeeded." The Russians were another faction that constantly beat up this empire throughout the 19th century. The Treaty of Kuciuk Kainargi (1774)was at the outset of Russian dominance over that sick empire that resulted after the Russo-Turkish War (1768-1774). Since that date, Russians always have prevailed during the conflicts with ottomans. (except the Crimean War 1863, in that war Britain&French teamed up with ottoman and saved them from another disastrous defeat) I'd add that info too, The battle of Serbs ain't happened. It's a myth the ignorant turk fools tend to believe in. You cannot find any single history book that covered this battle. As for the battle of Maritsa, there was no way the Serbs had gathered such a large army at that time. ( just a lie spread by pan turk clowns) Even at the Battle of Kosovo, Lazar Hrebeljanović (the national hero of Serbs barely rallied around 10,000/12,000 men under his command). The numbers of Balkan faction armies are grossly exaggerated by foolish turk brats, without any single historical proof. As a history geek, I am an expert on seljuk&ottoman history even though I despise both factions. I gave the exact date of the Battles and the names of prominent military figures who crushed ottomans with supplement citations. :) I'm pointing out historical facts here. Only ignorant ottoman fanboy turk fools are bragging about that garbage empire. They never read any decent history books in their lives all of their knowledge is based on the internet and ahistorical TV shows in turkey, merely coming up with copy/paste replies from the internet. (mostly Wikipedia) This garbage-sick man empire only brought poverty and misery to humanity. Zero contribution to science, art, and literature had left behind a disgraceful legacy. Their so-called bloated military might is just a myth that ignorant muslim clowns ( ottoman fanboy turks mostly) believe it. :) With this lucid argument, I've debunked those myths one by one based on detalied historiography.
Big difference between arab conquest to arabic land and Roman invasion. An example is tax was 2.5 to 5 percent at max, not 30% in our modern society. Land for whoever works in it, everyone free to worship their god. Jews and Christians had own courts from respective community
A small correction concerning the photos: Arabs then did not wear like Saudis wear today I can not describe well but Watch for example the series of UMAR
You do a better job in maintaining neutrality and unbiased tone in narrating than Kings and Generals. Everytime I watch a video for them that involves Muslims I feel like they wanna cuss or something😅
A very strange thing Every historical channel distorts as it pleases or as it is dictated to by higher authorities Each channel has a different story But some Western historians unanimously agreed that Muslims ruled very justly The Muslim army was small in number and weakly armed, which means that it did not need a lot of money, unlike the Roman army, which was large in number and powerfully armed, which needed money a lot, and despite that, you say that they increased taxes.
Sad story. If the Muslims not able took their pawns into farmland of Egypt they just only able to grown as big as like the cathars and soon lost in the history. Maybe some history geek cry for them but the world could be much better today. :(
This channel has given me hours of absolute bliss, my mind is so focused on the awesome battle tactics animations & your great descriptions i dont have a worry in the world until its over lol
