💥Download War Thunder for FREE and get your bonus! ► Use my link - playwt.link/historically #ad We noticed a group of viewers being unhappy with our storytelling of the rise of Shia and the caliphs. Please keep in mind the shia movement very much existed though not officially, more politically, as they supported the caliph Ali to be the first (shiatu Ali).
I am sure I would like it. Just one problem. I will see it in 18 hours. But that is fine because it is worth waiting. I wish all readers and you Historically a lovely start to (or is it of) pride month.
Professionally made and wrong. Several mistakes here. First of all most of persia was NOT shia, it was only majority shia after the 16th century of the common era calendar (which was made by the way in the 6th century by Dionysius Exiguus), Second there were no 'sunni' 'shia' split post sucession, the word 'shia' literally means faction, "Shiat Ali", literally 'the faction of Ali'. Sunni means following the Sunna, which means following the path of the prophet by his habits, commands, and deeds that are reported from the companions and wives outside of the Sacred Scripture. Furtheron, there was a siege During Caliph Uthman's reign, the perpetrators of that Siege became part of the faction of imam Ali, the reason why there was a dispute was due to him having been assassinated without the assassins being punished, the assassins and the clans which formed their body refused to hand them over to Imam Ali, which is why he was having several disputes inside his faction and later what came to be known as the kharijites emerged, he had the "Most rebellious troops" as opposed to the Umayyads who had the most disciplined troops due to the Levant being ruled by Muawiya for over 2 decades at the time. The Umayyads claiming to fight for justice for the assassination of the third caliph managed to win in the end when the kharijites attempted to assassinate both their leaders and Ali, they survived, Ali himself was assassinated. Later on the Umayyad shortly after almost collapsed when most of their territory rebelled after Karballa, but they were restored later on, but that's another story. Either way, Karballa for the next century was the focal point behind vengance for Husayn, the grandson of Ali and the prophet, they recruited followers from Khorasan, Transoxiana because of the large distance, they were not Shia, they were actually Sunni as, as mentioned before, that distinction had yet to emerge. The twelvers and the seveners, both the major denominations of what we call shia today came 300 years later. P.S. Imam Ali also did not name a successor, even when he was explicitly asked to on his death bed because this is a kingdom of faith, not worldly powers.
watch oversimplified upload tomorrow randomly also oversimplified name not being able to be oversimplified in a good way so that its shorter but still makes sense is ironic
Professionally made and wrong. Several mistakes here. Several mistakes in the video; First of all most of persia was NOT shia, it was only majority shia after the 16th century of the common era calendar (which was made by the way in the 6th century by Dionysius Exiguus), Second there were no 'sunni' 'shia' split post sucession, the word 'shia' literally means faction, "Shiat Ali", literally 'the faction of Ali'. Sunni means following the Sunna, which means following the path of the prophet by his habits, commands, and deeds that are reported from the companions and wives outside of the Sacred Scripture. Furtheron, there was a siege During Caliph Uthman's reign, the perpetrators of that Siege became part of the faction of imam Ali, the reason why there was a dispute was due to him having been assassinated without the assassins being punished, the assassins and the clans which formed their body refused to hand them over to Imam Ali, which is why he was having several disputes inside his faction and later what came to be known as the kharijites emerged, he had the "Most rebellious troops" as opposed to the Umayyads who had the most disciplined troops due to the Levant being ruled by Muawiya for over 2 decades at the time. The Umayyads, being the clan which the third caliph belong to, claimed to fight for justice for the assassination of the third caliph managed to win in the end when the kharijites attempted to assassinate both their leaders and Imam Ali, they survived, Imam Ali himself was assassinated. Later on the Umayyad shortly after almost collapsed when most of their territory rebelled after Karballa, but they were restored later on, but that's another story. Either way, Karballa for the next century was the focal point behind vengeance for Husayn, the grandson of imam Ali and the prophet, they recruited followers from Khorasan, Transoxiana because of the large distance, they were not Shia, they were actually Sunni as, as mentioned before, that distinction had yet to emerge. The Twelvers and the Seveners, both the major denominations of what we call shia today came 300 years later. P.S. Imam Ali also did not name a successor, even when he was explicitly asked to on his death bed because this is a kingdom of faith, and the final testament, the Qur'an had been brought down to completion. The Apostle of God (Apóstolos Dio was the final messenger's designation in Greco-Egyptian papyri), The Prophet's Farewell Sermon elucidates further on that.
Honestly I’m surprised he respected the beliefs of Islam refusing to let people depict Prophet Muhammad’s face. Thank you for this respect. edit: I think I started a war in the replies
8:50 Hello, I'm from Saudi Arabia and studied the history of the Umayyad. actually at that time even after the Abbasids planned to kill every single Umayyad some of them hidden in Damascus and many of them ran to Taif (a city south to Mecca, and still exists). they descents of those who ran to Taif live today in the same city.
thanks for the clarification man! with family lineage that huge its hard to believe all but one escapes, but perhaps the one that run to Taif are far from royal bloodline and starts to life like normal peasant so there's less story about them
@@nashmi-8609 bruh!? I meant that did they successfully escape the wrath of the Abbasid armies? And what would be their population by now? I also know they live like humans.
Would he be any better? First of all most of persia was NOT shia, it was only majority shia after the 16th century of the common era calendar (which was made by the way in the 6th century by Dionysius Exiguus), Second there were no 'sunni' 'shia' split post sucession, the word 'shia' literally means faction, Shiat Ali, literally, the faction of Ali. Sunni means following the Sunna, which means following the path of the prophet by his habits, commands, and deeds that are reported from the companions and wives outside of the Sacred Scripture. Furtheron, there was a siege During Caliph Uthman's reign, the prerutaros of that Siege became part of the faction of Ali, the reason why there was a dispute was due to him having been assassinated without the assassins being punished, the assassins and the clans which formed their body refused to hand them over to Ali, which is why he was having several disputes inside his faction and later what came to be known as the kharijites emerged. The Umayyads claiming to fight for justice managed to win in the end when the kharijites attempted to assassinate both their leaders and Ali, they survived, Ali himself was assassinated. Later on the Umayyad shortly after almost collapsed when most of their territory rebelled after Karballa, but they were restored later on, but that's another story. Eitherway, Karballa for the next century was the focal point behind vengance for Husayn, the grandson of Ali and the prophet, they recruited followers from Khorasan, Transoxiana because of the large distance, they were not Shia, they were actually Sunni as, as mentioned before, that distinction had yet to emerge. The twelvers and the seveners, both the major denominations of what we call shia today are a result of 300 years later.
People tend to forget, that cultures surrounding the European continent shaped its history just as much as the ones inside it. Well, parts of it any way.
Tehnically this is part of European history as it ends in modern-day Spain. But still i think the continent's story was shaped by the events in Middle East and vice versa
@@andersasblom6452Just because you always watch european history doesent mean other cultures are forgotten! There are hundreds of historical documentaries of at the many cultures! The problem is your not watching or searching them and just because it somehow is related to europe doesent mean its european! Europe really just influenced the entire history of the world than others ranging from colonization to diplomacy i mean theres no spot in the european history where they did not respect and recognize Middle eastern,Asian,African,Oceanian, And American Success from battles, and diplomacy europe fought with all of them! Unlike some cultures who tend to unrecognize europes success thats just being racist! And you call the whites racist? But you tend to forget that all cultures in the world is way more racist to the whites than the whites to them
Please don't stress. Comment sections have a habit of dictating how creators create content. We're all here for you and your teams work. Higher quality content is from content you're passionate about. P.S you weren't lying, this is a brilliant video! Well done
Several mistakes in the video;; First of all most of persia was NOT shia, it was only majority shia after the 16th century of the common era calendar (which was made by the way in the 6th century by Dionysius Exiguus), Second there were no 'sunni' 'shia' split post sucession, the word 'shia' literally means faction, "Shiat Ali", literally 'the faction of Ali'. Sunni means following the Sunna, which means following the path of the prophet by his habits, commands, and deeds that are reported from the companions and wives outside of the Sacred Scripture. Furtheron, there was a siege During Caliph Uthman's reign, the perpetrators of that Siege became part of the faction of imam Ali, the reason why there was a dispute was due to him having been assassinated without the assassins being punished, the assassins and the clans which formed their body refused to hand them over to Imam Ali, which is why he was having several disputes inside his faction and later what came to be known as the kharijites emerged, he had the "Most rebellious troops" as opposed to the Umayyads who had the most disciplined troops due to the Levant being ruled by Muawiya for over 2 decades at the time. The Umayyads, being the clan which the third caliph belong to, claimed to fight for justice for the assassination of the third caliph managed to win in the end when the kharijites attempted to assassinate both their leaders and Imam Ali, they survived, Imam Ali himself was assassinated. Later on the Umayyad shortly after almost collapsed when most of their territory rebelled after Karballa, but they were restored later on, but that's another story. Either way, Karballa for the next century was the focal point behind vengeance for Husayn, the grandson of imam Ali and the prophet, they recruited followers from Khorasan, Transoxiana because of the large distance, they were not Shia, they were actually Sunni as, as mentioned before, that distinction had yet to emerge. The Twelvers and the Seveners, both the major denominations of what we call shia today came 300 years later. P.S. Imam Ali also did not name a successor, even when he was explicitly asked to on his death bed because this is a kingdom of faith, and the final testament, the Qur'an had been brought down to completion. The Apostle of God (Apóstolos Dio was the final messenger's designation in Greco-Egyptian papyri), The Prophet's Farewell Sermon elucidates further on that.
The persians at that time were not shia the majority was sunni muslim, they started to become overwhelming shia in the 16th Century during the reign of shah ismail I.
The Safavids even faced the problem of the lack of any Iranian Shiite scholars, so they encouraged the migration of Arab Shiite scholars to Iran. Many of those who held religious positions in Safavid Iran were of Lebanese and Iraqi origin, and even from Bahrain.
Yes, not just that. Several mistakes in the video; First of all most of persia was NOT shia, it was only majority shia after the 16th century of the common era calendar (which was made by the way in the 6th century by Dionysius Exiguus), Second there were no 'sunni' 'shia' split post sucession, the word 'shia' literally means faction, "Shiat Ali", literally 'the faction of Ali'. Sunni means following the Sunna, which means following the path of the prophet by his habits, commands, and deeds that are reported from the companions and wives outside of the Sacred Scripture. Furtheron, there was a siege During Caliph Uthman's reign, the perpetrators of that Siege became part of the faction of imam Ali, the reason why there was a dispute was due to him having been assassinated without the assassins being punished, the assassins and the clans which formed their body refused to hand them over to Imam Ali, which is why he was having several disputes inside his faction and later what came to be known as the kharijites emerged, he had the "Most rebellious troops" as opposed to the Umayyads who had the most disciplined troops due to the Levant being ruled by Muawiya for over 2 decades at the time. The Umayyads, being the clan which the third caliph belong to, claimed to fight for justice for the assassination of the third caliph managed to win in the end when the kharijites attempted to assassinate both their leaders and Imam Ali, they survived, Imam Ali himself was assassinated. Later on the Umayyad shortly after almost collapsed when most of their territory rebelled after Karballa, but they were restored later on, but that's another story. Either way, Karballa for the next century was the focal point behind vengeance for Husayn, the grandson of imam Ali and the prophet, they recruited followers from Khorasan, Transoxiana because of the large distance, they were not Shia, they were actually Sunni as, as mentioned before, that distinction had yet to emerge. The Twelvers and the Seveners, both the major denominations of what we call shia today came 300 years later. P.S. Imam Ali also did not name a successor, even when he was explicitly asked to on his death bed because this is a kingdom of faith, and the final testament, the Qur'an had been brought down to completion. The Apostle of God (Apóstolos Dio was the final messenger's designation in Greco-Egyptian papyri), The Prophet's Farewell Sermon elucidates further on that.
The Rashiddun caliphate came right out of their own civil war too, where many of their men died and were exhuasted. They were as fatigued or even more so compared to the Romans and Persians.
Not only that, the losses from the first Fitna far exceed that of the dual liberation of both Persia and Byzantium. Several mistakes in the video; First of all most of persia was NOT shia, it was only majority shia after the 16th century of the common era calendar (which was made by the way in the 6th century by Dionysius Exiguus), Second there were no 'sunni' 'shia' split post sucession, the word 'shia' literally means faction, "Shiat Ali", literally 'the faction of Ali'. Sunni means following the Sunna, which means following the path of the prophet by his habits, commands, and deeds that are reported from the companions and wives outside of the Sacred Scripture. Furtheron, there was a siege During Caliph Uthman's reign, the perpetrators of that Siege became part of the faction of imam Ali, the reason why there was a dispute was due to him having been assassinated without the assassins being punished, the assassins and the clans which formed their body refused to hand them over to Imam Ali, which is why he was having several disputes inside his faction and later what came to be known as the kharijites emerged, he had the "Most rebellious troops" as opposed to the Umayyads who had the most disciplined troops due to the Levant being ruled by Muawiya for over 2 decades at the time. The Umayyads, being the clan which the third caliph belong to, claimed to fight for justice for the assassination of the third caliph managed to win in the end when the kharijites attempted to assassinate both their leaders and Imam Ali, they survived, Imam Ali himself was assassinated. Later on the Umayyad shortly after almost collapsed when most of their territory rebelled after Karballa, but they were restored later on, but that's another story. Either way, Karballa for the next century was the focal point behind vengeance for Husayn, the grandson of imam Ali and the prophet, they recruited followers from Khorasan, Transoxiana because of the large distance, they were not Shia, they were actually Sunni as, as mentioned before, that distinction had yet to emerge. The Twelvers and the Seveners, both the major denominations of what we call shia today came 300 years later. P.S. Imam Ali also did not name a successor, even when he was explicitly asked to on his death bed because this is a kingdom of faith, and the final testament, the Qur'an had been brought down to completion. The Apostle of God (Apóstolos Dio was the final messenger's designation in Greco-Egyptian papyri), The Prophet's Farewell Sermon elucidates further on that.
@@mznxbcv12345original Shia were political their beliefs was same as sunni but differed on who should have been first caliph then ibn saba in the last part of uthman ra reign and Ali ra reign created the modern day Shia where he said Ali ra should he worshipped and was later killed but the ideology was unfortunately deeply buried in the hearts of people and it ended up growing to the Shia of today
@@andersasblom6452The Ummayads And Abbasids Are Both Arab Clans From The Same Muhammadean Family. Their War Is A Succession War, Nothing To Do With "muh equality" Or Whatever Modern Day Agenda This Guy Tries To Shove In... Not To Mention The Fact That persians Don't Even Exist...
Underrated how? The video is choke-full of mistakes; Several mistakes in the video; First of all most of persia was NOT shia, it was only majority shia after the 16th century of the common era calendar (which was made by the way in the 6th century by Dionysius Exiguus), Second there were no 'sunni' 'shia' split post sucession, the word 'shia' literally means faction, "Shiat Ali", literally 'the faction of Ali'. Sunni means following the Sunna, which means following the path of the prophet by his habits, commands, and deeds that are reported from the companions and wives outside of the Sacred Scripture. Furtheron, there was a siege During Caliph Uthman's reign, the perpetrators of that Siege became part of the faction of imam Ali, the reason why there was a dispute was due to him having been assassinated without the assassins being punished, the assassins and the clans which formed their body refused to hand them over to Imam Ali, which is why he was having several disputes inside his faction and later what came to be known as the kharijites emerged, he had the "Most rebellious troops" as opposed to the Umayyads who had the most disciplined troops due to the Levant being ruled by Muawiya for over 2 decades at the time. The Umayyads, being the clan which the third caliph belong to, claimed to fight for justice for the assassination of the third caliph managed to win in the end when the kharijites attempted to assassinate both their leaders and Imam Ali, they survived, Imam Ali himself was assassinated. Later on the Umayyad shortly after almost collapsed when most of their territory rebelled after Karballa, but they were restored later on, but that's another story. Either way, Karballa for the next century was the focal point behind vengeance for Husayn, the grandson of imam Ali and the prophet, they recruited followers from Khorasan, Transoxiana because of the large distance, they were not Shia, they were actually Sunni as, as mentioned before, that distinction had yet to emerge. The Twelvers and the Seveners, both the major denominations of what we call shia today came 300 years later. P.S. Imam Ali also did not name a successor, even when he was explicitly asked to on his death bed because this is a kingdom of faith, and the final testament, the Qur'an had been brought down to completion. The Apostle of God (Apóstolos Dio was the final messenger's designation in Greco-Egyptian papyri), The Prophet's Farewell Sermon elucidates further on that.
not really mate. they were zoroastrian. Rey was captured but Ali, his companions and sons, the people there saw him as their liberator from the persian empire so followed shi'ism, it makes sense.
@@aunnaqvi3133 You are absolutely wrong. The Persians were Sunnis (thats why many Sunni Scholars were from Persian origin) but Shah Ismail of Safavids forcefully converted Persia into Shia religion.
@@aunnaqvi3133 buddy you're wrong, yes prior to Islam they were zoroastrian but that doesn't mean anything for their following of Islam Iran was primarily Sunni, mainly Hanafi and Shafi'i until the Safavids took over in the 1500s and forced conversions of Sunnis to Shi'ism
2:17 is not correct. All community accepted Abu Bekr, without knowing who would be next. Before he died, he suggested to the community to take Umar as next, after Umar, the most prominent people chose Usman
Man, I can't express how good this video is. As an Arab Muslim, this history is very much historically accurate, and the art is absolutely phenomenal (+ I appreciate not drawing the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him) Genuinely an amazing video, I've been watching since the Valorant map recreations on the Arch channel and your videos were consistently of amazing quality. Keep up the good work man!
@@Mohammad-xk7xw lol what? a brutal civil war is cope? also do you really think an arid desert vwould profuce equal man power to the romans and iranians in pre modern times?
If you're going to mention the tax on non-muslims, to be fair you should probably mention the Zakat tax that muslims were/are to pay that was even higher than their tax.
As a muslim...he whole tax thing used to be a fair deal. The non muslims were ment to pay jizya(tax) to muslims for protecting them and if muslims weren't able to do so they return the jizya money back...and the muslims are obligated to pay zakat which is more expensive. Just wanted to clarify
The kicker is that non Muslims were forced to do embarrassing and humiliating practices whilst paying and also Christian tithe is up to 10% much higher than zakat
Really appreciate your respect of our conduct of not drawing the faces of Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) and his companions. By the way, as Muslims we refrain too from drawing Jesus Christ or any other prophet (peace be upon them all).
just an note: modern shia is not the same as ali shia ali shia :are group of muslims who sided with ali politically otherwise modern shia deviated from the path and started worshiping ali and saying Quran was corrupted
@@groundzero5708 shia quran corrupted: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BNfPR9Ldtjk.htmlsi=VY39v41_--7Zp3VW shia ali is allah : ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-4jNN2DVO8lA.htmlsi=kPAedrCOmX7xt1ac , ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-vmrH8sS1ewI.htmlsi=9a9vc7x-8mSPnyls , ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cHcC5AIqtaM.htmlsi=etyb4bZZTt6YZtAT .
discovered you through the last Nietzsche video, safe to say my new favorite channel already. I'd love to see more videos about philosophers from you guys
3:44 quick correction the abbasid movement wasn't made by the supressed groups the abbasids were a powerful family that were also descendants of the prophet(via his uncle abbas) even though the abbasids had alot of non arab supporters it also had alot of arab supporters and after they've risen up they've gottten a great victory in the battle of great zab river which was the collapse of the ummayads and the very large rise of the abbasids
Unfortunately this orientalist over simplification of the Abbasid revolution as just non Arabs (Persians) revolting against the Umayyad still popular, it really stupid for anyone who knows about the Quraish clans dynamic and the rivalry between Yemenite and Qaissy Arabs
@@miracleyang3048without Salman Farsi (Solomon the Persian, and the traitor) there would be no Muslim empires to follow. Once Arabs colonized Persia and The Byzantine’s, the Arabs quickly flocked to Persian in search of governance of the new empire.. because you know, they’ve done it before, and they’ve done it multiple times before at that. So the Abbasids might’ve been Arab and may have been a powerful family, however they would be nothing without the political support of the Persians who were actually running the empire while the Arabs were at constant internal conflict within their families.
this channel is just here to make the best content, the video is accurate informative and fun to watch, your narrative is unmatchable, everything that you do is amazing mr arch i am your biggest fan
1:52 Why “Self Proclaimed Romans” Eastern Roman Empire is still Roman. They practice Roman traditions in the Greek language and had their capital in a city once known as New Rome.
@@Ungehorsam Blatantly untrue, and that’s not even how Roman civil wars worked. Roman civil wars were always between individuals commanding pieces of the Roman military, not regions.
@@fishconnoisseur This is like saying that the Ottomans were Romans. The Romans ended as Christianity spread, their culture disappeared, and they became slaaves to a cuult from the desert that destroyed everything And To this day, Euurope still suffers from this
@@king.g-l1g The Ottomans conquered the Eastern Roman rump state(s). There is never a break in continuity of the Roman state from its very foundation in the 7th century BC to 1204 AD at the earliest and 1475 at the latest. This is a false equivalency fallacy. Stop pushing your pagan agenda like it’s legitimate history. Rome was never conquered by Christianity as much as it had an internal transition that took both bloody and peaceful shapes.
@@king.g-l1g yeah the latin romans were dead but the empire lived on in byzantium, and I dont see why the ottomans dont have that by right of conquest. They called themselved roman, their people said they lived in the roman empire and a muslim turk has a lot more in common with a christian greek than a greek has with a latin pagan
3:19 actually islamic empires such as the ummayiads couldn’t care less about ethnicities and in fact they only taxed non muslims and gave them protection in favor
@@Alrightmira this video is filled with misinformation. Can't even watch this for entertainment I stopped at maybe 7 minutes in such a shame it's obvious a lot of work was put into making this
@@quandaliousdingle-r3b Hahaha i know right the animation looks sick but it is very triggering when the information is wrong too such as Iran being shia during that era and no mention of the khawarij
2:05 Acually hinted many times that Abu Bakr will be next, so the companians chose him, then everyone agreed that Omar should be next, then before Omar died he chose 6 companians to elect one of them which they choose Othman by majoroty of the public vote, When Othman was killed, Muawiyah, the governor of the Levant, refused to pledge allegiance to Ali before taking revenge on the killers of the former Caliph Othman, and this was the reason for the civil war. 2:20 The Kharijites emerged from this conflict, not the Shiites. The word "شيعة" Shiites in Arabic means his group or party, which is why it was used in the civil war. The Shiites sect did not appear until 82 years after the civil war (so that is a translation error).
Us Shia believe the Prophet s.a.w chose Ali a.s in Ghadir Khumm, that’s why we see Ali a.s not being the 1st caliph as an injustice. I guess both sides seem to claim something else, in the end we will see during Judgement day. Peace be upon all that love ahlul bayt, I don’t wish to argue and insult Sunni’s when the real enemy is the people killing Palestinians.
There wasn't public vote rather it was مجلس الشورى witch is a sort of counsil made of the biggest figures witch were the companions of prophet at that time that elected othman
@@absoluterage6147 Firstly, I am Sunni, and thank you for your respect Secondly, of course Ali is a wonderful Islamic figure, but let me show you our point of view We believe that Ali is not the caliph after the Messenger for two reasons: 1. Because we believe that the caliphate is chosen by all Muslims (the people of the solution and the contract) and we do not believe that it is a property by inheritance. We also believe that all people are equal, so they all have the right to be the caliph, and the caliphate is not limited to a specific person or a specific family. 2. Our second reason is that Ali himself did not say that he was the Caliph or that the Messenger chose him, just as no one chose Ali at that time. Even his wife (Fatima) did not choose him. . I hope you understand the point, thank you ❤
@@نسيتكلمةالمرور-ذ5بironic when it was Muawiyah (a Sunni) who turned the caliphate into a hereditary empire. Didn't the prophet say in his last sermon to take Ali as the wali?
@@user-op8fg3ny3j Thank you for clarifying your point of view, but I don't think this changes anything for me I do not sanctify Muawiyah, but as a matter of fairness and historical reliability, Muawiyah is not the first to bequeath power to his son, because Ali did that before him when he bequeathed power to his son Hassan, so we can say that Muawiyah is the second to do that. . As for the word “wali,” I am an Arab, and it does not mean a president, a king, or a caliph. Ali himself did not say that this is what it means, nor did he say that he is the caliph after the Prophet Muhammad. Rather, this is a claim that came later. Thank you
That's genuinely very exciting, Al-Rahman's life definitely has a lot of potential for an amazing history video, especially considering how awesome Historically's skill is to turn any piece of history into a genuinely amazing tale.
Hiya, a Muslim here🫡 I would like to point that Abd Al-Rahman name cannot be simplified as Al-Rahman. Partly because the word Al-Rahman refers to Allah as it's one of His 99 names. And also Abd and Al-Rahman cannot be separated as the Arabic grammar states. Same rule applies as someone named Ibn Battuta, had you mention Battuta without Ibn you would be referring to a complete different person. And for this instance separating it would refer to his father or grandfather or even the occupation of the family which is wayyyy too far. So yes, Arabic is not easy to learn especially for non native speakers like me😬
The Mod was about his successor. This guy in the video lived at mid 700's, while his successors that also being made into mod in Civ 6 lived around the year of 900's.
The Mod was about his successor. This guy in the video lived at mid 700's, while his successors that also being made into mod in Civ 6 lived around the year of 900's.
Basically history repeat itself, when Mongol conquer Baghdad and destroy remaining Abbasid Caliphate, they also on the run and hunted by Mongol's troops.
Several mistakes here. First of all most of persia was NOT shia, it was only majority shia after the 16th century of the common era calendar (which was made by the way in the 6th century by Dionysius Exiguus), Second there were no 'sunni' 'shia' split post sucession, the word 'shia' literally means faction, "Shiat Ali", literally 'the faction of Ali'. Sunni means following the Sunna, which means following the path of the prophet by his habits, commands, and deeds that are reported from the companions and wives outside of the Sacred Scripture. Furtheron, there was a siege During Caliph Uthman's reign, the perpetrators of that Siege became part of the faction of imam Ali, the reason why there was a dispute was due to him having been assassinated without the assassins being punished, the assassins and the clans which formed their body refused to hand them over to Imam Ali, which is why he was having several disputes inside his faction and later what came to be known as the kharijites emerged, he had the "Most rebellious troops" as opposed to the Umayyads who had the most disciplined troops due to the Levant being ruled by Muawiya for over 2 decades at the time. The Umayyads, being the clan which the third caliph belong to, claimed to fight for justice for the assassination of the third caliph managed to win in the end when the kharijites attempted to assassinate both their leaders and Imam Ali, they survived, Imam Ali himself was assassinated. Later on the Umayyad shortly after almost collapsed when most of their territory rebelled after Karballa, but they were restored later on, but that's another story. Either way, Karballa for the next century was the focal point behind vengeance for Husayn, the grandson of imam Ali and the prophet, they recruited followers from Khorasan, Transoxiana because of the large distance, they were not Shia, they were actually Sunni as, as mentioned before, that distinction had yet to emerge. The Twelvers and the Seveners, both the major denominations of what we call shia today came 300 years later. P.S. Imam Ali also did not name a successor, even when he was explicitly asked to on his death bed because this is a kingdom of faith, and the final testament, the Qur'an had been brought down to completion. The Apostle of God (Apóstolos Dio was the final messenger's designation in Greco-Egyptian papyri), The Prophet's Farewell Sermon elucidates further on that.
Solid and entertaining videos, I like the art style a lot. Only complaint is There are some big errors regarding sunnis and shia as some other commenters have explained, but it's understandable seeing you are not normally taught this history where you're from. looking forward to part 2
I tried to make these fit into Star Wars episodes, so.... Episode I: The Shadow of Antiquity 0:46 -- 2:00 Episode II: The Caliphate in Decay/ The Expansion Wars: 2:08 --- 3:59 Episode III: Revenge of the Abassids: 4:00 -- 14:42 Episode IV: A New Hope 14:42 --- Sometime before Oversimplified uploads)
=The Al-Rahmad Saga= Episode I: The Muslim Menace Episode II: The Abbasid Wars Episode III: The Return of the Shias Episode IV: A New Hope Episode V: The Caliphate Strikes Back Episode VI: The Return of the Sunnis
I've seen one documentary, and a number of other independent scholars, make some extremely convincing arguments that Mohammad's birthplace and early home was Petra rather than Mecca. It is also a theory that current powerful political and religious forces would have every reason to resist ever taking seriously, on top of the usual academic/human intransigence when it comes to such ideas (another good example of this is the Shakespeare Authorship Question, look up Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship and/or Alexander Waugh on this platform for anyone curious). I know this isn't terribly germane to the focus of this video; it's simply hard for me to hear "Mohammad was born in Mecca" without feeling the need to let others know that there is an alternative theory about that, which fits both the descriptions in the Quran and the cultural ingredients of the Quran (from an agnostic, academic perspective) far better than the Mecca of that time can. It's just fascinating for me, to find highly plausible alternative theories about hugely important cultural history, that one has heard one's entire life is ostensibly so settled and absolutely known that no rational debate or skepticism even exists.
Historically is thee bestttt thing that has happened in a long time andd even better, the videos are good quality and NOT boring I made a comment but It disappeared
Fun fact: the ones who murdered Ali and his two sons are the same group of people who murdered uthman 😊. (Shia or whatever it is the group name was at that time)
wow, I'm an Indonesian muslim yet I feel shameful for not knowing almost all of these (TIL that Ali was actually assassinated) (our country education system isn't exactly a role model)
Well tbh this was more of Arabic history, rather than Islamic one. The Rashidun Caliphate history is still felt like the continuation of the Prophet (pbuh) history. Hence it was included into Islamic history. But the Ummayads and Abbasyds (and more Caliphates after that) is more of political history. It's the ole classic "who will control this land/people". And on the other hand Indonesian history education focused more on Indonesia history. I mean of course, innit. So there's nothing to be ashamed of
To clarify. It was not an invasion of the Iberian Peninsula, but it was a conquest, and the people there were not forced to leave their religion, but rather they chose what they wanted, and the Muslim lived with the Christian and the Jew in peace until the fall of the Andalusian state at the hands of the invading Crusaders.
Fun fact Some historical maps are simplified and not as accurate as you think. "Maps often depict Oman within the domains of the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphates due to their broad cultural and administrative influence across the Middle East and North Africa during those historical periods. Despite Oman not being directly governed by these caliphates, traditional map representations simplify the geographical context, showing Oman as part of these empires to illustrate their regional reach and historical influence."...CHAT GPT Reference: 1. "A History of Oman" by Peter Sluglett. 2. "The Sultanate of Oman: A Twentieth-Century History" by Jeremy Jones. 3. "Oman in Early Islamic History" by John C. Wilkinson.
great stuff, but its best if you remove the "- Historically" from your titles since it doenst really add anything and can potentially confuse people what the video is about. it's a small change but I do think it could help you guys' channel just a little bit
there some things we need to clarify one Persia wasn't Shia until later by a prince who was a Shi'i and enforce all of Persia to become Shia. Two when prince Abdoulrhaman's brother returned to Abssids soldiers they told him to comeback to him or they'll kill his brother which he replied "my brother killed himself".
There are some things I like to Clearfield: The Persians weren't a shee in that time and Alwaleed 1st is his great uncle not great grandfather Alwaleed was Hisham brother
You missed out the martyrdom of Hussain Ibn Ali, the grandson of the Prophet and the son of Ali who was brutally killed at Karbala, Iraq with his companions by Yazid and his army. This event is significant in Islamic history. It not only made the Umayyads unpopular among the masses and sparked many revolutions against them.
its the first time i see a westrner depicting our history with resprect and without bias thank you for that even though there are some missing facts but in the end for 15 minutes video you did quite a good job
Abdulrehman's son and sisters were not killed, infact the son was reunited after Abdur rehman became the emir of Cordoba. And his sisters couldnt come to andalusia because of the long journey.
I am amazed at how many inaccuracies there are such a short video: - Iran at the time of the Umayyad dynasty had nothing to do with Shi'a Islam, Iraq was their center. - The poll tax or Jizya is a lesser tax. Muslims payed more. - The most important aspect of who the Abbasids were was left out, they were descendents of Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet Muhammad (S)
@The_sad_penguin well you clearly aren't smart enough to infer what situation I'm currently referring to therefore I don't think you would care to know
My friend, there is no reason to lower yourself to petty insults. Obviously i understood your point, i just thought that it wasn't the best way to support your opinion, thats all.
@The_sad_penguin so now we are on the same page of Romans renaming judea for spiteful reasons You cannot morally justify a group of established native Muslim and Christian arabs having their land and homes taken off them by european settlers because they like to say "we are gods chosen people" Why are you doing the same today what the Romans and nazis did to you? You have become the very thing you swore to "never again" let happen. Also funny how the holy land was gonna be Uganda or grand island New York but No God chose a place where we all get skin cancer cause we have to emigrate halfway across the world to do so I mean they tried to make all the abbyssinian jews infertile and I wonder what reason that was.... Your whole land is based upon colonial plans of establishing a western democracy in the middle of a place it had nothing to do with.
I saw some people claiming that the Abbasids are evil. Let me clarify that the Ummayyads killed the last closest lineage to the Prophet. That's like if after Jesus died, the Paul systematically tried to find Joseph and Mary's other relatives and children and killed them all specifically so there is no lineage from Jesus' familial tribe. In cold blooded too, imagine if Jesus' nephews was trying to make the Christians more in tune with Jesus' teaching instead of becoming corrupt. And then was killed by it. Yeah and no wonder why a lot of people hated the Umayyads.
There are some false historical events in this video. One of them is the persian peninsula being shias at that time. Persia was sunni at the time and the shias were in parts of modern day Saudi and Iraq
Correction: i just researched this topic in depth the persians were still sunni at the time but were getting treated unfairly so they started the revolution, thus abbasids are considered a sunni empire. Persians became shias in the 16th century
I'm tired of people saying that the "Roman & Persian empires were already weak lol ofcourse Arabs would win haha", do you even know what the power difference is between these two bulking empires and nomad fighters from the desert?! it's like Inuit fighters take on Germany/orAxis & Britian/orAllies around the end of WW2... it's simple really, the early Muslims made an amazing feat by defeating two world superpowers at that time, proved by their ingenuity, willpower, & sheer bravery, & God's grace, if you're a believer in God.
I mean considering half the Iranian population died of disease and famine and tax was too high and shahbanu purandokht spent her entire career trying to fix the famine And the fact that we have seen romans get defeated by **khosrow anushirvan I** Because they didn't have enough money to pay their soldiers explained enough by that logic god was on the British side because they took over half the world and we speak their language now GLOBALLY
@@loulishadow1468 Fam considering roman sources claim that they're army during the islamic conquest had 90 thousand soldiers while islamic sources claim they defeated roman armies of 100 to 200k each and considering syria was evacuated because of the roman persian wars and was empty And plus soviet union and usa already took over Europe and influenced them when every colonial empire collapsed even though america was weaker than the British empire in terms of wealth and territory they made Europe their playground And remember soviet union previously lost a war to a small poland and didn't do much against Finland
@@loulishadow1468 Every empire falls man this includes yours nothing lasts forever in this world not even rome but you are making it seem as if it was you against all odds but those empires were already finished by the time. British empire fell for the same reasons if you look at it it happens we don't live in 1400 years ago to change it it is what it is but you make it seem that logic doesn't apply to you
