AHC: Arab conquests before Islam

Mort the Reaper

Within a century of the death of Muhammad, the newly Islamized Arabs had managed to conquer vast territories. In the process, they had destroyed the Sasanian Empire, and if they'd been slightly luckier, they could very well have done the same to the Byzantine Empire.

Now, of course, there are many reasons for why the Muslims were so successful in their early expansion. But I'm not here to discuss that. I'm here to present a challenge: have pre-Islamic Arabs conquer vast territory outside Arabia. You don't necessarily have to have them keep their territories for long or expand as quickly as the Muslims did, but you'll get bonus points if you do.
 

John7755 يوحنا

In otl, the success of the Arabs came from their recognition of the fighting prowess and learning the process of warfare from their northern neighbors and mixing it with their own. In other words, the Arabs when they invaded from the peninsula, were a people with a strong and disciplined army (relatively) and a great grasp of command structures. This was learned from internal conflict within Arabia, which occurred frequently and the Arab experience as mercenary for the northern empires and peoples, but also war with them along the frontiers of the civilizations.

Early conquests were made under the Qedarites during the later Neo-Assyrian Empire. During the reign of Sargon II (722-705 BCE) the Qedarites had expanded against Assyrian vassal states in the Levant and caused much strife there and were known to have supported the rebellion of the city of Carchemish and several other Syrian cities. Later, during the reign of Ashurbanipal, the Qqedarites expanded once more, cooperating with the Elamo-Babylonian forces and invading Assyrian ruled Levant. The Qedarites were ultimately tamed and decimated by Ashurbanipal and revived only for a short time in the chaos following the likely slaying of Ashurbanipal in the battle against the Scythians somewhere in the southern sector of historical Urartu-Armenia. These Qedari supported the revolt of the Babylonians once more against Assyria and supported the Median conquest of Assyria.

Likewise, Arab tribes made inroads against the Sassanids, in later times, spreading up to the Euphrates by 311 CE under the Lakhmid federation. One could use either of these as early examples of nascent expansions of the Arab people northward in a disciplined fashion.
 

Byzantion

Mort the Reaper said:
Within a century of the death of Muhammad, the newly Islamized Arabs had managed to conquer vast territories. In the process, they had destroyed the Sasanian Empire, and if they'd been slightly luckier, they could very well have done the same to the Byzantine Empire.

Now, of course, there are many reasons for why the Muslims were so successful in their early expansion. But I'm not here to discuss that. I'm here to present a challenge: have pre-Islamic Arabs conquer vast territory outside Arabia. You don't necessarily have to have them keep their territories for long or expand as quickly as the Muslims did, but you'll get bonus points if you do.
Click to expand...
A hellenized Arab Empire from a Hellenic Dynasty akin to the Ptolemäens would be interesting. Or a Jewish kingdom of Himyar being more successful expanding to East Africa maybe ? (Don´t know, if its actually Arabic ?).
 
Last edited:

John7755 يوحنا

Byzantion said:
A hellenized Arab Empire from a Hellenic Dynasty akin to the Ptolemäens would be interesting. Or a Jewish kingdom of Hymar being more successful expanding to East Africa maybe ? (Don´t know, if its actually Arabic ?).
Click to expand...

They were Arabs within Himyar, but not speakers of Arabic which as a language derived from the Hijaz-Nejd region. Their language were a collection of South-Arabian languages who descendants are still spoken in very rural sectors of Yemen, Oman, Socotra, Red Sea islands, etc...

In a period without Islam, it may be effective to say that what we teen Arabic, is more akin to a Hijazi language.
 
Skallagrim

Skallagrim

Banned
In between the two excellent 'starting points' @John7755 يوحنا mentioned, I will add: a longer-lived Alexander goes through with his planned Arabian campaign. This draws Arabia into the sphere of his empire. When that empire later collapses, a post-Alexandrian Arabia is one of the powers playing a part in the succession wars. Could benefit from its position to wait out the fight between rivals to the north, only to strike into their underbelly when they've bled each other dry.
 
KingOnTheEdge

KingOnTheEdge

Skallagrim said:
In between the two excellent 'starting points' @John7755 يوحنا mentioned, I will add: a longer-lived Alexander goes through with his planned Arabian campaign. This draws Arabia into the sphere of his empire. When that empire later collapses, a post-Alexandrian Arabia is one of the powers playing a part in the succession wars. Could benefit from its position to wait out the fight between rivals to the north, only to strike into their underbelly when they've bled each other dry.
Click to expand...
But seeing as Alexander basically copy/pasted persian law, only making it bigger, if he lived much longer his son would be able to inherit, thus stabilizing the empire. so we might need arabia to be part of Egypt or Persia in your tl, but then it probably would've been nominally roman, making even otl arab conquest harder
 
Coluber

Coluber

Maybe the Nabataeans could achieve more than they did in actual history, going further south into the Arabian peninsula, maybe conquering Judea and Egypt, and perhaps Mesopotamia. Another candidate could be Mavia and her Tanukhids, but I don't know how many butterflies would be needed to make her successful...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top