Huns conquer Arabia

for some context, iirc the main reason that the Mongols of later centuries didn't really go much further than Mesopotamia was because they ran out of grazing lands for their horses: after the Fertile Crescent, it was mostly desert. i imagine the Huns would have similar limitations.
 
Why would they bother? There's nothing there to loot.

Medina and Muscat were wealthy trading towns in the deep Arabian pennisula.

Aden was also very strategic in the global markets at the time.

It could also be for personal reasons (Arab daughter offers Arabia to her husband as dowry? :p). To be honest, all the Huns would have to is to ride down there and take the cities. Arabia doesn't have that many people there anyway.
 
Either Attila´s Huns (whereever they orginated ) or the so called White Huns of the Orient.

You know, practical lobster has written an extensive time line on just this subject, not on Attila specifically but on the white huns taking over the sassanians.
 
Medina and Muscat were wealthy trading towns in the deep Arabian pennisula.

Aden was also very strategic in the global markets at the time.

It could also be for personal reasons (Arab daughter offers Arabia to her husband as dowry? :p). To be honest, all the Huns would have to is to ride down there and take the cities. Arabia doesn't have that many people there anyway.


Arabia at this time was not some wasteland... The region was very wealthy in trade resources as evident in many states from the time of Alexander till the rise of Islam. Makkah, Madinah, Dilmun, Musqat, Zafar, Saba, Adnan, Bahrain, etc where all lucrative trade cities and areas with great wealth. If it was worth Alexander's interest then it is worth Attila's as well. Not to mention that Axum is a short boat ride once Arabia is secured (not going to happen).
 
The only way I can see this is if you have the Huns or the Hephtalites displace the Sassanians in Persia, and then take an interest in Arabia like the Sassanians did.
 
Top