Muslim World: The True Faith Timeline

Prologue: Chapter 16
Muslim World

The Betrayal of the Caliph and the Start of the Abassid Revolution

September 2, 743 - Dimasriq
After expelling the Byzantines from Damascus, Sulayman while resting securely in the newly reconquered city, he undergoes an assassination attempt, with pro-Caliph officers attempting to stab him while they debated about what way to take now, but being stopped by guards who arrived with the screams of the general who managed to deflect the stab. Then, indignant at the attitude probably taken from the Caliph (which he himself already knew that did not like him), Sulayman declares the secession of Damascus, yes, the glorious capital of the Umayyad Caliphate, after declaring: "The oppression caused by these lords is finished in this city, today is Damascus, tomorrow will be all of Islam, may Allah protect us in this mission of freedom!" The people celebrate, well, it is they who freed them from the byzantines who said this, because it would not be true?

In the following days, Sulayman discreetly uses his great connections and support throughout the caliphate to offer the throne to the Abbasids of Abu al-'Abbās, descendants by right of Muhammad by Abdullah ibn al-'Abbās. Abbās accepts at the first opportunity, and begins his long-planned uprising.

An uprising of loyalist troops to the umayyads happens within the Sulayman army, yet it is quickly stifled by the intelligence of Sulayman, and because of the lack of leadership for the troops.

October 5, 743 - al-ʾIskandariyya
The Caliph had scarcely awakened from his sleep, when an emissary comes screaming at the gates of Alexandria, he expects good news, such as Sulayman's success and death in Damascus, but they were waiting for him much worse news.

"Lord, bad news, VERY bad news." says the emissary.

"What?" asks the confused Caliph

"Sulayman rebelled and one called Abbās also began to revolt in Jibāl! The last one have shown to have enough support among the Mawālī. The situation is not good."

The Caliph climbs the stairs quickly after the news, and asks for a man to come with him, the same goes with him until the highest room.

The Caliph quickly writes a letter and hands it to the man, right after saying "Deliver this crap to Mecca, we need all possible arab troops."

"What happened my lord?" asks the man, confused.

"Rebellions my dear, two of them, i need you to deliver this letter as faster as possible." explains the rushed Caliph.

The man quickly took the letter and ran down the stairs, the Caliph could see through the window the same, taking a horse and rushing out of the city. The Third Fitna begins.
 
Talus i have a question i re read your timeline really good but there is something i dont uderstand you said in old responses that the siege of constantinople of 717 still happend

if it did the caliphate lost all most of their navy and nearly 100 000 men

by that piont the umayyed navy was destroyed and the byzantines began to retake the sea

and the army forgot about taking anatolia (which the reason why they took the sea rute is becuse crossing anatolia quite a trip) and just focused on raids

These raids concentrated on securing booty rather than territory. The Umayyad army was weakened in the aftermath of the siege and Leo III began to retake territories that had been lost to the Muslims.

also i guess in your timeline leos defeat of the umayads in Akroinon never happend

also why did the byzantines go for damascus ?

Costantine V did plan for an attack against the east yes but to reclaim all of anatolia first , the byzantine empire was at the definsve for this peridod and Constantine V was a capable and smart ruler so i dont get why he would attack a place so far away as damascus

Constantine did attack nother syria but those where raids since his main goal was anatolia in 746 and to create a no man zone again he never did go as far as damascus since that would be suicide not even in 746 where the umayads where weak

also that Constantine V attack was stopped by rebelions making an attack on august 743 impossible as he was dealing with a rebelion that did not end until november that year

now i can understan changes i did them in my own timeline but i would just recomend you writting why these changes happened what led to the these things why did characters changed do these actions that contradict what they would most likely do
 
Last edited:
now i can understan changes i did them in my own timeline but i would just recomend you writting why these changes happened what led to the these things why did characters changed do these actions that contradict what they would most likely do
Oh, of course, tomorrow (for me because it's already 1:00 here), i'll make a text explaining the changes from OTL to TTL
 
i like your timeline it’s just that it has to have explanations for these changes you don’t even need to write big explanations , even subtle things work


Imaginary example say a smart old wise king is a good commander in OTL was confronted by a challenge of a duel one might said he is too smart to accept such a proposal but you write things like the king appeared to be weak by his servants

(Because that is a huge problem) and do to this he accepts

now explain them out side the narritve of your story to some its ok but to others it seems bad and liked forced , is a sing of sloppy writing and lack of narrative story telling

now dont take that as insult just as valid critisim , i really like your timeline and changes are welcomed but they have to be explained by the story , i say dont rush things beacuse you end up confusing some readers who do know about this period


And yes, The Battle of Akroinon (the ultimate disaster of the arabs in the arab-byzantine wars) don't happened here
}


well i would say the siege of Constantinople was the worst one in the 8th century with out there is no Akroinon
 
I talked about that 2 chapters ago
you did but the revolt began in 742 like the OTL so he revolted the question is why did the usseper not follow the original plan of the OTL ?

Artabasdos struck against Constantine when their respective troops combined for the intended campaign this surprised Constantine since he and those loyal to him where not expecting this and Constantine had to escape

but here he just revolted? this goes agian to my questions as to why ? why did he not follow the OTL plan that was a good one by the way i mean again there is no reason as to why this is what i dont undestand
 
Last edited:
Explanations:

Artabasdos: He followed the original OTL plan, what changed was that Constantine instead of being in the middle of Anatolia was in the same province as the revolt (In the case the Opsikion Theme) he followed the plan to march to Constantinople, just failed to succeed like in OTL, because Constantine was close enough to put down the rebellion before Artabasdos could get to Constantinople.

Muslims on Anatolia: The muslims are not trying to get to Anatolia, the establishment in Akroinon was more opportunistic rather than a policy towards an Anatolia, keeping Akroinon was another opportunity that Hisham saw and thought would be useful strategically.

Damascus: Going to Damascus is not as dumb as it may seem, the plan was to attack (and capture) Damascus, and let the chaos happen in the Caliphate (which was really going to happen), and use that chaos to quickly retake lost territories for muslims as long as everything catches fire in the Caliphate. Unfortunately (for Constantine) Sulayman was there to prevent the plan from coming to reality. The change of plans also comes from the change of reality, the Battle of Akroinon gave for the byzantines the realization that the arabs were completely unable to make long-range attacks in Anatolia, and that the byzantines no longer needed to be alone on the defensive, without this view it is much more rational to risk the attack on Damascus, because as you said, Constantine is wise, and he measures that even if the attack fails he will not leave with a total defeat (Which was quite likely, i'm really playing around with odds in this TL) he just didn't really expect was that Sulayman would change that prediction, the attack on Damascus in this situation is another shot of a very opportunistic sniper that ended up being diverted back at the last moment.

*really long sigh :teary:*
 
Well like I said again it does not matter if he is close or not if the OTL plan was held

Since like I said Artabasdos struck against Constantine when their respective troops combined for the intended campaign this surprised Constantine since he and those loyal to him where not expecting this and Constantine had to escape

2) Damascus sorry mate this makes no sense it's a higth risk so much so
Now if it where a raid it would be more believable
Raids and counter raids would be common from 740s to 870s
These where almost exclusively in anatolia and some few would be in norther Syria
But capture as far as Damascus was a big unnecessary risk
So much so big campiangs in Syria and beyond nothern would not be done until empeor nikephoros re conquered all of anaotlia

Like I said changes could be done but there has to be a good explanation as to why these characters would do something completely different
There was to be an explanation as to why
Why did Constantine do that
What convinced him to take this desicion
Also there is the political context
He was a refomer and hated his guts
So even if the defeat is not a disaster
The political backlash would
Since his enemies would jump at this
And use the defeat his "unpopular " reforms and some the iconoclastic controversy to start more civil unrest
 
Last edited:
Since like I said Artabasdos struck against Constantine when their respective troops combined for the intended campaign this surprised Constantine since he and those loyal to him where not expecting this and Constantine had to escape
The problem is that he was too far away to do anything after Artabasdos struck him and his troops, with the location being closer to the rebellion (and also closer to the coast), it is possible that instead of running away to Amorion, he would return to Constantinople by boat and put down the rebellion
 
The problem is that he was too far away to do anything after Artabasdos struck him and his troops, with the location being closer to the rebellion (and also closer to the coast), it is possible that instead of running away to Amorion, he would return to Constantinople by boat and put down the rebellion
The question is with what army ?
The army he had was routed by the encounter and he had to flee to to get more soldiers
Also Constantine regent and the patriarch supported the userper
If he returns with out an army to Constantinople he is a dead man
 
So much so big campiangs in Syria and beyond nothern would not be done until empeor nikephoros re conquered all of anaotlia
I think you did not understand, the plan was not a big campaign in Syria, but one in Anatolia, the attack in Syria was more of a distraction and if the risk gives fruit that would be a mere bonus of total internal confusion in the Caliphate, which would further facilitate the objective. Meanwhile, the bulk of the Byzantine army is invading the muslim territories in Anatolia, the next chapter will be about this ;)
 
The question is with what army ?
The army he had was routed by the encounter and he had to flee to to get more soldiers
Also Constantine regent and the patriarch supported the userper
If he returns with out an army to Constantinople he is a dead man
The regent and the patriarch supported the userper when the usurper arrived in Constantinople with a army, so Constantine will be safe in my vision
 
I think you did not understand, the plan was not a big campaign in Syria, but one in Anatolia, the attack in Syria was more of a distraction and if the risk gives fruit that would be a mere bonus of total internal confusion in the Caliphate, which would further facilitate the objective. Meanwhile, the bulk of the Byzantine army is invading the muslim territories in Anatolia, the next chapter will be about this ;)
I did even a distraction attack is wierd nother Syria ok but not Damascus also I left other reasons as to why it would not happened based on political context

I will leave them here

Also there is the political context
He was a refomer and hated his guts
So even if the defeat is not a disaster
The political backlash would
Since his enemies would jump at this
And use the defeat his "unpopular " reforms and some the iconoclastic controversy to start more civil unrest

In our timeline this was avoided because he won almost every encounter
Here he lost his first
This is why he first only attacked frointier populations
And kept doing so his goal was to depopulate the east by moving the population of the town he captured to make a no man zone not a reconquest of the whole Anatolian penisnula ( but I believe this is not the case here in your timeline)

Why it was way to risky like the attack on Damascus
In our tinetime he did do a distraction attack on Syria but it was norther Syria
Here he goes for damascus ( no offense ) for no reason
If he wanted a distraction why not go for nother Syria, Alepo would have been a more believable target
 
Last edited:
The regent and the patriarch supported the userper when the usurper arrived in Constantinople with a army, so Constantine will be safe in my vision
While true Constantine has to return with an army to the capital because if the userper comes with one and he doesn't it's obvious what is going to happen to him
 
Last edited:
Top