Pre-Islamic Arab Empire

Was there a leader, entire tribe or Kingdom within Arabia that had the ambition or the ability to create an Arab Empire before the Arab Muslim empire of the Rashidun Caliphate?

By Arab Empire I mean the unification of the Arab people, likely against a common enemy like the Egyptian, Seleciuds, Macadonians or maybe even an inter threat like Christianity or Judaism.

Any information would be very interesting and helpful.
 
Was there a leader, entire tribe or Kingdom within Arabia that had the ambition or the ability to create an Arab Empire before the Arab Muslim empire of the Rashidun Caliphate?

By Arab Empire I mean the unification of the Arab people, likely against a common enemy like the Egyptian, Seleciuds, Macadonians or maybe even an inter threat like Christianity or Judaism.

Any information would be very interesting and helpful.

Your best shot is the Palmyrene Empire.
Under certain circumstances and PODs (like Odaenathus surviving) this empire might last longer.
And it might make an effort to subdue Arabia (probably mostly nominally) in order to make it recruiting grounds for the imperial Palmyrene armies, and securing it's southern border.
 
My personal choices always fall to Himyar, Nabataea, the Lakhmids and Tanukhids.

Himyar has the advantage of the wealth of Yemen/Arabia Felix - As far as I understand their main problem was Axum interfering in their affairs (including invading). An early alliance with the Romans or Sassanids may allow them to stave off Axum, and then focus on uniting the Arabian peninsula. (I'd suggest the Romans, simply because two allies of Rome are less likely to go to war than the two parties choosing the opposite sides and becoming another front in the Persian Wars).

Nabataea could do very well if the Romans don't do so well. So if Carthage wins the Punic Wars, you could see Nabataea come to rise as the Egyptians and Selucids pummel each other, later becoming trade partners with Carthage. That wealth could certainly allow them to expand into Arabia.

The Lakhmids in Al-Hirah have a pretty sweet location, if they switched sides during a Sassanid war with Rome, they could easily take control of Mesopotamia, and later Arabia. The key is not pissing off Rome and the next empire on the Persian Plateau.

Tanukhids had a pretty badass period where they caused the Romans problems. I think they're a missed chance at an Arabian Levant - but I don't know enough about them to say if it was possible.

If I was to choose PoDs in terms of what chance they have, I'd probably say Himyar, Nabataea, Lakhmids then Tanukhids - but I do have a particular favourite. - A Tanukhid-Lakhmid union. Mavia and her contemporary in the Lakhmid unite the two groups together and having greater understanding of the Romans, she convinces her partner to take advantage of the next war with the Romans to turn on the Sassanids, confident that the Romans aren't as strong as they fear.

Those are some ideas for you. I have no idea about the Ghassanids, otherwise I'd throw them in as a possibility.
 
My personal choices always fall to Himyar, Nabataea, the Lakhmids and Tanukhids.

Himyar has the advantage of the wealth of Yemen/Arabia Felix - As far as I understand their main problem was Axum interfering in their affairs (including invading). An early alliance with the Romans or Sassanids may allow them to stave off Axum, and then focus on uniting the Arabian peninsula. (I'd suggest the Romans, simply because two allies of Rome are less likely to go to war than the two parties choosing the opposite sides and becoming another front in the Persian Wars).

Nabataea could do very well if the Romans don't do so well. So if Carthage wins the Punic Wars, you could see Nabataea come to rise as the Egyptians and Selucids pummel each other, later becoming trade partners with Carthage. That wealth could certainly allow them to expand into Arabia.

The Lakhmids in Al-Hirah have a pretty sweet location, if they switched sides during a Sassanid war with Rome, they could easily take control of Mesopotamia, and later Arabia. The key is not pissing off Rome and the next empire on the Persian Plateau.

Tanukhids had a pretty badass period where they caused the Romans problems. I think they're a missed chance at an Arabian Levant - but I don't know enough about them to say if it was possible.

If I was to choose PoDs in terms of what chance they have, I'd probably say Himyar, Nabataea, Lakhmids then Tanukhids - but I do have a particular favourite. - A Tanukhid-Lakhmid union. Mavia and her contemporary in the Lakhmid unite the two groups together and having greater understanding of the Romans, she convinces her partner to take advantage of the next war with the Romans to turn on the Sassanids, confident that the Romans aren't as strong as they fear.

Those are some ideas for you. I have no idea about the Ghassanids, otherwise I'd throw them in as a possibility.

Your best shot is the Palmyrene Empire.
Under certain circumstances and PODs (like Odaenathus surviving) this empire might last longer.
And it might make an effort to subdue Arabia (probably mostly nominally) in order to make it recruiting grounds for the imperial Palmyrene armies, and securing it's southern border.

Thank you both.
 
It would be impossible to unite against Christianity or Judaism in Arabia following the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. Anywhere between 10-20%~ of the Arabian peninsula was Jewish and south of the
Ghassanids, perhaps 5% Christian; although very rare.

Both of these groups were essentially indigenous to Arabia by the 5th century. Judaism had only a small stigma before the periods of Islam, this is mainly due to a small sense of kinship between the groups as very close relation in language and a common history of resistance to more powerful near eastern societies. Some major cities too where primarily the possessions of Jewish tribes which oddly, followed modified Arab customs. Even famous cities such as Yahtrib/Madinah had powerful Jewish presence with an imposing Jewish defensive compound.

As well, it should be noted that the Quyaish at times had a more favorable opinion of Jews in the Hijaz than that of neighboring Arabs and their own Arab subjects. The distinct issue with Jews was their religion and some of their customs. Worship of one God however, was not extremely taboo for the Arabs, just In their opinion, wasteful. After all, the taboo in worshipping one god never existed in the Arab people until Islam; however, the Arabs did see Allah as the primary god and worshipped many, many more gods as intermediaries of Allah. Jews by the time, according to the earliest Muslim accounts, where apparently seeking a prophet in Arabia; this would correspond to certain Jewish teachings regarding the diaspora taking Judaism to the world seeking a messiah. This sort of messianic search, might have had an influence on the eventual creation of Islam.

Take note, antijewish (antisemitism makes no sense, whenever Arabs are also Semites) sentiment in Arabs only began after Islam and waxed and waned over the centuries. However, a constant was the Arab view of Jews as being honorless or cowardly; this sentiment did not exist before Islam.
 
As well, it should be noted that the Quyaish at times had a more favorable opinion of Jews in the Hijaz than that of neighboring Arabs and their own Arab subjects. The distinct issue with Jews was their religion and some of their customs.
From what I've heard it was not 'the Jews' in the strict sense; I mean it was not their ethnicity. They were ethnic Arabs, it was their religion which was Jewish; Judaism, I mean. So they were the ethnic Arabs converted to Judaism (at least 'Cambridge history of Islam' says so).
I guess there might be some 'ethnic' Jews in the beginning, but they were soon dissolved among the overwhelming Arab majority.
 
From what I've heard it was not 'the Jews' in the strict sense; I mean it was not their ethnicity. They were ethnic Arabs, it was their religion which was Jewish; Judaism, I mean. So they were the ethnic Arabs converted to Judaism (at least 'Cambridge history of Islam' says so).
I guess there might be some 'ethnic' Jews in the beginning, but they were soon dissolved among the overwhelming Arab majority.

That is a reading into it. There is no Islamic firsthand account that says that the Jews were Arab. They clearly were distinct in terms of Arab tradition. Jews had resided in Arabia from the earliest times and had melded with Arab culture and society, but they were clearly not Arabs and did not follow Arab customs that could fit with Judaism.

It is very interesting that Jews who move to Europe and other areas are called ethnic Jews but for some reason, Jews in the Mid East are actually Arabs or what not. In my opinion, this is false at best and racist at worst.

If you are referring to Jews of Yemen, that is correct; but I am only referring to the Hijaz and Nejd.
 
Top