Umayyad invasion of Sicily?

[Pachac]

In the year 740 the governor of Ifriqiya, Obeid Allah ibn al-Habhab sent Obieda al-Fihri to Sicily to take it for the Umayyads. He had seized Syracuse and was making good time before he was forced to return with his army to Ifriqiya because of the massive Berber revolt there.

Say that Obeid is a bit more callous in his treatment of the berbers; they were constantly being insulted by him and he overturned the Edict of Umar in order to heighten taxes on them. Had he not done this, perhaps the Berber revolt is postponed for a few years(if not altogether abandoned). This would free up more resources for al-Fihri and he would be able to continue his campaign in Sicily. Assuming he does this, what is the likelihood of him conquering Sicily, and beyond?

 

[Mirza Khan]

In the year 740 the governor of Ifriqiya, Obeid Allah ibn al-Habhab sent Obieda al-Fihri to Sicily to take it for the Umayyads. He had seized Syracuse and was making good time before he was forced to return with his army to Ifriqiya because of the massive Berber revolt there.

Say that Obeid is a bit more callous in his treatment of the berbers; they were constantly being insulted by him and he overturned the Edict of Umar in order to heighten taxes on them. Had he not done this, perhaps the Berber revolt is postponed for a few years(if not altogether abandoned). This would free up more resources for al-Fihri and he would be able to continue his campaign in Sicily. Assuming he does this, what is the likelihood of him conquering Sicily, and beyond?

Well, if I remember correctly, the Byzantines weren't exactly in great shape at the time, and considering that the Arabs managed to conquer Sicily in the 900's OTL, I'd definately say its possible.

Anyone know what the political situation in the rest of Italy was like at the time? How much could the Arabs have plausibly conquered? The effects of them holding Rome for a prolonged length of time would be interesting-I think it would eventually get reconquered from Northern Italy or France, but it would likely prevent the Papacy from coming into existence, at least in its OTL form.

 

[Pachac]

Well, if I remember correctly, the Byzantines weren't exactly in great shape at the time, and considering that the Arabs managed to conquer Sicily in the 900's OTL, I'd definately say its possible.

Anyone know what the political situation in the rest of Italy was like at the time? How much could the Arabs have plausibly conquered? The effects of them holding Rome for a prolonged length of time would be interesting-I think it would eventually get reconquered from Northern Italy or France, but it would likely prevent the Papacy from coming into existence, at least in its OTL form.

At this time the Lombards dominated northern Italy. It's the later years of the reign Liutprand so they're fairly powerful. He died a few years later in 744 and besides a few outposts in the Toe and heel of Italy Byzantium had no territories there. I would think that these would fall first to the Arabs. The question is what happens when the Umayyads collapse.

 

[Pachac]

No one else has ideas?

 

[Badshah]

No one else has ideas?

It would help, as long as their naval capabilities were good. If that were the case, a push up into Italy might be possible? Although the further he stretches, the more decentralised the Caliphate has to become to survive.

 

[Pachac]

It would help, as long as their naval capabilities were good. If that were the case, a push up into Italy might be possible? Although the further he stretches, the more decentralised the Caliphate has to become to survive.

The Caliphate was decentralized. The general of the campaign, if he's not too competent would likely be rewarded the title of Amir of Sicily and Italy. The Caliphate generally had a system of Amirs that they used outside Syria and Iraq. It is likely that a successful campaign in Italy could make him decide to cross the strait from Messina and attack Reggio.