WI:Vahan had listened to Heraclius

The Byzantine commander at Yarmouk, Vahan, had been ordered by Heraclius not to begin the attack until November, when the Sassanid Persians would launch thier own offensive into Mespotamia. The Goal was to make the Arabs fight a two front war and eventually retake lands conquered by the Muslims.

However, Vahan attacked in August, he feared that many Arab reneforcments were coming, but in reality the brilliant Muslim commander Khald al Wind, was moving in small bands over and over to make the illusion many soldiers were coming.

My Question is had Vahan waited until november of 636 to attack?

Would the Muslims have gotten much more reneforcements?

Would Muslims at Yarmouk be recalled to Mesopotamia?

Would the Byzantines manage to pull a win?

Assuming they lose, what luck would the Sassanids have?

Could the Calpihate be ended? or would there be peace?


- I will use this for a project i have in mind ;)-

Also what would a reasonable POD for delaying fighting 3 months?

-Better Roman Intellegence foils the Arab deception?

-A Commnand Change?

-Emperor plans to provide more troops in November?

Do the Ghassanids have any chance of regaining thier holdings?

Do muslims Aposticize after this defeat?

In a post war situation, how fast does Islam spread? Would Christianity spead into Arabia as well?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its been a slow week, and people are busy. Also a lot of people don't know much about this time period so don't have anything to say.
Be patient.
 
Would the Muslims have gotten much more reneforcements?
I believe the majority of the Arab army then operating in the Levant was present at Yarmouk- so lots more reinforcements are unlikely.

Would Muslims at Yarmouk be recalled to Mesopotamia?
Given the Muslims were already quite badly outnumbered by the Roman army, I think it's unlikely.

Would the Byzantines manage to pull a win?
Very much open to debate. Yarmouk was a battle fought over the space of a week after all, and the fortunes of both sides ebbed and flowed as it progressed. A Roman victory certainly isn't unlikely- but it isn't set in stone either.

Assuming they lose, what luck would the Sassanids have?
Depends. If Yazdegerd's army is able to win a decisive victory, then the young King is hugely secured on his throne from the civil wars that were wracking Iran at this point. Nonetheless, I think Mesopotamia could well be an easier nut to crack for the Arabs if they want to try again at conquest: the Sassanids are probably in too bad a state of disrepair to make short and medium term recoveery possible.

Could the Calpihate be ended? or would there be peace?
I think it's quite possible that following a series of bad defeats within a few years of the Prophet's death, the Caliphate could splinter. The sense of divine favour that OTL's spectacular conquests provided would be gone. The Islamic faith has not yet had time to properly consolidate itself amongst the Arabs, let alone the other peoples of the Near East. I think that, if the Arabs suffer several humiliations in 636/637, their unity could splinter and collapse.

Do the Ghassanids have any chance of regaining thier holdings?
Perhaps. I'm not really an expert on early Arab history, but I believe that it was only after Yarmouk that they were overthrown IOTL- so if we see a victory at Yarmouk, we'll probably see a surviving Ghassanid state, in one form or another.

Do muslims Aposticize after this defeat?
See my views above. Islam will certainly be on very, very shaky ground. I think it's probably 50/50 as to whether the faith will survive at all.

In a post war situation, how fast does Islam spread? Would Christianity spead into Arabia as well?
If Islam does survive, I'd assume it'll spread along the trade routes through Arabia- so into the Horn of Africa, perhaps southern Persia if Iran remains in anarchy, and on to India. It also may gain popularity in the Levant, since Islam isn't really so very different to some of the heretical branches of Christianity around at the time.

If the Ghassanids survive and the Romans remain weak, I could well see them attempting to expand their influence in Arabia. This will mean a Christianised Arabia- though it will of course be a Monophysite, not a Chalcedonian Arabia. In the slightly longer term, this will probably lead to conflict with the Romans as they start to recover from about 640 onwards.
 
I've always wondered what would have happend had the Romans won. I imagine Heraclius would greatly benefit from the victory. Should Islam survive the loss, I imagine there would be a three way stalemate between the Romans, Sassanids, and the Arabs. Also, how would this affect the Arab conquest of North Africa and Iberia?
 
If Yarmuk goes to the Byzantines, the whole course leading to the Arab conquest is derailed at best, and prevented entirely at worst.
 
This would change the Holy Roman Empire and the rise of the Carolingians as well. After all, Charles Martel's claim to fame was stopping Islam's invasion of Europe.
 

Ak-84

Banned
Khalid was one of the greatest generals of all time. I suspect he would have still found a way to win.
 

PhilippeO

Banned
> Assuming they lose, what luck would the Sassanids have?


Its 5.000 veterans from yarmouk that managed to win on Battle_of_al-Qādisiyyah. If yarmouk delayed / not happened, then Muslim have to decide whether to retain their veterans on Byzantine Front or sent them to Sassanid Front. Sassanid might win al-Qādisiyyah equivalent if Muslim veteran still in byzantine front.
 
Top