Something that was on my mind for some time - history shouldn't be used to give some kind of prognosis about the future, the goal of historiography is not that. "Something happened like that in year X, so it is going to happen in a similar way in year Y" is just plainly ahistorical. Patterns are important, they can help in understanding our present, but they are useless in predicting the future, so don't do that and don't listen to the people who do that. They have a bridge to sell you.
History don't always repeat itself but it surely effect the future btw can you continue your maratha or rajput or mughal series? Of at least start a series on nadir shah?
Please make a video about this. The position of historical patterns is something that many historians and history commentators preach, and I don't see many deconstructions of those positions
And can you make also more videos about the middle ages and early new ages like Renaissance and after the Renaissance? About the holy Roman Empire, the Kingdoms of Polen, Slovakia, Tschechien, Ungarn, Bulgaria, Serbia, the russian Kiev and the russian Moskovy Kingdoms, the Ukrainian Kingdom and how and why the Russians and Ukrainian separate from each other, about the Turks, Tatars and Mongols and so on and their States, Empires and Kingdoms and Religions, about the abbasid Empire, about the Assassins, the assassins in India and so on, about the Brotherhood of Purity, about the knight orders like the Teutonic Order, the Tempel Knights, the Johanniter, the Malteser and so on, about the Greek Kingdoms and italian Kingdoms, about the Normans, the Vikings, the Franks , the Galician, the Schottlands, the Englands, the walesian, the Danish, the Skandinavien, the French, the Angelsachsen, the Frisen, the Prussian, the Byzantine Empire and about the Andalusian Christian States like the Aragonian, the Castilian, the Navarre and so and about the Andalusian Muslim States like the Umayyads, the Mohadins, the Moravids and so on and about the Idea and rise of the two giant Empires Spain and Portugal and about the many German States and Kingdoms, about the many Anatolian, Caucasian, Iranian, Indian and Central Asian and Siberian States like the Turkish, Tatar, Mongol, Persian, Armenian, Georgian, and other Nationalities States, and about Georgia and Armenia and the Caucasus, about the Seljuks, the Ottomans, the Mamluks, the white Ships, the black Ships, the Safavids, the Qadria - they had a political and familiar Relationship with the Ottomans - , about the Qajars, the Efshars, about the Indian Kingdoms especially about the Mogul Empire, about the Persian Empires like the Samanuds and so on, about the Zangids, the Ubauidian - Fatimidian - Empire, about the Ayubian Empire and other Krudish States and Kingdoms, about Mali and the History of North Africa, about the History of Yemen, about the History of China, east Asia - north and south - , about Japan, about the first contacts of East Asia with Christianity, Judaism and Islam, about the European and Asian History, and about the most influential intellectual Priests, Monks, Scientists and Philosophers and Theologian who had the most influence on all these States, their Culture, Periods and History in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Jainism, Shintoism and so on?
Well said Sir. I think I know where you are coming from. History may repeat itself yet firsts in history is also common. I think you chose the right word in prognosis as history can repeat itself and we can learn from it but it certainly is and has too much nuance to suggest the ability to use it for a prognosis. The chaos and convoluted existence that is humanity is so dramatically complex and confusing that one might argue it can not be replicated perfectly time and time again. The idea that some things happen now that was similar to the past is of course observable. And of course we can learn from history to steer our great ship that is civilization away from similar waters, but one does need to be careful about thinking one knows history and therefore knows the future's outcomes.
I think I've said this before but truly I appreciate what you guys do. The videos are always so awesome and informative. I thank you for educating so many people, I hope you enjoy what you do!!!
Hah I found this channel a year ago. I decided to watch the entire thing chronologically. Finally caught up. 😎👍 Yeah everything on this channel is so good. Even those beginning videos before Officially Devin. 😁
Ok this is it. Kings and generals has managed to do something no one ever did before. A video on muslim history that is both accurate and satisfying for all sides, not creating fights in the comments.
If you want to learn regarding these sensible issues through an academic Islamic lense, I recommend the brother Abdurrahman from Knowledge North. He does extensive research on subjects such as these, but without the inaccuracies and with deeper understanding of the sources since Arabic is a language of many subtleties.
It's praiseworthy how none of the sides considered requesting support from one of the non-muslim regional powers like Romans and Khazars it would've been the absolute game changer
@@napolien1310 Very true, it was a civil war after all, if one side used foreign support, especially from non muslims such as the Eastern Roman Empire, it would have been immediately used by the other sides to gather support / incite rebellions or increase support for their own factions.
Where is Al-Hajjaj Bin Yusuf Al-Thaqafi in the video? He is one of the foundations of the personalities who put down the revolutions in the state (especially Iraq), without him the Umayyad state would be impossible to complete.
@@Sajsh-j2e i was. He was not mentioned in the proper scale. Al muhallab was a crucial element in the eradication of the kharijites and the control over eastern/northern persia and the spread of arabs in those areas. Not to mention his descendants who eventually contributed to the fall of the umayyads and subduing north africa.
Kings and Generals can you please do a series on the War of the Spanish Succession.Its very interesting with great generals such as the Eugene of Savoy, Claude De Villars and John Churchill,Duke of Marlborough.
@@yosman-609 Yes, I am presently reading about the war. I really want this channel to make one series on it. This channel is like a dream world for us,the guys interested in history.I found this channel while reading about the Ottoman Empire.
The fact Muhammad managed to unite the different peoples ,tribes ,during his lifetime after seeing how they all fought each other a second after his death .just shows his character
منجم التاريخ كثير من المعلومات هنا خطاء خلافة عبدالله بن الزبير لم يكن فيها روافض (شيعة) ملوك وجنرالات يستعين بمصادر شيعية مهزله، مثل لم ادعى ان عمر (ر) كسر باب علي (ر) وباقي المسرحية الخيالية التي يقولها الروافض
@@mhmdalhaj1954 Shiites don't follow zubayr they follow huseyn ,and the prophet said I am from huseyn and huseyn is from me it wasn't zubayr 's mecca that caused the downfall of Umayyad it was the sacrifice of huseyn
@@mhmdalhaj1954 I just wanted to translat his comment that he was afraid to write it in a language that everyone could understand it because of the level of racism and hate that hate that he has on shia and this is what he said. (History Mine Too many parameters here are wrong The caliphate of Abdullah Ibn Al-Zubayr did not have Raafidis (Shia) Kings and generals use ludicrous Shiite sources, such as why he claimed that Omar () broke the door (R) and the rest of the imaginary play that is going on) You could translate his comment into English and see your be your self and just in case he deletes his comment you could translate it from mine منجم التاريخ كثير من المعلمات هنا خطاء خلافة عبدالله ابن الزبير لم يكن فيها روافض (شيعة) ملوك وجنرالات يستعين بمصادر شيعيه مهزله، مثل لم ادعى ان عمر () كسر باب (ر) وباقي المسرحية الخيالية التي يقوبها
Why we use names and accuse the friends of the prophet with all of this Omar and Abu-Bakr was educated by the prophet and helped him in his life and saved Islam in his early days so why don't we put all of this away and be Muslims only pray to God and love each other and be in peace may Allah forgive us all for he is the most mercifully and the most great
Abdullah ibn Zubayr was a true revolutionary. He was a very balanced figure who opposed the Tyranny of the Umayyads, the blind tribalism of the Shias and the Extremism of the Kharijites.
@@MhmdBDRD it is blind tribalism because the Shias believe that only a descendant of the prophet can be a caliph and they believe that Banu Hashim is superior to all other tribes. This is completely false and goes against the Islamic message because guess what? Abu Lahab, who was the UNCLE of the prophet Muhammad, was also his biggest enemy. The prophet himself made no distinction between tribes and races.
@@MhmdBDRD But Muhammad is the last prophet. There is no prophet after him. So what's your point? His descendants are not prophets. Ali is not a prophet. Husayn is not a prophet. Also, NO, the Quran does not promote tribalism because although the prophets are progeny of each other that doesn't mean all descendants of each prophet are automatically good people. For example, the prophet Ibrahim faced opposition from his own father (Azar). Explain that? Furthermore, one of the prophets most beloved companions known as Abu Dhar Al Ghifari was from one of the most hated tribes in Arabia (Al Ghifar) why is that? Things are not as black and white as you might think. Even the Tyrannical Umayyad dynasty produced many great political reformers such ad Umar ibn Abdul Aziz who went against his own tribe and removed his family members from official positions. Islam encourages us to rise above tribalism and encourages us to criticise out own tribe, and even ourselves and our family if we have to! For example the prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم once stated: "Speak the truth even if it be against yourself.”
@@MhmdBDRD Also one thing that kings and generals forgot to mention in the video is that Mukhtar Al Thaqafi (Shia rebel) was a man who claimed to be a prophet himself and he claimed to receive divine revelation. He told his followers that he received revelations from God and his followers increased after he won a battle that "God told him he would win". But eventually many people abandoned him after he lost a battle that he said he was promised to win by God.
You missed the ending. Mus'ab fleefed to Al-Kufa searching for allies and a new army. But, there was no one helped him. So, Abdul-Malik and Al-Hajjaj killed him easily. Abdul-Malik then returned to Damascus, to focus on evolving the city of Damascus and Jerusalem, but before that, he sent Al-Hajjaj to take the two Muslim Holy cities, Mecca and Madinah. Al-Hajjaj entered Madinah killing so many important people there, even the neutral people, then he made a sage around Mecca, until he managed to reach and kill Abdullah ibn Al-Zubbayr. Al-Hajjaj's unfair policies made so many enemies in all of the Islamic World. So, Muslims from both Sunni and Sheia, and from both Iraq, Yemen and Hejaz, gathered together in Al-Kufa for one last revolution in this civil war, they killed the wali of Kufa. So, Abdul-Malik sent an order to Al-Hajjaj if he could stop them, Al-Hajjaj accepted the request. He moved to Iraq, and fighted the rebels that were under Abdul-Rahman, who is the son of Muhammad ibn Al-Ash'ath, and in one last epic fight, Al-Hajjaj won the battle, ending this civil war, starting an era of calm years, until the Umayyah-Abbasid civil war. There was a civil war between these two major civil war, Umayyah against Khwarij and Zaydiyyah in king Hisham's years, but Hisham defeated them all from Al-Andauls to Khurasn without a single lose, and without moving from the capital. So, it is not historically important.
Been watching this series since the beginning along with rome in chronological order . Fantastic episode as all the other ones. I was surprised that al hajjaj ibn yusuf al thaqafi name wasn't mentioned once in this episode. He played an important role in this war and won Iraq for the ummayds.
Thanks a lot kings and Generals, I just wanted to see that controversial Umayyad governor who actually reunited the Caliphate, he was Al hajjaj ibn Yusuf al thaqafi, he was a very good strategist yet very cruel
So many muslim factions rebelling and wanting to assume power at once, but I was wondering why there were no major anti-muslim rebellions at this time? It would've been a good opportunity for the egyptian copts or the zoroastrian persians to make a major uprising, but looks like they didn't, so could somebody tell me why?
They were mostly happy with rulership this fitna largely didn’t effect the non Muslims because during the early caliphate the Muslims were rulers but they were secluded from the non Muslim population by living in these new settlements like kufa or Basra. The non Muslims continued to have thier administration intact except they pay tax which was less than previous and their cities would be garrisoned otherwise why would they even need to rebel since they are largely undisturbed
@@yasinibrahim I don't think they liked paying jizya, being sometimes persecuted for being non-muslim, not being to have higher positions, being denied certain rights that only muslims could enjoy. Also, how there wasn't a movement to restore the Sassanid empire? Sure there were left some part of the old royalty.
@@-crimean_khagan-110 Because they weren't harmed of affected much,Muslims fought and died in the war the cities besieged during the civil war were all Muslim cities and in terms of funding Muslims were pretty much self reliant with their tribal armies and had no reason to rely on non muslims much.
@@zxera9702 during the early years there were not so many muslims, yet those rebellious factions could muster pretty big armies, surely they would have some non-muslims in their armies to bolster their numbers as they would sometimes hire non-muslims for their expertise, like in the Umayyad siege of Constantinopole when their navy was manned almost entirely by christians.
@@Mr_Fnan أهلا إلياس.. لا يشترط أن يكون الأمر التاريخي مرتبط بعرقيةٍ ما.. العرب والأكراد والفرس والترك والبشتون.. وغيرهم، خدموا الإسلام كديانة وثقافة، وكلنا تجمعنا رابطة روحية وحدة. (إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ إِخْوَةٌ...). ثانيا هذا المقطع يتحدث عن نشوء الخلاف الطائفي بين المسلمين والفتن التي عصفت "بالمسلمين" وقسمتهم. تاريخ الإسلام لا يحتكر من عرق واحد.
You have done very good job except by the very end of the video when you even skipped some key characters in the rise (and fall) of the umayyads. Al-hajjaj and al-muhallab were key figures who paved the road for the umayyads.
@علي يا سر man you have a lack of knowledge the shias apperd before any Islamic sect including the Sunnis and the khawarij the Shiites are the core of Islam their the main secet of Islam their the true Islam and the Tawwabin are one of the first shia armys and my advice to you is that you should educate yourself about the thing that you are going to speak about before you get into an Awkward position.
@علي يا سر I am a shia and I know more than you do about my secet and I am telling you that anyone who says that shiism is a political sect not a religious sect doesn't know anything about shiism because the Shiite sunii split was about who was the most suitable leader to lead the Islamic world after the prophet muhammad peace be upon and which brought with it other disagreement inclouding many disagreement related to the practices of Islam inclouding the five 5 pillars of Islam. I could agree that the split between the Shiites suniis and khawarij might be political although I don't agree that the sects are Political sects.
@@mohammedkamil5320 الشيعة يلي بدو الحروب وين المشكلة اذا حدا غير اهل البيت ستلم الحكم انتو الشيعة للان تسبو الصحابة وزوجة الرسول عشان شي حصل من 1400 سنة وانتو بداتو بقتل الصحابة اشياء صارت من 1400 سنة خلص انسوها وركزو على انفسكم وتعلمو القران ما ضروري الحقد يتم موجود بل نهاية كلنا مسلمين
@@567643tome امنا بالله ولا اسب الصحابة انا، لكن هذا كله حدث بسبب تغيير الحكم من اختياري الى وراثي. ومعاوية هو المسؤول الاول عن هذا. قرار لازلنا نحن العرب نعاني منه الى اليوم. اسأل الله ان نكون امة عظيمة من جديد.
@@mohammedkamil5320 للاسف انت عايش على النياحة والاحقاد. لم تعش الفترة ولن تسأل عن مادار بينهم. لكنهم المجوس وجدوا مدخلا للتفرقة بين المسلمين. ووجدوا اغبياء يمتطونهم. اخرجتم الحسين عليه السلام من الحجاز وخذلتموه وغدرتم به.تركتموه يقتل واختبأتم خلف نساءكم. والان تبحثون عن شماعة تعلقون عليها غدركم.
should do a piece on made up islamic history no evidence of prophet muhammad or the first few caliphs after so called muhammad's death. Hell no evidence mecca existed as a town before 8/9th century as well.
Missing from your impressive narrative is one Hujjaj Bin Yousuf Bannu Thakif who was a powerful character in Bannu Ommaya camp. He won several victories for Bannu Ommaya both under Marwan and Abdul Mulk.
its the month of muharam. 10th muharam today. day of the martyrdom of imam hussain and his kin and followers. consuming karbala related content. this is a good upload by kings and generals i suggest ppl to watch MUKHTAR NAMA a history based persian tv series that explains the political scenario after karbala
I wish you were this unbiased with the first fitna video, which was a complete chaos because you got your information mostly from weak narrations and Shiite accounts. This one is not biased and very informative. Great job!
It's not possible to make an unbiased history of the first fitna, all of the sources have bias regarding this period and from a historian's perspective there's no reason why one should take Sunni hadith as more objective over Shi'a (or even Ibadi) ones.
Shias literally don't have any science of hadith or ilm al rijal (study of the criticism of narrators) to know whether their narrations are authentic or not, unlike mainstream sunni muslims who have authentic historical accounts of the littlest events. Its very very hard to believe shia sources ngl.
@@Ahadun_ahd sunni's get there hadiths from people who weren't companions and during the time caliph Umar forbid recording hadiths for almost a century the family of the prophet preserved his Sunna if you need help your people don't refer to our caliphs
@@Ahadun_ahd you should refrain from such statements because the establishment forged many hadiths to cover there misdeeds that is why hadiths have to be referred to Koran and the name of the 4th caliph is Natiq talking book
What an irony. The descendants of Abu Sufyan, one of the Prophet's greatest opposition, ended up becoming the ones in charge of the Caliphate, and later, al-Andalus.
@@killerpie5981 I know that Abu Sufyan himself eventually converted to Islam. But I clearly did not know that it was not his direct descendants that founded the Umayyad Caliphate.
@@MrMkn1991 Well, I did heard about his descendant known as Sufyani, one of the Mahdi's enemies from the hadith ,that he is going to become the tyrant who somehow seized Syria as his domain.
The descendants of Abu Sufyan (ra) was up until Caliph Marwan (ra). Those after this, including the Andalusian Caliphate, were not from Abu Sufyans line
because they were busy fighting blugars and the most important thing the caliph umayyad during their civil wars they paid tax to bezntyine not attacking them,which that made us confused why umayyad was first dealt with bezntyine coins,simply to intentionally satisfaction the bezntyine.eventually umayyad finished their internal conflicts,and decided to coin minting for their own to make their trade and policy domainted..umayyad fooled bezntyine by preforming a genuis strategy to trick them
abdulmalik ibn marwan What a genius leader A man reorganized the army and ended the civil war , crushed the rebels, built the third most important mosque in Jerusalem, reunified centralized and bureaucrate all the empire, he started to Arabize the Middle East, defeated the North African queen and the Byzantine attack, started the first islamic economy and made coins by his name , he invaded central asia and Pakistan and he made many reforms and changes to the empire and historians started to call him as the true founder of Umayyad empire All that in only 20 years !! His son, al-Walid, continued his father's policies and his rule likely marked the peak of Umayyad power and prosperity he ruled an empire from Paris to china !! Unbelievable
That’s an exaggeration, the Ummayadds ruled the whole Iberian peninsula but they never controlled France after their invasion was thrown back by the Franks under the leadership of Charles Martel
You people are cowards who betrayed Hussein (R.A) and left him alone to die , also Yazid didn't order to kill Hussein (R.A) even though he wasn't a good leader
@@iiMubarak yazid and ubaydullah attacked the shia in kufa and killed them, they also imprisoned many if them. The rest that attacked Imam hussain AS where not shia, they were kufians. The shia were with Imam hussain AS and died defending him. Don't speak on issues you do not understand.
Thanks for precise details! As a Muslim that Knows the history of that times so well! I was amazed by watching this video. I recommend "Mokhtarnameh" series for more detail history of that era.
Found it interesting in the comments to see the amount of Shia Muslims complaining that you got too much historical information from Sunni Historians, and Sunni Muslims on here complaining that you got too much historical information from Shia Historians. Both these groups don't agree on anything. As someone that teaches Secondary School History, I personally got a lot out of your presentation on this 2nd Civil War in the Caliphate.
Mohktar never believed Mohammed ibn hanifiya was a the Mahdi. The main reason for his uprising was because he wanted to avenge the killers of Husyn. So the mohktar part was definitely taken from Sunni sources.
@@hussam2913 exactly. That’s one of the most important things. And musab didn’t enter inside the palace to execute mukthar, its well known that mukthar fought with only a couple of his companions against a large army in front of the palace to die like martyrs.
After 1st crusade, please don't forget to make a series of events just before 2nd Crusade and 2nd crusade itself, most bigger channels either don't make anything about it or don't make it in deep
@@KingsandGenerals what is the Christian vision on the crusaders why do they see them as a good group. Why don't they see them as a terrorist regime since there war involved winning against the army and then burning the city that they invade and killing its citizens just for the goal to reach Jerusalem. For me I see them like the qramita and the Nazis and isis.
Very good video, but i think that some colours are used vvrong: for example, Umayyads must de marked in red, because their symbol vvas red, shia - in green, because colour of Banu-Hashim is green.
You should've emphasised the significance of Ubaydullah Ibn Ziyad for being the commander during karbala . Also I disagree with the classification of Ibn Zubayr as a usurper. Marwan declared his claim well into ibn Zubayrs 'reign' and generally b. Zubayr is considered the caliph between Mu'awiya II and the seige of Mecca and Ibn Zubayrs death . The marwanids are seen as the rebels in Muslim history until they took power since they're a completely different branch of the Umayyad clan to those who ruled before anyways. Other than that great video .
8:02 his name al_husain in english look the same name of hussain ibn ali but its different الحصين بن النمير And the other general his name Shurhapil ibn abi kolag
Would you be interested in making a video on the Battle of Quebec, when the British and 13 colonies effectively won North America over the French? Every time i hear this story i can't help but thinking it would look great on your graphics!
Love your content. Long time viewer first time commenter. 😁 Please say the name that is big on the tiles to follow the narrative. Surnames are difficult to follow... 😭
@@MohamedMohamed-ws7mq Indeed, a medieval version of Islamic Kinslaying, Regicide, and Game of Thrones. With a little religious schism through Sunni, Shia, Ibadi and etc.
Probably due to your background maybe. I'd imagine a native Chinese would have no issue distinguishing and easily remembering all the "similar" sounding names that come up when discussing their history for example.
@@hmmm3210 That may be partially true, but look at for example the French Wars of Religion 1562-1598. Commanders Henry III, Henry of Navarra/Henry IV, Henry I of Guise, Henry I de Montmorency, Francis of Guise, Francis of Anjou, Francois de Montomorency, Charles IX, Charles of Mayenne, Carlos Coloma, Charles Emmanuel I.. and so on
The Byzantines is just a term to group together so many dynasties some won by force. There was even a time when there was no emperor in between the sack of Constantinople 1204 and the reconquest
@@MohamedMohamed-ws7mq Partially true, but the west Romans were one continuous political entity regardless of dynasty and they did see many numerous different and distinct political entities around them rise and fall.
@علي ياسر For numerous Geo-political reasons and because history isn’t as simple as you want it to be. They did enter a period of resurgence centuries later under emperor Basil, but there was a different balance of power.
Khalid Ibn Al Walid had 27 major battles in his life time and over 100 battles (big and small ones included) but you don't cover those, you cover Islamic Civil War. Ik Muslims are going through a hard time for the past hundred years and all but I thank God every single day that we are dignified ones in this Earth.
Regarding Mukhtar's Ibn Hanafiyyah reverence and Mahdism. Mukhtar al Thaqafi was not the most powerful leader, but had made serious enemies on all sides. The Ummayads were the biggest one of them, and the apparent objective of Mukhtar's movement was to avenge the killing of Imam Hussain, which meant Ummayads were his principle enemies. The Ummayads are known for their psychological warfare against their enemies. Imam Ali was regularly slandered and cursed in Syria under Muawiya. This was such a big issue that one of the conditions in the agreement between Muawiya and Imam Hasan was stopping this. Mukhtar was most likely another victim of much slandering and propaganda. It was popularised that he had created a new religion himself by claiming prophethood, or a new sect by following Ibn Hanafiyyah. Ibn Hanafiyyah himself never claimed to be anything significant. Most historian take these claims against Mukhtar with a pinch of salt, as the greater probability lies with these being mere propaganda points created either by the Ummayads or the Zubayrids. Mukhtar was pro-Alid, and amongst the early Shi'as. Any rebellion or act of violence in Shiism in particular, requires the sanctioning of the legitimate leader of the time (Imam). Mukhtar sought Ibn Hanafiyyah's permission for his uprising, after Imam Ali ibn Hussain refused to grant permission. It is believed by Shiites that Imam Ali Ibn Hussain endorsed his uprising, but didn't want to explicitly sanction it. The Imams of the Ahlulbayt were known to practice Taqiyyah, as none of them lived lives without state surveillance and persecution.
“Umayyads vs Zubairyds vs Mukhtar Vs Khawarjis”. Let's check history nerds here, Guys reply if I missed any faction in already four way Royal Rumble match. For my turn:- Apart from four I think :- Native persian revolt in North (just guess)
Uthman, Mu'awiya and many more also had Sassanid coins with Pahlavi inscriptions. It was changed under Abd al-Malik to the Byzantine style and then to its own style.
Much like Game of thrones Ummayads waited like Cersei so that two rivals may fight out let the victorious emerge and we'll fight it. Sadly Zubarids didn't have dragons and were far too good people than required at such times.
@@UserUser-ic1fw and do you care to explain how Zubayr and almost 1300 years later ISIS followed the same ideology? Zubayr literally spent four years doing nothing while he had the chance to crush all his enemies just because he was afraid of innocent bloodshed. ISIS on the other hand would would kill enslave and rape for pleasure. U say "Islam" is the common point among them might as well then call all Arab scientists predecessor of ISIS too coz they followed Islam too.
The group labeled as shiah in this video are simply the supporters of Caliph Ali and his family, they were sunni in creed and have nothing to do with the twelver shia of iran.
The Dabuyids very well could have exploited all the division in the Islamic world and played their cards right by allying certain Islamic rebels so they could have reconquered Persia for Zoroastrianism and could have established a powerful dynasty worthy of succeeding the Sassanids.
@@Kingofportals Roman very busy on Balkan front against Slav migration and Bulgar Invasion. In fact while this civil war happened city thessaloniki was under siege and they almost lost Greek to Slav migration So I don't think they will accept it and will rather have peace with the caliphate that also busy than make them their 3rd enemy
Way to bring light to so many lesser known facets of history! We truly appreciate all of your astounding content 👏
Same here :-)
@@KingsandGenerals hi
@@KingsandGenerals sikh empire please
@@KingsandGenerals could you please make a video about the qramita and how they invaded makkah and stole the black stone.
@@ajithsidhu7183No
Something that was on my mind for some time - history shouldn't be used to give some kind of prognosis about the future, the goal of historiography is not that. "Something happened like that in year X, so it is going to happen in a similar way in year Y" is just plainly ahistorical. Patterns are important, they can help in understanding our present, but they are useless in predicting the future, so don't do that and don't listen to the people who do that. They have a bridge to sell you.
History don't always repeat itself but it surely effect the future btw can you continue your maratha or rajput or mughal series? Of at least start a series on nadir shah?
Can you make also a new video about the rise of the second Umayyad Empire I mean the marwanid Empire that replaced the zubairids?
Please make a video about this. The position of historical patterns is something that many historians and history commentators preach, and I don't see many deconstructions of those positions
And can you make also more videos about the middle ages and early new ages like Renaissance and after the Renaissance? About the holy Roman Empire, the Kingdoms of Polen, Slovakia, Tschechien, Ungarn, Bulgaria, Serbia, the russian Kiev and the russian Moskovy Kingdoms, the Ukrainian Kingdom and how and why the Russians and Ukrainian separate from each other, about the Turks, Tatars and Mongols and so on and their States, Empires and Kingdoms and Religions, about the abbasid Empire, about the Assassins, the assassins in India and so on, about the Brotherhood of Purity, about the knight orders like the Teutonic Order, the Tempel Knights, the Johanniter, the Malteser and so on, about the Greek Kingdoms and italian Kingdoms, about the Normans, the Vikings, the Franks , the Galician, the Schottlands, the Englands, the walesian, the Danish, the Skandinavien, the French, the Angelsachsen, the Frisen, the Prussian, the Byzantine Empire and about the Andalusian Christian States like the Aragonian, the Castilian, the Navarre and so and about the Andalusian Muslim States like the Umayyads, the Mohadins, the Moravids and so on and about the Idea and rise of the two giant Empires Spain and Portugal and about the many German States and Kingdoms, about the many Anatolian, Caucasian, Iranian, Indian and Central Asian and Siberian States like the Turkish, Tatar, Mongol, Persian, Armenian, Georgian, and other Nationalities States, and about Georgia and Armenia and the Caucasus, about the Seljuks, the Ottomans, the Mamluks, the white Ships, the black Ships, the Safavids, the Qadria - they had a political and familiar Relationship with the Ottomans - , about the Qajars, the Efshars, about the Indian Kingdoms especially about the Mogul Empire, about the Persian Empires like the Samanuds and so on, about the Zangids, the Ubauidian - Fatimidian - Empire, about the Ayubian Empire and other Krudish States and Kingdoms, about Mali and the History of North Africa, about the History of Yemen, about the History of China, east Asia - north and south - , about Japan, about the first contacts of East Asia with Christianity, Judaism and Islam, about the European and Asian History, and about the most influential intellectual Priests, Monks, Scientists and Philosophers and Theologian who had the most influence on all these States, their Culture, Periods and History in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Jainism, Shintoism and so on?
Well said Sir.
I think I know where you are coming from. History may repeat itself yet firsts in history is also common. I think you chose the right word in prognosis as history can repeat itself and we can learn from it but it certainly is and has too much nuance to suggest the ability to use it for a prognosis. The chaos and convoluted existence that is humanity is so dramatically complex and confusing that one might argue it can not be replicated perfectly time and time again.
The idea that some things happen now that was similar to the past is of course observable. And of course we can learn from history to steer our great ship that is civilization away from similar waters, but one does need to be careful about thinking one knows history and therefore knows the future's outcomes.
I think I've said this before but truly I appreciate what you guys do. The videos are always so awesome and informative. I thank you for educating so many people, I hope you enjoy what you do!!!
This series is incredible- as a viewer from your first video the quality that you guys put out is mind blowing - keep it up!
Hah I found this channel a year ago. I decided to watch the entire thing chronologically. Finally caught up. 😎👍
Yeah everything on this channel is so good. Even those beginning videos before Officially Devin. 😁
Ok this is it. Kings and generals has managed to do something no one ever did before. A video on muslim history that is both accurate and satisfying for all sides, not creating fights in the comments.
Also most people that watch this channel probably want to learn rather than fight
"not creating fights in the comments"
ehhh, give it a day or two, a fight will happen sooner or later.
Accurate? So the Tawwabin were Shia? Really? If this is where you learn your history from, no wonder we are in the state we are.
If you want to learn regarding these sensible issues through an academic Islamic lense, I recommend the brother Abdurrahman from Knowledge North. He does extensive research on subjects such as these, but without the inaccuracies and with deeper understanding of the sources since Arabic is a language of many subtleties.
@@hmzzrg5045 Tawwabin is a shia revolution and are you now trying to create a fight 🥱
Battle of the Black Gate: th-cam.com/video/IVBvBxSp_LY/w-d-xo.html
it's so interesting to hear about the Syrian Wars that are hardly talked about
There not syrian wars their Islamic wars. Syria wasn't even there at the time.
Like the one going one rn
Syria has my deepest sympathies, that area has been a conflict zone for centuries upon centuries.
@@cjclark2002 Man he is saying syria and the word syria didn't appear until the foundation of the modern day republic of syria.
@Erodical Assyria not syria.
It's praiseworthy how none of the sides considered requesting support from one of the non-muslim regional powers like Romans and Khazars it would've been the absolute game changer
If a side did that, everyone else will go against them and their supporters will leave them.
I mean, mukhtar tried to use muslim persians and it destroyed him, i don't see why anyone could use non Muslims
@@napolien1310 Very true, it was a civil war after all, if one side used foreign support, especially from non muslims such as the Eastern Roman Empire, it would have been immediately used by the other sides to gather support / incite rebellions or increase support for their own factions.
Because they are unbelievers.
@@ic.xc. exactly
Another KINGS AND GENERALS video... I wouldn't have known this event if not for your videos. Thanks for your vids and keep it up! ❤️
Seriously I've said it before and I'll say it again. I feel cheated by my schooling.
This is absolutely fascinating!
Where is Al-Hajjaj Bin Yusuf Al-Thaqafi in the video? He is one of the foundations of the personalities who put down the revolutions in the state (especially Iraq), without him the Umayyad state would be impossible to complete.
And al-muhallab as well
@@mahmoudnaeem7552 Almuhalab was mentioned in the video I just think that you weren't paying attention.
@@Sajsh-j2e what are you saying al-hajjaj was the leader he was born by the end of the war he was 30 years old
@@Sajsh-j2e i was. He was not mentioned in the proper scale. Al muhallab was a crucial element in the eradication of the kharijites and the control over eastern/northern persia and the spread of arabs in those areas. Not to mention his descendants who eventually contributed to the fall of the umayyads and subduing north africa.
@@mahmoudnaeem7552 Almuhalab was mentioned in a way or another. You first said that he wasn't mintiond and I told you that he was mintiond.
Kings and Generals can you please do a series on the War of the Spanish Succession.Its very interesting with great generals such as the Eugene of Savoy, Claude De Villars and John Churchill,Duke of Marlborough.
Brilliant idea. You can check out the channel "Field Marshal" if you want to see a series about that conflict.
@@yosman-609 Yes, I am presently reading about the war. I really want this channel to make one series on it. This channel is like a dream world for us,the guys interested in history.I found this channel while reading about the Ottoman Empire.
@@yosman-609 Yes thanks for the info bro. Will surely look into that.
@@mahuyakhastagir3091 sure, no problem
The Battle of Blenheim from the Spanish War of Succession would be a great video to watch.
The fact Muhammad managed to unite the different peoples ,tribes ,during his lifetime after seeing how they all fought each other a second after his death .just shows his character
Religious ideology and bloody wars help
@@backstabber3537clown
The best channel on youtube. 👑
You guys really aced this. Second fitna very well explained. Chapeau-bas!
منجم التاريخ
كثير من المعلومات هنا خطاء
خلافة عبدالله بن الزبير لم يكن فيها روافض (شيعة)
ملوك وجنرالات يستعين بمصادر شيعية مهزله، مثل لم ادعى ان عمر (ر) كسر باب علي (ر) وباقي المسرحية الخيالية التي يقولها الروافض
@@mhmdalhaj1954 Shiites don't follow zubayr they follow huseyn ,and the prophet said I am from huseyn and huseyn is from me it wasn't zubayr 's mecca that caused the downfall of Umayyad it was the sacrifice of huseyn
@@mhmdalhaj1954 I just wanted to translat his comment that he was afraid to write it in a language that everyone could understand it because of the level of racism and hate that hate that he has on shia and this is what he said.
(History Mine
Too many parameters here are wrong
The caliphate of Abdullah Ibn Al-Zubayr did not have Raafidis
(Shia)
Kings and generals use ludicrous Shiite sources, such as why he claimed that Omar () broke the door (R) and the rest of the imaginary play that is going on)
You could translate his comment into English and see your be your self and just in case he deletes his comment you could translate it from mine
منجم التاريخ
كثير من المعلمات هنا خطاء
خلافة عبدالله ابن الزبير لم يكن فيها روافض
(شيعة)
ملوك وجنرالات يستعين بمصادر شيعيه مهزله، مثل لم ادعى ان عمر () كسر باب (ر) وباقي المسرحية الخيالية التي يقوبها
Why we use names and accuse the friends of the prophet with all of this Omar and Abu-Bakr was educated by the prophet and helped him in his life and saved Islam in his early days so why don't we put all of this away and be Muslims only pray to God and love each other and be in peace may Allah forgive us all for he is the most mercifully and the most great
@@omaraboal-azm8705 "But-but-but-but Husayn and Ali...MUST WORSHIP THEM, MUST WORSHIP THEM, MY PERSIAN COMMANDS US".
Abdullah ibn Zubayr was a true revolutionary. He was a very balanced figure who opposed the Tyranny of the Umayyads, the blind tribalism of the Shias and the Extremism of the Kharijites.
Everything you just said is historically inaccurate lol
@@MhmdBDRD it is blind tribalism because the Shias believe that only a descendant of the prophet can be a caliph and they believe that Banu Hashim is superior to all other tribes. This is completely false and goes against the Islamic message because guess what? Abu Lahab, who was the UNCLE of the prophet Muhammad, was also his biggest enemy. The prophet himself made no distinction between tribes and races.
@@MhmdBDRD But Muhammad is the last prophet. There is no prophet after him. So what's your point? His descendants are not prophets. Ali is not a prophet. Husayn is not a prophet. Also, NO, the Quran does not promote tribalism because although the prophets are progeny of each other that doesn't mean all descendants of each prophet are automatically good people. For example, the prophet Ibrahim faced opposition from his own father (Azar). Explain that?
Furthermore, one of the prophets most beloved companions known as Abu Dhar Al Ghifari was from one of the most hated tribes in Arabia (Al Ghifar) why is that?
Things are not as black and white as you might think. Even the Tyrannical Umayyad dynasty produced many great political reformers such ad Umar ibn Abdul Aziz who went against his own tribe and removed his family members from official positions.
Islam encourages us to rise above tribalism and encourages us to criticise out own tribe, and even ourselves and our family if we have to! For example the prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم once stated:
"Speak the truth even if it be against yourself.”
@@MhmdBDRD Also one thing that kings and generals forgot to mention in the video is that Mukhtar Al Thaqafi (Shia rebel) was a man who claimed to be a prophet himself and he claimed to receive divine revelation. He told his followers that he received revelations from God and his followers increased after he won a battle that "God told him he would win". But eventually many people abandoned him after he lost a battle that he said he was promised to win by God.
@@HistoryOfRevolutions Didn't Abdullah ibn Zubayr chose his own son as a successor?
And yet again i learn about a conflict i had no previous info on. Exellent done
You missed the ending. Mus'ab fleefed to Al-Kufa searching for allies and a new army. But, there was no one helped him. So, Abdul-Malik and Al-Hajjaj killed him easily.
Abdul-Malik then returned to Damascus, to focus on evolving the city of Damascus and Jerusalem, but before that, he sent Al-Hajjaj to take the two Muslim Holy cities, Mecca and Madinah.
Al-Hajjaj entered Madinah killing so many important people there, even the neutral people, then he made a sage around Mecca, until he managed to reach and kill Abdullah ibn Al-Zubbayr.
Al-Hajjaj's unfair policies made so many enemies in all of the Islamic World. So, Muslims from both Sunni and Sheia, and from both Iraq, Yemen and Hejaz, gathered together in Al-Kufa for one last revolution in this civil war, they killed the wali of Kufa. So, Abdul-Malik sent an order to Al-Hajjaj if he could stop them, Al-Hajjaj accepted the request. He moved to Iraq, and fighted the rebels that were under Abdul-Rahman, who is the son of Muhammad ibn Al-Ash'ath, and in one last epic fight, Al-Hajjaj won the battle, ending this civil war, starting an era of calm years, until the Umayyah-Abbasid civil war.
There was a civil war between these two major civil war, Umayyah against Khwarij and Zaydiyyah in king Hisham's years, but Hisham defeated them all from Al-Andauls to Khurasn without a single lose, and without moving from the capital. So, it is not historically important.
the only right side is the side of Mukhtar Al Thaqafi RA
An interesting but little told moment, like the Arab siege of Rome 853-856 (with the sacking of Saint Peter),Of which many ignore the importance.
Because it was not a proper siege, but more of a raid.
lol the Arabs never ever tried to capture Rome what are you smoking? It was just a raid
Egypt and the Middle East in the seventh century, how interesting! I watch and learn!😍
Been watching this series since the beginning along with rome in chronological order . Fantastic episode as all the other ones. I was surprised that al hajjaj ibn yusuf al thaqafi name wasn't mentioned once in this episode. He played an important role in this war and won Iraq for the ummayds.
I’m not even a Muslim but it’s so good to learn bout how it all started and the splits after the death of Muhammad S.A.W
First time seeing a non Muslim saying S.A.W after mentionning the prophet. Respect 🫡
Thanks a lot kings and Generals, I just wanted to see that controversial Umayyad governor who actually reunited the Caliphate, he was Al hajjaj ibn Yusuf al thaqafi, he was a very good strategist yet very cruel
Superb video! This has been a great series overall.
So many muslim factions rebelling and wanting to assume power at once, but I was wondering why there were no major anti-muslim rebellions at this time? It would've been a good opportunity for the egyptian copts or the zoroastrian persians to make a major uprising, but looks like they didn't, so could somebody tell me why?
They were mostly happy with rulership this fitna largely didn’t effect the non Muslims because during the early caliphate the Muslims were rulers but they were secluded from the non Muslim population by living in these new settlements like kufa or Basra. The non Muslims continued to have thier administration intact except they pay tax which was less than previous and their cities would be garrisoned otherwise why would they even need to rebel since they are largely undisturbed
@@yasinibrahim I don't think they liked paying jizya, being sometimes persecuted for being non-muslim, not being to have higher positions, being denied certain rights that only muslims could enjoy. Also, how there wasn't a movement to restore the Sassanid empire? Sure there were left some part of the old royalty.
@@MohamedMohamed-ws7mq weren't those only under Abu Bakr and Umar while under the Umayyads they began to persecute the non-muslims?
@@-crimean_khagan-110 Because they weren't harmed of affected much,Muslims fought and died in the war the cities besieged during the civil war were all Muslim cities and in terms of funding Muslims were pretty much self reliant with their tribal armies and had no reason to rely on non muslims much.
@@zxera9702 during the early years there were not so many muslims, yet those rebellious factions could muster pretty big armies, surely they would have some non-muslims in their armies to bolster their numbers as they would sometimes hire non-muslims for their expertise, like in the Umayyad siege of Constantinopole when their navy was manned almost entirely by christians.
فيديو مصنوع بإتقان .. عمل جيد
Well made video.. good job
Great to see a update on this series I watched the first 2 videos of when they expanded into the byzantines and the sasanidis love from ohio
As a Muslim, I am proud of you for your correct presentation of our history, and for taking events from their correct sources.. Thank you❤
It's Arabian history, Islam is not a race
@@Mr_Fnan أهلا إلياس..
لا يشترط أن يكون الأمر التاريخي مرتبط بعرقيةٍ ما.. العرب والأكراد والفرس والترك والبشتون.. وغيرهم، خدموا الإسلام كديانة وثقافة، وكلنا تجمعنا رابطة روحية وحدة.
(إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ إِخْوَةٌ...).
ثانيا هذا المقطع يتحدث عن نشوء الخلاف الطائفي بين المسلمين والفتن التي عصفت "بالمسلمين" وقسمتهم.
تاريخ الإسلام لا يحتكر من عرق واحد.
correct sources lol
@@hegantank6495 My friend, do you object to something?
@@Ibn_jala yeah im interested in what the 'incorrect sources' are
You have done very good job except by the very end of the video when you even skipped some key characters in the rise (and fall) of the umayyads. Al-hajjaj and al-muhallab were key figures who paved the road for the umayyads.
Also saying the Tawwabin were Shia is quite the blunder.
@@hmzzrg5045 Explain?
They were "Proto-Shias"?
@@hmzzrg5045 Tawwabin are Shias
@علي يا سر man you have a lack of knowledge the shias apperd before any Islamic sect including the Sunnis and the khawarij the Shiites are the core of Islam their the main secet of Islam their the true Islam and the Tawwabin are one of the first shia armys and my advice to you is that you should educate yourself about the thing that you are going to speak about before you get into an Awkward position.
@علي يا سر I am a shia and I know more than you do about my secet and I am telling you that anyone who says that shiism is a political sect not a religious sect doesn't know anything about shiism because the Shiite sunii split was about who was the most suitable leader to lead the Islamic world after the prophet muhammad peace be upon and which brought with it other disagreement inclouding many disagreement related to the practices of Islam inclouding the five 5 pillars of Islam. I could agree that the split between the Shiites suniis and khawarij might be political although I don't agree that the sects are Political sects.
هذه الصفحة من تاريخنا تملأ القلب حزنا وألما.
والسبب معاوية واقرانه😒😒
@@mohammedkamil5320 الشيعة يلي بدو الحروب وين المشكلة اذا حدا غير اهل البيت ستلم الحكم انتو الشيعة للان تسبو الصحابة وزوجة الرسول عشان شي حصل من 1400 سنة وانتو بداتو بقتل الصحابة اشياء صارت من 1400 سنة خلص انسوها وركزو على انفسكم وتعلمو القران ما ضروري الحقد يتم موجود بل نهاية كلنا مسلمين
@@567643tome امنا بالله ولا اسب الصحابة انا، لكن هذا كله حدث بسبب تغيير الحكم من اختياري الى وراثي. ومعاوية هو المسؤول الاول عن هذا. قرار لازلنا نحن العرب نعاني منه الى اليوم. اسأل الله ان نكون امة عظيمة من جديد.
@@mohammedkamil5320 للاسف انت عايش على النياحة والاحقاد.
لم تعش الفترة ولن تسأل عن مادار بينهم.
لكنهم المجوس وجدوا مدخلا للتفرقة بين المسلمين.
ووجدوا اغبياء يمتطونهم.
اخرجتم الحسين عليه السلام من الحجاز وخذلتموه وغدرتم به.تركتموه يقتل واختبأتم خلف نساءكم.
والان تبحثون عن شماعة تعلقون عليها غدركم.
@@567643tome suuuri arsah🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈😉😉😉😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂👌👌👌👌👌👌👌👌
Mashallah, thank you for such an interesting insight on Muslim history! 💙
should do a piece on made up islamic history no evidence of prophet muhammad or the first few caliphs after so called muhammad's death. Hell no evidence mecca existed as a town before 8/9th century as well.
It's Arabian history, Islam is not a race
you not mentioned alhajjaj bin yusuf al thaqafi and his role in 2nd fitna
I so very much enjoy these in depth presentations! Brain candy. Keep them coming. 😁
Nice, a kings and generals video for my birthday
Happy birthday 🎂
Thank you Kings and Generals Team.
Shame not to mention of the blood-thirsty general, Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, when Umayyads defeated al-Zubayr's caliphate and suppressed uprisings in Iraq.
Missing from your impressive narrative is one Hujjaj Bin Yousuf Bannu Thakif who was a powerful character in Bannu Ommaya camp. He won several victories for Bannu Ommaya both under Marwan and Abdul Mulk.
its the month of muharam. 10th muharam today.
day of the martyrdom of imam hussain and his kin and followers.
consuming karbala related content.
this is a good upload by kings and generals i suggest ppl to watch
MUKHTAR NAMA a history based persian tv series that explains the political scenario after karbala
I wish you were this unbiased with the first fitna video, which was a complete chaos because you got your information mostly from weak narrations and Shiite accounts. This one is not biased and very informative.
Great job!
It's not possible to make an unbiased history of the first fitna, all of the sources have bias regarding this period and from a historian's perspective there's no reason why one should take Sunni hadith as more objective over Shi'a (or even Ibadi) ones.
Rashidun first fitna are not legitimate just because of the name fitna is fitna Mahdi is not The Mahdi I don't let my opponents define my religion
Shias literally don't have any science of hadith or ilm al rijal (study of the criticism of narrators) to know whether their narrations are authentic or not, unlike mainstream sunni muslims who have authentic historical accounts of the littlest events. Its very very hard to believe shia sources ngl.
@@Ahadun_ahd sunni's get there hadiths from people who weren't companions and during the time caliph Umar forbid recording hadiths for almost a century the family of the prophet preserved his Sunna if you need help your people don't refer to our caliphs
@@Ahadun_ahd you should refrain from such statements because the establishment forged many hadiths to cover there misdeeds that is why hadiths have to be referred to Koran and the name of the 4th caliph is Natiq talking book
Again a great, informative and great documentary. I appreciate for sharing the knowledge for free :)
Been waiting for that!
Fantastic video keep it up your doing amazing job
What an irony. The descendants of Abu Sufyan, one of the Prophet's greatest opposition, ended up becoming the ones in charge of the Caliphate, and later, al-Andalus.
@@killerpie5981 I know that Abu Sufyan himself eventually converted to Islam. But I clearly did not know that it was not his direct descendants that founded the Umayyad Caliphate.
That's another beauty of Islam. Yesterday's enemies can be tomorrow's brothers, if they become believers.
@@MrMkn1991 Well, I did heard about his descendant known as Sufyani, one of the Mahdi's enemies from the hadith ,that he is going to become the tyrant who somehow seized Syria as his domain.
The descendants of Abu Sufyan (ra) was up until Caliph Marwan (ra). Those after this, including the Andalusian Caliphate, were not from Abu Sufyans line
@@Ahadun_ahdAbu Sufiyan, Muawiyah and Yazid, May Allah curse them, were always against Islam.
As a Christian Syrian the question is always my mind , why the Roman didn’t use this opportunity to retake lost provinces on Syria 🤔?
because they were busy fighting blugars and the most important thing the caliph umayyad during their civil wars they paid tax to bezntyine not attacking them,which that made us confused why umayyad was first dealt with bezntyine coins,simply to intentionally satisfaction the bezntyine.eventually umayyad finished their internal conflicts,and decided to coin minting for their own to make their trade and policy domainted..umayyad fooled bezntyine by preforming a genuis strategy to trick them
The slavs were besieging thessaloniki, the second city of the empire, while the bulgars invaded the balkans. They were pretty busy.
Also this was the time of the iconoclast issue in the empire this is on a social level
that's why I thought too
@@theawesomeman9821 well war with Bulger and Syrian Christan hated them despites being of same religion.
Mukhtar never said ibn al hanafiya is the mahdi
Could you send a source
صحيح وانا ايضا أردت الكتابة تعليق على ذالك
Please add Turkish subtitles to your videos. You have many subscriptions from Turkey.
U can use auto-translate
abdulmalik ibn marwan What a genius leader
A man reorganized the army and ended the civil war , crushed the rebels, built the third most important mosque in Jerusalem, reunified centralized and bureaucrate all the empire, he started to Arabize the Middle East, defeated the North African queen and the Byzantine attack, started the first islamic economy and made coins by his name , he invaded central asia and Pakistan and he made many reforms and changes to the empire and historians started to call him as the true founder of Umayyad empire
All that in only 20 years !!
His son, al-Walid, continued his father's policies and his rule likely marked the peak of Umayyad power and prosperity he ruled an empire from Paris to china !! Unbelievable
That’s an exaggeration, the Ummayadds ruled the whole Iberian peninsula but they never controlled France after their invasion was thrown back by the Franks under the leadership of Charles Martel
Actually the whole Iberian peninsula is a stretch, they were never able to establish control of the hostile northern regions of the country
They never reached Paris but they were at Tours which is close to Paris
@@rayhankhan8992 And at Tours they were thrown back and whatever territory they took was retaken by the Franks
@@williamjones2503 hostile northern regions? it was one region which became a client state to them.
Thank you for remembering Ayn Al warda ! The glorious episode in our history of fighting against Umayyad tyranny. God bless you and your channel
You people are cowards who betrayed Hussein (R.A) and left him alone to die , also Yazid didn't order to kill Hussein (R.A) even though he wasn't a good leader
@@iiMubarak yazid and ubaydullah attacked the shia in kufa and killed them, they also imprisoned many if them. The rest that attacked Imam hussain AS where not shia, they were kufians. The shia were with Imam hussain AS and died defending him. Don't speak on issues you do not understand.
Thanks for precise details!
As a Muslim that Knows the history of that times so well! I was amazed by watching this video.
I recommend "Mokhtarnameh" series for more detail history of that era.
Is it the Iranian series about Al-Moktar Al-Thaqafi? I watched an excellent Arabic dub. It was great!
@@HaloJumper7 it's full of mythologies though
You mean shia'iet propaganda made by bunch of wannabe arabs who happens to be brainwashed persians
@@HaloJumper7 Yeah, bro you're right.
there were several mistakes tho
I'll recommend this page to my friends, they history is accurate
K&G teaching me more about muslim world politics and history than my own islamic school back then
Crazy how during civil wars you see so many factions emerge. Such conflicts are often not so black and white.
We need more!!!
Great documentary. I'd advise you to read about alhajjaj. He's pretty interesting figure.
Found it interesting in the comments to see the amount of Shia Muslims complaining that you got too much historical information from Sunni Historians, and Sunni Muslims on here complaining that you got too much historical information from Shia Historians. Both these groups don't agree on anything. As someone that teaches Secondary School History, I personally got a lot out of your presentation on this 2nd Civil War in the Caliphate.
Mohktar never believed Mohammed ibn hanifiya was a the Mahdi. The main reason for his uprising was because he wanted to avenge the killers of Husyn. So the mohktar part was definitely taken from Sunni sources.
To be honest he forgot to mention that mukhtar did slay the killers of al Hussain
(Apart from ibn ziyad)
@@hussam2913 exactly. That’s one of the most important things. And musab didn’t enter inside the palace to execute mukthar, its well known that mukthar fought with only a couple of his companions against a large army in front of the palace to die like martyrs.
@@rakpak8290 Cite your sources for this?
@@hussam2913 Cite your source for this?
After 1st crusade, please don't forget to make a series of events just before 2nd Crusade and 2nd crusade itself, most bigger channels either don't make anything about it or don't make it in deep
Yep
@@KingsandGenerals what is the Christian vision on the crusaders why do they see them as a good group. Why don't they see them as a terrorist regime since there war involved winning against the army and then burning the city that they invade and killing its citizens just for the goal to reach Jerusalem. For me I see them like the qramita and the Nazis and isis.
Early muslim expansion, first crusade, pacific war…
What a good time to be alive 🥹
@علي ياسر me too and times were more exciting over there not to mention
We are upon the truth 🤭❤️
Ttank you l see you in kuwait.
Can you make a video about Al-Hajjaj Ibn Yusuf Al-Thaqafi and what he said about the people of Iraq.
Very good video, but i think that some colours are used vvrong: for example, Umayyads must de marked in red, because their symbol vvas red, shia - in green, because colour of Banu-Hashim is green.
You should've emphasised the significance of Ubaydullah Ibn Ziyad for being the commander during karbala . Also I disagree with the classification of Ibn Zubayr as a usurper. Marwan declared his claim well into ibn Zubayrs 'reign' and generally b. Zubayr is considered the caliph between Mu'awiya II and the seige of Mecca and Ibn Zubayrs death . The marwanids are seen as the rebels in Muslim history until they took power since they're a completely different branch of the Umayyad clan to those who ruled before anyways. Other than that great video .
Spot on
Hello, I have an important question. Was Damghan in the Tabaristan region during the second Fitna or Zubair region?
This needed to be done. 👍
8:02 his name al_husain in english look the same name of hussain ibn ali but its different
الحصين بن النمير
And the other general his name
Shurhapil ibn abi kolag
Can you make a documentary on 2nd crusade
Great job KG
Our Hero Al Mukhtar🙌.. Who avenged the Blood of IMAM HUSSAIN IBN ALI(as)
He is The Arab Hero of Arabs only😂
Would you be interested in making a video on the Battle of Quebec, when the British and 13 colonies effectively won North America over the French? Every time i hear this story i can't help but thinking it would look great on your graphics!
This was a nice video to watch
Love your content. Long time viewer first time commenter. 😁 Please say the name that is big on the tiles to follow the narrative. Surnames are difficult to follow... 😭
Love The vid
The last Fitna aka the 4th Fitna(4th Muslim Civil War) will be around 809 AD - 819 AD
That fitna was more like a dynastic war between brothers
@@MohamedMohamed-ws7mq
Indeed, a medieval version of Islamic Kinslaying, Regicide, and Game of Thrones. With a little religious schism through Sunni, Shia, Ibadi and etc.
@@Toumahitoedits it’s impossible for humans to stay united
That one was boring tho
@@zxera9702
Every last thing is boring perhaps, for you
Nice new vid
20:00 what is the bluish purplish faction on the Arabian peninsula there?
Khawarij faction
The commander of Umayed army which conquered Mika was not Abdul Malik himself he was Hujaj ebin yousuf the governor of Iraq and Khurasan.
Yeah he was very cruel
Ali a.s. was & is amazing 💪🏼
Is? He has been dead for quite some time
But where is the period after ali and upto battle of Karbala and Battle of Harrah?
great vid
Hey Kings and Generals, please make a series on the American Civil War and the American Revolutionary War. I really wish to see it
Always great.
Why civil wars of this kind are always so full of too many names to remember?
I think it's more so many of the people had the same names like Muhammad ibn such-and-such or Hussain ibn so-and-so.
Probably due to your background maybe. I'd imagine a native Chinese would have no issue distinguishing and easily remembering all the "similar" sounding names that come up when discussing their history for example.
@@hmmm3210 That may be partially true, but look at for example the French Wars of Religion 1562-1598. Commanders Henry III, Henry of Navarra/Henry IV, Henry I of Guise, Henry I de Montmorency, Francis of Guise, Francis of Anjou, Francois de Montomorency, Charles IX, Charles of Mayenne, Carlos Coloma, Charles Emmanuel I.. and so on
It so mind blowing how the byzantines saw so many empires rise and fall
The Byzantines is just a term to group together so many dynasties some won by force. There was even a time when there was no emperor in between the sack of Constantinople 1204 and the reconquest
@@MohamedMohamed-ws7mq Exactly. They aren’t any different from the Muslim Empire that had plenty of dynasties across history.
@@Haiofhqnnetula as caliphate only three
@@MohamedMohamed-ws7mq Partially true, but the west Romans were one continuous political entity regardless of dynasty and they did see many numerous different and distinct political entities around them rise and fall.
@علي ياسر For numerous Geo-political reasons and because history isn’t as simple as you want it to be. They did enter a period of resurgence centuries later under emperor Basil, but there was a different balance of power.
Another amazing video! thanks KnG
Khalid Ibn Al Walid had 27 major battles in his life time and over 100 battles (big and small ones included) but you don't cover those, you cover Islamic Civil War. Ik Muslims are going through a hard time for the past hundred years and all but I thank God every single day that we are dignified ones in this Earth.
@Rabbi Shaya Coriat no they did not. Battle of Ajnadan, Battle of Firaz etc. none of those are covered.
You can cover them Alvira. Im sure you will do a great job 😉
@@LouisKing995 Point out hypocrisy and a hundred hypocrites come to defend it.
@@alvirarahman574 What hypocrisy? Just get out your favourite camera and start filming. You will do so well.
@@LouisKing995 okay umm, are you some kinda escapee from mental assylum?
Amazing ,
keep living guys
Regarding Mukhtar's Ibn Hanafiyyah reverence and Mahdism.
Mukhtar al Thaqafi was not the most powerful leader, but had made serious enemies on all sides. The Ummayads were the biggest one of them, and the apparent objective of Mukhtar's movement was to avenge the killing of Imam Hussain, which meant Ummayads were his principle enemies.
The Ummayads are known for their psychological warfare against their enemies. Imam Ali was regularly slandered and cursed in Syria under Muawiya. This was such a big issue that one of the conditions in the agreement between Muawiya and Imam Hasan was stopping this.
Mukhtar was most likely another victim of much slandering and propaganda. It was popularised that he had created a new religion himself by claiming prophethood, or a new sect by following Ibn Hanafiyyah. Ibn Hanafiyyah himself never claimed to be anything significant.
Most historian take these claims against Mukhtar with a pinch of salt, as the greater probability lies with these being mere propaganda points created either by the Ummayads or the Zubayrids. Mukhtar was pro-Alid, and amongst the early Shi'as. Any rebellion or act of violence in Shiism in particular, requires the sanctioning of the legitimate leader of the time (Imam). Mukhtar sought Ibn Hanafiyyah's permission for his uprising, after Imam Ali ibn Hussain refused to grant permission. It is believed by Shiites that Imam Ali Ibn Hussain endorsed his uprising, but didn't want to explicitly sanction it. The Imams of the Ahlulbayt were known to practice Taqiyyah, as none of them lived lives without state surveillance and persecution.
“Umayyads vs Zubairyds vs Mukhtar Vs Khawarjis”. Let's check history nerds here, Guys reply if I missed any faction in already four way Royal Rumble match. For my turn:-
Apart from four I think :- Native persian revolt in North (just guess)
I suggest you guys watch Mukhtar Nama. Great series that
Love is temporary. Anger is forever.
- Angry Birds.
Nice
Who else thinks kings and Generals could nail THESE topics:
The disaperance of the 9th LEGION
Rise of Garibaldis redshirts
Fun fact, most of abdullahs coins were the coins of sassanid khosrow ii that was reminted with arabic script around it (they even kept the fire altar)
Uthman, Mu'awiya and many more also had Sassanid coins with Pahlavi inscriptions. It was changed under Abd al-Malik to the Byzantine style and then to its own style.
@@diyar3219 correct. But i have seen the fore altar on Abdullahs coins (to my surprise)
When will you upload a new video of Ukraine? I'm dying to watch a video about the battle of Mariupol or the new situation of the front
Perun
Much like Game of thrones Ummayads waited like Cersei so that two rivals may fight out let the victorious emerge and we'll fight it. Sadly Zubarids didn't have dragons and were far too good people than required at such times.
After all they are predecessor for Isis.
@@UserUser-ic1fw yeah much like the Holy Roman empire was predecessor for Hitler
@@razaalee9477 : nah, different ideology, ideology is Islam.
@@UserUser-ic1fw and do you care to explain how Zubayr and almost 1300 years later ISIS followed the same ideology? Zubayr literally spent four years doing nothing while he had the chance to crush all his enemies just because he was afraid of innocent bloodshed. ISIS on the other hand would would kill enslave and rape for pleasure.
U say "Islam" is the common point among them might as well then call all Arab scientists predecessor of ISIS too coz they followed Islam too.
@@razaalee9477 ; islamist caring about innocent non Muslims? Your funny
The group labeled as shiah in this video are simply the supporters of Caliph Ali and his family, they were sunni in creed and have nothing to do with the twelver shia of iran.
Wrong
Lol you must be Sunni
@@lvsoad22 obviously he is 😅
@@Narutnax Can you provide any records of them shrine kissing, self flagellating and deifying imams among other Shia practices? You must be a Shi'a. 💀
True.
K&G, I love you so much ❤❤
Where can i find the battle of Karbala, in which Hussain ibn Ali was killed?
sir can you please tell in which app did you do the animation?
this is no app...this is program!
The Dabuyids very well could have exploited all the division in the Islamic world and played their cards right by allying certain Islamic rebels so they could have reconquered Persia for Zoroastrianism and could have established a powerful dynasty worthy of succeeding the Sassanids.
The Muslims of this period would never even think of allying with non Muslims even if they were on thier last leg
@@MohamedMohamed-ws7mq In that case an alliance with the Eastern Romans would be a good alternative.
@@Kingofportals Roman very busy on Balkan front against Slav migration and Bulgar Invasion. In fact while this civil war happened city thessaloniki was under siege and they almost lost Greek to Slav migration
So I don't think they will accept it and will rather have peace with the caliphate that also busy than make them their 3rd enemy
Could you please cover a series on Simon Bolivar the napoleon of south america
What's the name of the mod you use for the game attila total war?