The Seljuk sultanate of rum didn't fall because of an ottoman revolt, their power grew less and less especially when the ilkhanates conquered them, they split into separate states like karaman, gremian and others

It wasn’t just Arab/berber tensions that brought the Umayyads down, it was everybody who wasn’t arab and to some extend not a semite, and it was the persians or tipped the scale by hosting the abbasids and actively joining them in the rebellion to topple the umayyads. the berbers only operated in the far fringes in what is now morroco, Algeria and spain and posed no real threat to the Umayyad power base in Syria or its most loyal provinces in egypt and the levant. The movement of non arabs rising up and the Abbasids fueling them and courting them is called the “Shu‘ubiyya“ by historians of this period , which ironically means l”populism“.

In fact: The Abbasids were one of the strongest empires of the time, they modeled the Sassanids and succeeded to do great breakthroughs in terms of science, technology etc

Still watching the episode, so I may develop more comentary as I go on. On the mamluks starting to be militarized by the State, it remembers me a lot about Rome. As Rome started to adopt more and more germanic and other groups of people, it seems the people on the italic peninsula became more and more vulnerable to attacks, especially if the Emperor did not care at all. It's fun to see how much some faults really spread on,basically, same problems.

I've been binge watching your lectures and they are amazing. Thanks so much for posting these and keep up the great and informative content.

can we confidently claim the fact to be that the ummayad empire was simply too gigantic for a previously isolated dynasty from the arabian peninsula to govern effectively?

Thanks for the video. Its great to see all pre Mongolic Islamic dynasties summarized in one place. And the information was very well organized and accurate too.

Good contextual presentation. Thanks for posting!

Great video, just found your channel & subscribed, i very much enjoy histories & your channel definately does break it down into manageable & relevant episodes. I'm looking forward to going through your previous videos each afternoon. TY & keep up the great work.

Al-Muttasim was not Al-Mamun's son, rather his brother. Correct it @11:47

Great presentation and session ! Thanks alot

👍👍👍👍 good explaination.

Beautiful and thorough summary

like any historical commentary, this can be debated, but still an entertaining video

Thanks a lot , sir . Your videos save me long hours of study .

I would like to see a in depth look at the Janissary. Perhaps following the life of a child until he goes to fight at Constantinople .

I watched this and was like wow this is amazing, it's like a history lecture given by a professor. Then I read the about section and realized it's a history lecture given by a professor.

Hello. I'm new on your channel. I think it's interesting and I want to learn more. Where can I find your source please ?

The great Abbasid Caliphate crumbled due to internal strife between the philosophy of the Muttazilaism and the orthodox view of the rebel Ibn Hambal and thus came the end of the scientific quest of the Muslims.

Cool video dude.

Iran became shia during the time of shah ismail in 1500s

Hello! This is very helpful could you provide your sources?

Seems they lacked what Rome had at its peak: An Imperial ideology.

Al Mamun is the guy who excavated a secret passage in the Great Pyramid of Giza

Good video, however the caliphate wasn't completely weakend after caliph al mutadid, his son caliph al muktafi managed to restore Egypt and levant back.

your the best thersites

what is your opinion on Gibbon, his historical method? do you recommend lay people/armchairs read him?

There is another reason hiding in the background i think you can call it a schism ... it started during Al ma'muon by the end all moatazilites have left the city or changed sect... look up ibn hanbal and Al ma'moun debate

The Mamluks (or Mamelukes) stayed on as _de facto_ rulers of Egypt until 1798, when Napoleon defeated them in the Battle of the Pyramids. Napoleon, strangely enough, kept a Mamluk as his personal servant.

Best learn from history

The Umayyads were also seriously weakened by their failure, twice, to take Constantinople after long, and bankrupting, sieges. This broke the spell of Islamic superiority and destiny of conquest, opening the door to revolt. Give the Byzantines some credit!

Abbasid empire one of the powerful Islamic empire and Abbasids promote Revolution of science and culture

A little correction to your map. Messina that is the northernmost part of Sicily too was in the hands of the Abbasids or in reality Aghlabids How do I know it? I play Paradox games

Yes there are Abbasids and indeed Ummayads. I have taught children from both families in Arabia in the past few decades. Now though, they are just middle class professionals.

Actually for several centuries the Turks kept the name Constantinople, as they wanted to be seen as the new Romans, not replacing or eliminating them.

Al-Mutasim was Harun's son, not grandson

Basically Abbasid Caliphate died as a political functional system after Harun Al Rashid died

A small correction; iran didn't become majority shia with buyids, buyids' home regions, mazandaran and gilan became majority shia (they kinda were already shias even before probably). After Safavid dynasty most of iran became shia.

Dawla - state. Modern example Isis - dawla islamiya - literally state, not dynasty. For US folks - government

Abbasid era was golden age of Islam

I have heard that the holy city used to be Petra, but that it was changed to Mekka by the Abbasids. What do you think?

Iran was mostly sunni with the exception of the north west until the reign of the Safavids

And if any of them were twice convicted of theft - it was “Mamaluk - NO HANDS!”

He is just all over the place

Albino u miss me Black stone

25:50 Isn't that the fall of Constantinople?

Thersites. Wasn't he a Greek God.

The early caliphates were never an empire, nor was there a single state stretching from Spain to India and Central Asia. In practice, the only areas firmly controlled by the Caliphs were, at most, from Syria and Iraq to Egypt and some of the surrounding areas (Jordan, parts of Western Iran, the Caucuses, parts of what is now Turkey, and bits of Saudi Arabia). Actual power was held by the local rulers.

Not having a pope certainty does not help with managing central control

Umayyad caliphate master race! No, really. It's political structure was stronger as it left power to a clear minority of Muslim Arabs. The Abbasids opened up a chaotic period were it was free-for-all and desintegrated political authority. Up until the Ottomans and Safavids, at least, the Muslim world was utter political chaos.

Why was France scared of the Caliph? Because Caliphate NINE!

Arabs caliphte ❤️

Abbasid Caliphs : Abu Al-Abbas the blood shedder (Assaffah), Abu Ja'far the victorious (Al-Mansor), Aron the elder (Al-Rasheed) And the rest are useless

Abbsid were great

Similarly, Sunni Islam continued to exist in Iran as a major force until the supremacy of the Safavid shahs who were overtly Shi'ite in the fifteenth to sixteenth centuries. A lot of notable Sunni scholars were Persian - Rumi and Al Ghazali amongst them.

The khwarazmians will never be remembered for anything other than getting owned by the mongols lol

The very IDEA of a slave soldier is INCREDIBLY stupid for the people intending to use them. I say that was the primary cause of the fall of Arab led Islamic states(outside of Arabia proper) and the rise of the turk and the berber states instead; but the Arabs REALLY blundered, and they themselves would pay DEARLY for it, but also all of their neighbors both allies and enemy alike(esp the East Roman Empire) was when they started enslaving and using Turk slave soldiers from their border areas and elsewhere. This isnt Game of Thrones, these guys ARENT Eunuchs; and they both hate you their arab overlord(and want to reverse your positions) but also have grand ambitions of their own as a people/tribe. Honestly it was a similar situation to the one where the idiot Muslim leader killed those Mongol Messengers because they were disrespectful and rude pieces of shit to the Lord of the City and Empire. You basically invited in these people to destroy you; directly so with the Turks(who also destroyed Byzantine Empire the final vestige of the glorious ancient Roman Empire; and capturing Constantinople wasnt enough for the Turks they also had to desecrate the city that had been the greatest city on Earth for a THOUSANDS YEARS(or close to it; perhaps even slightly over 1,000 years) by not just looting, murdering, enslaving, forced Conversions of Christians, "infidel taxes" and general persecution and bloodshed of ones who wouldnt convert, but they even tarnished the NAME of the city giving it some piece of shit name I refuse to say openly. That cities name is CONSTANTINOPLE and the Turks defiling the city will not change that or its former importance. Keep in mind that Constantinople is IN Europe itself; its on the side of the strait that is on European soil. And they then Enslaved basically all of the former Byzantine subjects and people who lived their whole lives, and so did their parents and grandparents long stretching back a thousand years(or far longer if we include the time period when the West and East had not yet Split, BEFORE the Tetrarchy for example), as Romans and as Christians with SOLE loyalty to Constantinople, to the East Roman Empire and to nobody else. Its why there were soooo many small scale revolts in greece and in the balkan states(who were pretty much in the same situation as Greece such as Serbia; and Bulgaria too and others), but because of Ottoman Turk deceit and bribery and treachery on the side of many of the rebels(many of whom were outright scoundrels fully willing to sell out their fellows for Turkish gold and a couple slave girls(or slave boys/catamites for the sicko's) the Turks were infamous for giving out) was why the Turks were not fully expelled from European soil until World War 1, even though by the mid 1700s or so they were rightfully called the sick man of Europe. They couldve been taken out handily too but the Western powers never forgot the East-West Schism and wanted to delay putting the Orthodox East back on its feet(how dumb and short sighted and harmful to themselves; the Turks were NOT their friends just cause of some schism between Christians) as long as possible it seems to me; and only deprived the Turks of their ill gotten gains when the Ottoman Empire was collapsing in on itself and was gonna die anyway, so they may as well carve it up before another Muslim power, or Russia, gets it all. Frankly they shouldnt have let enemies be based so near to Europe itself.... ESP with how far into Europe the Ottomans had gotten, how many nations they conquered and enslaved. It was possibly even worse than the Arab-Berber Muslim invasion of Spain which was pretty much identical in terms of the driving out or enslavement or murder of the local Christians, the widespread disaster it caused, the rapes and the mass murders and deportations(to slave galleys, where you werent expected to live longer than a couple years...if even that), or sold to some sick freak Turkish pervert bey. Like in the fictional movie Lawrence of Arabia, the Turkish pervert has his men torture lawrence then does something to him off screen that fucks him up in the head and makes him start hating the Turks. People dont like talking about how messed up and weird(esp from a Western European perspective...no, from a general EUROPEAN perspective not even necessarily Western) the Ottoman Empire was. But it should be discussed; something so evil should never exist again, and moreover, know thy enemy; someday the Greeks(or maybe the Russians) will take back Constantinople as is their birthright; I'll be rooting for them, whatever Eastern European Power that does it. It has NEVER sat well with me that the city SECOND in Importance in the history of the Roman Empire(second to Rome only) is in the hands of the enemy, moreover, a religious enemy that has many fanatics who want to blow themselves up and also blow up churches and PRICELESS Holy Relics and Art Christian art esp but Art just in general is seen as degenerate in Islam; its why they dont have those life-like Greek/Roman/Renaissance Statues in Islamic countries and never did, even though they PROB could have trained artisans to acquire the skills to make good lifelike statues. Theres some weirdo nonsense line in the quaran and Art and Statues in particular being Idols or some other dumbass rambling that makes no sense at all.

You are not neutral .

Umayyad and Abasid were arabs stop your history properganda

Al-Muttasim was not Al-Mamun's son, rather his brother. Correct it @11:47