Great video, thanks for your hard work! I do have a quick question regarding the map of the Byzantine Empire during the Heraclian dynasty. It shows the city of Virunum and the surrounding Alpine regions as part of the empire in the 7th century. However, according to archaeological and historical data, by that time Virunum had long been destroyed during the Slavic and Avar migrations. Could you please share what sources you relied on when including these northern lands into the empire's borders? I would be really interested to know!
The Roman historian Sebeos, author of the 7th-century Chronicle of Heracles, notes that the swift and unexpected Islamic conquests were astonishing and coincided with the prophecy of Daniel, which speaks of a small rock rolling down to become gigantic and destroying the statue whose legs were a mixture of clay and iron—a metaphor for the second, weaker era for the Persians and Romans, the Sassanids and Byzantines.
Under the Macedonian dynasty the Eastern Roman Empire reached Antioch and the Levant once again. This period is called the Macedonian Renaissance and lasted until 1071 AD.
2 things: (1) Carthage was conquered by the Arabs in the 690s and was still very much part of the ERE in 668. And (2) most of the former province of Illyricum barring a few isolated settlements on the Adriatic and Ionian coasts had long since slipped from Roman control by this point.
Many thanks for the nice summary video.
One small suggestion: it may be more accurate and fair to refer to the “Arabs” side as the Muslims or the Islamic Caliphate, led initially by Arabs (at least for this era). By the end of the period covered in the video, a significant portion of the Muslim population was no longer ethnically Arab nor native Arabic‑speaking, so the broader terms better reflect the historical reality.
Thanks again for the concise and informative overview.
Please note the following historical correction: The military campaigns against the Sassanid and Roman Empires were initiated by the first Caliph, Abu Bakr, rather than Caliph Umar.
You keep saying how the empires were facing civil wars before Muslims invaded but didn't say that the caliphate themselves had civil wars and they had multiple caliphs assassinated by rebel groups
The Rashidun Caliphate Had a 95% Battle Win rate, that's one of the highest For Any Empire In History Considering the Fact That Rashidun Caliphate Armies Fought a 2 front war Outnumbered,outsupplies,ou equipped against 2 Strong Empires, Annihilating the persian empire and humiliating the Byzantine Empire and ending their presence in Egypt and levant forever in just a few years is truly a huge Feat
Watch the Entire Playlist here: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOJtsUMWwR9jamsXtYkz-rX…
We use cookies, device fingerprinting and cross-device tracking to personalise content, serve targeted advertising, and analyse how you use our site across your devices. By clicking Accept all you consent to the use of these tracking technologies. Your data may be used to build a profile of your interests and show you personalised ads on other sites.
Privacy policy
Comments (20)
Daily Junction discussion mixed with clearly attributed comments from the original video provider.
Join in — free. Comments on Daily Junction are for members, so real names stay rare and bots stay out.
One field. We email you a 6-digit code — no password needed. Your comment is kept while you do it.
Under 13? You’ll need a parent’s OK first — it takes them one click.
One small suggestion: it may be more accurate and fair to refer to the “Arabs” side as the Muslims or the Islamic Caliphate, led initially by Arabs (at least for this era). By the end of the period covered in the video, a significant portion of the Muslim population was no longer ethnically Arab nor native Arabic‑speaking, so the broader terms better reflect the historical reality.
Thanks again for the concise and informative overview.
Watch the Entire Playlist here: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOJtsUMWwR9jamsXtYkz-rX…