Just how were the early Muslims able to topple Sassanid Persia and pretty much everything else?

Yes, but the Byzantines, and the Sassanids? Those were not weak states at all.

they were not weak

so typical of western  to undermine such eastern POWER

Alexander the "Great"  couldn't controle India,  Arabs did ( the Arab General was a teenager  younger than Alex)

Alexander the "Great" couldn't reach China,    Arabs did

and that was done in 1 to 2 years with taking spain too.

Arabs didnt reach China they reached its protectorate, and Islam was introduced to India by Turks, not Arabs.

Arab sucess has to do with skilled generalship and that Sassanids and Byzantium had just concluded a very destructive war.

I copied the following from Wikipedia

With the ascent of al-Walid I, Hajjaj's reputation grew due to his selection and deployment of numerous successful generals who expanded the Islamic empire. Hajjaj was given these powers due to his high status in the Umayyad government, and he exhibited a lot of control over the provinces that he governed.

Among these generals was the teen-aged Muhammad bin Qasim, who in 712 was sent to Sindh in India. Compared to his general Hajjaj was more hardline insisting that pagans (or those who were not people of the book) be killed or enslaved.

Qutaibah bin Muslim was sent to conquer Turkestan which he did, even penetrating the borders of China and getting a tribute payment from the Chinese emperor. Perhaps his most successful general was Musa bin Nusair who consolidated control over North Africa and who sent Tariq bin Ziyad to invade Spain.

still persia was not weak

How long did it take the Arabs to reach China? When did Arabs  control India? Wasn't it the turks? Alexander is one man, and I guess he must be pretty important if u need to compare a WHOLE group of people up to him.

since you dont read the rest of the posts i will repeat what i posted earlier

I copied the following from Wikipedia

With the ascent of al-Walid I, Hajjaj's reputation grew due to his selection and deployment of numerous successful generals who expanded the Islamic empire. Hajjaj was given these powers due to his high status in the Umayyad government, and he exhibited a lot of control over the provinces that he governed.

Among these generals was the teen-aged Muhammad bin Qasim, who in 712 was sent to Sindh in India. Compared to his general Hajjaj was more hardline insisting that pagans (or those who were not people of the book) be killed or enslaved.

Qutaibah bin Muslim was sent to conquer Turkestan which he did, even penetrating the borders of China and getting a tribute payment from the Chinese emperor. Perhaps his most successful general was Musa bin Nusair who consolidated control over North Africa and who sent Tariq bin Ziyad to invade Spain.

 

those were arabs not turkish

 

also Alexander is one man and this one man wont be able to do anything without something called ARMY with more than 40000 men so my comparison doesnt make him that much important ( he is more important to Europeans and Westerners but not to Arabs) it is a Comparison between two Armies

also alexander's army was a nation army while the Army sent to india was just part of the Islamic armies who were speread in the west and the east Conquering every directions.

so to compare Alexander and His Army with one part of Ummayad Empire army makes that Group of people more important than Alexander's Empire's Army.

 

-------------

I can assure you, any Scholar, western or not, can appreciate alexanders conquests. (unless they have some problems)

I'm going to have to agree with Christcrusader with this.  Hellenistic culture influenced Indian architecture- which got transmitted to rest of asia via Buddhism.  So its quite interesting to see how 40000 men changed the artistic style of a continent. 

Even if someone defeats others in battle, soon or later, it will degenerate into another fairy tale about a brave knight.  But art, lives forever. 

Actually, what is today is labeled as Islamic architecture is derived from Sassanid domed architecture which was adapted by Muslims. It really has nothing to do with Arab conquerers.

Originally posted by Christscrusader how LONG did it take for that? quite longer than hellenisism.

much less than the Hellenisisim

from year 708 AD to 714 AD  north africa, spain, north india and big part of centeral asia were taken.

I would say it has alot to do with Muslims, though Islamic architecture is derived from Persian architecture.  Islam basically changed Arabs from one of the most savage to the one of the most advanced people in the world.  They obviously adopted elements of nearby civilizations since they had less civilization of their own (at first), but Pre-Islamic Persia would have known nothing of the splendour of the great Muslim architects.  But I think it is correct to say that Persia was largely to the calliphates what Greece and Rome were to later Europeans.

Hellenism isn't just about architecture. And if one must recognize and cherish the muslim heritage to the world, one must also honestly agree that the greek heritage is unsurmountable.

The Byzantine Empire was oppressing non-Orthodox Christians, including the Coptic Egyptians, Apostolic Armenians, and Assyrians. Maybe that's why they would rather have seemingly tolerant Arabs as their rulers, not because Islam was closer to their beleifs.

But some Armenians were far from welcoming them with open arms. Local  dynasties and lords (such as Theotoros Rshduni) formed armies to try to stop the Arab invaders.

The Arabs' tolerance towards Armenians depended from emir to emir.

The Persians were definately weak. They just concluded two decades and a half of warfare with the Romans, followed by a civil war. The Roman armies had pierced into their very heart and took their major cities, so yes, they were weak.

There is some evidence that Egyptians may have helped the Arabs with their conquest (or so I hear).

I copied the following from Wikipedia

Do not cut and paste when it comes to historical facts. Rely on the respective book such as Rene Grousset' s Empire of the steps.

Among these generals was the teen-aged Muhammad bin Qasim, who in 712 was sent to Sindh in India. Compared to his general Hajjaj was more hardline insisting that pagans (or those who were not people of the book) be killed or enslaved.

Qutaibah bin Muslim was sent to conquer Turkestan which he did, even penetrating the borders of China and getting a tribute payment from the Chinese emperor. Perhaps his most successful general was Musa bin Nusair who consolidated control over North Africa and who sent Tariq bin Ziyad to invade Spain.

But these aside, Abbasid and Umayyad Empires were as strong as Alexander' s, no doubt. Lets just make something clear, but. These empires were the USA of 8th century. Only Franks and Turks stopped them.

It was actually Turkish Empires such as Turgish Empire and 2nd Gokturk Empire who played the aggressive guy, trying to invade arabic lands. but Uighur, Karluk, Basmil alliance changed much things. Gokturks were demolished and Uighurs took control. In those days Talas occured, Chinese attacked arabs. We saved the arabs , like we saved them in the Crusades.

at the time of Conquesting Persia, egypt was already part of the Caliphat so if there was some Egyptians in the Army led by Khalid bin AL-Waleed Doesnt mean they helped, they were part of the country.

i found this map showing the expansion of Arabs untill the Ummayad who were More Arabic than the later Abbasids

i copied that just becouse it is English text talking about Islamic early expansion for more detailed history about islam i will have to check the Arabic Books the early once i wont rely on some strangers trying to tell us our history

iam talking at the period of the 7th century not the 14th century

the Generals at that times were Arabs Not Turkish

Turkish didnt come to power before the 10th century

and about China

if the chinese were able to destroy us and they did reach Arabic land why the hell the Chinese Emperore sends Gifts to the Caliphate?

more maps

this one at year 661 AD

this one at year  750  ( the Ummayads)

I honestly accept Arabic Empire was the strongest of its time in the first half of 8th centry. It was as great as Alexander' s Empire, sure. I have no doubt.

BUT

Take a look at this map, this has nothing conquered in Chinese and Indian territory.

If you say you came to Chinese territory, you are wrong. It was Chinese who attacked you but it was Tukish-Arabic alliance who beat Chinese so that they bowed down before all of us. Karluk Turks terminated their infantry. They sent you gifts but Uighur Turks did not consider the gifts sent to them, they invaded China.

Only the original Persian lands of Sogdia and Khwarizm; Khorasan (Afghanistand and Pakistan) is conquered in this map, actually Sogdia was temporarily conquered by Gokturks in 7th century however after Gokturk Empire was crashed by Chinese, we lost the control, Sogdians became independent. Even we do not consider these lands Turkified until the times of Timur, even in the times of Seljuks,  Khwarizm Shahdom, or Karahanids, land was Persian dominated.

Turkistan is a new region. After the Cengiz invasions, Turks settled to the place and Persians immigrated west to escape from slaughter. In the times of Timurlenk (Tamerlane), Semerkand was rebuilt, the inhabitants were mostly Turkmen. Later Uzbeks invaded Turkmen lands and destroyed Timurlenk' s Empire. Still Semerkand is in Uzbek hands today.

Turkmens moved west. For example Todays Turkmenistan is totally unrelated to the lands of Oguz (Turkmens) in 8th century. Those days Turks were living approximately same axis but to the north. lets say Mongolia and southern Russia. But Russian Invasions, and Chinese invasions pushed Turks to those regions.

India was first conquered by Ghaznavids, later whole conquest was done by Baburids (Mughals).

Significant conquests of Arabic Empire is actually the invasion of Iberia (Tariq Ibn Ziad), Persia (King Omer), Sogdia (Governer Qutaiba ibn Muslim). Well also the Roman Africa was conquered.

You did a good job Azimuth, very succesful start; however, could not keep it for the long term. Alexanders Empire was far more fragile than yours, do not worry, today world is Crusader oriented. I do not believe in western-eastern civilization. But most believes. I believe there is always one civilization and it can be anywhere in the world. They try to think a world which does not include, Chinese, Turks, Russians, Arabs, Persians, etc... We can not compare Arabic Empire and Hellenic Empire. Arabic Empire had better state organization. Alexanders Empire shattered after his death.

For the battle of Talas, celebrate it, it is your right, since you are one part of the alliance., but do not forget Karluks.

If we were not there result might be different.

People forget them. Always forget them.

Invading China is not a good thing, look at us, we invaded there, but they assimilated us. Yuan Dynasty.

However Timurlenk prepared an attack to china, to make them Muslim. I am sure he could do that but he prefered to fight against his brothers...

This is the conwuest of India:

Mughals you know them, we Call them Babur Empire:

http://www.mcah.columbia.edu/dbcourses/dehejia/large/mughal_stronge02_map_062102.jpg">

well when i said India i didnt mean all Indian contenet, the most eastern part was called india too Pakistan was called india

and the northeastern part of that map was the Borderes of the Chinese Empire and Arabs Crossed it

when they say Alexander reached india they mean the area which is now Pakistan

Arabs went more north than Alexander's Army

the Macedonian Empire map