Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


View Poll Results: What is the most "significant" Muslim victory ?
Yarmuk 13 24.53%
Qadissiyah 3 5.66%
Nehawand 1 1.89%
Conquest of Constantinople 19 35.85%
Mohacs 1526 0 0%
Chaldiran 0 0%
Hattin 2 3.77%
Ain Jalut 4 7.55%
Talas 0 0%
Manizkert 8 15.09%
Nicopolis 0 0%
Other 3 5.66%
Voters: 53. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 18th, 2012, 03:17 PM   #11

bartieboy's Avatar
.
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: The Netherlands
Posts: 6,565
Blog Entries: 5

Manzikert crippled the force that was keeping the Muslims at bay for hundreds of years so that has my choice.
bartieboy is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 18th, 2012, 03:53 PM   #12

Sam-Nary's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: At present SD, USA
Posts: 3,143

Manzikert is the most significant.

The battle would cripple the Byzantines and would lead to the Crusades in response and ultimately the fall of the Byzantine Empire and the rise of the Ottoman Turks in its place. Had this battle not happened, or had it been a Byzantine victory, European and Middle Eastern history would have been drastically different.
Sam-Nary is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 04:28 PM   #13

Kirialax's Avatar
Megas Domestikos
 
Joined: Dec 2009
From: Canada
Posts: 3,633
Blog Entries: 3

al-Qadissiya does not receive nearly as much attention as Yarmouk, but I believe that it deserves more. After Yarmouk the remaining Byzantine forces retreated north of the Taurus Mountains and continued to make life difficult for the Muslims to the point where they had to re-write their eschatology. al-Qadissiya, on the other hand, was the end for the Sassanid state, which never managed to get back on its feet. Although similarly weak from its long and disasterous war with Rome, seventh-century Persia had shown itself to have possessed a centralized and very dangerous military machine. Its rapid defeat after this battle opened the road east Islam, where its influence can be felt today.
Kirialax is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 05:38 PM   #14

Shaheen's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2011
From: UK
Posts: 2,027

Good point Kirialax, thats why I said I wish you could have voted for more than 1 option. Qaddisiya, Yarmouk, Hattin and Manzikert would have been my choices.

The actual conquest of Istanbul by itself was not very significant IMO. The Byzantine empire had already crumbled and the Ottomans were the major power of the region. Symbolically it was very significant indeed but the actual siege by itself is not the most "significant victory".
Shaheen is online now  
Old November 18th, 2012, 06:25 PM   #15

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 2,580

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaheen View Post

The actual conquest of Istanbul by itself was not very significant IMO. The Byzantine empire had already crumbled and the Ottomans were the major power of the region. Symbolically it was very significant indeed but the actual siege by itself is not the most "significant victory".

Yes, as AlpinLuke pointed, Istambul was a point of arrival.
Frank81 is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 06:28 PM   #16

Kirialax's Avatar
Megas Domestikos
 
Joined: Dec 2009
From: Canada
Posts: 3,633
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaheen View Post
The actual conquest of Istanbul by itself was not very significant IMO. The Byzantine empire had already crumbled and the Ottomans were the major power of the region. Symbolically it was very significant indeed but the actual siege by itself is not the most "significant victory".
I agree. I also wouldn't choose Manzikert, since the battle itself was hardly decisive; it was the civil wars afterwards that did. By my own criteria, though, I disqualify all but Yarmouk, al-Qadissiya, Nahavand, and Talas, since there was no recognizable monolithic Islam at that the time of the other battles, and even by the time of Talas large cracks had begun to appear.
Kirialax is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 06:31 PM   #17

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 2,580

But, what's your criteria? From my point of view, if there is an Islamic army on the one side (whatever the Islamic branch) and a non Islamic on the other, the battle qualify.
Frank81 is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 06:43 PM   #18

Kirialax's Avatar
Megas Domestikos
 
Joined: Dec 2009
From: Canada
Posts: 3,633
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank81 View Post
But, what's your criteria? From my point of view, if there is an Islamic army on the one side (whatever the Islamic branch) and a non Islamic on the other, the battle qualify.
My criteria is that there is some sort of unified Islamic force directed against a non-Islamic force. This would also disqualify the fitna wars, unfortunately, since they include some of the most important Islamic victories/defeats as well. I have problems considering more limited campaigns by smaller powers that happen to be Islamic as "Islam against whatever" because it unnecessarily magnifies the scope of the conflict. It's simply wrong to say that Manzikert was a case of Islam against Byzantium, because more accurately it's a case of Byzantium vs. Byzantium and the Seljuks vs. the Fatimids. In the same way we cannot say that the Ottoman attack on Vienna was a case of Islam vs. Christianity/Europe/whatever because it's really a matter of the Ottomans fighting the Habsburgs. Likewise, when the Zenghids of Mosul fought the crusaders in the 1130s this was a case of one small dynasty fighting another small principality in the Levant. To say otherwise is to misrepresent that piece of history. So to answer your question, essentially when the Abbasid Caliphate began to disintegrate is when I cut off the chronology.
Kirialax is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 11:39 PM   #19

Essa's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Bahrain
Posts: 1,791

Making it a single choice here made it tricky for me, but its a good exercise anyway.....

My criteria was this:

- Consequences of the battle (either short-term or long-term). Including whether the effect of the battle is significant on 'religious' point of view in addition to 'political'.
- The "What-if", in case we reverse the outcome of a battle.
- Scale of the engagement.

After this I've shortlisted: Yarmuk, Qaddissiya, Ain Jalut, and Hattin

The way I see it....

Yarmuk, Qaddissiya and Ain Jalut ranked higher than Hattin in terms of consequences and the What-if....This is because Yarmuk opened the door for the whole area until Spain and completely knocked Byzatines out of the Levant. Qaddissiya was a key battle that eased the Arab situation at Nehawand and paved the way for Muslim conquest up to China.

I ranked Ain Jalut slightly lesser than Yarmuk and Qaddissiya...Although I agree with Temujin that a Mongol victory would mean an absolute no opposition in the Middle East. I've considered that "Cultural" factors of mixing with rich civilizations of the Middle East will drive the Mongols back and/or cause some fragmentation, besides the Mongols are far from their bases.

Based on scale......Yarmuk and Qaddissiya were larger engagements compared to Ain Jalut and Hattin....

That left me with Yarmuk and Qaddissiya.....and I favored Yarmuk because of:

- Yarmuk completely ended Byzantine presence while it took another 2 major battles in Jalula and Nehawand to completely wipe the Sassanids.
- Yarmuk was a larger military engagement than Qaddissiya.
- Yarmuk also was mentioned in the Quran, as a prophecy that Muslims will gain victory in "Surat Al-Roum" (i.e. Chapter of the Romans).
- Yarmuk was a necessary victory because the Levant held hight importance to the Muslims due to its location, religious sense (as it included one of the 3 holy sites for Muslims), and cultural reasons (as its people and heritage were assimilated to Arabia more than anywhere else).

Conquest of Constantinople was a great Muslim victory, its something I really admire....I even watched the movie "Fetih 1453" 4 times !! .....The reason its not my top choice is its low "What-if". Suppose Ottomans had to break and return then it wouldn't be the end of the world for them, they were already surrounding the city and Byzantines were in a weaker state than prior periods of Muslim engagements. Sultan Mehmet Fatih was very young himself and highly motivated, and could've returned to besiege the city.
Essa is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 02:02 AM   #20

Mohammed the Persian's Avatar
Persicus Maximus
 
Joined: Sep 2010
From: Bahrain
Posts: 9,972
Blog Entries: 15

Yarmuk definitely. Opened up the Islamic word to the Shams region, incorporating multiple ethnicities and acquiring an agricultural hub as well as providing sea access to the Mediterranean.
Mohammed the Persian is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
islamic, significant, victory


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is really significant about the A-bomb willrocks10 History Help 6 October 17th, 2011 04:02 PM
Most Significant Archaeological Find okamido Ancient History 12 June 21st, 2011 11:45 AM
Who was Li Naomasa and why is he historically significant? lokariototal Asian History 13 March 6th, 2011 07:01 PM
Least-known significant battles Hoplite General History 41 July 29th, 2009 11:52 AM
The most significant century in history Commander General History 3 July 13th, 2007 10:18 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.