Does anyone disagree with that? The Rashidun army maintained a high level of discipline, strategic prowess and organization. The Visigoths conquered Byzantine territory of Spania along the southern coast of Iberia. The Sassanid empire had a population of roughly 40 to 45 million, even if by some catastrophic phenomenon the empire's population got reduced to about 35 million, which would make this war one of the deadliest in world history mind you, this is just me somewhat exaggerating to make logical deductions here, it should still have a population of a little greater than 35 million which would mean at the start of the Arab conquests the population should presumably be 15 million plus for the ERE and 35 million plus for Sassanids'.
After all, the Arab records on this are vague and limited. Apart from a few paragraphs, it is entirely written from a strictly Muslim point of view.
As for the size of the Caliphate, while I respect Rein Tagpeera's efforts, I believe the numbers he has cited are false, by mistake of course, for example Rein puts the Caliphate's size as 4.1 million km2 in 644, though if you look at the conquests of Umar, you will notice that this is blatantly wrong, the Arabian Peninsula's area is 3.2 million km2, then you have the fact that in Umar's time the area we call modern Syria and Palestine was completely conquered along with south-eastern anatolia, plus almost all of modern day Iran, disregarding the fact that the Caliphate didn't take the coastal region of Iran with the Caspian Sea, the area of Iran occupied by he Caliphate is still easily more than 1.5 million km2 in area, I did (an admittedly crude) area calculation of the area in Iran not occupied by the Caliphate (through google maps Area calculator) is just a tad shy of 135,000 km2, subtract that from Iran's 1.648 million km2 area and it is still above 1.5 million km2, add to that the other areas in Umar's reign, like Egypt, about a half of the area of Turkmenistan ( including the area occupied in modern Afghanistan) and the area west of Egypt and north of Anatolia, such as Armenia and Azerbaijan, who had recognized Umar's reign by the very end of his reign, it becomes blatantly obvious that Umar's Caliphate was bigger than 5.2 million km2 easily, that then begs the question, how big was the Caliphate at Usan's time, especially considering that he had conquered all of modern day Balochistan, which comprises 47 percent of Pakistan and a little of Sindh plus he moved extended Egypt, moved further westward, a little further than Tripoli and even conquered some of the Iberian coast.
Does anyone else oppose "خلافة الراشدين" ?? The Rashidun Caliphate lasted for 30 years from 632 CE to 661 CE. The empire was founded after Muhammad's death in 632 and lasted until 'Ali's death in 661. What changes can we agree on? If this is true, then why remove it?
I don't read mention of faith as nonsecular when it's carefully put into context, as this seems to. If it isn't, what is the real flag of the rashidun caliphate? I would also avoid words like "apostaphy" and "treason", as while that may be the Sunni Muslim view of certain events, it is not a neutral point of view. I don't know who "rated" this article for accuracy, but it makes it seem to the lay reader that the Rashidun Era after Mohammad was more of a monolithic state rather than just being an era of successive rule by four of Mohammad's closest comrades immediately after his death.
So, please, someone, ban him from this page. Since the conversation on this page appears to be very limited I'm going to go ahead and clip it down to what it should be: a description of purported invasions of the Iberian coastline before the Muslin conquest of the 8th century. I feel that this article is in a very, very sorry state. I'm also not sure that the box for "countries included in the empire" should be in the article. It was the largest empire in history by land area up until that point.By purchasing this item, you are transacting with Google Payments and agreeing to the Google Payments It has little to do with history, but much with ideology. It uses an entirely non-encyclopedic language.
I read in many sources that the black standard flag was used by the Rashidun Caliphate. Those areas came under Muslim control in the time of the Ummayad dynasty. The entire article, and many of the articles it links to, and very obviously written from a Muslim, Sunni perspective, with no sourcing and wiki-inappropriate wording. Discover country information: flag description, emoji codes, anthem, data & infographic. What is 'true faith' in this context? I'm hoping for some discussion on what is a very important but sadly abused article.please explain the meaning of the word "Rashidun" to non-arabic speakers! This article contains numerous grammar errors and fragmented sentences abound. that wish to 'educate' us on the history of their faith, but that are unable to think uncritically or unbiased about it. Does anyone disagree with that? Alright, then. The empire was founded after Muhammad's death in …
After the Abbasid Caliphate had been overthrown in the Sixth Fitna in 1599, the Ulema (or Council of Senior Scholars) took full control over both the nation and the religion of Islam. So this should be kept in mind when contemplating the Rashidun Era. thsts a historical fact and its not about writing any thing from a muslim point of view or any thing, obviously when u write an exclusive muslim history u ought to write it as it is mentioned in muslim sources, so far there is no western historian who have worked on rashidun caliphate, therefore only muslim sources can be considered, and its not bias-ism, is it ? At its height, the Caliphate controlled a vast empire from the Arabian Peninsula and the Levant, to the Caucasus in the north, North Africa from Egypt to present day Tunisia in the west, and the Iranian plateau to Central Asia in the east. Written in this way, in very first line it seems that the Rashidoon used to call this way their Empire. In its time, the Rashidun army was a powerful and very effective force.
Do you think the Visigoths would have ignored such a threatening action? Can we all agree to remove such sections if they do not add to the I would also like to neutralize the language of the article. Nor have any archaeological remains been found of such sites. The capital was later moved to Kufa. so I'm going to clip it. Copy & Paste for any device.
I understand that the point is the tribes' conversion for mercenary purposes. I think "Rashidun forces" is better than "the Muslims", for example. There is no indication where the information comes from, and 'holy books' do not really count. Just a couple of things that caught my eye even if I don't have Editor experience.
It also lacks references for many of the claims it makes, and never explores contrary views and records (for example well documented cases of brutality in the imperial conquest).