You can be a city, a lesser tribe in Arabia, a minor noble family in Persia with only modest estates, or a Roman Dux with limited command. Whatever you can think of that fits.

We shouldn't forget Abyssania either.

Gotta be some Ethiopia at some point. Gotta make Sahle proud.

I'll do some research and mull stuff over in my head before submitting something. The Taghlib seem rather interesting, I may make a lesser clan within it and go at it.

I want to be a Hebrew philosopher in Dioseses Orientis who finds himself dealing with two different worlds, the thousand year lasting, yet perpetually declining romans and the rising Arabs and their strange faith. Also he may be attempting to continue the legacy of greek philosphy in a increasingly theocratic world.

Is that possible? Given no province of Judah I am not so sure how things are doing in the holy land.

Like other players I may not actually make any app until I finish my history homework so I pass the test village has in store.

Go for it. Might want to read up on early Rabbinic Judaism and its relationship with Jewish philisophy. There would also be the competing importance of Jewish scholarship in Iraq vs in the Roman Empire.

Leader Name: Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman

Faction Name: The Banu Abs Tribe

Map Province: Located very close to the tri-border between the provinces of Al-Azd, Banu Taghlib and Banu Hanifa, centred around the town of Ha'il

History/Bio: The Banu Abs are an ancient Arab tribe and pride themselves on their numbers and illustrious history, as well as the many great poets their tribe has come out with over the eras - of them being the famed Antarah bin Shaddad al-Absi.
The tribe had long been told by its elders and chiefs that there will come a day when a man to unite the Arabs would rise, and that when he came they must willingly follow him. And so the Prophet has come and gone, and the Banu Abs have been of his most willing followers and most ardent supporters. It is now their duty to carry his message of light to the world, with words to those who will listen and with the sword to those who are obstinate and stubborn fools.

Known for their numbers, courage and their warrior ways, the Banu Abs were vital during the Ridda Wars against the treacherous apostates and false prophets, and now they are among the most willing followers of the Caliph. Their warriors thirst to be sent forth against the disbelievers and forge an Islamic Empire to topple the decadent and misguided ones of old.

Hudhayfa ibn al-Yaman was not born the son of a chief of the Banu Abs, but with the death of the old and the converging of the tribal council, he has been chosen as a most worthy chief indeed. He is well known to have been among the closest of the Companions to the Prophet, praised by the Messenger for his intelligence, quick wit and ability to keep a secret against the greatest pressures - it is Hudhayfa, after all, who is The Keeper of the Prophet's Secret. Hudhayfa was entrusted by the Prophet with the names of all the hypocrites and commanded to keep an eye on them, but to keep their names a secret from anyone. These most evil ones, who pretend at faith while their hearts disbelieve, still roam around, and people often look for whether Hudhayfa is present at a person's funeral or not to know whether to conduct the funeral prayer or not - for Hudhayfa would never be present at the funeral prayer of a hypocrite.

Hudhayfa participated in all of the Prophet's battles bar the Battle of Badr, and his father was killed in error by the Muslims during the Battle of Uhud, though Hudhayfa was quick to forgive and donated the blood-money to the Muslims as sadaqah - charity. During the Battle of the Ditch, too, Hudhayfa was present, having remained when the majority of people, foremost among them the hypocrites, had abandoned the battle. And he was the one sent by the Prophet to find out what the enemy forces of the Quraysh were up to, only to discover that they were retreating, and it was he who brought this joyous news.

Now the Prophet is gone and the Muslims have been left the weighty burden of continuing his message of light and guidance to mankind. Hudhayfa would rather never have existed than betray this most hefty trust!

Looks good to me.

Sorry for the disappearance guys, wi-fi has been shaky in these parts. I'm writing up the intro post so please do not crush the Sassanians yet. XD

@Dinh AaronMk Do I need to wait on Village to approve as well? Before I can post it in the characters thread

@Kho
I'll alert him.

Works for me.

Will get a post up soonish. Great to be part of this, really hope it becomes something ;)

What are everyone's thoughts? Would the Muslims have reached their levels of success if Rome still existed in east and west?

Will get a post up soonish. Great to be part of this, really hope it becomes something ;)

What are everyone's thoughts? Would the Muslims have reached their levels of success if Rome still existed in east and west?

A Rome that holds the West that just means more borders to defend. The 30 year war against the Persians probably exhausted the Empire (or at least the Eastern portions) as much as it did IOTL, but unlike the Byzantines IOTL Rome has much more territory to defend. It's very plausible that while Rome was focused in fighting off the Sassanians, the Franks/Vandals/Visigoths and etc seized the opportunity to increase the pressure on the Western half of the Empire. Which would pretty much negate the advantage provided by having access to more lands and manpower. Of course, down the road a larger Rome might be able to muster enough strength to check the Islamic advance somewhere along OTL lines (maybe hold on to bits of Africa). But even then they would always have to be on the lookout for their other neighbors looking to profit on the weakness of Rome.

Taking the IC situation as an example we have: A Roman army, led by the Emperor's third son, crushed by the Caliphate. Sure, Emperor Marcellus could in theory muster another army and march East to stop the Muslim advance and restore the status quo. But if he were to do that the western half of the Empire would be left vulnerable. After all the reason why Priscus was sent to Syria is because Marcellus is busy fighting the Lombards. So from my point of view the situation in the Roman East isn't good, they have the power to beat back the Arabs but they have too many enemies to focus their effort on just one of them. And until they can do so (maybe if Marcellus defeats the Lombards decisively) the Muslims will have much more freedom in the Roman East.

I didn't see that the OOC was up until now for some reason!

I'M HERE

I didn't see that the OOC was up until now for some reason!

I'M HERE

Nice, was really disappointed when I noticed you weren't here (since I read through the interest check and you seemed really excited xP plus, having Persian characters makes it so much more interesting ;P)

@Drunken Conquistador

Hmm, one of the fortes of the Roman Empire was its phenomenal manpower. While it certainly was not the kind of Empire that just threw human waves at its enemies, it was certainly capable of doing so. As early as the Punic Wars, with Hannibal marauding through the Italian country-side, Rome could afford to lose 50,000 men in one battle (Battle of Cannae, with estimates as high 70-80,000), then punish those who lost against Hannibal by decimating them, and then raise another damn army to crush Hannibal.

Given that was 800 years ago in our current IC time, Roman manpower was something amazing even without the Western half - Byzantium was capable of calling up an army of 100,000-400,000 men at the Battle of Yarmouk (at a time when the Rashidun manpower was 70,000 at the max.)
If we add the manpower pools of North Africa and the Western half of the empire, then the Empire at this point in time is a manpower behemoth. Meanwhile, the Rashidun had a manpower pool of some 41,000 in 634 AD.
While I understand that Rome had issues in the West, it is likely that it's manpower is great enough in West to maintain itself there, thus meaning that it was capable to fend off the Persians in the East simultaneously.

Thus looking at it from a completely military-power perspective, Rome seems to be an undeniable powerhouse. Of course, whether increased Roman manpower in this alt-timeline would be able to make up for the fact that the Rashidun were extremely skilled warriors and were adept at taking advantage of Roman weaknesses (that being the lack of mobile, light cavalry) and were also constantly defeating armies far superior to them in numbers anyway, remains to be seen I guess.

We also need to take into account what having control of the West really means: pretty much undisputed control over the Mediterranean. Being able to move armies swiftly by sea was vital to Roman supremacy, and I'd assume that if they've managed to hold onto the West, that Rome has managed to develop a rather formidable navy and is capable of landing armies wherever there is a threat in a reduced amount of time. There is also internal trade, no doubt a safer Mediterranean means increased internal trade, more revenues etc.
As a whole, whether Rome is embattled from all sides or not, there is no denying that it is in a a far better position than the Byzantines could ever be, militarily and economically.

While I'm very interested in Ancient History, I admit that my knowledge on it is not as great as later times (I much prefer my Ottomans, Safavids, Mamelukes, Englandss and HREs and France(s), even Spain and some Murica), so feel free to correct me if I've said something stupid xP

I think Vilage stated earlier on the "other" interest check that floundered that in the military history of Rome, Roman focus shifted based on the enemies it was fighting. So it could be reasonable to assume that over a more prolonged survival the Empire of Rome chould likely phase certain aspects in and out. And Rome currently is likely used to dealing with more heavily-armored forces such as the equally immobile Sassanids and/or even the Germanic tribes (although I don't know much about Frankish and Germanic warfare tbh). So their army would be structured to deal with those threats in particular. Any restructuring too could imply that they'd leave themselves vulnerable to any one of their own enemies if they chose to adapt to lighter-forces.

It might also be argued that the Rashidun can more readily shift than Rome or Persia since they are young. All they'd need is the economic capability to do so. Muslim armies at this time were largely all infantry (it wasn't until the Levant and Mesopotamia were in Rashidun hands that the army could shift from 20% cavalry to 50-50). The Rashidun too could also count on using groups native in the Empire, but those who don't necessarily hinge to Rome being potentially loyal assets. Groups native to Arabia even - the Taghlib mostly - were Christian but didn't hinge on the whims of Byzantium, and presumably they wouldn't be loyal to Rome even if they're still Christian so could still be an indirect asset to the Rashidun or be an immense group to move into occupied territory to bend the demographics to Rashidun favor and shore up Latinized regions with simply more Bedouins.

General Arab activity too even in their conquest could as well contribute to them shoring up well, even if they don't go beyond the Levant. They may not have absolute loyalty, but they'd recognize the necessity of local populations to aid in the administration and we can propose that they could Romanize themselves pretty fast, provided they get the access to resources.

And then there is of course the ever lingering specter of some pissy general thinking he can do the Emperor one better and demanding the title through force of arms. The lineage of Roman Emperors isn't much of a unbroken line of dynastic rule.

But all-in-all this might lead into the world of excess OOC banter which can be poisonous. I don't like to see these implications and such explored in OOC but would rather the creative and mental effort but towards writing IC posts. If we hack it all out here outside the story then we'll have no energy or wonder yet to write it ourselves.

And on that note, I'll get to writing that IC post!

But just a comment on Arab Romanization. While the Arabs did indeed 'inherit' the intellectual legacy of the Romans and Greeks, they very quickly developed a culture of their own, and rather than Romanizing themselves, it was those they conquered who became Arabized - one need only look at the Arab world today to see that. I think Islam and the position of the Arabic language in it ensured that Arabic - and through it Arab culture - did not simply give way.
Conquered people Arabizing was also largely due to the fact that the Arabs actually treated their subjects much better than the Byzantines or Persians ever did, and the taxes they levied (even with non-Muslims paying the Jizya) were less strenuous than those of the Byzantines and Persians, meaning that many people embraced both Islam and Arabic and became Arabized within a generation or two. It's rather shocking just how fast the Muslims managed to assimilate the lands they conquered, and with that they managed to very quickly gain Muslim administrators and bureaucrats, helping the Rashidun build some rather efficient bureaucratic systems in the various regions they had under their control.
Kinda like of a more advanced version of how Romans managed to quickly assimilate those they conquered with promises of citizenship and whatnot, thus vastly increasing their manpower to those famed reserves.

Of course, it would be interesting to see Arabs Romanize, as unlikely as that would be.

Hey Kho man, could you de-red the dialogue? Using color for dialogue is hella distracting. Its better to use traditional formatting.

@Vilageidiotx Will do. Are italics-bold fine?

@Kho

Generall the preferred between us is standard dialog format. But given that lines can't be indented on forums like this then the two of us have developed a habit of double-line-breaking between lines of dialog in the same way we break paragraphs. Otherwise we like to see practice in what you'd see in the traditional novel format.