They could and they perceived that doing this was their duty as pious Muslims.
Historically, there was the "Right to Conquest" which was a pervasive idea in political thought. The idea was that it was natural for any country or state to grow and control more territory as it grew stronger. This allowed weaker states to dissolve in place of ones that were better run, a bureaucratic version of "survival of the fittest". The "Right to Conquest" prevailed as the dominant theory of nation-building until the mid-1800s when people started bringing up the concept of self-sovereignty and ethnic nationalism, which held the idea that people should govern themselves even if they are not the most powerful in the world. This view of state sovereignty has become dominant today and the Right to Conquest is seen as incorrect.
Since the Caliphates existed well within the Right to Conquest Period, the Caliphs did not have to assert a reason to conquer neighboring territories in Southwest Asia. It was their natural prerogative.
The Muslim armies conquered Persia, Syria, Damascus, Jerusalem, and Egypt in the 7th century primarily due to a combination of military strength, political instability in the regions, and the appeal of Islamic teachings. The rapid expansion was facilitated by the weakened state of the Byzantine and Sassanian empires, which were preoccupied with internal conflicts and had exhausted their resources. Additionally, the promise of social justice, economic opportunities, and religious freedom under Islamic rule attracted many local populations to accept or support the conquerors. This expansion was part of a broader campaign to spread Islam and unify the Arabian Peninsula and beyond under a single political and religious authority.
Because they let people they conquered keep their religion.
France
The Muslims didn't conquer lands peacefully, they had armies and fought like any other conqueror. Many of the lands they conquered were weak from years of war, most historians agree that the Sassanid Persian and Byzantine Roman empires were militarily and economically exhausted from decades of fighting one another.,
They could and they perceived that doing this was their duty as pious Muslims.Historically, there was the "Right to Conquest" which was a pervasive idea in political thought. The idea was that it was natural for any country or state to grow and control more territory as it grew stronger. This allowed weaker states to dissolve in place of ones that were better run, a bureaucratic version of "survival of the fittest". The "Right to Conquest" prevailed as the dominant theory of nation-building until the mid-1800s when people started bringing up the concept of self-sovereignty and ethnic nationalism, which held the idea that people should govern themselves even if they are not the most powerful in the world. This view of state sovereignty has become dominant today and the Right to Conquest is seen as incorrect.Since the Caliphates existed well within the Right to Conquest Period, the Caliphs did not have to assert a reason to conquer neighboring territories in Southwest Asia. It was their natural prerogative.
Saladin
711 - 712 AD
Yes, in 1492 the Spanish armies led by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella conquered Granada, marking the end of Muslim rule in the Iberian Peninsula and completing the Reconquista.
----------------------- Jerusalem was holy to Muslims, as well as to Christians and Jews, so to give up Jerusalem would have meant denying Muslims the opportunity to perform pilgrimages to Jerusalem, since Christian rulers never accepted Muslim rights. Contrary to modern opinion, the Arabic empire was not at that time entirely Muslim, but included a very substantial proportion of Christians and Jews, although the ruling classes were Muslim. Generally, Christians and Jews were permitted to visit Jerusalem without hindrance. To have given up Jerusalem would also have provided the crusading armies a well fortified base from which to attack the Arab empire. Even the cities that remained in Christian hands provided bases for attacks until the Christian armies were finally driven from the Holy Land, but Jerusalem was more easily defended, and would extend the reach of the Christian armies right into the heart of the Arabian empire.
Alexander the great was able to conquer part of Persia, Macedonia, and Asia Minor among other lands. He had an ingenious means of military command that always surprised even the largest armies of that generation.
Alexander the great was able to conquer part of Persia, Macedonia, and Asia Minor among other lands. He had an ingenious means of military command that always surprised even the largest armies of that generation.
No.
The armies were known as the Arab Nomads, Jihadis, or Mujahedin.
Goths, Huns, Sassanid Persia, Vandals, Ostrogoths, Avars, Slavs, Muslim Caliphate, Bulgaria, Rus', Normans, Crusader states, Seljuks, Anatolian beyliks, Ottomans and others
The Sahara Desert stood as a powerful border for Muslim armies for several centuries.
1279
1279