There were many kingdoms and empires across coastal Arabia.
None of them encompassed the whole peninsula because the deserts in the central Hejaz as a natural barrier.
Yemen has been a civilization for 3000 years, and it did indeed hold strategic value for its location on the Indo-Pacific.
There were Christian and israeli kingdoms in Yemen. The oldest surviving form of Hebrew is from Yemen.
South Semitic language was introduced to Abyssinia from Yemen. The Queen of Sheba was from Yemen.
That may be but if you were the Persians, Greeks, or Byzantines in order to even exert control as a land empire over those coastal cities you basically had the entire arabian peninsula of desert to traverse.
this is image of modern population density
premodern times it would be even worse
basically everything outside like 7-8 cities would be ungovernable half migrating tribes
all the maps of impressive empires should come with population density maps alongside
so people see just how much territory was held, and how much was actually "held"
The eastern coastline of Arabia was part of the Persian Empire for much of Antiquity.
Northwest Arabia and Southern Jordan was the Nabataean Kingdom. It was conquered by the Romans.
The deserts of the Northern Hejaz (Northern Arabia) were ruled by nomadic Arab Christian tribes, and these peoples were allied with the Roman Empire. They made up the Byzantine foederati.
Southwest and Southcentral Arabia were always independent from empires from mainland Asia or the Mediterranean. Their political links were more with East Africa. There have been Southwest Arabian empires who conquered Abyssinia, and later Aksumites who conquered Yemen for a period.
>The region held 0 value
yeah just that tons of trade passed through there and lets ignore multiple roman attempts to take it and persian involvement as well
It was a desert and the people were viewed as tribal and backwards and thus nothing to be gained from exerting control over the land.
That was until the age of exploration when maritime control couldn't be left to chance. I believe the Ottomans took Arabia to monopolize trade particularly around the Arabian sea through control of ports.
this is image of modern population density
premodern times it would be even worse
basically everything outside like 7-8 cities would be ungovernable half migrating tribes
all the maps of impressive empires should come with population density maps alongside
so people see just how much territory was held, and how much was actually "held"
>Why did no one conquer some barren desert
Idk its a mystery
There were many kingdoms and empires across coastal Arabia.
None of them encompassed the whole peninsula because the deserts in the central Hejaz as a natural barrier.
strength, the rest were too weak
The region held 0 value, why would any empire waste hundreds of its resources and manpower for a spit of sand?
Alexander saw the region's potential but died from AIDs before his plan could manifest
He was poison really.
Yemen has been a civilization for 3000 years, and it did indeed hold strategic value for its location on the Indo-Pacific.
There were Christian and israeli kingdoms in Yemen. The oldest surviving form of Hebrew is from Yemen.
South Semitic language was introduced to Abyssinia from Yemen. The Queen of Sheba was from Yemen.
That may be but if you were the Persians, Greeks, or Byzantines in order to even exert control as a land empire over those coastal cities you basically had the entire arabian peninsula of desert to traverse.
The eastern coastline of Arabia was part of the Persian Empire for much of Antiquity.
Northwest Arabia and Southern Jordan was the Nabataean Kingdom. It was conquered by the Romans.
The deserts of the Northern Hejaz (Northern Arabia) were ruled by nomadic Arab Christian tribes, and these peoples were allied with the Roman Empire. They made up the Byzantine foederati.
Southwest and Southcentral Arabia were always independent from empires from mainland Asia or the Mediterranean. Their political links were more with East Africa. There have been Southwest Arabian empires who conquered Abyssinia, and later Aksumites who conquered Yemen for a period.
>The region held 0 value
yeah just that tons of trade passed through there and lets ignore multiple roman attempts to take it and persian involvement as well
It was a desert and the people were viewed as tribal and backwards and thus nothing to be gained from exerting control over the land.
That was until the age of exploration when maritime control couldn't be left to chance. I believe the Ottomans took Arabia to monopolize trade particularly around the Arabian sea through control of ports.
this is image of modern population density
premodern times it would be even worse
basically everything outside like 7-8 cities would be ungovernable half migrating tribes
all the maps of impressive empires should come with population density maps alongside
so people see just how much territory was held, and how much was actually "held"
But Aryanbros, I thought the Arabs migrated in the millions to Egypt and genocided the population?
There were several attempts by the greeks, romans, persians and Auxumites but the juice was never worth the squeeze.
cause zzZZzaudi arabia is so boring
All parts of Arabia worth conquering were conquered
it was mostly empty and had trade relations with the romans until annexed
They did.
Get your Bulgarian ass leave
Always spamming the same incoherent shit in every thread regardless of the specific topic.