How long would medieval Muslims last if they had conquest France, UK and Italy?

[Hamilcar]

Central Europe would have been too cold for the Arabs, being a desert people of the warm climates. Arabs develop flues at even 10 Degrees Celsius, let aside going through snowy European winters.
Iberia has a physical geography that looks like the MENA regions, it has warm-leaning mild climate. It is why Arabs and their Berber clients have been successful. Gaul or Brittany are other stories.

that's a ridiculous argument you have plenty of MENA and black people who live in northern europe and they're not dying lol

Soldiers especially iberians and north africans soldiers were totally able to conquer central europe (it's not as if there are no cold areas in NA and iberia)

[Damião de Góis]

They were cut from Baghdad not Damascus. The Ummyads took refuge in Spain from the Abbassids. The Abbasid actually committed a genocide against the Ummyads, this why the last Ummyad prince took refuge among the Berbers and then established the Ummyad Caliphate in Iberia. That said if the Arabs and their Muslim allies pushed further they would most likely have stayed longer, however the Arabs would suffer from the cold snowy European weather. When the Arabs attempted to invade the Balkans, the cold winter was the major reason for their defeat. It also depends if the Arabs had gained use of gun powder, which they did not until much later. People underestimate the weather. The reason Arab/Muslim Spain fell was due to internal rivalries which made them split into Taifes, in Arabic word meaning fragment.

Damascus was their capital.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_Caliphate

[TheMaestro]

Arabs are not the smartest bunch, so not too long.

[Damião de Góis]

that's a ridiculous argument you have plenty of MENA and black people who live in northern europe and they're not dying lol

Soldiers especially iberians and north africans soldiers were totally able to conquer central europe (it's not as if there are no cold areas in NA and iberia)

I think the weather was also harsher centuries ago. Islamic account of Gerald the Fearless's tactics, portuguese warrior, which they didn't view in good light:

The dog [Gerald] marched on rainy and very dark nights, with strong wind and snow, towards the cities and, having prepared his wooden instruments of scaling [walls] very large, so that they would surpass the wall of the city, he would apply those ladders to the side of the tower and catch the sentinel [by surprise] and say to him: "Shout, as is your custom," in order that the people would not hear him. When the scaling of the group had been completed on the highest wall in the city, they shouted in their language with an abominable screech, and they entered the city and fought whom they found and robbed them and captured all who were there in [the city, taking] captive and prisoner all who were there.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_the_Fearless

He operated mostly in Alentejo and spanish Extremadura and they mention snow so....

[kundur]

that's a ridiculous argument you have plenty of MENA and black people who live in northern europe and they're not dying lol

Soldiers especially iberians and north africans soldiers were totally able to conquer central europe (it's not as if there are no cold areas in NA and iberia)

We talk about 8th century CE. There were no drugstores or hospitals everywhere, around the corner, back then, nor people could take not-yet-invented medicines, like antibiotics or so, in their saddlebags upon setting off on long journeys. Survival was strongly depending on living in natural environment for every type of people back then.
Even today, many aspects related to that reality have not changed.
Ever wondered why the colder Canada attracts less immigrants than the US, in spite of being more attractive than the US in many more aspects.

[Hamilcar]

I think the weather was also harsher centuries ago. Islamic account of Gerald the Fearless's tactics, portuguese warrior, which they didn't view in good light:



He operated mostly in Alentejo and spanish Extremadura and they mention snow so....

if it was really the case it's only by a small margin nothing too big and I suppose today it can still snows in these areas. Actually there was a little Ice age between the XIVth and XIXth century (some says between the XVIIth and XIXth century) but it does not concerns our period here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age)

[Hamilcar]

We talk about 8th century CE. There were no drugstores or hospitals everywhere, around the corner, back then, nor people could take not-yet-invented medicines, like antibiotics or so, in their saddlebags upon setting off on long journeys. Survival was strongly depending on living in natural environment for every type of people back then.
Even today, many aspects related to that reality have not changed.
Ever wondered why the colder Canada attracts less immigrants than the US, in spite of being more attractive than the US in many more aspects.

again this doesn't make sense why would romans be able to conquer central europe but not iberians or north africans despite all living under the same climate ? (btw romans used moorish/numidian cavalry in germania and dacia and many north africans were posted at the hadrian's wall in northern england). Central europe is not antarctica it was totally possible for Iberians and NAs to conquer it

[Gota_type_]

1º Spain was never muslim. Spain was never conquered. Just the half south of Spain had 4-5 main cities that were RULED by berebers-jews or visigothic converts to islam. It is like when the Romans ruled England, they just ruled the power centres or the main 5-6 cities. Although the maps are "painted" as if the romans were all full in all England, in reality I doubt that the Romans were more than the 1% of the total population in England in those 500 years. The same for Spain with the Romans and with the muslims. Just a few capitals were muslim and for simplification processes (in order to teach History) they paint the maps as if almost all of Spain was muslim, when in fact 90% of the people in rural Spain never saw a moor in their lives. That is also why our genetics are 99-100% European (even less mix than in some parts of Scandinavia with the ANE) or even less mix than in other parts of southern Europe. Not because we were esplendid (we were in fact) but because it was a "rule" thing and not a "demographic" thing. That is also why the initial opposition was low.....the reason was that ALMOST NOBODY realized it (just after 100-200 years they will notice something but in those times it took 1 week to go from a city to other in 200 kms).

For Spain to have been muslim it would have been conquered all of it, when in fact, 50% of it was never conquered (in reality, the main cities of the half south and of the northEast and not the rural áreas). The half north ONLY had a few garrisons and what people see in the maps (when they reach to the north) are just RAIDS, not settlement of muslims living in the cities.

2º The total number of real northafricans or arabs in AlAndalus was like 50.000, like 4 times less than when the visigoths came (the visigoths also ruled Spain for 300 years and they were like 2-3% of the total population). So, all of this nonsense of thinking that because they see the map of Spain painted by retards as if it was all muslim, it is a stupidity. MOST people never saw muslims. It was a "city thing" and just in a few cities, and it was not even a conquest since most of these 4-5 main cities had no battles but just change of head of power (islam was just created 50 years before Al Andalus so people, especially visigoths, changed religión to islam because they will get more power). Many of the muslims were ex-visigoths or ex-romans that just changed religión to maintain their status, like the Banu-Qasi family in Zaragoza, which were the Casio family in Roman times. Changed names, adapted to new power, and that is all.

So, there are many MYTHS that falsify the reality of what happened. Just think about the Mongol "empire". The painted maps cover most of Eastern Europe, even most of Germany. Does this mean that there were mongols all over Eastern Europe??? No. Probably the % of mongols were like 0.5% of the total population of those áreas and just in a few cities, but for simplification processes, the maps are painted as if they conquered everything because if not, they will just have to paint 3-4 cities here, and 5 cities there, and 2 overthere, and that is all.

I don´t know why but with Spain there are many black legends (not only in the American conquest but also with the AlAndalus change of power -not really a conquest-).

[PaleoEuropean]

It wouldn't have been possible, they didn't have enough manpower which is why they never conquered central or northern Italy. The Muslim armies took a great deal of damage and had a great deal of infighting in their conquests.

[PaleoEuropean]

1º Spain was never muslim. Spain was never conquered. Just the half south of Spain had 4-5 main cities that were RULED by berebers-jews or visigothic converts to islam. It is like when the Romans ruled England, they just ruled the power centres or the main 5-6 cities. Although the maps are "painted" as if the romans were all full in all England, in reality I doubt that the Romans were more than the 1% of the total population in England in those 500 years. The same for Spain with the Romans and with the muslims. Just a few capitals were muslim and for simplification processes (in order to teach History) they paint the maps as if almost all of Spain was muslim, when in fact 90% of the people in rural Spain never saw a moor in their lives.

For Spain to have been muslim it would have been conquered all of it, when in fact, 50% of it was never conquered. The half north ONLY had a few garrisons and what people see in the maps (when they reach to the north) are just RAIDS, not settlement of muslims living in the cities.

2º The total number of real northafricans or arabs in AlAndalus was like 50.000, like 4 times less than when the visigoths came (the visigoths also ruled Spain for 300 years and they were like 2-3% of the total population). So, all of this nonsense of thinking that because they see the map of Spain painted by retards as if it was all muslim, it is a stupidity. MOST people never saw muslims. It was a "city thing" and just in a few cities, and it was not even a conquest since most of these 4-5 main cities had no battles but just change of head of power (islam was just created 50 years before Al Andalus so people, especially visigoths, changed religión to islam because they will get more power).

So, there are many MYTHS that falsify the reality of what happened. Just think about the Mongol "empire". The painted maps cover most of Eastern Europe, even most of Germany. Does this mean that there were mongols all over Eastern Europe??? No. Probably the % of mongols were like 0.5% of the total population of those áreas and just in a few cities, but for simplification processes, the maps are painted as if they conquered everything because if not, they will just have to paint 3-4 cities here, and 5 cities there, and 2 overthere, and that is all.

I don´t know why but with Spain there are many black legends (not only in the American conquest but also with the AlAndalus change of power -not really a conquest-).

Muslims also used a great deal of Spanish mercenaries in Spain including El Cid.