I trust Islamic history
I trust the records I saw when I went to Damascus. My ancestor was an Arab who had to escape the Mameluke conquest of Yemen. He fled to the African coast in the 1440s (translating to the Gregorian calendar). So 600 years ago-ish. The Mamelukes being slave-kings never made sense to me, but they pulled a January 6 on the Ayyubids (Saladin's dynasty), and succeeded. These were bumpkins and yokels brought from Turkestan and Circassia..."white ppl" that never bothered learning Arabic, but outwardly converted to Islam.
They ruled much of the Muslim realm up until Napoleon showed up in Egypt in 1799 and whooped them with his cannons.
Everything after in the Middle East...is as murky to me as western history. The Al-Saud popped up around this time, from fucking nowhere for eg...Then India (The Mughals actually, where the English term "Mogul" came from) succumbing not even to an actual "army" but like the corporate militia of a fawkin spice exporting outfit???? (British East India Company). Make that make sense to me, please. So basically, Mall security conquers a fawkin sub-continet? Riiiight.
Oh, prior to that, all the way on the other side of the "globe"... a guy named Christophe Columbus did some things. Did he?
Columbian exchange and how wimpy the Aztecs were facing 3-4 Conquistadors make ZERO logical sense (unless you need to establish a premise for white supremacy). Make that make sense.
Napoleon's rise and the Napoleonic era makes ZERO sense...Guilotines sound like a myth/scare-y booboo stuff. "We came up with this humane device and beheaded all the sassy french kangs and sassy clergy"...make it make sense, please.
Why does George Washington look like a dopplegagger of King George III?
Why did Czar Nicholas II look like a body double for King George V?
and because the Spaniards were able to match Aztec numbers with rival tribes and native allies