A Greater Dar al-Islam and an Ever Shrinking Dar al-Harb / a resurgent Islam TL
- Thread starter Teutonic_Thrash
- Start date
-
- Tags
- europe islam medieval middle east
Unironically i thought other place not being ireland(who is still catholic and outside caliphate reach) that coincidencially is north of Al-Andalus...ummmm
Yes but Nivek was hinting at the Alids conquering Asturias and transforming into a Shia refuge.
Both got my ideas right, very nice, both have reason why would be more receptive Shia ideas, but that come much later
Ireland's far too out of the picture and disconnected to the Islamic world to become a Shia refuge. Though on a related note Irish monks in mainland Europe have certainly been enslaved by this point in the timeline, and are likely in high demand for scribal work.
I'm not convinced Asturias would be a good pick. In OTL a lot of their political legitimacy/ideology came from them being a bastion of Christianity against the Islamic conquest of the rest of Spain; ITTL that theme would arguably be stronger.
Speaking of the Irish, it would be p cool for the Andalusians to establish themselves in the (relatively) empty Iceland.
Not only monks, i think andalusi and faranj would like the idea of 'celtic beauties' much like otl circassian ones...so could happen women become wives of wali and other muslim nobles.
That was just ideas, dunno if could happen, and that is an after effect when the mountain kingdom is gone or maybe in the meantime but was just one of my dart ideas.
"And that's how these arabs created the most irish of all the irish communities."
The same, i'm trying to get it, as an Islamic Ireland would hate the guts of the nazarean anglos even more?
Islam in the land of Midnight Sun and Midday Night would be unique.
Iceland is just outside of the Arctic Circle, so it doesn't get affected by that particular phenomenon. Either way, I think Muslims from Western Europe would be really disappointed if they attempted to colonise Iceland.
Poor, cold, rocky, isolated and volcanic, everything you wouldn't want for your colonization process.
But good for meditation. Trust me, I was there. Beautiful country.
PART 1 - Regionalisation of the Abbasid Caliphate
Regionalisation of the Abbasid Caliphate
The appointment of Abdallah ibn al-Hakim al-Abbasi (son of the caliph) as wali of Khurasan caused quite a stir among some of the abna al-dawla. It was after all their homeland, adopted or otherwise, and since the Abbasid Revolution its governorship had solely been in the hands of the abna al-dawla. Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid al-Ta’i, who succeeded his brother Asram as wali of al-Sham, was the most vocal of the governors opposed to Caliph al-Hakim’s deposition of Ali ibn Isa ibn Mahan. Joining him was wali Khuzayma ibn Khazim ibn Khuzayma al-Tamimi of Misr and wali Abdallah ibn Malik ibn al-Haytham al-Khuza’i of Ifriqiya. The three governors secretly agreed to cooperate in preventing the khalifah or his bureaucracy from overstepping their bounds within their provinces. Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid also attempted to convince wali Abbas ibn al-Musayyab ibn Zuhayr al-Dabbi of Arminiya to join their pact, but the precarious position of Arminiya’s frontier with both the Romans and the Khazars swayed the governor to stay loyal to Caliph al-Hakim.
The governors of the provinces of Iran were more loyal to the caliph and his first heir, if only due to their proximity and the increasing number of Iranian dihqans with their retinues of warriors. The wali of Fararud, Yahya ibn Mu’adh ibn Muslim, wholeheartedly took to integrating the native Sogdians, Muslim and dhimmi, into his administration and army. The old Sogdian trading networks east into China and north into the steppe ensured a large and steady stream of income into the province, a large portion of which was dutifully forwarded to Baghdad. Abu Ishaq Muhammad ibn Harun al-Abbasi, the new wali of Azarbayjan, was in much the same predicament as his counterpart in Arminiya in that his frontier with the Khazars precluded any potentially dangerous politicking against his relatives. Besides, the Khazar frontier afforded him the perfect opportunity to expand his private army of Turkish ghilman (slave-soldiers) who were relentlessly trained in their ancestral manner of combat.
The relation of the provinces in Europe to the centre of the caliphate was more complicated however. Ruma al-Gharbiya, under the direction of its wali Harthama ibn A’yan, was increasingly incorporated into the Mediterranean economy that was so crucial to the Abbasid Caliphate. The Islamic nobility of the province though were, at best, indifferent to the authority of the Abbasids; most of the Arabs and Berbers, and even the Lombards in a way, were of Andalusian heritage. The small number of abna al-dawla soldiers who arrived with Harthama ibn A’yan after the Fourth Fitna would not be enough to maintain control if a pro-Fihrid rebellion occurred. The Banu Fihr for that matter had long given up on loyalty towards the Abbasids, but wali Ilyas ibn Muhammad was a pragmatist above all else; he would continue to pay lip service to the Abbasids just as long as it was in his province’s interest to do so. The new wilaya of al-Faranj was the least predictable of the three European provinces. Muhammad Qarulamun ibn Baban al-Qarula breathed his last in 811 CE and was succeeded by his son al-Qasim. To the collective amirs of the Abbasid Caliphate, the newest governor of the newest province was too much of an unknown quantity.
The first act of insubordination committed by the governors of al-Sham, Misr, and Ifriqiya was their drastic reduction in revenues sent to Baghdad. As the three provinces were among the wealthier regions of the Abbasid Caliphate, the effect on the central government’s budget was certainly noticeable. When the administrators conveying the revenues to Iraq were questioned about the decrease, they claimed that droughts had reduced agricultural productivity. Caliph al-Hakim and wazir al-Fadl ibn Sahl suspected that there was a concerted and coordinated embezzlement occurring, but they decided not to act just yet. Emboldened by their sudden increase in wealth, in 814 CE the governors of Misr and Ifriqiya concocted a plan to invade Roman Sikelia [Sicily]. Two years earlier Roman Emperor Nikephoros had died and was succeeded by his son Constantine VI; the new emperor and his twin brother Leo had both been crowned as co-emperors during their teenage years. The Misri soldiers departed by ship from Dumyat and rendezvoused with their counterparts in Tunis. From there they set sail to Sikelia in 815 CE. Strategos Gregory reacted quickly to the threat, mobilising his army to defend Syrakousai [Syracuse] and dispatching messengers to inform Emperor Constantine of the invasion. The Muslim army reached Syrakousai and put the city to siege.
The messengers reached Konstantinoupolis in a timely fashion and informed the emperor of the first real challenge to his rule. Constantine responded by ordering his brother Leo to mobilise the armies of the eastern themes and lead an invasion of Abbasid-held Kilikia. Wali Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid al-Ta’i of al-Sham was privy to his allies’ plan to invade Sikelia and so had prepared his army to defend against any Roman retaliations in his province. Consequently he and his army clashed with the Romans near Tarsus. The battle was a draw but Leo had not expected stiff resistance so soon and therefore retreated to Seleukeia. It was in the aftermath of the battle that Caliph al-Hakim was finally made aware of the adventure to Sikelia; he was understandably furious. Failing to inform the khalifah of the expedition had not only threatened the security of the central Dar al-Islam but also Ruma al-Gharbiya. As much as it would please al-Hakim to see the rebellious governors humbled by the Romans, he could not just stand by and allow a war against the Dar al-Islam to go unpunished. Messengers were dispatched to Harthama ibn A’yan in Ruma al-Gharbiya ordering him to defend any against any Roman incursions, but to refrain from campaigning aggressively. The khalifah himself took to mobilising the Iranian levies and the abna al-dawla soldiers in Iraq. Afterwards he travelled north to Azarbayjan to collect Abu Ishaq Muhammad ibn Harun al-Abbasi and his ghilman.
The siege of Syrakousai was not progressing as well as the Muslim commanders had hoped. The city was well-fortified and its place on the coast ensured easy resupply by sea. This of course occurred in the form of reinforcements sent by Duke Anthimus of Neapolis; the Roman navy was still dominant in the region and demonstrated itself to be so when the expedition’s fleet was defeated in battle and driven back to Melita. Given that they were stranded, the expedition’s commander, Abu Zaki al-Kinani, gave the order for the siege to be lifted and for a retreat to the south. A part of the Roman army in Syrakousai pursued the Muslims, but the retreat was partly a ruse and the pursuing Romans were caught in an ambush and soundly defeated. This victory gave the Muslims leeway to march along the coast to Gela and conquer the city before the end of 815 CE. Strategos Gregory travelled with the remainder of his army to besiege Gela, but at that point the Abbasid fleet returned to the island with more soldiers from Ifriqiya, forcing the Romans to retreat. The Roman strategos left most of his army to garrison the mountain fortress of Ragusia; Gregory meanwhile went to Messene where he crossed to the mainland. There he mobilised more troops and sent to Konstantinoupolis for reinforcements.
Back in the east, the large Abbasid army commanded by Caliph al-Hakim marched west and besieged the Roman fort of Keltzene [Erzincan]. Most of the Roman soldiers of the east were with Leo at Seleukeia, so Keltzene surrendered in relatively short order. Some Abbasid soldiers were left as a garrison while the rest moved on to besiege Koloneia. At about the same time, the Abbasid fleet controlled by Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid al-Ta’i raided Kibyrrha, prompting Leo to retreat west towards the port city. Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid’s army pursued the Romans and brought them to battle before they could reach Kibyrrha. Even though the Abbasids were victorious the Roman losses were not too grave, so Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid turned back and invested Seleukeia. Emperor Constantine faced a dilemma: he only had enough manpower to reinforce either Mikra Asia or Sikelia, not both. In the end he chose Mikra Asia, and raised an army from the western themes, as well as hiring Bulgar mercenaries. The emperor took command of the army himself and travelled by ship to Kibyrrha with some of the army, while the rest took the land route. After the Romans had converged outside Kibyrrha, they set off towards Seleukeia. Having both the emperor and his brother fight on campaign was a risk but it paid off; the Muslims besieging Seleukeia were surprised by the much greater size of the Roman army and thus were easily defeated. Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid was lucky to survive the battle, after which he and his remaining forces limped back to al-Iskandarun. This left the Romans free to besiege Tarsus.
Over in Sikelia the recently reinforced Muslim expedition under Abu Zaki al-Kinani turned its sights to the west of the island. Leaving a sizeable garrison at Gela, the Muslims went west and besieged Agrigentum. The Roman garrison surrendered the city and were spared, but Abu Zaki al-Kinani insisted that they left. The exiled Romans eventually made their way to join the rest of their army at Ragusia, while the Muslim expedition marched further to the west. They reached Mazara, which boasted a larger harbour than Gela but was appropriately better defended. The city was besieged and the Abbasid fleet arrived soon afterward to blockade the port. Strategos Gregory returned from the mainland with some reinforcements but his pleas to the emperor had gone unanswered. Accordingly, he reunited with his main army at Ragusia and began to advance toward Gela; Berber scout cavalry sighted the Romans however and warned the garrison of Gela, who took the questionable decision of abandoning the town and retreating to Agrigentum. Abu Zaki al-Kinani became furious when informed of the desertion and was induced to lift the siege of Mazara. The Muslims returned to Agrigentum just as Gregory and his army arrived. The battle was a decisive victory for the Muslims; the Romans were just about outnumbered and the appearance of more Abbasid ships off the coast evaporated their morale. The remnants of the Roman army fled back to Syrakousai and remained there in vain hope for reinforcements.
In the meantime, Koloneia had fallen to the besieging army of Caliph al-Hakim. The khalifah had planned to be lenient to the conquered population, but then he was informed of the Roman siege of Tarsus. Koloneia was put to the sword before the Abbasid army retreated to Arminiya. There al-Hakim mobilised the Armenian nakharars (nobility) and their retinues, then marched to al-Thughur al-Shamiya to eject the Romans. Tarsus had been conquered and sacked by the time the Abbasid army arrived in the region; Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid al-Ta’i’s small force sheepishly joined the larger army and accepted al-Hakim’s command. The subsequent battle near Adhana may have been the largest the Abbasids had yet fought; the army comprised abna al-dawla, Iranians, Armenians, Turkish ghilman, and Arabs. It was notable for the predominance of heavily armoured horse archers. The Roman army was no less impressive, comprised as it was of soldiers from themes on both sides of the Aegean Sea, including Bulgar mercenaries. The battle was close-run, but the Abbasids clinched victory. Their losses however precluded any further campaigning. The Romans had come out much worse though and when Emperor Constantine had safely reached Seleukeia, he sued for peace in 820 CE. The agreed upon terms were a ceasefire in the east, exchange of prisoners, and an annual tribute paid by the Romans. There was a conspicuous silence concerning the war in Sikelia; Roman spies had learned of the tensions between the khalifah and his governors, so the negotiators studiously avoided reminding al-Hakim of his waning authority. Sikelia would continue to remain a battleground between the Muslims and the Romans for some time.
[*] You’ve probably noticed there’s been no revolt of Thomas the Slav, and nor will there be (at the moment anyway). That’s because the divergent circumstances of TTL don’t warrant it. From what I can tell, Thomas’ revolt was a reaction to the assassination of his friend Leo V the Armenian by supporters of their erstwhile ally Michael the Amorian. Leo V came to power after a series of militarily weak emperors (and the connected victories of the Bulgar Krum Khan). With a strong line of military emperors so far, it’s likely that Leo, Michael, and Thomas would have remained mid-tier commanders.
The appointment of Abdallah ibn al-Hakim al-Abbasi (son of the caliph) as wali of Khurasan caused quite a stir among some of the abna al-dawla. It was after all their homeland, adopted or otherwise, and since the Abbasid Revolution its governorship had solely been in the hands of the abna al-dawla. Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid al-Ta’i, who succeeded his brother Asram as wali of al-Sham, was the most vocal of the governors opposed to Caliph al-Hakim’s deposition of Ali ibn Isa ibn Mahan. Joining him was wali Khuzayma ibn Khazim ibn Khuzayma al-Tamimi of Misr and wali Abdallah ibn Malik ibn al-Haytham al-Khuza’i of Ifriqiya. The three governors secretly agreed to cooperate in preventing the khalifah or his bureaucracy from overstepping their bounds within their provinces. Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid also attempted to convince wali Abbas ibn al-Musayyab ibn Zuhayr al-Dabbi of Arminiya to join their pact, but the precarious position of Arminiya’s frontier with both the Romans and the Khazars swayed the governor to stay loyal to Caliph al-Hakim.
The governors of the provinces of Iran were more loyal to the caliph and his first heir, if only due to their proximity and the increasing number of Iranian dihqans with their retinues of warriors. The wali of Fararud, Yahya ibn Mu’adh ibn Muslim, wholeheartedly took to integrating the native Sogdians, Muslim and dhimmi, into his administration and army. The old Sogdian trading networks east into China and north into the steppe ensured a large and steady stream of income into the province, a large portion of which was dutifully forwarded to Baghdad. Abu Ishaq Muhammad ibn Harun al-Abbasi, the new wali of Azarbayjan, was in much the same predicament as his counterpart in Arminiya in that his frontier with the Khazars precluded any potentially dangerous politicking against his relatives. Besides, the Khazar frontier afforded him the perfect opportunity to expand his private army of Turkish ghilman (slave-soldiers) who were relentlessly trained in their ancestral manner of combat.
The relation of the provinces in Europe to the centre of the caliphate was more complicated however. Ruma al-Gharbiya, under the direction of its wali Harthama ibn A’yan, was increasingly incorporated into the Mediterranean economy that was so crucial to the Abbasid Caliphate. The Islamic nobility of the province though were, at best, indifferent to the authority of the Abbasids; most of the Arabs and Berbers, and even the Lombards in a way, were of Andalusian heritage. The small number of abna al-dawla soldiers who arrived with Harthama ibn A’yan after the Fourth Fitna would not be enough to maintain control if a pro-Fihrid rebellion occurred. The Banu Fihr for that matter had long given up on loyalty towards the Abbasids, but wali Ilyas ibn Muhammad was a pragmatist above all else; he would continue to pay lip service to the Abbasids just as long as it was in his province’s interest to do so. The new wilaya of al-Faranj was the least predictable of the three European provinces. Muhammad Qarulamun ibn Baban al-Qarula breathed his last in 811 CE and was succeeded by his son al-Qasim. To the collective amirs of the Abbasid Caliphate, the newest governor of the newest province was too much of an unknown quantity.
The first act of insubordination committed by the governors of al-Sham, Misr, and Ifriqiya was their drastic reduction in revenues sent to Baghdad. As the three provinces were among the wealthier regions of the Abbasid Caliphate, the effect on the central government’s budget was certainly noticeable. When the administrators conveying the revenues to Iraq were questioned about the decrease, they claimed that droughts had reduced agricultural productivity. Caliph al-Hakim and wazir al-Fadl ibn Sahl suspected that there was a concerted and coordinated embezzlement occurring, but they decided not to act just yet. Emboldened by their sudden increase in wealth, in 814 CE the governors of Misr and Ifriqiya concocted a plan to invade Roman Sikelia [Sicily]. Two years earlier Roman Emperor Nikephoros had died and was succeeded by his son Constantine VI; the new emperor and his twin brother Leo had both been crowned as co-emperors during their teenage years. The Misri soldiers departed by ship from Dumyat and rendezvoused with their counterparts in Tunis. From there they set sail to Sikelia in 815 CE. Strategos Gregory reacted quickly to the threat, mobilising his army to defend Syrakousai [Syracuse] and dispatching messengers to inform Emperor Constantine of the invasion. The Muslim army reached Syrakousai and put the city to siege.
The messengers reached Konstantinoupolis in a timely fashion and informed the emperor of the first real challenge to his rule. Constantine responded by ordering his brother Leo to mobilise the armies of the eastern themes and lead an invasion of Abbasid-held Kilikia. Wali Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid al-Ta’i of al-Sham was privy to his allies’ plan to invade Sikelia and so had prepared his army to defend against any Roman retaliations in his province. Consequently he and his army clashed with the Romans near Tarsus. The battle was a draw but Leo had not expected stiff resistance so soon and therefore retreated to Seleukeia. It was in the aftermath of the battle that Caliph al-Hakim was finally made aware of the adventure to Sikelia; he was understandably furious. Failing to inform the khalifah of the expedition had not only threatened the security of the central Dar al-Islam but also Ruma al-Gharbiya. As much as it would please al-Hakim to see the rebellious governors humbled by the Romans, he could not just stand by and allow a war against the Dar al-Islam to go unpunished. Messengers were dispatched to Harthama ibn A’yan in Ruma al-Gharbiya ordering him to defend any against any Roman incursions, but to refrain from campaigning aggressively. The khalifah himself took to mobilising the Iranian levies and the abna al-dawla soldiers in Iraq. Afterwards he travelled north to Azarbayjan to collect Abu Ishaq Muhammad ibn Harun al-Abbasi and his ghilman.
The siege of Syrakousai was not progressing as well as the Muslim commanders had hoped. The city was well-fortified and its place on the coast ensured easy resupply by sea. This of course occurred in the form of reinforcements sent by Duke Anthimus of Neapolis; the Roman navy was still dominant in the region and demonstrated itself to be so when the expedition’s fleet was defeated in battle and driven back to Melita. Given that they were stranded, the expedition’s commander, Abu Zaki al-Kinani, gave the order for the siege to be lifted and for a retreat to the south. A part of the Roman army in Syrakousai pursued the Muslims, but the retreat was partly a ruse and the pursuing Romans were caught in an ambush and soundly defeated. This victory gave the Muslims leeway to march along the coast to Gela and conquer the city before the end of 815 CE. Strategos Gregory travelled with the remainder of his army to besiege Gela, but at that point the Abbasid fleet returned to the island with more soldiers from Ifriqiya, forcing the Romans to retreat. The Roman strategos left most of his army to garrison the mountain fortress of Ragusia; Gregory meanwhile went to Messene where he crossed to the mainland. There he mobilised more troops and sent to Konstantinoupolis for reinforcements.
Back in the east, the large Abbasid army commanded by Caliph al-Hakim marched west and besieged the Roman fort of Keltzene [Erzincan]. Most of the Roman soldiers of the east were with Leo at Seleukeia, so Keltzene surrendered in relatively short order. Some Abbasid soldiers were left as a garrison while the rest moved on to besiege Koloneia. At about the same time, the Abbasid fleet controlled by Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid al-Ta’i raided Kibyrrha, prompting Leo to retreat west towards the port city. Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid’s army pursued the Romans and brought them to battle before they could reach Kibyrrha. Even though the Abbasids were victorious the Roman losses were not too grave, so Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid turned back and invested Seleukeia. Emperor Constantine faced a dilemma: he only had enough manpower to reinforce either Mikra Asia or Sikelia, not both. In the end he chose Mikra Asia, and raised an army from the western themes, as well as hiring Bulgar mercenaries. The emperor took command of the army himself and travelled by ship to Kibyrrha with some of the army, while the rest took the land route. After the Romans had converged outside Kibyrrha, they set off towards Seleukeia. Having both the emperor and his brother fight on campaign was a risk but it paid off; the Muslims besieging Seleukeia were surprised by the much greater size of the Roman army and thus were easily defeated. Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid was lucky to survive the battle, after which he and his remaining forces limped back to al-Iskandarun. This left the Romans free to besiege Tarsus.
Over in Sikelia the recently reinforced Muslim expedition under Abu Zaki al-Kinani turned its sights to the west of the island. Leaving a sizeable garrison at Gela, the Muslims went west and besieged Agrigentum. The Roman garrison surrendered the city and were spared, but Abu Zaki al-Kinani insisted that they left. The exiled Romans eventually made their way to join the rest of their army at Ragusia, while the Muslim expedition marched further to the west. They reached Mazara, which boasted a larger harbour than Gela but was appropriately better defended. The city was besieged and the Abbasid fleet arrived soon afterward to blockade the port. Strategos Gregory returned from the mainland with some reinforcements but his pleas to the emperor had gone unanswered. Accordingly, he reunited with his main army at Ragusia and began to advance toward Gela; Berber scout cavalry sighted the Romans however and warned the garrison of Gela, who took the questionable decision of abandoning the town and retreating to Agrigentum. Abu Zaki al-Kinani became furious when informed of the desertion and was induced to lift the siege of Mazara. The Muslims returned to Agrigentum just as Gregory and his army arrived. The battle was a decisive victory for the Muslims; the Romans were just about outnumbered and the appearance of more Abbasid ships off the coast evaporated their morale. The remnants of the Roman army fled back to Syrakousai and remained there in vain hope for reinforcements.
In the meantime, Koloneia had fallen to the besieging army of Caliph al-Hakim. The khalifah had planned to be lenient to the conquered population, but then he was informed of the Roman siege of Tarsus. Koloneia was put to the sword before the Abbasid army retreated to Arminiya. There al-Hakim mobilised the Armenian nakharars (nobility) and their retinues, then marched to al-Thughur al-Shamiya to eject the Romans. Tarsus had been conquered and sacked by the time the Abbasid army arrived in the region; Humayd ibn Abd al-Hamid al-Ta’i’s small force sheepishly joined the larger army and accepted al-Hakim’s command. The subsequent battle near Adhana may have been the largest the Abbasids had yet fought; the army comprised abna al-dawla, Iranians, Armenians, Turkish ghilman, and Arabs. It was notable for the predominance of heavily armoured horse archers. The Roman army was no less impressive, comprised as it was of soldiers from themes on both sides of the Aegean Sea, including Bulgar mercenaries. The battle was close-run, but the Abbasids clinched victory. Their losses however precluded any further campaigning. The Romans had come out much worse though and when Emperor Constantine had safely reached Seleukeia, he sued for peace in 820 CE. The agreed upon terms were a ceasefire in the east, exchange of prisoners, and an annual tribute paid by the Romans. There was a conspicuous silence concerning the war in Sikelia; Roman spies had learned of the tensions between the khalifah and his governors, so the negotiators studiously avoided reminding al-Hakim of his waning authority. Sikelia would continue to remain a battleground between the Muslims and the Romans for some time.
[*] You’ve probably noticed there’s been no revolt of Thomas the Slav, and nor will there be (at the moment anyway). That’s because the divergent circumstances of TTL don’t warrant it. From what I can tell, Thomas’ revolt was a reaction to the assassination of his friend Leo V the Armenian by supporters of their erstwhile ally Michael the Amorian. Leo V came to power after a series of militarily weak emperors (and the connected victories of the Bulgar Krum Khan). With a strong line of military emperors so far, it’s likely that Leo, Michael, and Thomas would have remained mid-tier commanders.
The biggest thing..muslim now have a foothold in sicily, the first step could be vital to conquer the island later on...and Ruma was on full alert and still is fresh...ummm that could be exploided later on
Even when the Caliphate is at each other's throats, the Romans can't catch a break.
Jejeje, not much as throat as the wali not being amuse each other BS, and that is good for me, still a shame was not a fully sucess in Sicily.
We would need a butterfly, Andalusi and Faranj have the ports in the atlantic but how they reach north and who stay is a big question... maybe the shias?
That's kinda what I'm hinting at. Iceland would be the perfect place for a fringe sect to hang out. Maybe the cold will incentivize their descendants to spread Islam to the natives in Canada and Greenland.
The later region would be much later, the whole thing is a unique proposal but dunno if teutonic trash would accepted it, still was unique buddy.