AHC WI Reverse Asia Minor and Iberia

WI Iberia remained under Moorish control and Asia Minor and Constantinople were to stay Christian?

Could it happen?

How much does it weaken the Catholic Church?

How does that change the first century or two of contact with the Amereicas?
 
Not likely for Iberia. You would really need an early PoD to change how Al-Andalus came in existance in first place.

See, the Arabo-Berbers represented in the middle of VIII century a tiny, tiny minority in Spain (at the very best, 20 000, mostly Berbers for 3,5 millions).
The Berber Revolt and the Umayyad takeover in Al-Andalus having efficiently cut the peninsula from arab reinforcement they ,in order to preserve their political supremacy, cloisoned their rule making only the arabized population having a possibility of a power position (and it didn't really was the case up to the X century, after decennials of almost complete anarchy and revolts).

If you add that the need of constant warfare (the emir/caliphe/ruler legitimacy depending on his capacity to efficiently raid or prevent Christians to advance), a regular division (the big regional rulers acting often most idependently and not feeling themselves that much tied to a central authority) that led rulers to or suffer rebellions or to waste ressources preventing them (sometimes both) and appearing as a target for Muslims neighbours as well than Christians (that managed more regularly to unify themselves and that, at the contrary of Al-Andalus, beneficied from support from neighbours).

Each of these factors alone aren't enough to make it crush, but the whole thing is a serious issue.

At best, I could see a Berber takeover of southern Iberia, efficiently maintaining a little Muslim Iberia but it wouldn't be Al-Andalus (more like a transcontinental Morocco)
 
Not likely for Iberia. You would really need an early PoD to change how Al-Andalus came in existance in first place.

See, the Arabo-Berbers represented in the middle of VIII century a tiny, tiny minority in Spain (at the very best, 20 000, mostly Berbers for 3,5 millions).
The Berber Revolt and the Umayyad takeover in Al-Andalus having efficiently cut the peninsula from arab reinforcement they ,in order to preserve their political supremacy, cloisoned their rule making only the arabized population having a possibility of a power position (and it didn't really was the case up to the X century, after decennials of almost complete anarchy and revolts).

If you add that the need of constant warfare (the emir/caliphe/ruler legitimacy depending on his capacity to efficiently raid or prevent Christians to advance), a regular division (the big regional rulers acting often most idependently and not feeling themselves that much tied to a central authority) that led rulers to or suffer rebellions or to waste ressources preventing them (sometimes both) and appearing as a target for Muslims neighbours as well than Christians (that managed more regularly to unify themselves and that, at the contrary of Al-Andalus, beneficied from support from neighbours).

Each of these factors alone aren't enough to make it crush, but the whole thing is a serious issue.

At best, I could see a Berber takeover of southern Iberia, efficiently maintaining a little Muslim Iberia but it wouldn't be Al-Andalus (more like a transcontinental Morocco)

You could see something like the Ottomans, who successfully incorporated Greeks and Armenians into the Turkish culture form in Spain. Though, personally I think that something of a hybrid culture would form. If Al-Andalus manages to encourage conversion in exchange for power, then maybe a steady bloc of supporters forms; enough to keep them in power in Iberia.
 
You could see something like the Ottomans, who successfully incorporated Greeks and Armenians into the Turkish culture form in Spain.
Oh, you did have that. Mozarab means "arabized" after all. However, the regular needs for military forces (loyal ones, critically) made the rulers raise mercenaries/foreign troops from Maghreb or even Christian Spain, the first critically being largely foreign to arabo-andalusian culture continuum (far less for the Christians, that eventually led to a neo-mozarab culture)

If Al-Andalus manages to encourage conversion in exchange for power, then maybe a steady bloc of supporters forms; enough to keep them in power in Iberia.

Conversion didn't change many things in this regard : Berbers were Islamized and Hispano-Roman elites did rather quikcly, and they didn't get an hold on power.
What mattered was "arabity".

I may have been unclear : no matter you was a Muslim or not (hell, the Berber while Muslims were treated as if they weren't, causing the Berber Revolt in first place), what mattered was if you were an Arab, tribally speaking.
Of course, non-Arabs could be in good position, but not that much by themselves and more by promotion by rulers that wanted to prevent an opponent to play too much on this.
 
So, thinking of it, having a Greater Morrocco would probably means a stronger more cohesive presence in North Africa.

Maybe the Mameluks could turn more powerful than OTL, critically if Morocco prevent a real circunavigation of Africa, which lead to prevent Portuguese to ruin Mameluk trade power in Indias. After all, they had a relativly good position in Middle-East and without Ottomans, they could use the void let by Tamerlan, even if I don't really see how it would be doable.
 
Top