How successful could a Muslim Spain be? (POD after 1200)

As it says on the tin.

There are several old threads discussing the subject, but none of them seem to satisfactorily address the following two issues (particularly the second):

1) How well could it actually do? That is, how much of Iberia can it really gain control of and for how long?

2) To what extent will the Christian west attempt to destroy it? Including any surviving Christian states in Iberia.

Obviously there will be some hostility. Probably quite a bit. But France and England and other such states have other things that matter, and it may or may not be the most important issue at any given time.
 
I am going to make the assumption you're hoping I'll comment because the word Spain is in the title. ;)

Okay, post 1200 PoD means Almohads. That's difficult. In the first place, the Almohads were anti-Maliki school which was the dominant school in Al-Andalus and the western Maghreb and this led to a number of revolts. While they won, the victory was so brutal it really made people hate them.

They had the usual problems in that they could not weld the society of Al-Andalus together let alone forge it with Africa. They were always busy rushing from Europe to Africa to put down revolts or stop Christian attacks. Gerli and Roth write "only the caliph could lead an expedition to counter a Christian Offensive" so you see they were kind of hobbled from the start. There's also the issue that by the 1200s the Christian kingdoms were now becoming grown up and so they were a lot harder to overrun or beat back than in the days of the Umayyad Caliphate.

But assume an-Nasir is a different person or has a better successor. Under Ya'qub himself apparently was able to take Guadalajara and Salamanca among other towns, but apparently not Toledo. So the usual borders are likely best the alternate an-Nasi can do. I'm not even sure he can retain Valencia. There were a lot of Muslims there, but as long as Aragón has a good navy....

I think--especially if the Crusades go bad as in OTL--the situation in Spain will take on more importance. It's a good place for wins, but in OTL after Las Navas it became a mopping up that could be handled by the locals.

There were a lot of rights and freedoms that border people got because of that situation (things that made it harder to govern Spain later) and that's going to be attractive. I think it depends on the make up of an Al-Andalus. Is it just Spain? Spain-Morocco? Spain-Maghreb? How much does Al-Andalus want to associate with the rest of Europe? At some point, if it decides to leave them alone they will leave it alone as Crusading fervor fades. Jerusalem was always a bigger draw than Spain anyway. Those who disagree will probably go to Spain as mercenaries or volunteers to fight. It's likely the Spanish will tolerate them but also attack in moments of weakness.

I think a surviving Muslim Spain is a good possibility depending on the situation. I suppose it depends on how the situation in Italy and the eastern Med. shake out.
 
I am going to make the assumption you're hoping I'll comment because the word Spain is in the title. ;)

Not just you, but yes. :D

Okay, post 1200 PoD means Almohads. That's difficult. In the first place, the Almohads were anti-Maliki school which was the dominant school in Al-Andalus and the western Maghreb and this led to a number of revolts. While they won, the victory was so brutal it really made people hate them.

They had the usual problems in that they could not weld the society of Al-Andalus together let alone forge it with Africa. They were always busy rushing from Europe to Africa to put down revolts or stop Christian attacks. Gerli and Roth write "only the caliph could lead an expedition to counter a Christian Offensive" so you see they were kind of hobbled from the start. There's also the issue that by the 1200s the Christian kingdoms were now becoming grown up and so they were a lot harder to overrun or beat back than in the days of the Umayyad Caliphate.

But assume an-Nasir is a different person or has a better successor. Under Ya'qub himself apparently was able to take Guadalajara and Salamanca among other towns, but apparently not Toledo. So the usual borders are likely best the alternate an-Nasi can do. I'm not even sure he can retain Valencia. There were a lot of Muslims there, but as long as Aragón has a good navy....

That seems problematic. Not the same as unbeatable if I am reading you correctly, but a position where the Muslim position is strongly contested by Christian states actually in a position to do what happened OTL (if events permit). Not good for a state which is not-truly-united.

I think--especially if the Crusades go bad as in OTL--the situation in Spain will take on more importance. It's a good place for wins, but in OTL after Las Navas it became a mopping up that could be handled by the locals.

There were a lot of rights and freedoms that border people got because of that situation (things that made it harder to govern Spain later) and that's going to be attractive. I think it depends on the make up of an Al-Andalus. Is it just Spain? Spain-Morocco? Spain-Maghreb? How much does Al-Andalus want to associate with the rest of Europe? At some point, if it decides to leave them alone they will leave it alone as Crusading fervor fades. Jerusalem was always a bigger draw than Spain anyway. Those who disagree will probably go to Spain as mercenaries or volunteers to fight. It's likely the Spanish will tolerate them but also attack in moments of weakness.

So not necessarily worse than any other old rivalry of early modern Europe. Which isn't saying very much, but France and England managed to endure the other's existence. More or less.

And I'm looking at "Spain", mostly - not to rule out more success in Africa, but an Andalusi (is this the right word?) state defined by its presence on the Iberian peninsula with the Mahgreb (however much of that means) subordinated to the same.

I think a surviving Muslim Spain is a good possibility depending on the situation. I suppose it depends on how the situation in Italy and the eastern Med. shake out.

For my timeline:
The eastern Mediterranean more or less as OTL, though with the ERE recovering. But the Crusader states are too weak to amount to much. Haven't figured out exactly how that goes.

Italy is partially more-or-less within the HRE (more or less as the Hohenstaufen focus on Germany and Italy is just a source of money and to a lesser extent manpower - but mercenaries work for anyone), with the Kingdom of Sicily in the line of a junior Staufen branch.
 
It's more than just problematic. After 1200 the Andalusis only have one chance of getting a state that is not puppetized by somebody and that is Ibn Hud near-miraculously holding back Castile and Leon while stomping the Nasrids in Granada and managing to fund a new, long-lasting dynasty. And that's not easy. The Hudites will probably have to accept that Valencia and the Balearics are gone and concentrate in keeping what they can of their "Murciandalusia" together.

integra.servlets.Imagenes


You know somebody has it in the neck when "best case" means basically "survival"...
 
It's more than just problematic. After 1200 the Andalusis only have one chance of getting a state that is not puppetized by somebody and that is Ibn Hud near-miraculously holding back Castile and Leon while stomping the Nasrids in Granada and managing to fund a new, long-lasting dynasty. And that's not easy. The Hudites will probably have to accept that Valencia and the Balearics are gone and concentrate in keeping what they can of their "Murciandalusia" together.

You know somebody has it in the neck when "best case" means basically "survival"...

Short form: Why?

Long form: Looking for more detail here. I mean, surely this isn't the only possibility for a Muslim state in Spain - the Almohads might not be Andalusi, but that doesn't necessarily rule them out for purposes of the original question.
 
Well, you said you wanted an Andalusi state. If all you want is a Muslim one just have the Almohads win at Las Navas de Tolosa.
 
Well, you said you wanted an Andalusi state. If all you want is a Muslim one just have the Almohads win at Las Navas de Tolosa.

Well, what I'm hoping for is a Muslim state in that area.

And I'm looking at "Spain", mostly - not to rule out more success in Africa, but an Andalusi (is this the right word?) state defined by its presence on the Iberian peninsula with the Mahgreb (however much of that means) subordinated to the same.

Instead of something where Spain is just a place to go fight Christians for an Berber state that is defined around being in possession of the Maghreb.

That's what I meant by Andalusi, not necessarily native Andalusi vs. Berber rulers.
 
The only other possibility than an African-ruled Muslim Spain I can think of, is what Tocomocho said. But you'd have to create chaos in the Christian realms.

I've often wondered if there was something more than simple internal divisions that resulted in the Muslims unable to stand up to the Christian kingdoms. Was there some small technological advantage (Christians using heavier armor? I don't know!) because after a certain point it seems the Moors can't stop any of them.
 
Beats me.

Your thoughts (yours and Tocomocho's) on this (bold italics on the parts I'm particularly puzzled by, typos in the original):

These more sturdy fanatics were still African rather than Spanish sovereigns. Moslem Spain was administered by a Vali deputed from Morocco; and Cordova, shorn of much of its former splendor, was the occasional abode of a royal visitor from Barbary. For seventy years the Almohades retained their position in Spain. But their rule was not of glory but of decay. One high feat of arms indeed shed a dying luster on the name of the Berber prince who reigned for fifteen years (118S99) under the auspicious title of Almanzor, and his great Moslem victory over Alfonso II. at Alarcon in 1195 revived for the time the drooping fortunes of the Almohades. But their empire was already doomed, decaying, disintegrated, wasting away. And at length the terrible defeat of the Moslem forces by the united armies of the three Christian kings at the Navas de Tolosa in 1212, at once the most crushing and the most authentic of all the Christian victories of medieval Spain, gave a final and deadly blow to the Moslem dominion of the Peninsula. Within a few years of that celebrated battle, Granada alone was subject to the rule of Islam.


It was in the year 1228 that a descendant of the old Moorish kings of Saragossa rebelled against the Almohades and succeeded in making himself master not merely of Gfranada, but of Cordova, Seville, Algeciras, and even of Ceuta, and, obtaildng a confirmation of his rights from Bagdad, assumed the title of Amir ul Moslemin, Commander of the Moslems, and A1 Mutawakal, the Protected of God.


But a rival was not slow to appear. Mohammed A1 Ahmar, the Fair or the Ruddy, defeated, dethroned, and slew Al Mutawakal, and reigned in his stead in Andalusia. Despoiled in his turn of most of his possessions by St. Ferdinand of Castile, Al Ahmar was fain at length to content himself with the rich districts in the extreme south of the Peninsula, which are known to fame, wherever the Spanish or the English language is spoken, as the Kingdom of Granada. And thus it came to pass that the city on the banks of the Darro, the home of the proud and highly cultivated Syrians of Damascus, the flower of the early Arab invaders of Spain, became also the abiding place of the later Arab civilization, overmastered year after year, and destroyed, by the Christian armies ever pressing on to the southern sea. Yet, in the middle of the thirteenth century, the flood tide of reconquest had for the moment fairly spent itself. The Christians were not strong enough to conquer, and above all they were not numerous enough to occupy, the districts that were still peopled by the Moor; and for once a wise and highly cultivated Christian shared the supreme power in the Peninsula with a generous and honorable Moslem. Alfonso X. sought not to extend his frontiers, but to educate his people, not to slaughter his neighbors, but to give laws to his subjects, not to plunder frontier cities, but to make Castile into a kingdom, with a history, a civilization, and a language of her own. If the reputation of Alfonso is by no means commensurate with his true greatness, the statesmanship of Mohammed Al Ahmar, the founder of the ever famous Kingdom of Granada, is overshadowed by his undying fame as an architect. Yet is Al Ahmar worthy of remembrance as a king and the parent of kings in Spain. The loyal friend and ally of his Christian neighbor, the prudent administrator of his own dominions, he collected at his Arab court a great part of the wealth, the science, and the intelligence of Spain. His empire has long ago been broken up; the Moslem has been driven out; there is no king nor kingdom of Granada. But their memory lives in the great palace fortress whose red towers still rise over the sparkling Darro, and whose fairy chambers are still to be seen in what is, perhaps, the most celebrated of the wonder works of the master builders of the world.
After his long and glorious reign of forty-two years, Mohammed the Fair was killed by a fall from his horse near Granada, and was succeeded by his son, Mohammed II., in the last days of the year 1272. Al Ahmar had ever remained at peace with Alfonso :K., but his son, taking advantage of the king's absence in quest of an empire in Germany, sought the assistance of Yusuf, the sovereign or emperor of Morocco, and invaded the Christian frontiers.
Victory was for some time on the side of the Moors. The Castilians were defeated at Ecija in 1278, and their leader, the Viceroy Don Nunez de Lara, was killed in battle, as was also Don Sancho, Infante of Aragon and Archbishop of Toledo, after the rout of his army at Martos, near Jaen, on the 21st of October, 1278; and the victorious Yusuf ravaged Christian Spain to the very gates of Seville.
In the nest year, 1276, the Castilian armies were again twice defeated, in February at Alcoy and in the following July at Lucena. To add to their troubles, King James of Aragon died at Valencia in 1276. Sancho of Castile sought to depose his father Alfonso, at Valladolid. All was in confusion among the Christians; and had it not been for the defection of Yusuf of Morocco, the tide of fortune might have turned in favor of Islam. As it was, the African monarch not only abandoned his cousin of Granada, but he was actually persuaded to send one hundred thousand ducats to his Christian rival at Seville in 1280.
The value of this assistance was soon felt. Tarifa was taken in 1292, and the progress of the Moor was checked forever in Southern Spain. Mohammed II. died in 1332, and was succeeded by his son, Mohammed III., who was usually considered by the Moslem historians to have been the ablest monarch of his house. But he reigned for only seven years, and he was unable to defend Gibraltar from the assaults of his Christian rivals.

http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/MoorSpan.html

So what exactly is happening here? Is there a chance (if things go differently at the beginning of the 13th century) for more? Or even if it doesn't?

Or this "a chance" in the sense the Byzantine Empire in the 14th century can limp on longer than OTL, but has been too badly damaged to once again take flight, and some stronger predator will bring it down?

Something seems to have kept victory from the grasp of the Moors, even as they reach for it, and I'm not sure its any particular something. But as I understand it, it wasn't an inevitable process - we keep seeing things that could be "other than what they were", if somehow someone changed something that made them go the way they did OTL.

But as Spain's medieval history is a mystery to me, I'm hoping those who understand it better can add to that.
 
It's more than just problematic. After 1200 the Andalusis only have one chance of getting a state that is not puppetized by somebody and that is Ibn Hud near-miraculously holding back Castile and Leon while stomping the Nasrids in Granada and managing to fund a new, long-lasting dynasty. And that's not easy. The Hudites will probably have to accept that Valencia and the Balearics are gone and concentrate in keeping what they can of their "Murciandalusia" together.
I could go for an earlier PoD where the Moors conquer all of Spain thus leaving no Christian bridgehead south of the Pyrennes for the Infidel to develop from. Of course that does not keep them out completely; they can come by sea as English did, or along the Mediterranean coast. However, it would made it more difficult and so buy time.
 
Muslim Spain was well past its prime by 1200, and would continue to be a target of its Christian neighbors to the North. It might help the East Romans hold on longer, but could instead be the target of a formal crusade. Also, after 1200, maintaining only one Muslim state in Spain will probably be a challenge unless said state is reduced to what the Emirate of Granada was by the end.
 
Muslim Spain was well past its prime by 1200, and would continue to be a target of its Christian neighbors to the North. It might help the East Romans hold on longer, but could instead be the target of a formal crusade. Also, after 1200, maintaining only one Muslim state in Spain will probably be a challenge unless said state is reduced to what the Emirate of Granada was by the end.

Well, the ERE living longer is unrelated to events in Iberia, at least for my timeline. It happened for reasons with an earlier POD.

Why would it be hard to maintain only one Muslim state in Spain?
 
Well, the ERE living longer is unrelated to events in Iberia, at least for my timeline. It happened for reasons with an earlier POD.

Why would it be hard to maintain only one Muslim state in Spain?

There were increasing divisions in leadership, and, from what I understand, the Moorish state(s) in Spain were increasingly devolved to local strongmen of dubious allegiane who became pawns of the Christian states to their north.
 
What's going on is a massive dynastic dispute. Myself I doubt it would amount to much. Here's the background. Alfonso X was off in Germany, the Marinids invaded. The Heir, Fernando, marched to confront them but died of illness before reaching the battle field in 1275. The second son, Sancho, held off the Marinids and obtained a truce by 1277. There after more invasions followed but as of 1279, no Castillian territory had been lost.

At the same time, the dynasty dispute was where Sancho or Fernando's son Alfonso should succeed as king. France and the pope supported Alfonso, most (but not all!) the nobility supported Sancho. By 1282 Sancho broke with his father, who had already faced a lot of anger over his policies and was proclaimed king. This is the background to those losses. In 1285, just one year after Alfonso X's death, with the incomplete support of the Spanish nobility, opposition from France and Papacy and after 2 years of low-level civil war, he faced a Marinid invasion. However the emir, Abu Yusuf did not want to risk a battle and retreated, and they made peace later.

If after all that, Abu Yusuf did not want to risk a battle indicates that possibilities for expansion were limited and had a low rate of success and that they could not take advantage of the dynastic turmoil and internal strife speaks more to me about the strength of the Marinids than the weakness of Castille.
 
Last edited:
That suggests that a stronger Muslim state at the time of a similar conflict would see Castile...torn apart.

Not destroyed - but it might be the one which looks like a broken state when its over.
 
Top