Moonlight in a Jar: An Al-Andalus Timeline

I am absolutely fascinated by the direction Al-Andalus is going here. Having the Saqaliba take on this quasi-mamluk role is something I could absolutely see happening with the right pressures.

I am unfamiliar with the terminology used OTL for Saqaliba, but I do know much more about how Christians in general were talked about in period sources (rum, nasara, farkhan etc.). How do you think Andalusians would have described these resurgent slave-soldiers? Maybe something like the Saltanat al-A'laj? Sultanate of Slaves?
 
I am absolutely fascinated by the direction Al-Andalus is going here. Having the Saqaliba take on this quasi-mamluk role is something I could absolutely see happening with the right pressures.

I am unfamiliar with the terminology used OTL for Saqaliba, but I do know much more about how Christians in general were talked about in period sources (rum, nasara, farkhan etc.). How do you think Andalusians would have described these resurgent slave-soldiers? Maybe something like the Saltanat al-A'laj? Sultanate of Slaves?
That seems pretty accurate. Dealing with languages I don't speak is always dicey to me - I tend to err on the side of "don't do it" unless it's low-hanging fruit - but the period has become known to history as the Rule of the Slaves. But Saqaliba was applied pretty broadly to all manner of Central and Eastern Europeans, from the Volga Bulgars to the Serbs.
 
I am absolutely fascinated by the direction Al-Andalus is going here. Having the Saqaliba take on this quasi-mamluk role is something I could absolutely see happening with the right pressures.

I am unfamiliar with the terminology used OTL for Saqaliba, but I do know much more about how Christians in general were talked about in period sources (rum, nasara, farkhan etc.). How do you think Andalusians would have described these resurgent slave-soldiers? Maybe something like the Saltanat al-A'laj? Sultanate of Slaves?
Sultanate itself is a turkish title created by the abbasids. You might see malik in use however while power is with the slaves they have no legitimacy, so they can't overthrow the umayyads and become direct rulers. You could see a eastern/roman title be used, as these people come from the roman and slavic areas.
 
Sultanate itself is a turkish title created by the abbasids. You might see malik in use however while power is with the slaves they have no legitimacy, so they can't overthrow the umayyads and become direct rulers. You could see a eastern/roman title be used, as these people come from the roman and slavic areas.
At the moment, the title of the highest-ranking Saqaliba is simple: Hajib. That is, the effective head of government is the chamberlain, who acts as the ruler while the Caliph functions as nominal Commander of the Faithful and figurehead. (Muslim Spain is notable as a place where the hajib outranks the vizier.)
 
At the moment, the title of the highest-ranking Saqaliba is simple: Hajib. That is, the effective head of government is the chamberlain, who acts as the ruler while the Caliph functions as nominal Commander of the Faithful and figurehead. (Muslim Spain is notable as a place where the hajib outranks the vizier.)
Very interesting, so almost like the Mamluks keeping the nominal Abbasid Caliph around technically in charge, just for the PR.
 
Very interesting, so almost like the Mamluks keeping the nominal Abbasid Caliph around technically in charge, just for the PR.
That's exactly the circumstance I based this on.

I've also had in mind something I saw during my research: The Caliphate served the purposes of al-Andalus en route to a mass Muslim culture in the region. Once the mass Muslim culture is in place, the importance of the Caliphate decreases, though it's still an important figurehead.
 
That's exactly the circumstance I based this on.

I've also had in mind something I saw during my research: The Caliphate served the purposes of al-Andalus en route to a mass Muslim culture in the region. Once the mass Muslim culture is in place, the importance of the Caliphate decreases, though it's still an important figurehead.

Can you expand on what you mean by this?
 
Can you expand on what you mean by this?
The argument I read made the point that the Caliphate served as a focal point for a more centralized administration, after the initial mostly-tribal-warlordy economic model gave way to economic booms in the southern cities. Al-Andalus had enough cash that it could afford to evolve into a more centralized polity with a more robust administration. This would also create a framework for Arabization and cultural cross-pollination with new Muslims, and in fact for the creation of new Muslim conversos in the first place. Eventually what you'd get is a population that's majority Muslim and has established a distinctively Andalusi identity.

The initial study made the point that the Umayyads' "usefulness was at an end" at that point, which I tend to disagree with; the Caliphate still has an important role to play, but what has happened is the Umayyad period bought a bunch of time to build up a critical mass of Muslim citizens not just at the leadership level, but at the general populace level. Basically Muslims now outnumber Christians in Andalusia by a decent margin.
 
The argument I read made the point that the Caliphate served as a focal point for a more centralized administration, after the initial mostly-tribal-warlordy economic model gave way to economic booms in the southern cities. Al-Andalus had enough cash that it could afford to evolve into a more centralized polity with a more robust administration. This would also create a framework for Arabization and cultural cross-pollination with new Muslims, and in fact for the creation of new Muslim conversos in the first place. Eventually what you'd get is a population that's majority Muslim and has established a distinctively Andalusi identity.

The initial study made the point that the Umayyads' "usefulness was at an end" at that point, which I tend to disagree with; the Caliphate still has an important role to play, but what has happened is the Umayyad period bought a bunch of time to build up a critical mass of Muslim citizens not just at the leadership level, but at the general populace level. Basically Muslims now outnumber Christians in Andalusia by a decent margin.

Where did you read about this argument? I'd be interested in reading it myself.
 
You mention Al-Andalus will eventually become more Muslim by a large majority; if I may ask what are the current percentages/numbers of people based on faith within the TL now?
 
You mention Al-Andalus will eventually become more Muslim by a large majority; if I may ask what are the current percentages/numbers of people based on faith within the TL now?
I tend to proceed from scholarly estimates which pegged the Muslim population as at most 2.8 million in 912 and as high as 5.6 million in 1100, though those might be a bit generous. I'd say there are at least 4.5 to 5 million Muslims as of 1065, well on their way to 5.6 million Muslims by 1100. Percentages could be anything from 65% to as high as 75%, but the Muslims are certainly very much in the majority now, which is why Wahb was able to win over the rebels with promises of waiving the jizya when it was being unfairly applied to Muladies.

The last third-ish or so of society is largely Mozarabic Christians, with maybe a quarter of that slice being Sephardi Jews.
 
Random question. But could the reason andalusia goes to america is that trade from the east is under shia fatimid control. (The same reason spain and not spain went west due to ottomans). Fatimids are going to have some good leaders soon, as i think it was mentioned somewhere. They have no strong regional rivals, so they have now a monopoly. When andalusia is finally settled down, the fatimids are their natural muslim rival, also the fact anyone holding mecca and medina, are regarded as leaders of islam. Doesn't matter if you have title of caliph its legitimacy comes through action.
 
Random question. But could the reason andalusia goes to america is that trade from the east is under shia fatimid control. (The same reason spain and not spain went west due to ottomans). Fatimids are going to have some good leaders soon, as i think it was mentioned somewhere. They have no strong regional rivals, so they have now a monopoly. When andalusia is finally settled down, the fatimids are their natural muslim rival, also the fact anyone holding mecca and medina, are regarded as leaders of islam. Doesn't matter if you have title of caliph its legitimacy comes through action.
The Fatimids have this problem where a huge famine starts to whack them around this point in history and they end up with an enormous swack of debt and exacerbated ethnic tensions exploding into war.
 
ACT III Part XII: A God-Fearing Man Named George
Excerpt: Crying Survivor: Last Centuries of the Eastern Roman Empire - Yunus Pagonis, International Scholastic Press, AD 2008


The arrival of the Pechenegs in the 1070s changed the fate of the Haemus Peninsula completely.

With the Eastern Roman Empire already strained and pushed back almost to its limits against the onslaught of the Turkmens, the situation in the Haemus was left precarious, and into that void, the Pechenegs stepped. Their host had largely decamped north of the Danube, in the vale between the Carpathian Mountains and the river, and begun to intermarry with the locals. Bought off and hired by the Bulgarian Tsar, the Pechenegs enjoyed a nominal alliance with their Orthodox neighbours, despite tensions and religious differences.

The Pechenegs, led in the 1070s by the ambitious Khagan Bughra, were the last thing the Romans needed. Scholarly estimates attribute to the Pechenegs a fighting force as large as 100,000 strong in that decade,[1] plus Vlach auxiliaries and Bulgarian allies. With the Roman army depleted by the persistent conquests of the Turkmens east of Constantinople, the Haemus was comparatively ill-prepared for the arrival of such a large host into the field.

The Empire's holdings in Sirmium were the first to be lost; the Pechenegs and Bulgarians swamped a much smaller Roman army in 1071 at the Battle of Negotin. Legend has it that Bughra immediately established his reputation with his Roman foes by taking the skull of the slain general Romanos Mandrapilias and plating it in silver as a drinking goblet. It's said as well that Bughra castrated a thousand captured men, stripped them naked and released them into the countryside, terrifying and shocking the settlements at which the survivors arrived.

Truthfully some of that may be the stuff of polemics from the likes of Georgios Dougenis, the 12th-century historian, whose antipathy for all things Turk tends to shine through in his writing. Whatever the reality is, however, the sudden arrival of thousands of well-armed Pechenegs seems to have spooked Roman officials across the region. By the end of the year, the Pechenegs arrived in the shadow of Sirmium itself, but the siege was short-lived before the Roman governor of that theme, one Cucimir Milohradovic, opened the gates and surrendered.

Given the divided state of things in that part of the Haemus, Bulgarian and Pecheneg control over Serbia was far from absolute - the land of Duklja along the coast was raided, but the young and ambitious Prince Mihajlo II led a concerted resistance, bringing in mercenaries and managing to hold off what raids came his way. Nevertheless the raids led to decades of hardship in that part of the Haemus. Out of that hardship emerged a pattern of Serbs escaping the harder-hit regions inland and migrating to the coast, with Mihajlo and his dynasty - the future Spiridonovics, named for his father[2] - establishing themselves as protectors of the Serbs.

By 1073, Skoupoi was back in Bulgarian hands, and the Pechenegs continued to maraud through the lands. That year, Bughra attempted to cross the Pindus Mountains to make a play for Dyrrhachion, but poor weather stymied the effort, and the Pechenegs contented themselves instead with raiding towns and villages throughout upper Hellas proper.

In general, coastal cities - and cities along the west coast - were spared Bulgarian and Pecheneg depredations. Only in 1074, with hostilities against the Turkmens dying down, did Emperor Manuel Apokapes scrape together enough men to mount a serious counterattack. Landing a small army in Zetounion[3] by ship, Manuel and his troops, accompanied by Norman and Italian mercenaries, headed north to relieve Larissa, which was under siege by an army of Bulgarians, Pechenegs and Vlachs. The host broke off the unsuccessful siege upon hearing word of the relief column and moved to engage. Estimates suggest about 25,000 Bulgarians and Pechenegs on the field against roughly 20,000 Roman troops, but with the Bulgarian host disorganized and worn down from their failed siege, Manuel was able to rout them and force the rest into retreat.

The Roman offensive pressed northward, but stalled out around Kastoria upon encountering heavy resistance from Bughra's forces, and actions in the region continued through 1075, even as Manuel returned home. The emperor left matters there in the hands of Staurakios Katakalon, a hard-bitten former infantryman whom Manuel had elevated for his military merit and stubborn resolve.

Katakalon was tested early in 1076, when the Pechenegs made a play deep into Thessaly, attempting to overrun Trikke and press deeper into Hellas. The central battle of this campaign was likely the Second Battle of Larissa, in which the Romans again managed to turn the Pechenegs back with help from hired mercenaries. While Pecheneg pressure continued after that, the core of Hellas would be spared for some time.

Off the beaten path, however, other foes vexed the Romans. The Pechenegs themselves had arrived under pressure from the Cumans, who had by now overrun much of the Pontic Steppe and locked themselves into a series of back-and-forth skirmishes with the southernmost Rus'. The discussion of Rus' is outside the scope of this tome, but more directly applicable is the dispensation of the Empire's holdings in Taurica.[4]

The Empire had set up the Theme of Cherson along the southern coast of the Tauric Peninsula, mainly centred on the city of Chersonesus, which had been reinforced after the 980s after being damaged by the Rus'.[5] With the Empire in crisis, however, the arriving Cumans flooding into Taurica found Chersonesus effectively cut off from its support network. The Cumans, having already annexed the post-Khazar town of Korchev on the east side of the peninsula, soon gained control over Chersonesus as well.

Sources from this period are almost completely absent, with those that exist mainly coming in archaeological fragments - distinctive Cuman helmets and particularly kazans[6] begin to be found in greater abundance from this century, speaking to the prevalence of Turkic peoples in the area, while Greek artifacts also continue to be found. We know from later sources, though, that the Cumans who settled in Chersonesus, Sudak and Korchev - today's cities of Hersones, Sudaq and Qeriç - did not displace the Greeks so much as move into the area and set up shop, and the area continued to consider itself a nominal subject of the Empire, while in fact being completely irrelevant in Roman affairs from here on in. The local Cuman clans set themselves up to receive tribute in exchange for protection, enriching themselves via the Silk Road trade which had begun to pour into the area in the 11th century.

The mid-1070s mark the period at which the Tauric region in general began to recede slowly but permanently out of the Imperial remnant and into the Turkic world - another casualty of the Crisis of the 11th Century.[7]

Back in the Haemus, meanwhile, a resurgent Bulgaria moved to consolidate its captured lands, fortifying cities and keeps and building new forts and watchtowers to hold the line against the Romans. The campaign in the west ground down to a slow-churning stalemate as the Romans and the Bulgarians deadlocked. The Bulgarians granted the Pechenegs run of the north of Sirmium; much of the northern part of their empire was effectively a big Pecheneg playground. Tensions continued to crop up in the alliance, mostly over faith, but the alliance was at least sealed through the marriage of Bughra's son and heir, Barkyaruq, to the daughter of Tsar Presian III, Miroslava.

While the Romans managed to hold the line into the back half of the 1070s, Emperor Manuel's position was still precarious. Further, the Latin world lifted scarcely a finger to come to the Romans' aid.

What hope of help existed came in the form of a legate sent by Pope Marinus III in 1074 to investigate the situation. The Papal legate, Cardinal-Bishop Marcellus of Porto, began his investigation in Dyrrhachion, then traveled to Bulgaria to meet with Presian. From there, Marcellus crossed into Anatolia to examine the situation between the Romans and the Turkmens, paying a visit to the court of George Anushtakin. George is said to have impressed Marcellus mightily during the legate's stop in Iconium.

It would appear that Marcellus conducted mostly a surface investigation, or perhaps was instructed to make a more political ruling by Marinus, a supporter of then-Holy Roman Emperor Hermann I. Nevertheless, Marcellus reported back to Rome that the fighting in the east was largely a matter of disputes between co-religionists. "What have the Greeks to fear from a God-fearing man named George?" he is said to have reported.

The relative silence of the Latin world in coming to the aid of Rome in these troubled times would have ramifications later, furthering a sense among eastern Christendom that the western world was too remote from their concerns, both spiritual and temporal, to ever be part of their existence. For now, though, nothing was remarked upon.

Some Latins did make their way into the fight, however: Sometime in the mid-to-late 1070s, Norman mercenaries were hired by the thousands into Dyrrhachion with promises of land and gold, charged with battling Pecheneg and Bulgarian raiders and protecting the important Roman holdings in old Epirus from the invaders. Most of these Normans came from those settlers used as mercenaries in southern Italy, particularly from Benevento and the area around Foggia. A major attack into Dyrrhachion was batted aside by the Normans of Guy of Ouistreham in 1078, and the Normans settled comfortably into the city, bolstering its defenses but creating new worries for the Romans in the process.


[1] Compare to the host at the Battle of Levounion in 1091, which is estimated at 80,000.
[2] Analogous to the Vojislavljevics.
[3] Lamia.
[4] Crimea.
[5] This time around, Vladimir didn't level the place.
[6] Big ol' iron cookpots used by the Turkic nomads.
[7] FUN WITH ETHNOGENESIS: The Crimean Tatars arrived early.


SUMMARY:
1071: A huge army of Pechenegs and Vlach auxiliaries, fighting on behalf of the Bulgarians, crushes a Roman host at the Battle of Negotin. The Pecheneg Khagan Bughra allegedly has the Roman general Romanos Mandrapilias's skull silver-plated as a goblet, then castrates a thousand prisoners, strips them naked and forces them to walk home, sparking fear in the Haemus Peninsula. Later that year, the Pechenegs secure the surrender of Sirmium to Bulgaria, though Duklja holds out.
1073: Bulgaria retakes Skopje from the Romans, but a Pecheneg strike on Dyrrhachion is prevented by poor weather in the mountains.
1074: Eastern Roman Emperor Manuel Apokapes relieves a Bulgarian siege of Larissa, managing to hold the line against an invasion of Thessaly for the time being. The campaign grinds down into a stalemate in Thessaly and Thrace.
1074: The papal legate Marcellus of Porto visits Bulgaria, Constantinople and Iconium, investigating the war in the Roman world.
1075: Marcellus of Porto returns to Rome and reports to Pope Marinus III that the Eastern Roman Empire's troubles are largely interfaith squabbling, assuming that the Christian rulers of Bulgaria and the Khanate of Iconium have the situation well in hand.
1076 or so: Chersonesus falls under Cuman "protection," though its citizens continue to consider themselves Roman.
1078: Norman mercenaries under Guy of Ouistreham repel a major Bulgarian attack on Dyrrhachion.
 
Top