Reverse Reconquista

  • Thread starter Deleted member 67076
  • Start date
The obvious question comes up - why can't Al-Andalus change the political factors its struggling with?

Its all well and good to say that there are clan/tribal issues, or power based on the leader and his family, or not very many Muslims ruling over a much larger Christian population - but why is all of this set in stone when for instance, the kings of France went from among the weaker kings of Christendom to the most dominant?

It all seems to be something that - intentionally or not - implies that people outside Western Christendom are just incapable of political evolution and development.

The big problem I see is that any berber state is ruling over effectively two separate kingdoms that have hugely different factors in how they need to be run. I see the issue as more that if they change something to make Al Andalus run better they risk alienating the North African tribespeople they rely on for military support. Really what's needed in Al-Andalus in my opinion is for Al Andalus to be able to put together it's own means of defending itself independent of North African troops. One idea I will steal from An Age Of Miracles was the idea of Al Andalus adopting a system similar to the Byzantine Themes of semi professional soldiers so as to not break the bank while also providing a much needed native defense force.
 
The big problem I see is that any berber state is ruling over effectively two separate kingdoms that have hugely different factors in how they need to be run. I see the issue as more that if they change something to make Al Andalus run better they risk alienating the North African tribespeople they rely on for military support.
Basically and regarding military issues, it's that.


One idea I will steal from An Age Of Miracles was the idea of Al Andalus adopting a system similar to the Byzantine Themes of semi professional soldiers so as to not break the bank while also providing a much needed native defense force.
You had a quite important use of sakaliba slaves as soldier OTL. But it remained the issue of loyalty : were they loyal to their owners, to themselves...

What population they would use as semi-professional soldiers? Sakaliba, Muladi, Berbers? (Obviously, not Christian or Mozarabs) Where would they be settled? In the marches? Widely distributed?

And finally, who'll give the land? The Emir/Caliphe? Wouldn't that remove the only advantage of mercenary use, aka they cost only money (critically when the issue isn't the bank, it was well furnished on this regard), not lands and political power (well, at least when it's the emir/Caliphe doing this)

The way I see this, creating themes could risk to weaken Emiral/Caliphal power by creating eventually more rival houses (like the theme system would provides rival byzantines dynasties).
The marches of Al-Andalus were quite autonomous OTL, and it went sometimes not that well : Banu Qasi history show that if the Emir/Caliph didn't intervene, he could kiss his land good bye. You have others exemples, the marches history being full of revolts and troubles (admittedly, essentially before the X century)

Depending how it's done, it could be an efficient tool (whom range is to determinate) to an hilarous backfire.
 
Last edited:
Is there any plausible replacement for what seems to be an Islamic tradition of extensive use of slave soldiers?
 
Is there any plausible replacement for what seems to be an Islamic tradition of extensive use of slave soldiers?

Mercenaries? That's what they used after all :p

Seriously, while Sakaliba were used as militia, guards, rarely as campainging armies. The personal link between them and their owner was judged more safe if kept close (because having a slave army on its own, isn't going to end well).
The problem isn't there, but in the fact they were used for more domestic matters. Admittedly, they managed to build taifas during the fitna, so it's hard to really appreciate their numbers.

You had a local recruitment made in Al Andalus, more or less based on will (as participating to summer campaign was promising a rise of wealth and social status). A more important redistribution and/or allowance couldn't help, but it wouldn't be possible to do that permanently, even if Umayyads benefited from huge treasury, it wasn't infinite.

While it was enough for raiding, keeping order and usual campaigns in peninsula, it wasn't for Cordoban needs in North Africa and against growing pressure of Christians.
 
The big problem I see is that any berber state is ruling over effectively two separate kingdoms that have hugely different factors in how they need to be run. I see the issue as more that if they change something to make Al Andalus run better they risk alienating the North African tribespeople they rely on for military support. Really what's needed in Al-Andalus in my opinion is for Al Andalus to be able to put together it's own means of defending itself independent of North African troops. One idea I will steal from An Age Of Miracles was the idea of Al Andalus adopting a system similar to the Byzantine Themes of semi professional soldiers so as to not break the bank while also providing a much needed native defense force.

The tagmata would be my preferred choice there. Have something that is dependent on the ruler(emir/caliph/whatever), meaning that the ruler doesn't have to hope that the great lords cooperate - and can deal with them saying "Wait, you want to do what?" because he has a military force not requiring their aid.

The themes risk suffering from what they did OTL - having the dynatoi (as good a term here as in Byzantium) gobble up land if nothing else.
 
Top