WI No Almoravid Spain

[John Fredrick Parker]

Based on an idea from a few months back -- what if, instead of inviting the Almoravid forces from Africa to help fight off the invading forces of Alfonso VI, the tiafas had managed to consolidate around Seville? (Details in the link; if they're important here than yes, the Normans are also in the mix.)

What are the medium and longer term prospects of this new Al-Andalus, or by contrast, of the Reconquista? More generally, how does this change the culture, demographics (religious, racial, linguistic, etc), and what not of the Iberian peninsula? And given these general changes, what can we infer about how history is changed?

 

[GauchoBadger]

I don't see just Seville rising as a strong taifa -- perhaps Badajoz and Toledo could also gain a bit of power for themselves.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

I don't see just Seville rising as a strong taifa -- perhaps Badajoz and Toledo could also gain a bit of power for themselves.

Really? Weren't Seville and Granada the two most powerful taifas in the south? I also recall that @Planet of Hats thought they'd be the lead contender.

 

[Planet of Hats]

The taifas didn't need help just for the hell of it. If you look at what was going on in the field at the time, the taifas were fielding armies of a few hundred guys to maybe a couple thousand while Castile was putting more than 10,000 in the field routinely. There just isn't enough manpower in any individual taifa for them to overcome their rivals without help.

 

[Faeelin]

I wonder if you could do something with the "People of the Market" who in OTL tried to defend Cordoba. Could Al-Andalus create urban militia that would be willing to defend their cities?

 

[GauchoBadger]

The taifas didn't need help just for the hell of it. If you look at what was going on in the field at the time, the taifas were fielding armies of a few hundred guys to maybe a couple thousand while Castile was putting more than 10,000 in the field routinely. There just isn't enough manpower in any individual taifa for them to overcome their rivals without help.

Back in the Battle of Sagrajas, the muslim armies outnumbered the christian kingdoms three-to-one. And the christian side involved not only Castille, but also Aragon and León.
Of course, one could say the numbers are inflated in western sources, but i doubt it, since there was no drive for numerical account inflation due to a christian defeat in the battle.
Thus, unless just one battle is insufficient for comparison, i hold my belief that the taifas could hold out.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Alright then, getting back to the OP, what does Spain look like in the medium to long term -- the taifas holding out without the Almoravids?

 

[LSCatilina]

the tiafas had managed to consolidate around Seville?

The problem there is that even if taifas tended to unite by the mix-XIth century into larger entities, they still fell under Christian dominance at various degrees, which drained their legitimacy (which was partially based on the fight against Christians) and their ressources due to tributes.
The strategical weaknesses of taifas were the same than al-Andalus during Umayyads, as in an extreme dependence on mercenaryship or recruitment from Christian Spain and Maghrib. While Umayyad Spain could, trough clientelism and military force, control the immediate geopolitical neighbourhood, there wasn't one taifa really able to do so, meaning the various Berber tribes were free to undergo their traditional cycle of unification/split/unification whom obvious targets were Ifriqiya and al-Andalus, further destabilizing these regions (and in the case of Spain, at the benefit of Christians).

A total unification around Seville, you might say, may be the solution but I find it unlikely : as said above, the various taifa did underwent regional unification but they reached an equilibrium that couldn't be easily overlooked on risk of overextension : not only logistical, but as well from legitimacy (again, the legitimacy came from a fight against Christians, which nobody was able to pull, and dynastico-religious which none of local dynasties could claim)

What are the medium and longer term prospects of this new Al-Andalus, or by contrast, of the Reconquista?

If, by some happenance, you don't have Berbers managing to form an unified super-chiefdom as it regularily happened from this point onwards (you see I'm not exactly enthusiastic about chances), you'd end up with a quicker Reconquista. Taifa were really weakened by raids, tributes and even inner settlement (which was a thing since late Umayyad period), to say nothing of ethnic/religious tensions, and were a prey for Christian kingdoms, which would pull the same thing they did to the Taifa of Toledo, for exemple.
Altough I could see other Christians joining the party : Normans and Meridionals did IOTL joined their forces with Christian princes, and the prospect of more glory, wealth and so on might provide even more of them.

More generally, how does this change the culture, demographics (religious, racial, linguistic, etc), and what not of the Iberian peninsula?

Maybe a more archaic take on Spanish, less because absorbating Mozarabic dialects, than a lesser Basque influence on language.
You might see Portugal being butterflied as a separate political entity, altough I wouldn't write off a possible maintained Galaico-Portugese continuum not just on language but on politics.
You'd certainly have Christians to deal with a more mixed Andalusia than IOTL : Christian and Jewish communauties were still pretty much significant in these (altough still mainly Islamic by the late XIth) which wouldn't be possible to just get rid of as they did for Jews in 1492, or to quickly assimilate (if imperfectly) based on territory as for Moriscos.

It would be likely to see, IMO, a mix between how Latin States were managed as in general disinterest on systematical conversion, strategical settlement policy (as IOTL, essentially from southern France altough I could see, as said above, a Norman* settlement as well ITTL) which would not only have an effect on linguistic (greater Occitano-Romance ensemble?) but as well on political conceptions (making Spanish medieval institutions closer to French-influenced Portuguese and Catalans' ones).

*Let's be clear : by Normans I mean not just people from Normandy, but the usual mix of Normans, Angevins, Bretons and surrounding French groups you had in Italy or England.

And given these general changes, what can we infer about how history is changed?

It would look a lot like southern Italy, meaning not only a certain drive to raid and control surrounding shores (there Maghrib), and with a strong plantation economy as in Sicily, altough bigger.
Its big advantage over Sicily as it happened IOTL would certainly be a closer royal power, and less neglect and predatory economy from it.

 

[LSCatilina]

Back in the Battle of Sagrajas, the muslim armies outnumbered the christian kingdoms three-to-one. And the christian side involved not only Castille, but also Aragon and León.

These numbers included not only the (willy-nilly) unified armies of taifas and the Berber forces of Almoravids which traditionally accounted for a large part of Andalusian forces.
Not only unifying taifas out of blue is not possible, but no taifa had the capacity to raise such a Berber reinforcement at their benefit without controlling Mahrib.

Of course, one could say the numbers are inflated in western sources, but i doubt it, since there was no drive for numerical account inflation due to a christian defeat in the battle.

Medieval chroniclers weren't payed to give precise details on numbers, but to give impressions : a defeated army of 2 500 christians against an army that was "at least twice, no thrice, no wait ten times" more important is a really good narrative device (probably inspired by the Song of Roland in this precise exemple) to put in light the glorious, pious, fierce and ultimatly brave up to death Christian knight.

In the reality, forces were probably much more balanced.

 

[GauchoBadger]

In case a nonexistent Almoravid Caliphate leads to a quicker reconquista, what shall be the political makeup of Iberia?
Will there be a stronger León? And what happens to Aragon?
I also expect Portugal to not become a nation-state ITTL.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Were there any sizable number of Christian *heretics* in Muslim Spain? Or were the Christians under Islamic rule reliably *Catholic*?

 

[LSCatilina]

In case a nonexistent Almoravid Caliphate leads to a quicker reconquista, what shall be the political makeup of Iberia?

When I said quicker Reconquista, I should have precised that I didn't find likely that Christian would swallow whole all of the taifas : Toledo was already hard to digest, and I'd bet on something relatively gradual : periods of slow advance interrupted by taifa resistence, then relatively quick conquest. While Christian dominance is ITTL (and ignoring the capacities of Magrib which certainly wouldn't be realistically) pretty much a given in the late XIIth/early XIIIth IMO, it's not to be an unstoppable behemoth but something more pervasive.

I stress this : even if Almoravids for some reason doesn't exist, they would likely be replaced in this role by another (possibly weaker) Berber dynasty.

Will there be a stronger León?

The various kingdoms issued from Asturias (namely Galicia, Leon and Castile) had a tendency to form a same ensemble and to unify/split/unify for a while. At some point, I'd expect this cycle to stop as IOTL in face of structuration and reinforcement of what were originally peripherical principalties.
While this cycle could technically end with establishment of three distinct kingdoms, I do think the complete reverse is more likely. It doesn't mean of of these couldn't resurrect in one form or another, but for what matter core parts, unity would probably prevail.

And what happens to Aragon?

Eastern part of the peninsula had to deal with stronger taifa and Islamic fleets than in the western and central parts (as well a more ethnicall and culturally unified background for these).
ITTL, Aragon could be much more tied to Pampelune and maintain unification, for instance.
IIRC the reinforcement of Aragon as a peninsular player was partially due to the struggle against Almoravids and the need of Alfonso VI to have a reliable ally, as well logistical and military support from Pyrenean principalties (especially after the Crusade).

I wouldn't see most of Peire I's conquest happening this easily, with Sarqusta not being attacked by Almoravids in the same time. But I wouldn't see why Aragon wouldn't manage to take its share (especially if still united with Pampelune) when Barcelone will likely remains more focused on Languedoc and Provence IMO, for what matter the late XIth century.

I also expect Portugal to not become a nation-state ITTL.

I'm not so sure : the IOTL County of Portucale was created by ALfonso VII to give a prize to Henri de Bourgogne, who helped him and also to shield Galicia on the south. The idea of a specific "southern Galician" land was more or less already present altough it could be true of any feudal or quasi-feudal delimitation.
The point is, while you might not see a litteral Portugal arise, the borders regions, still in need for various reasons, of geopolitical organisation, would find a cultural echo would be only trough a similar happenance that made Catalan ensemble distinct from the Occitan one (while Catalan was probably much more closer to Languedoc in most manners than, say, Gascon was).

Giving that a southern Galician ensemble would already be somehow distinct, it might be a departure point as well ITTL : there's no reason it couldn't (altough there's not much reasons, even if there is, to make it happen no matter what)

 

[LSCatilina]

Were there any sizable number of Christian *heretics* in Muslim Spain? Or were the Christians under Islamic rule reliably *Catholic*?

The *latter* : Christians of *the* old rite practiced in Muslim Spain weren't considered as heretics (if a bit, you know, "specials"), and the only *real* heresy in the region that was Adoptianism which was more of an intellectual debate (probably *not* that much about adoptionism eventually) with no posterity to be recorded*.*

 

[GauchoBadger]

An idea just sprung up into my head... how about a Fatimid intervention in Iberia?

 

[Planet of Hats]

An idea just sprung up into my head... how about a Fatimid intervention in Iberia?

That's probably not going to happen considering the general decay in Fatimid authority in Ifriqiya once they moved the capital to Cairo. Well before the Almoravids show up, you already have defections in the central Maghreb. Sending the Banu Hilal in is only going to do so much.

 

[LSCatilina]

An idea just sprung up into my head... how about a Fatimid intervention in Iberia?

While I do think it's possible, even if not particularily obvious, in the Xth century; by the XIth century it's really not doable.
As they refocused from Ifriqiya to Egypt with the conquest of the latter, Fatimids more or less put dependent dynasties in charge of the Islamic West (Zirids, notably).

It didn't worked out, as it soon fractured into various sub-branches or new branchs, and eventually Zirids cut ties with Egypt. Fatimids did tried to restore their influence in Ifriqiya by proxy with Banu Hillal, but it only added to the general mess, in the same time Fatimid underwent serious inner crisis in Egypt, as the Berber management was replaced by Turks (which didn't helped to focus on the West).

Eventually, Fatimids had enough troubles on its own to really think taking back Ifriqiya, let alone conquering al-Andalus.

 

[Tocomocho]

My two cents: Because Seville is a way smaller fish than the Almoravids, I see them basically doing what Ibn Hud did 140 years later IOTL, that is, wasting their energies in campaigns to unify the south while the Christian kingdoms take the northern Taifas undisturbed, and then being jumped on by them. Not right away as in Ibn Hud's case, but the Almoravids and later the Almohads were the desperate dams that stopped and pushed back the Christian tide, and you are removing that. Perhaps the most interesting ripple of no Almoravids is that it doesn't prevent El Cid's exile nor his servive in Zaragoza (as it predates the POD), nor possibly his conquest of Valencia, but it does likely prevent his OTL death and (more importantly) the death of his son. The survival of an independent kingdom of Valencia under Christian leadership, wether as a kingdom of its own or as a vassal of Leon-Castile once Zaragoza is taken out, is certainly a colorful and not explored development. Maybe an actually separate Romance language called Valencian is developed ITTL, rather than the Catalan dialect in denial that we have in our own. As for less evident consequences, the Almoravid/Almohad interludes also islamized southern Spain more than we tend to think, both because of prolonging Muslim rule there and the outright flight of Mozarabs and Jews to the Christian kingdoms (and other parts of the Muslim world in the Jews' case). The bulk of the people in Moorish Spain in this period, more so in rural regions and towards the interior, was still Christian and would be integrated more easily into the Leon-Castile populace than when the conquests happened later IOTL. Even then, there would still be important Muslim and Jewish minorities in large cities like Toledo, both ITTL and IOTL. The capitulations that forced all Muslims out of cities like Cordoba and Seville in OTL came both later and in a very different context, the 13th century, that wasn't there yet in the 11th.

I don't see just Seville rising as a strong taifa -- perhaps Badajoz and Toledo could also gain a bit of power for themselves.

Badajoz and Toledo were both taken by Alfonso VI of Leon before the Almoravids came. The Almoravids recovered Badajoz (and also Lisbon), but could not take Toledo back. Just look at this map, Leon is in control of half of Iberia, and the red line is how the Almoravids pushed it back in just 20 years:

There are only two big taifas left: Seville (which made it all the way to Murcia before inviting in the Almoravids) and Zaragoza (which conquered or puppetized all the taifas east down to Valencia (EDIT - Denia actually) at one point, oddly mirroring the territories that Aragon would take later). This is six years before the above:

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

I stress this : even if Almoravids for some reason doesn't exist, they would likely be replaced in this role by another (possibly weaker) Berber dynasty.

What about the Andalusian Muslim population? If they could be effectively incorporated, would Berber or Arab forces/leaders/etc be needed to keep the Christians at bay?

Another thought occurs to me -- some of the most important philosophers in western history (eg Mainonides, Aveorres) worked and wrote during the Almohad Dynasty, which doesn't exist TTL, regardless of whether the taifas can hold off Christians or if the Reconquista hapoens much earlier. Is it fair to say that if Islamic Spain falls to Christian rulers by then that this flowering doesn't happen? Even if we take the more *optmistic* (and already argued to be unlikely) scenario, where the taifas manage to hold together, would this dawn of scholasticism now be less likely without the context of Almoravid and Almohad *Islamification*?

 

[Planet of Hats]

What about the Andalusian Muslim population? If they could be effectively incorporated, would Berber or Arab forces/leaders/etc be needed to keep the Christians at bay?

Another thought occurs to me -- some of the most important philosophers in western history (eg Mainonides, Aveorres) worked and wrote during the Almohad Dynasty, which doesn't exist TTL, regardless of whether the taifas can hold off Christians or if the Reconquista hapoens much earlier. Is it fair to say that if Islamic Spain falls to Christian rulers by then that this flowering doesn't happen? Even if we take the more *optmistic* (and already argued to be unlikely) scenario, where the taifas manage to hold together, would this dawn of scholasticism now be less likely without the context of Almoravid and Almohad *Islamification*?

Arab forces are in pretty short supply considering that Arabo-Andalusians were always a narrow minority of the actual population; the last new jolt of Arabic blood into Iberia was when the Syrian junds were sent in around the 740s, and then the Abbasid Revolution outright cut Iberia off from any further help. Half the problem is that even a unified al-Andalus got its troops from elsewhere - Christian mercenaries, imported Berber tribes, and later on some experimenting with Saqaliba, but for the most part their manpower relied on having willing troops in the Maghreb who could be shipped in to help.

Muladi armies never really happened considering that with so few Arabo-Andalusians, suppressing shu'ubiyya was pretty imperative for the existing order to survive.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Muladi armies never really happened considering that with so few Arabo-Andalusians, suppressing shu'ubiyya was pretty imperative for the existing order to survive.

I think what I'm getting at is, could that very order fall without collapsing Islamic rule in Spain entirely? Could shu'ubiyya (more or less) actually happen here around this time?