Slitherine

Hello everyone on the forum.

I decided to play a game with a Frankish unit set-up vs an Andalusian one. To be able to experience fighting against other units I also decided to have the Andalusian army being able to bring in allies. I was pretty certain their allies would be either Moroccan or other North African muslim ones. To my surprise the Andalusian Muslims can only bring in allies from Spanish armies. Is that really historically correct? I thought the Spanish Catholics didn't like the Muslim kingdom on the Hispanic peninsula.

It is correct. Have you heard of the great Christian hero El Cid? He actually fought for Muslim Princes as often as he fought against them!

Paul59 wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 11:41 am It is correct. Have you heard of the great Christian hero El Cid? He actually fought for Muslim Princes as often as he fought against them!

And there’s a decent enough movie with Charlton Heston as El Cid too!

According to Wikipedia (a source many don't trust) it says about Al-Andalus

For much of its history, al-Andalus existed in conflict with Christian kingdoms to the north. After the fall of the Umayyad caliphate, al-Andalus was fragmented into minor states and principalities. Attacks from the Christians intensified, led by the Castilians under Alfonso VI. The Almoravid empire intervened and repelled the Christian attacks on the region, deposing the weak Andalusi Muslim princes, and included al-Andalus under direct Berber rule. In the next century and a half, al-Andalus became a province of the Berber Muslim empires of the Almoravids and Almohads, both based in Marrakesh. Ultimately, the Christian kingdoms in the north of the Iberian Peninsula overpowered the Muslim states to the south. In 1085, Alfonso VI captured Toledo, starting a gradual decline of Muslim power.

So it seems that El Cid mostly worked as a mercenary for personal gain, just like John Hawkwood who after the end of the Hundred Year's War went down with the White Company to fight for the different city states in Italy. I still haven't been convinced that Andalusian allies should be armies from Spanish Kingdoms and Navarre.

BornGinger wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 12:07 pm According to Wikipedia (a source many don't trust) it says about Al-Andalus

For much of its history, al-Andalus existed in conflict with Christian kingdoms to the north. After the fall of the Umayyad caliphate, al-Andalus was fragmented into minor states and principalities. Attacks from the Christians intensified, led by the Castilians under Alfonso VI. The Almoravid empire intervened and repelled the Christian attacks on the region, deposing the weak Andalusi Muslim princes, and included al-Andalus under direct Berber rule. In the next century and a half, al-Andalus became a province of the Berber Muslim empires of the Almoravids and Almohads, both based in Marrakesh. Ultimately, the Christian kingdoms in the north of the Iberian Peninsula overpowered the Muslim states to the south. In 1085, Alfonso VI captured Toledo, starting a gradual decline of Muslim power.

That is an extremely broad-brush-strokes account of the events of several hundred years. The details are more interesting, and even wikipedia will reveal them if you delve in more deeply.

BornGinger wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 12:07 pm According to Wikipedia (a source many don't trust) it says about Al-Andalus

For much of its history, al-Andalus existed in conflict with Christian kingdoms to the north. After the fall of the Umayyad caliphate, al-Andalus was fragmented into minor states and principalities. Attacks from the Christians intensified, led by the Castilians under Alfonso VI. The Almoravid empire intervened and repelled the Christian attacks on the region, deposing the weak Andalusi Muslim princes, and included al-Andalus under direct Berber rule. In the next century and a half, al-Andalus became a province of the Berber Muslim empires of the Almoravids and Almohads, both based in Marrakesh. Ultimately, the Christian kingdoms in the north of the Iberian Peninsula overpowered the Muslim states to the south. In 1085, Alfonso VI captured Toledo, starting a gradual decline of Muslim power.

So it seems that El Cid mostly worked as a mercenary for personal gain, just like John Hawkwood who after the end of the Hundred Year's War went down with the White Company to fight for the different city states in Italy. I still haven't been convinced that Andalusian allies should be armies from Spanish Kingdoms and Navarre.

It would be very wrong to think of this entire period in Spanish history as being unremitting Holy war between Christians and Muslims. Once the Caliphate started to fall apart in 1009, it was replaced by several competing small Andalusian emirates, who were often at war with each other. They also took a rather relaxed view of their religion, much to the horror of the Berber dynasties who later invaded the peninsular. Similarly in the north, the Christian kingdoms were disunited and often at war with each other. In such circumstances it was not unusual to see Muslims fighting for Christian kings, and Christians fighting in the armies of Muslim emirs.

Here are a few examples quickly pulled from the wiki, but I am sure there would be many others if you dug deeper into other sources;

Aqbat al-Bakr 1010:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Aqbat_al-Bakr

Graus 1063:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Graus

Cabra 1079:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cabra


What I will agree with you on though is that it would probably be unusual for Christians to fight for Muslims against a Christian king, and vice versa. But it's not possible for the FOG2 Allies feature to make that distinction.

And this sort of thing happened in the Holy Land as well, with Crusader states allying with Syrian Muslims to fight other Muslims.

SnuggleBunnies wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 4:04 pm And this sort of thing happened in the Holy Land as well, with Crusader states allying with Syrian Muslims to fight other Muslims.

Indeed:

Ø In 1108 Tancred of Antioch allied with Ridwan of Aleppo against Baldwin of Edessa and Jawali Saqawa of the Jazirah. Battle was joined, and was hard contested until Jawali’s Bedouin allies noticed Baldwin’s reserve horses and deserted the field to steal and ride off with them. On seeing this, Jawali’s Turks fled, leaving Baldwin’s troops alone to face the whole enemy army. They too soon fled. Christian losses amounted to almost 2,000.

Ø In 1115, Baldwin of Jerusalem, Roger of Antioch and Pons of Tripoli allied with Toghtekin of Damascus against the Seljuk Sultan Mehmed I. The Sultan’s general Bursuq retreated rather than face this alliance, the danger appeared past and the allied army broke up. Bursuq then advanced again. Roger had not dismissed his army, but felt he could not wait for his allies to reassemble. He made a surprise attack on the Sultan’s army at Tel-Danith while they were setting up their tents for lunch, and won a complete victory. Thus ended the last attempt by the Seljuk Sultans to regain control over Syria.

Ø In 1124 the armies of Antioch and Edessa under King Baldwin of Jerusalem allied with the Bedouin emir Dubais to besiege Aleppo. When the atabeg of Mosul turned up, however, together with contingents from Homs and Damascus, the Franco-Bedouin alliance broke up.

Ø In 1139 King Fulk of Jerusalem allied with Unur of Damascus against the atabeg Zangi of Mosul. Zangi retired rather than face the combined army, so Damascus was saved without a battle.

Ø In 1167 King Amalric of Jerusalem allied with the Fatimid vizier Shawar against Zangi’s son and successor, Nur-ed-din, whose army, under Shirkuh, had invaded Egypt. Battle was joined at al-Babein. Shirkuh’s centre, under his nephew Saladin, drew Amalric and his knights off by a feigned flight, whereupon the rest of the Zangid army soon put the Fatimid forces to flight. Amalric managed to cut his way out, but many of his knights were killed or captured. Amalric and Shawar retreated with the remnants of their army, which was still larger than Shirkuh’s. They were eventually able to negotiate his withdrawal from Egypt. The following year Amalric broke his treaty with Shawar and invaded Egypt. This time the Fatimid Caliph called on the aid of Nur-ed-din, who once again sent an army under Shirkuh and Saladin. Amalric was forced to retreat and Shawar was executed on the orders of the Caliph, leaving Shirkuh master of Egypt.

Ø In 1244 the combined forces of Christian Outremer, including the knights Templar and Hospitaller under their Grand Masters and even a contingent from the Teutonic Order, allied with the Ayyubids al-Mansur Ibrahim of Homs, Ismail of Damascus and an-Nasir of Kerak against the Ayyubid Sultan of Egypt, as-Salih Ayyub, and his Khwarazmian allies. The Sultan’s army was under the command of the young mamluk general, Baibars (later himself Mamluk Sultan of Egypt). Battle took place at La Forbie near Gaza. The Egyptian troops held the Franks while the Khwarazmians attacked their Muslim allies. The Damascene troops collapsed first, followed by those from Kerak. Al-Mansur Ibrahim and the Homs troops fought their way out, but the Khwarazmians turned on the flank of the Christians. Although the Franks fought bravely, the situation was hopeless and their whole army was destroyed, with at least 5,000 losses.

From what I have read of the crusades, pretty much every involved group (Europeans, Byzantines, various middle eastern peoples, Mongols, etc) was allied with every other group to fight every group (including themselves) at some point during the few centuries of crusader states existence (and that's not even counting mercenaries).

Looking at history in general it's very rare to have a situation where two factions would have been only enemies or only allies over an extended period of time.