How much land could the Almohad realistically gain with a victory at Las Navas de Tolosa

[Blaze]

Losing Toledo would probably still be the biggest setback the Christian will suffer so far . Also wasn’t Al-Nasr assasinated OTL and only 38 ? If his defeat lead to his assasination which is probable then the Almohad could have some two decade to stabilize and expand a little further in Iberia (thinking about them taking Lisbon at some point) but yeah in the long term the Almohads are pretty screwed seeing how everyone hated them . And depending on what happen in the ATL fall of the Almohad and if the dynasty succeeding them is more successful at taking al Andalusia the fall of Al Andalus except Grenada could be delayed for some century .

Indeed it will be. But Toledo is really the high-water mark for immediate expansion. And it´s not by itself fatal to the christian countries since it only affect one kingdom, albeit the most powerfull. Moreover even if they are able to take Toledo and it´s doubtfull, depending on the damage suffered, they will also certainly have to contend with a call for a crusade on the part of the Pope and two kingdoms ( Portugal and Léon) that did not participate in the battle.
I don´t know if he was assassinated, i couldn´t find any source saying that, tough i´m also not rulling that out. Is survival is indeed paramount for a successfull aftermath since the Almohad collapse was hastened in the following decades during the regency of his son. But either way they will colapse and that will leave Muslim Iberia vulnerable to new christian advances, because at this point, or rather, since the colapse of the Umayadd Caliphate, the andalusi by themselves are not able to repel christian advances

 

[Abd ar-Rahman II]

Indeed it will be. But Toledo is really the high-water mark for immediate expansion. And it´s not by itself fatal to the christian countries since it only affect one kingdom, albeit the most powerfull. Moreover even if they are able to take Toledo and it´s doubtfull, depending on the damage suffered, they will also certainly have to contend with a call for a crusade on the part of the Pope and two kingdoms ( Portugal and Léon) that did not participate in the battle.

Would Leon actually join the crusade ? I would think that Alfonso IX would be quite delighted to see Castille weakened even if he might start to fear the Almohads becoming to powerful . I see him as doing the bare minimum and only lightly participe . And a crusade in and only in Iberia would probably have far less following than the one for the holy land .

I don´t know if he was assassinated, i couldn´t find any source saying that, tough i´m also not rulling that out. Is survival is indeed paramount for a successfull aftermath since the Almohad collapse was hastened in the following decades during the regency of his son.

I have seen it in the Spanish wiki the source come from a Spanish historian of al andalus . He seem to have been assassinated by courtesan in Marrakesh .

But either way they will colapse and that will leave Muslim Iberia vulnerable to new christian advances, because at this point, or rather, since the colapse of the Umayadd Caliphate, the andalusi by themselves are not able to repel christian advances

Agree . The Almohads will still collapse and if the Andalusia are lucky the dynasty that will remplace them might be less hated than the Almohads .

 

[Osman Aga]

Would Leon actually join the crusade ? I would think that Alfonso IX would be quite delighted to see Castille weakened even if he might start to fear the Almohads becoming to powerful . I see him as doing the bare minimum and only lightly participe . And a crusade in and only in Iberia would probably have far less following than the one for the holy land .

I have seen it in the Spanish wiki the source come from a Spanish historian of al andalus . He seem to have been assassinated by courtesan in Marrakesh .

Agree . The Almohads will still collapse and if the Andalusia are lucky the dynasty that will remplace them might be less hated than the Almohads .

I wouldn't question an Almohad Collapse. But with a victory in Iberia against the Christians this makes me wonder when they will collapse. If it is in the 1220s or so as OTL then the Iberians can gain initiative again depending on the result of their previous defeat (large defeat means no huge attack on Al Andalus, small defeat means larger attacks on Al Andalus if the Almohads pull their forces to North Africa just like OTL). If the Almohads collapse later on in the 1250s, or 1260s, then the situation might be different than OTL. Will Al Andalus be controlled by one united Emir/Sultan rather than taifas? Will it be controlled by he who controls Morocco?

These things are important. If the Nasrids, for example, control Al Andalus and secure at least Northern Morocco in the the 13th century they have a manpower source to fight the Christians. If they secure more of North Africa over time they can actually consider offensives against the Iberians.

 

[Abd ar-Rahman II]

I wouldn't question an Almohad Collapse. But with a victory in Iberia against the Christians this makes me wonder when they will collapse. If it is in the 1220s or so as OTL then the Iberians can gain initiative again depending on the result of their previous defeat (large defeat means no huge attack on Al Andalus, small defeat means larger attacks on Al Andalus if the Almohads pull their forces to North Africa just like OTL). If the Almohads collapse later on in the 1250s, or 1260s, then the situation might be different than OTL. Will Al Andalus be controlled by one united Emir/Sultan rather than taifas? Will it be controlled by he who controls

i see the the Almohads collapsing around that possibly a little later if he have a more competent successor than OTL. But yeah the political situation will be different and probably depend on how exactly the Almohad collapse best case scenario for Al Andalus will probably be something like the A House of Lamps TL where Almohads andalusi general manage to hold on Andalusia when the rest of the Maghreb fall to tribal revolt and create a more local and popular dynasty . Another scenario could be a short limited (in numbers) Taifa period with a more successful ibn Hudd or the succesor state Moroccan state of the Almohads basically doing what the Almoravid and Almohads had done and conquering the various Taifa and put another temporary end to Christian expansion .

These things are important. If the Nasrids, for example, control Al Andalus and secure at least Northern Morocco in the the 13th century they have a manpower source to fight the Christians. If they secure more of North Africa over time they can actually consider offensives against the Iberians.

After the fall of the Umayyad the trend seemed to be more of Morocco going and controlling al andalus than the other way so not sure about that but assuming al andalus doesn’t loss the gain made by the Almohads during their collapse and have more breathing room they could get some outpost in Morocco from from where they could hire more mercenary not sure if direct control of vast region is possible or necessary good for Andalusia .