My Moorish Christain Legion

My son was making fun of me at the weekend becuase despite playing the Moors in my current campaign my main army is composed of almost entirely christian mercenary crossbowmen and spearmen.

He claimed that there was no point me playing the Moors because my army was the same as if I was playing a christian faction. My retort was that the muslim faith at this period in history was very tolerant of other religions and allowed both christains and jews to hold military and political rank as equal citisens and so my army was merely reflecting the religious tolerance of the muslim faith.

He saw that as nothing more than a lame excuse for wanting to avoid relying on the poor quality muslim troops.

So, imagine my surprise and delight then when last night I completed a council request to blockade Toulouse and was rewarded with three units of Christain Guard cavalry.

Nice, now my Christain legion has a guard cavalry contingent.:2thumbsup:

The cristian troops are excellent for the Moors.

It would be a challenge to do the opposite - defend the holy land with nothing but muslim mercs. Would be quite difficult i bet, but probably doable, especially if you have acces to the african merc pool also.

I agree with the son. I'm just coming to the end of a Moorish campaign and it has been great, but I still rely heaving on mounted and dismouted Christian Guard and I flight using largely Catholic tactics. I feel I've really missed an opportunity to get into flowing mounted missile tactics. They should be available as mercenaries, but not as build units.

You see, I've used a half and half approach, and I think that would be realistic.

I'm playing as the Moors now, and I am currently fighting on two fronts: in Europe up through France and Northern Italy and in Egypt (now sieging Gaza). On the Egyptian front I have my desert troops, with my desert archers, Lamtuna (sp?) spearmen, and more desert friendly cavalry.

However, why should I use desert troops in Europe, especially the more northern portions, when I have units that don't receive penalties for fighting in the snow and in the forests like the desert troops do? So, in Europe, I find myself relying more on my Western style troops and tactics with heavy Christian infantry and cavalry, upgraded Arab cavalry, crossbowmen, etc. supported by desert troops (like Lamtuna) here and there.

That is, except for my Tuareg regiment! A full stack of Tuareg Camel Spearmen and Camel Gunners led by my Crown Prince that rides ahead of my main heavy force to clear away field stacks before the siege.

Well, the Janissaries were composed of mainly Christian men and they are the backbone of the high-tech Turkish armies. So the Moors aren't the only ones who are in this situation.

I think when I used to play Moors, I hired a few mounted christians and realized how useless they were and used the dismounted version at best.
Mainly relied on Desert cav and Arab cav. Sometimes jinetes and mounted xbows.
For infantry i'd have loads of berber spears, desert archers and peasant xbows coupled with the occassional dismounted christian.

Once gunpowder dawned, I added a few camel gunners, but realized how useless they were agaisnt missile heavy opponents compared to desert cavalry.

Why, oh why, do you need merc spearmen and crossbowmen when playing the moors? For spearmen, they have Lamtuma's, who are among the best in the game, with a 9 attack and 14 defense with padded armour. For crossbowmen, they have peasant crossbows. While they sound poor, they are armed with the steel crossbow, and so has an attack of 12 and a long range. Much better than the mercs.

Of course, then you can start adding the rest of the roster. Long range archers, excellent fast cav, camels... In the late game, you get good gunners, WONDERFUL mounted ones and the christian guard...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TinCow

Well, the Janissaries were composed of mainly Christian men and they are the backbone of the high-tech Turkish armies. So the Moors aren't the only ones who are in this situation.

---

No-no... Christian boys, converted to muslim men...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

No-no... Christian boys, converted to muslim men...

---

It was my understanding that they remained Christians. Where do you read that they were all converted?

I'm playing Turks, not Moors but half the janissaries are former Christian slaves and they are the bulk of my armies.

On the other hand while I have mainly abandoned my early HA armies and switched to Inf (Jan musketeers with the odd archer for stakes, 2 cannon, hashishim for punch, saracen or dis sipahi for anti-cav and qapakulu for cav. Haven't found JHi as awe inspiring as others who post here. Maybe I've been using them wrong.) my one remaining HA army is terrorising Europe.

Despite technological advances nothing beats full stack Milanese pavise crossbow/broken lance/dismounted knioght armies woth barely a general or ducal knight in there like a HA army backed by Qapakulu. Soften them up with arrows and a couple of charges against any exposed xbows, then charge from all sides. Chain routs in no time.

I love my two 3 gold chevron turkomans, even if their stats are still not as good as my sipahis (mostly silver) - It's the principle of good service.

I'm also plannning on taking this army to america against the inf aztecs.

However for Timurids and Mongols Infantry firepower was the only way to go. It helps that JM have such good melee stats when required too.

I know the armies are expensive but I've been giving each AI 200,00 every ten turns or so to try and make a fight of it.

As a matter of interest do HRE or anyone else get muslim mercs? I think the Sicilians might...

Certainly Frederick 11, grandson of barbarossa, used them extensively. Probably because he managed to get excommunicated 3 times and invaded by the pope!

(I love that guy. To get xcommed 3 times - but never be reconciled! That takes some doing! Went on crusade and was distrusted by muslims as he sneered at God too much. They would rather negotiate with a christian fanatic, who at least believed, than a *gasp* secularist. They felt if he didn't believe in his own god how could you trust him? The templars and hospitallers scuppered him as well...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TinCow

It was my understanding that they remained Christians. Where do you read that they were all converted?

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janissary

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The first Janissary units comprised war captives and slaves, selecting one in five for enrollment in the ranks (Pencik rule). After the 1380s Sultan Mehmet I filled their ranks with the results of taxation in human form called devshirmeh: the Sultan’s men conscripted a number of non-Muslim, usually Christian Balkan boys, taken at birth at first at random, later, by strict selection – to be trained. Initially they favoured Greeks, Albanians (who also supplied many gendarmes), and Bulgarians, usually selecting about one boy from forty houses, but the numbers could be changed to correspond with the need for soldiers. Boys aged 14-18 were preferred, though ages 8-20 could be taken. Greeks formed a large part of the Janissary units. Next the devshirmeh was extended to also include Serbs, Croats and other Balkan countries, later especially Ukraine and southern Russia. The Janissaries started accepting enrollment from outside the devshirmeh system first during the reign of Sultan Murad III (1546-1595) and completely stopped enrolling devshirmeh in 17th century. After this period, volunteers were enrolled, mostly of Muslim origin.[3]

Janissaries trained under strict discipline with hard labour and in practically monastic conditions in acemi oğlan ("rookie" or "cadet") schools, where they were expected to remain celibate. They were also expected to convert to Islam. All did, as Christians were not allowed to bear arms in the Ottoman Empire until the 19th century. Unlike other Muslims, they were expressly forbidden to wear beards (a Muslim custom), only a moustache. These rules were obeyed by Janissaries, at least until 18th century when they also began to engage in other crafts and trades, breaking another of the original rules.

Excellent, thanks.

The POWER of Wikipedia! :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

The POWER of Wikipedia! :laugh4:

---

... is the power of the dark side.

Anything that has, "Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." on it's front page isn't a reliable source, though the information is correct in this case.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-Janissar.html

Hmm! I didn't expect my little story to create such a debate.

To answer a couple of point made above.

@AgentSmith
Like you I find it inappropriate to be raising desert style units in northern Spain, so I tend not to do it. I try to stick to troops which I think fit in better with the location even if that means hiring mercenaries rather than training them. This is equally true of Christian factions operating in the Holy Land, who normally end up being supplemented with Arab mercenaries rather than Knights and Men-at-Arms recruited from local Arab tribesmen.

The ideal solution would be regionally specific unit training, but that isn't provided so I improvise as best I can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Why, oh why, do you need merc spearmen and crossbowmen when playing the moors?

---

There are a number of reasons why this has happened.

My opening strategy regardless of faction is to hire mercenaries to bolster the strength of my initial army. My preference is for mercenary crossbowmen and spearmen which I find suit my style of play and enable me to take initial rebel settlements with minimal losses.

The spearmen usually get replaced by 2nd tier trained units pretty quickly. The crossbows tend to remain in service longer but eventually get replaced by faction specific 2nd or 3rd tier missile units once they become available.

This has not happened as rapidly as usual with the Moors partly because the 1st and 2nd tier units builds just weren’t good enough to replace the mercenaries. But also because as mentioned to AgentSmith I don’t like producing inappropriate units in regional area’s.

For example, the Lamtuma spearmen you mention have only just become available to me in Algier’s. They have been available to me for a while in Pamplona but I would not consider training them there and have stuck with Mercenary Spearmen instead.

I continue to rely heavily on mercenary crossbowmen for similar reasons. Having had peasant crossbowmen and mercenaries fight side-by-side in a couple of sieges I found the mercenaries outclassed their peasant neighbours inflicting a far higher kill count. Desert Archers were similarly outclassed and more importantly died in seconds once the enemy reached the walls. So, my Mercenary Crossbows will be serving me for some time to come and I am still recruiting them which is unusual this late in the game.

The other major influence in the formation of my Christian Legion was quite simply its resilience. I found that most Christian Cities were able to provide enough volunteers to replenish my Christian units quickly after a siege and allow them to march on to their next conquest. Whilst, any Muslim units tended to get left behind waiting for pre-requisite building developments, or worse still sent home to retrain. So, over time my offensive army has become more and more exclusively Christian as lagging Muslim units were replaced with fresh Christian mercenary units to keep it up to strength. In fact as things stand the only Muslim troops in it are the General’s bodyguard and the artillery crews.

It has just been shipped to North Africa where it was needed to relieve Algiers from a Sicilian Siege. A large army of exclusively Swiss Pikemen and Handgunners, quite an impressive sight and pretty tough opposition, luckily 3 batteries of cannon and 4 ballista teams plus 5 units of mercenary crossbowmen knocked the stuffing out of them and my Christian Guard Cavalry rolled up both their flanks and finished them off.

It then got shipped down the coast and took revenge by capturing and sacking Tunis, before being shipped to Sardinia capturing the port and recruiting Sardinian Christians to replace its losses. It is now about to return to Spain where I plan to complete my conquest of the Iberian peninsula.

North Africa will then be left to my Muslim troops to protect and some of those Lamtuna’s, Berber and Bedouin troops will find their way into the garrisons of Algiers and Tunis, just as Sudanese troops form the garrisons of Timbuktu.

Hope that sort of explains the story behind the Christian Legion.

I am curious though. Did the Moors in history actually rely so heavily on Christian forces? What little I know of the invasion is limited to the "Song of Roland" and "El Cid", and a bit of the Reconquista.

If the Moors actually utilized Christian soldiers as the game represents, then you've got an excuse - "As the Moors, I'm having Christians kill Christians and saving my Moors for real battles." :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeutonicKnight

I am curious though. Did the Moors in history actually rely so heavily on Christian forces? What little I know of the invasion is limited to the "Song of Roland" and "El Cid", and a bit of the Reconquista.

If the Moors actually utilized Christian soldiers as the game represents, then you've got an excuse - "As the Moors, I'm having Christians kill Christians and saving my Moors for real battles." :)

---

Well, even if the Christian units were taken away, you still have other options. There are still Grenadine Lancers and Urban Militia which would work better than desert units in northern and central Europe.

While I've reviewed their unit roster, I've never played the Moors. I've only trounced them in Spanish campaigns. They don't seem to last long in any of my games.

From the stat guides, the UM and Lancers seem ok, but UM are swordsmen so cavalry will eat them for lunch. Lancers are outclassed by European knights, but that's a problem all across the Muslim factions.

To the OP's point, the Christian units are really the best units the Moors have for European invasion. Not using them is just gimping his own game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeutonicKnight

From the stat guides, the UM and Lancers seem ok, but UM are swordsmen so cavalry will eat them for lunch. Lancers are outclassed by European knights, but that's a problem all across the Muslim factions.

---

I think this is just a Moorish problem. The Turkish Qapaluku (sp?) and the top end Egyptian Mamluk are comparable to the best European knights.

Muslims used a lot of non-Muslims in their armies for one excellent purpose: to fight other Muslims. Muslims are forbidden to war amongst themselves, so they made extensive use of outsiders for 'brotherly' disputes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeutonicKnight

I am curious though. Did the Moors in history actually rely so heavily on Christian forces?

---

From what I've read the Muslim religion during this period of history was remarkably tolerant of other faiths, unlike the Christians. Both Christians and Jews were allowed to served both in the army and government as equals. Their rights were protected and subject to Muslim law under ‘The Code of Umar’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Umar

So, its reasonable to assume that the Moorish Army, particularly those troops recruited in Spain contained a considerable number of both Christian and Jewish troops. The massive exodus of Jews from Spain did not begin until after its conquest by the Christians.

I’ve tried finding some reference to specific non-Muslim units in the Moorish Army but haven’t had much luck. I can't even find anything like a Moorish Order of Battle let alone details of Christian units. There are some interesting research sites that discusses racial mixing during the Moorish occupation of Spain, though one has to tread carefully as some of these are obviously racist. But basically, the original genetic stock of the Moorish army was ‘black’ (black as pitch, as one writer puts it) with black ‘fuzzy’ hair. However, as the Moorish empire expanded it incorporated lighter skinned tribes such as the Berbers from North West Africa who also had a significant tendency towards ‘red’ hair. And after invading the Iberian peninsula they mixed with essentially white skinned peoples with blonde hair. Thus over the period of the occupation, interbreeding led to a steady change in the mix of racial characteristic’s amongst population and consequently the troops of the Moorish army.

Eyewitness accounts describe the initial invasion army as consisting of Arab’s riding camels and Negro infantry. Later depictions show light skinned troops with red beards and of three Moorish leaders killed in one of the later battles two were said to be white with red or blonde hair and third to be Negro. (its interesting to specualte whether any of them were Christian but obviously nobody thought to ask, and if they had they wouldn;t have got an answer)

This inter-breeding probably extended and merged religious belief also as it doesn't seem as though any racial/relgious segregation took place. Muslims were free to marry (or at least co-habit) with Christians or jews as love or lust dictated. Certainly Muslim leaders included Christian women in their harems whether under duress or otherwise.

It would have been nice to find some reference to something like the Janissaries but so far I’ve found nothing.

I've been playing as the moors now for about 130turns and my armies are usually comprised of 70% moors and i haven't had any problems fighting egypt and european countries. Haven't fought the timurids nor the mongols though..

Quote:

---

He claimed that there was no point me playing the Moors because my army was the same as if I was playing a christian faction. My retort was that the muslim faith at this period in history was very tolerant of other religions and allowed both christains and jews to hold military and political rank as equal citisens and so my army was merely reflecting the religious tolerance of the muslim faith

---

I imagine he was more concerned with the way the army played,than the supposed religion of the little dudes :beam:

As far as the 'historical background' of such a situation goes, there were more than enough European mercs running about, willing to fight for whoever would give them coin. Likewise, the Crusaders were happy to recruit arab mercenaries, particularly as light troops, once their own lack of good light troops was illustrated to be such a large handicap.

As a postscript to the opening post, I am sad to announce that my Christian Legion is no more. They died together with their commander bravely defending Leon against a huge English invasion and now that I am able to recruit Urban Militia, Christian Swordsmen, Peasant Crossbowmen and Grenadien Cavalry they will not be reformed in this campaign.

Its nearly over anyway. Portugal and Spain have been eliminated and I only need one more province to win. (Short Campaign Victory)

The Moors are an interesting military culture because even alot of their Muslim troops were quite alot like their Christian enemies. Apparently after the initial success of the Christian Reconquista the Moors felt that the best way to succeed in future would be to copy the equipment and tactics of Latin Christians, which is reflected somewhat in units like Grenadine Lancers and the various crossbow infantry and cavalry. And they also made use of Christian mercenaries and prisoners. How is this for an obscure unit- in an invasion of Mali in 1570 a Moroccan army equipped 70 captured Spanish soldiers with blunderbusses and put them in the van!