Why dont there seem to have been mercenaries in the Islamic world?
the east in general?
>>2046912
The average soldier in this period was a mercenary so it doesn't need to get mentioned.
>>2046912
Who are the Kwarezmians?
>>2046912
I don't know about the East in general, but Islam encourages Jihad fi Sabil-Allah, so it wasn't really necessary. Besides, mercenaries were reviled, fighting for the sake of wealth (fi Sabil al-Mal) was harshly criticized in the religion. If a caliph or Emir did something like this, it would be a sign of corruption and breaking God's commandments.
>>2046912
The Turks entered the Muslim world as mercenaries who then converted and brought more of their people around.
>>2046932
The average soldier was probably a levied conscript, not mercenary.
>>2046939
ahh forgot about them. but were they mercenaries specifically or just a wandering tribe of Turks fighting for whoever until they became independent.?
>>2047034
I know they became known for being mercs after the Mongols fucked their shit up. I don't think they were entirely mercenaries though.
>>2047044
I don't think they need them. I mean, when Yazid killed a huge portion of Muhammad's family at Karbala, there was still a great deal allegiance to the caliph, especially from Bilad ash-Sham where they ruled. Caliphs had no problem conscripting soldiers, as baligh (mature) males could be potentially penalized and labeled disbelievers if they failed to comply. Either way, Caliphs were reluctant to hire mercenaries, although because Muslims could come from anywhere on earth to serve a caliph, or to support their fellow Muslims, this often happened, albeit tweaked andwithout the title. If they weren't Muslims, it was an unspoken rule that they should not be given positions of authority over Muslims, so for a Christian or Jew to have power over civilians was also something disliked, although not unheard of.