See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/277910395

Myths, Moors and Holy War: Reassessing the History and

Archaeology of Gibraltar and the Straits, ad 711–1462

Article  in  Medieval Archaeology · September 2014

DOI: 10.1179/0076609714Z.00000000034

CITATIONS READS

2 1,000

5 authors, including:

Kevin Lane Clive Finlayson

Universidad de Buenos Aires The Gibraltar National Museum
43 PUBLICATIONS   148 CITATIONS    176 PUBLICATIONS   4,809 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Francisco Giles Guzmán

The Gibraltar National Museum
45 PUBLICATIONS   633 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Death on the Rock: the bioarchaeology of a post-med-ieval hospital in Gibraltar View project

Behavioural ecology of bats, swifts and crag martins in Gibraltar View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Francisco Giles Guzmán on 01 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Medieval Archaeology, 58, 2014

Myths, Moors and Holy War: Reassessing

the History and Archaeology of Gibraltar
and the Straits, ad 711–1462
By KEVIN LANE,1 CLIVE FINLAYSON,2 UWE VAGELPOHL,3
FRANCISCO JOSÉ GILES GUZMÁN4 and
FRANCISCO GILES PACHECO5

WHEN DOCUMENTING GIBRALTAR’s medieval history and that of its eponymous Straits, there
is a tendency to accept at face value the historical accounts that relate the existential struggle for control of
this strategic area between Christianity and Islam through time. For Gibraltar’s history this entailed a
continuous occupation from at least the 11th or even the 8th century to the present day. Fieldwork at
Gibraltar over the last 20 years is transforming this picture. Instead of a slow diachronic development of
the town and fortifications of Gibraltar, new evidence suggests relatively late, mainly Islamic construction
work, mostly undertaken in the 13th and 14th centuries in response to the newly encroaching Christian
forces from the north. In this scenario the Straits became a hotly contested battleground at that time,
even one invested with religious significance by some observers, between competing Muslim and Christian
factions. The archaeology of Gibraltar helps elucidate these shifting patterns of hegemony for control of the
Straits, culminating in the Castilian victory in the 15th century.

In ad 711 Ṭāriq ibn Ziyād, a Berber general under the command of the Damascene,
and later Cordoban, Umayyad caliphate, crossed the straits separating Africa from Europe
at the western edge of the Mediterranean. He landed at or near to Gibraltar, renamed
in Ṭāriq’s honour Ǧabal Tāriq (‘Mountain of Ṭāriq’). His campaign precipitated the col-
lapse and rapid conquest ˙of Visigothic Spain and the establishment of Muslim al-Andalus.
Islam in Spain survived down to the fall of the Naṣrid dynasty of Granada in 1492 against
the combined forces of Castile and Aragon — an alliance that foreshadowed the
establishment of modern Spain.
In this conflict, spanning well over seven centuries, control of the Straits of Gibraltar
constituted the benchmark against which to chart the fate of the various neighbouring
Muslim and Christian kingdoms. By the 13th century at the very latest the struggle for

1 McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridgeshire
CB2 3ER, UK. kevin.lane@cantab.net
2 Gibraltar Museum, 18–20 Bomb House Lane, PO Box 939, Gibraltar. jcfinlay@gibraltar.gi
3 Classics and Ancient History, The University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK. u.vagelpohl@warwick.ac.uk
4 Servicios de Arqueología, Lebrillo, 43, 11500, Sierra De San Cristobal, El Puerto De Santa Maria, Cádiz,
Spain. frangilesguzman@hotmail.com
5 Museo Municipal de El Puerto de Santa María, Calle del Pagador 1, 11500, El Puerto de Santa María, Cádiz,
Spain. pacogiles@hotmail.es

136

© Society for Medieval Archaeology 2014 DOI: 10.1179/0076609714Z.00000000034

 myths, moors and holy war 137

fig 1
Map of the Straits of
Gibraltar, showing main
medieval towns.
Map by K Lane.

control of the Straits of Gibraltar had essentially been reduced to a fight for five towns or
plazas (Fig 1), two on the African coast — Tangier and Ceuta — and three on the Euro-
pean coast — Tarifa, Algeciras and Gibraltar. Of these, the closer-knit triangle of Ceuta,
Algeciras and Gibraltar at the eastern end of the Straits zone was the crucial fulcrum
around which the contest for the area by the various parties fluctuated. For the Muslims,
control of the Straits was not just of local geopolitical importance but constituted in effect
the essential link that made an Islamic political presence viable on the peninsula. With the
loss of Gibraltar, the last port on the north shore, in 1462, the fate of Muslim al-Andalus
was sealed. With the fall of Tangier to the Portuguese in 1471, all five Straits ports had
passed into Christian hands.
This article takes an implicitly historical-anthropological approach that aims to
reconstruct the historical narrative of the Straits of Gibraltar by using extant historical
sources and, especially, the archaeological record of over 20 years of excavations at the
city of Gibraltar.6 As one of the pivotal military bulwarks of the Straits during this period,
Gibraltar serves as a perfect proxy for understanding the Islamic and Christian presence
in the Straits zone and especially for resolving the convoluted history of this region during
the final struggle from the 13th to the 15th century, which culminated in Christian
domination of the Straits.

6 Macfarlane 1977; see also Lightfoot 1995; 2005; Voss 2008 for an updated assessment of this theory.
138 kevin lane et al
There are a large number of excellent studies dealing with the medieval history of
Gibraltar and its context within the Straits.7 Conversely, within archaeology, only one
study offers a synthetic account of the area’s evolution.8 This study, while an admirable
achievement, fails to reappraise the historical sources in the light of archaeological discov-
eries and thus propagates interpretative errors that have been present since Torres Balbás’
seminal work on Islamic Gibraltar,9 among them the erroneous attribution of a gatehouse
inscription to the Naṣrid emir Yūsuf I (1333–54).10 This article aims to rectify this by
comparing and contrasting the historical and archaeological evidence from unpublished
reports and published articles. Three main questions on medieval Gibraltar arise from
this:
• When was Gibraltar first permanently settled?
• How did the town and fortress of Gibraltar evolve over time?
• How does Gibraltar relate to the history of the Straits?
With this in mind, we first chart the traditional account of the history of Gibraltar
and the Straits during this period, briefly correlating it with the architectural evidence.
This section helps to highlight discrepancies between the relevant archaeological evidence
and the accepted history of Gibraltar while at the same time providing the tools with
which to engage with the altogether more difficult theoretical aspects of political and cul-
tural hegemony in the Straits area. It is on this basis that we propose a new chronology
for this region that addresses these themes.
A discussion section then blends archaeology and history in a more holistic and
integral view of this region in its social, cultural and political context, elucidating the con-
tradictions, misrepresentations and myths that pepper all memory (and recreation) of the
past.11 Seen from a wider perspective, the historical narrative of this region describes the
ebb and flow of empires and kingdoms and highlights issues such as frontiers, cultural
hybridity, creolisation and, crucially, forcible population expulsion.12

A HISTORY OF MEDIEVAL GIBRALTAR AND THE STRAITS

Gibraltar, a hulking mass of Jurassic limestone covering c 6 sq km and rising more
than 400 m above the sea, lies on the NE corner of the eponymous Straits. Although its
strategic significance has long been acknowledged, it is not an ideal site for a town. Even
though Gibraltar provides fresh drinking water through rainfall seepage in the limestone,
its quantity was only ever sufficient for a small population. Likewise, the steep-set, thin
soils of Gibraltar could not sustain much agricultural activity, while herding could supply
only a small quantity of food, even at the best of times. Fishing would have provided a

7 For its reliance on early Arabic sources, Gozalbes Busto 1999 is very complete, while Torres Balbás 1942,
Norris 1961 and Hills 1974 provide excellent, though now dated, syntheses of the historical record. A good sys-
tematic appraisal of Gibraltar’s architecture between the 8th and 16th century is presented by Ballesta Gómez
2001; but in the last two decades a superb Algeciran scholar, Ángel Sáez Rodriguez (sometimes in collaboration
with Antonio Torremocha Silva), has produced a series of papers and books on the topic (Sáez Rodríguez 2007;
Sáez Rodríguez and Torremocha Silva 2001; Sáez Rodríguez 2006; Torremocha Silva and Sáez Rodríguez
1998), which represent the final word on the fortifications and settlement of Gibraltar until the 18th century (it is
best to consult Hughes and Migos 1995 for an appraisal of the 19th- and 20th-century fortifications). Other
studies consider particular details of Gibraltar’s architecture, such as Márquez Bueno and Gurriarán Daza 2008
on Almohad construction features; and López Fernández 2010 on the period between 1309–33.
8 Gutiérrez López et al 1998.
9 Torres Balbás 1942.
10 James 1771, 409.
11 Lowenthal 1985; Connerton 1989.
12 Eg Dawdy 2000; Hurst and Owen 2005; Lightfoot and Martinez 1995.
 myths, moors and holy war 139
rich source of protein, but the medieval town of Gibraltar subsisted in essence on the
produce from the immediate hinterland to the north of the rock itself. Roughly covering
the area of the modern municipalities of San Roque and La Linea, it amounted to c 145
sq km bounded by the Guadarranque River to the west, the Guadiaro River to the east
and the Pinar del Rey National Park to the north (see Fig 1). During times of siege,
though, Gibraltar had no recourse to these resources.
Gibraltar’s precariousness was attested by the poet and historian Ibn al-Ḫaṭīb (1313–
74), who observed:
Gibraltar sparkles with excellent qualities, but it finds itself very isolated, lacking springs, which
makes it necessary to collect even rainwater for drinking, and it is assailed by strong winds impreg-
nated with sand [. . .] It has a dangerous neighbourhood, has few provisions, lacks wells and its soil
is sterile. As a result of this its herds are not sufficient for the needs of the town, given the scarcity
of pasture. [. . .] in reality it lives off the ships that arrive at its port. It appears like a beehive and
its inhabitants live a tiring life, as if they were buried in a tomb.13
Given these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that for most of recorded history
other settlements in the vicinity were larger and more important than Gibraltar (known
as Mons Calpe to the Romans). Carteia, a major urban settlement occupied from the
Classical to the early medieval period was located at the base of the inverted ‘U’ formed
by the Bay of Gibraltar to the north-west of Gibraltar. During the Islamic period the
medieval town of Algeciras immediately westwards across the bay fulfilled this role. Sáez
Rodríguez suggests that some sort of military watch, though not a town, was maintained
at Gibraltar from the Classical period onwards.14 De Luna claims that the first military
constructions on Gibraltar were Carthaginian, but this is not supported by any physical
evidence.15
The discovery of a probable Roman tile during excavations in front of the Catholic
cathedral16 and a possible Roman votive figurine at the Gates of Granada excavation17
might indicate occupation during antiquity, although the evidence is still inconclusive.
Much better documented is the use of caves on the southern littoral, which were once
occupied by Neanderthals and subsequently used as shrines or sanctuaries by passing
seafarers during later periods.18 Even so, Gibraltar’s archaeology has yet to uncover evi-
dence for substantial occupation during the Classical or Visigothic period (ad 409–711).
At the beginning of the Islamic period in Spain (ad 711–1492) Gibraltar became the
pivotal entry point for the troops under Ṭāriq’s command (Fig 2). Ṭāriq landed on 27 April
711, probably along the eastern beach of the sandy isthmus connecting Gibraltar to main-
land Spain.19 Although numerous Arab chroniclers, for example the historian Ibn al-Aṯīr
(1160–1233) and travel writer Ibn Baṭṭūṭa (1304–68/69), attest to early Islamic construc-
tions on Gibraltar, perhaps even contemporary with Ṭāriq’s landing, it should be noted
that both were writing centuries after the event. If any fortifications existed, they were
either built from perishable materials or are as yet archaeologically invisible. It seems in
fact likely that, given the speed with which the Muslims conquered the Iberian Peninsula,
a defended fallback position at or close to Gibraltar would have been unnecessary. In
marked contrast to Gibraltar, Algeciras (Arabic al-Ǧazīrat al-åaÅrāʾ) across the bay was

13 Ibn al-Ḫaṭīb, cited in Abellán Pérez 2005, 72; our translation from the Spanish.
14 Sáez Rodríguez 2007, 23–5; see also Ballesta Gómez 2001.
15 de Luna 1944; based on the chronicler Hernández de Portillo 2008 [1610–22], 71.
16 Finlayson et al 1996.
17 Giles Guzmán et al 2008, entry 899.
18 Gutierrez Lopez et al 2001; Waechter 1964.
19 An excellent reappraisal of these events can be found in the 2011 issue of Alijaranda: Revista de Estudios Tarifeños,
edited by Ruiz Bravo.
 140
kevin lane et al

fig 2
A historical chronology of Gibraltar and the Straits ad 700–1550. Figure by K Lane.
 myths, moors and holy war 141
founded shortly after the Muslim arrival next to (and replacing) an earlier settlement
dating back to the Classical period.
Given the early supremacy of Islam, the history of the Straits fades into the back-
ground under the period of Umayyad control (711–1031), exercised first from Damascus
and after 929 directly from nearby Cordoba, Damascus having been lost to the Abbasids
in the early 11th century. The Umayyad collapse resulted in the fragmentation of Muslim
Spain into taifas (Arabic Ðāʾifa, petty kingdoms or emirates). The southern tip of Spain
(including Gibraltar) passed initially to the Ḥammūdid taifa of Algeciras (1035–58), which
confirms Algeciras’s paramount position in the region. This taifa was later absorbed by the
larger ʿAbbādid taifa of Seville (1042–91). It was Muḥammad al-Muʿtamid (1069–91) who
ordered the strengthening of Algeciras and, significantly, Gibraltar as an insurance against
rising Almoravid power in North Africa.20
The Almoravids (1090/91–1146) ushered in a period of consolidation, albeit of a
smaller Muslim Spain than that controlled by the Umayyads. Gibraltar again slips from
the chronicles, which confirms once more the politically secure nature of this region
within Muslim Spain. Almoravid dominion re-introduced political control of al-Andalus
from North Africa rather than by a peninsular-based power. This continued under the
Almohads (1146–1230/31), who followed another short period of taifa emirates after the
collapse of the Almoravid state. The brief taifa interlude is also the setting for the First
War of the Straits of Gibraltar (1143–46), during which various Christian and Muslim
factions fought for control over this strategic thoroughfare. This new threat raised the
geopolitical importance of the towns in this area.
The arrival of the Berber Almohads (1146–1230/31) coincides with the first
unequivocal indication of urban construction on Gibraltar, documented by, among others,
al-Ḥimyarī.21 ʿAbd al-Muʾmin (1130–63) is credited with having constructed the first town
at Gibraltar, renaming Gibraltar Madīnat al-Fat¬ (‘City of Victory’). Construction of this
city allegedly commenced in March of 1160 and was largely finished by the beginning of
1161.22 It included palaces, a major mosque, a fortress, a port, elite residences, a water
reservoir and a water canal system.23
Even though there is very little archaeological evidence for any of these construc-
tions, most historians and archaeologists agree that this was the first urban settlement at
Gibraltar.24 Sáez Rodriguez for instance claims that the tapial (rammed earth) technique
employed along the wall and gateway (Puerta de la Victoria) of the main castle structure
is of Almohad origin,25 a view supported by other studies.26 New archaeological evidence
indicates that the case for an extensive 12th-century town is less secure than the original
sources indicate. Rather, it supports a later foundation date for the town, possibly in the
late 13th century (see below).
After 1160 Gibraltar and the whole Straits area disappear from the chronicles until
the fall of the Almohads, which started with an internecine power struggle in 1228 and
ended in 1231 with the collapse of Almohad power on the peninsula. In 1231 a new
period of taifas, the third, commenced, and Gibraltar and Algeciras, two of the last out-
posts of the Almohads on the Iberian Peninsula, fell to Muḥammad ibn Hūd, emir of the

20 Jiménez-Camino Álvarez 2012.

21 ‘One of the caliphs of the dynasty [Almohad] [. . .] ordered the construction of a city over Ǧabal Ṭāriq. [. . .]
The sovereign built in her [Gibraltar] a large mosque, a palace as his residence and other palaces for the
princes [. . .]’ al-Ḥimyarī (15th century) as cited in Abellán Pérez 2005, 70, our translation from the Spanish.
22 Sáez Rodríguez and Torremocha Silva 2001, 188.
23 See Abellán Pérez 2005, 70; Sáez Rodríguez 2007, 33–4; Torres Balbás 1942, 175; see also Al-Himyari 1963
[1461], 249; and Ibn Sahib al-Sala 1969 [1200–10], 21–3; for the original Arab sources.
24 Sáez Rodríguez and Torremocha Silva 2001; Norris 1961; Gutiérrez López et al 1996.
25 Sáez Rodríguez 2007, 36.
26 Gurriarán Daza and Sáez Rodríguez 2002, 587, 608; Márquez Bueno and Gurriarán Daza 2008, 118.
142 kevin lane et al
taifa of Murcia (1228–38). The early 13th century was a critical moment for Islam on the
Iberian Peninsula; warfare among petty Muslim rulers provided a perfect opportunity for
the Christian forces to complete the crusading initiative known as the Reconquista. In this
uncertain political landscape Castilians, Aragonese, Genoese, Portuguese and various
Muslim players vied for control of the Straits zone and the adjacent hinterland.
With the collapse of the Almohad state two main Muslim powers emerged, the
North African Marīnids based in Fez and the peninsular Naṣrid dynasty ensconced in
Granada. By 1238–39 the Gibraltar-Algeciras-Tarifa region had fallen to Muḥammad I
ibn Naṣr (1238–73), the Naṣrid founder of Granada. Meanwhile, in North Africa, the
Almohad dynasty was supplanted by the Marīnids, while in central and northern Spain
growing Christian power was increasingly felt in the Straits zone itself, precipitating the
Second War of the Straits that was to last with varying intensity from 1275 to 1350 and
beyond.
This period witnessed constant advances and retreats by the major players as
they strove for hegemony over the Straits zone, including the wax and wane of Marīnid
power, the partial consolidation of the ever-precarious Naṣrid emirate, and the rise of the
eventual Castilian dominance. In a bid to contain Christian ambitions, the Naṣrids ini-
tially invited the Marīnids across the Straits in 1275 but confined them to a small zone
that would not jeopardise their own existence. Their initial beachhead around Gibraltar
eventually came to comprise more than 50 villages and towns.27 The subsequent Marīnid
failure to subjugate Islamic Spain as a whole was due as much to adroit political manoeu-
vring by the Naṣrids as to the growing military strength of the Christians. We should
emphasise, however, that factional and religious divisions did not always coincide: Marīnids
and Naṣrids occasionally aided Castile or other Christian powers in a geopolitical power
struggle that lasted until the end of the 15th century.28
This first period of Marīnid ascendancy lasted from 1275 to 1294 and curtailed
Castilian aspirations in the area, epitomised by the aborted Castilian siege of Algeciras in
1278–79. This period also saw the fall of Marīnid-controlled Tarifa to Castile (1292) with
Naṣrid help. Tarifa was the first town in the Straits zone to fall to a Christian power; it
resisted all subsequent recovery attempts by the Muslims and served as a forward base for
Castilian endeavours in the region. With the wane of Marīnid interests by 1294–95 their
possessions in Spain passed back into Naṣrid hands.
The fall of Tarifa illustrates another aspect of this pitiless struggle for the Straits,
namely that conquest meant expulsion and population replacement. In Tarifa and later
in Algeciras and Gibraltar, the ordenanzas — decrees — issued by various Castilian mon-
archs demonstrate their attempts to populate these towns with loyal subjects. The chron-
icles also report the expulsion of inhabitants of garrison towns; in the case of Algeciras
and Gibraltar, expulsions occurred every time these places changed hands between Chris-
tians and Muslims, for example in Algeciras in 1342 of Muslims and 1369 of Christians.
In Gibraltar Muslims were expelled in 1309, Christians in 1333, and, finally, Muslims in
1462.
The next period (1295–1333) saw a failed Naṣrid attempt to take advantage of
internal problems in the Marīnid kingdom in order to extend their dominion in the Straits.
The Naṣrids took Ceuta from the Marīnids in 1306 while holding on to Algeciras and
Gibraltar. These developments forced the Marīnids and Castile to coordinate their efforts
in stalling the Naṣrids. The Marīnids recaptured Ceuta in 1309 while Castile campaigned
along the north shore of the Straits from their base at Tarifa. In 1309 Castile besieged

27 The source is Rawḍ al-Qirṭās, cited in Manzano Rodríguez 1992, 111.

28 Housley 1992; Harvey 1992; O’Callaghan 2011.
 myths, moors and holy war 143
Naṣrid-held Algeciras by land while the Aragonese fleet invested it by sea. While this siege
was underway, Castile undertook a successful assault on Gibraltar and captured this
redoubt after a short siege of little more than two months.
This was a crucial moment in the history of the Rock: it was the first time that a
wide range of contemporary sources covered events in Gibraltar, including the important
Chronicle of Rey Don Ferdinand IV, King of Castile, at the moment of the actual conquest.29
This siege is also known in traditional historiography as the First Siege of Gibraltar. This
appellation attests to the physical presence of at least a fortress on Gibraltar. All earlier
reports about Gibraltar changing hands do not mention any drawn-out attack or persistent
resistance, adding credibility to the theory that there was only a low level of occupation
and defensive construction on the Rock before this time. The fact that Gibraltar was
completely surrounded during this attack would seem to imply that the fortress lacked a
seaward wall in addition to the keep itself, so that a relatively unopposed landing to the
south in conjunction with a land attack from the north could be attempted.30
Although the siege of Algeciras was abandoned in 1309, Gibraltar was to remain in
Castilian hands until 1333. That same year saw Algeciras (and Ronda) pass to the Marīnid
ruler, Abū l-Rabīʿ Sulaymān, as part of a dowry, which renewed the Marīnid’s interest in
Spain. A Christian outpost in an otherwise Islamic hinterland, Gibraltar’s survival was
always precarious. It had to contend with a Marīnid-Naṣrid attempt at recapture as early
as 1316 by Yaḥyā ibn Abī Ṭālib al-ʿAzafī, the pro-Naṣrid Governor of Ceuta, known as
the Second Siege of Gibraltar. Access to it, and from it, from Christian territory was
always hazardous. In spite of all these difficulties, the Castilian monarch Ferdinand IV
decided to invest heavily in the fortress, extending and reinforcing the walls and towers,
and building a dry dock (atarazana).31 Nevertheless, the fortified precinct of Gibraltar and
its urban core was probably still modest, given its relative isolation.32
The period 1333–74 began with a final sustained effort by the North African
Marīnids to force the issue in southern Spain. In 1333 the Marīnid leader Abū l-Ḥasan
ibn ʿUṯmān (1297–1351) sent his son Abū Malik with an army to capture Gibraltar and
establish himself in the peninsula. The Third Siege of Gibraltar was successful and the
new Marīnid rulers of Gibraltar rebuffed an attempt by the Castilian monarch Alfonso
XI to recapture the recently lost fortress (the Fourth Siege of Gibraltar). A Marīnid
advance towards Tarifa in the same year was defeated, but between 1333 and 1340
Marīnid power in the peninsula reached a level not seen since the late 13th century: they
controlled an important wedge of territory between Algeciras to the west, Ronda to the
north and Marbella to the east.
Hopes for a sustained Marīnid presence in Spain were dashed by the disastrous
Battle of Salado in 1340, when another attempt on Tarifa failed. Thereafter Marīnid
activities focused more on retaining than extending their possessions and by 1350 their
influence was on the wane. Still, they were able to thwart Alfonso XI’s second attempt at
taking Gibraltar (the Fifth Siege), during which the king succumbed to the Black Death.
Declining Marīnid power witnessed the almost farcical attempt by ʿĪsā ibn al-Ḥasan, the
Marīnid governor of Gibraltar, to declare himself king (1355–56) until his capture and
execution by his erstwhile suzerain Abū ‘Inān Fāris (1348–58). Castile and the Naṣrids
stepped into the power vacuum created by the dissipation of Marīnid power; the former
captured Algeciras in 1344 after an arduous siege lasting two years, the latter recovered
until 1374 all former Marīnid holdings, including Algeciras from Castille.33

29 See López de Ayala et al 2010 [1923].

30 López Fernández 2010, 58–9; Sáez Rodríguez and Torremocha Silva 2001, 187.
31 Ballesta Gómez 2001, 150.
32 Sáez Rodríguez and Torremocha Silva 2001, 187, 189–90.
33 Manzano Rodríguez 1992.
144 kevin lane et al
During the long reign of Muḥammad V (1354–59, 1362–91) the Naṣrids re-
established control over their western frontiers.34 Although Tarifa remained in Castilian
hands, Muḥammad V took Algeciras in 1369 and had it completely razed in 1379.35 The
stones were hauled across the bay to Gibraltar — itself surrendered by the Marīnids to
the Naṣrids in 1374 — for use in strengthening that town. The destruction of Algeciras
reduced the number of Straits ports to four: Tangier and Ceuta, both under tenuous
Marīnid control, Tarifa under Castilian control, and Gibraltar under Naṣrid rule. The
probable reason behind the destruction of Algeciras was the increasing difficulty for the
Naṣrids to maintain two such outposts along their western land and maritime frontier at
a time when Marīnid power in North Africa was also declining. In fact, after 1374 no
more substantial aid was to be expected from across the Straits, while the disappearance
of Algeciras denied the Castilians a base on the bay, which left Tarifa as their closest
forward post. These developments also attest to the continuing militarisation and
fortification of the Straits area.
It is during this period that the defences of Gibraltar were seriously enlarged, first
under the Marīnids, who between 1340 and 1350 initiated major constructions such
as completing the seawall down to the modern-day Rosia Bay area known as the tierras
bermejas, as well as a major restructuring of the northern defences including the Calahorra
Tower or main keep, still in existence today.36 The sources also mention the (re)construction
of walls and destroyed buildings, the building of a watchtower, as well as markets, mosques,
an arsenal and a Pilgrim House for the Hajj.37
The Naṣrid ‘quarrying’ of construction material after the razing of Algeciras in
1369–79 also added to the increasingly formidable defences of Gibraltar. The scale of this
construction is perhaps best illustrated by an inscription that existed on the so-called
Yusuf Gate, one of two recorded by James in the late 18th century and since destroyed.38
It is likely that Marīnid or Naṣrid constructions extended to Europa Point, known in the
16th century as Tarfe, including wall remnants, the Nun’s Well water cistern, a possible
mosque or zāwiya — an Islamic school or monastery — at or near the site of the Shrine
of Our Lady of Europa, as well as now destroyed structures such as the Corral of Fez and
the Genoese Tower.39 Architecturally, Nun’s Well has been tentatively dated to the Naṣrid
period, which supports this hypothesis.40
The final Muslim period (1374–1462) seems almost anti-climactic. With North
Africa effectively out of the picture, the existence of Naṣrid Granada depended increas-
ingly on the goodwill of Castile and the other Christian powers. A series of weak emirs
and a civil war led to the gradual erosion of Naṣrid power as the various Christian factions
chipped away at al-Andalus and indeed North Africa. Although Gibraltar briefly declared
for the Marīnid emir Abū Saʿid Uṯmān III (1399–1420) in 1410, control by the Granadine
ruler Yūsuf III (1408–17) was quickly reasserted during the Sixth Siege in 1411. Through-
out this period the Naṣrid hold over Gibraltar remained constant, albeit ever more pre-
carious. The decline in Granadine power is marked by a neglect of Gibraltarian defences
and garrison. The end came in 1462 when Gibraltar fell after a brief siege (the Seventh)
to Juan Alonso de Guzman, Duke of Medina Sidonia, and vassal of Enrique IV of Castile.
By this time Ceuta had already fallen to the Portuguese in 1415 and Tangier followed suit

34 Harvey 1992.
35 Torremocha Silva in press.
36 Sáez Rodríguez 2007; Sáez Rodríguez and Torremocha Silva 2001; Ballesta Gómez 2001; Hughes and Migos
1995.
37 Abellán Pérez 2005; see also Ibn Battúta 1929, 312.
38 James 1771 409.
39 Hernández del Portillo 2008 [1610–22].
40 Gutiérrez López et al 1996, 420.
 myths, moors and holy war 145
in 1471. With this the whole of the Straits zone was in Christian hands and the final
chapter in the Reconquista of Spain commenced. The union of the Castilian and Aragonese
crowns, presaged by the marriage of Isabel I and Fernando II in 1469 and consummated
on their accessions to their respective thrones by 1479, brought the independent Islamic
presence in Spain to an end. The final conquest of Granada in 1492 heralded the
beginning of the late-morisco period, which was to last until expulsion in 1614.41

THE ARCHAEOLOGY — FROM THE SOURCES TO THE MATERIAL

The traditional history of Gibraltar poses a series of questions, the most salient being:
when exactly was this medieval town first constructed? The sources differ but are mostly
ambiguous. Although early Arabic writers mention Gibraltar and the construction of for-
tifications (and perhaps a town) at the site in 711, they are very vague about the nature
of these constructions.42 They did not seem to involve any actual settlement. All these
sources were written at least 100 years after the events, if not later. After 711 Gibraltar is
very much a backwater and whenever a town is mentioned in the vicinity, it is invariably
Algeciras (or Tarifa) rather than Gibraltar.43 Some new construction during the first taifa
period (1031–90) is mentioned, but again does not seem to amount to more than a watch-
tower, at most a small keep with no mention of an urban core. Neither do the Almoravids
(1090/91–1146) seem to have added any new constructions, so that most scholars
regard the well-documented Almohad (1146–1230/31) foundation of Madinat al-Fat¬ at
Gibraltar/Ǧabal al-Fat¬ (‘Mountain of Victory’) as the first town. One exception to this
mainstream account is the view that the town was established in the 13th century in the
aftermath of the fall of Tarifa in 1292.44 What does the archaeology tell us?
The late medieval town of Gibraltar was divided into three main districts: Villa
Vieja, which occupied a thin stretch of land adjacent to the western end of the alcazaba or
main fortress precinct; the Barcina, which extended westwards from Villa Vieja to the
seashore; and the Turba (probably derived from the Arab al-turba al-¬amrāʾ, ‘red sands’), a
larger area located south from both Villa Vieja and the Barcina that covered the red sands
area south up to the King Charles V wall of 1540.45 Further south lay the area known as
the Tarfe.
In the past two decades a team led by Clive Finlayson, Director of the Gibraltar
Museum, has conducted a series of urban and sub-urban archaeological surveys and
excavations within the old medieval town and environs of Gibraltar (Fig 3). It should be
noted that the funds available for these excavations only covered the fieldwork itself and
a preliminary ceramic analysis. It was therefore not possible to obtain radiometric dates
or specialised material analyses of the shell, osteology, geomorphology, etc. This restricts
our interpretations to the architectural, stratigraphical and ceramic evidence.
The most significant of these excavations took place, from north to south, at the Gate
of Granada;46 the SE flank of the castle proper and Willis’s Road47 (these two located in,
or around Villa Vieja); Casemates Square in the Barcina;48 and Saint Mary’s Cathedral49

41 Harvey 2006.
42 Gozalbes Busto 1999, 397–404.
43 Sáez Rodríguez and Torremocha Silva 2001, 188.
44 Hills 1974, 51.
45 Hernández del Portillo 2008 [1610–22], 59–74.
46 Giles Guzmán et al 2008a; Giles Guzmán et al 2008b; Giles Guzmán and Giles Pacheco 2008; Giles Guzmán
et al 2010.
47 Respectively, Piñatel Vera et al 1999; and Giles Guzmán et al 2007.
48 Finlayson et al 1997; Finlayson et al 2000; Piñatel Vera et al 2001.
49 Finlayson et al 1996.
146 kevin lane et al

fig 3
Map of modern Gibraltar, showing medieval districts and major urban excavations. Map by K Lane, adapted
from Wikipedia.
 myths, moors and holy war 147
and the Museum courtyard50 (both in the Turba district). Other, minor digs have been
undertaken at Lover’s Lane,51 the Governor’s Residence at Convent House,52 and at
Engineer Lane53 (all three in the Turba); and at Bray’s Cave at 400 m within the Upper
Rock Natural Park.54 An existing article gives a summary of several structure surveys
including the main fortress precinct, ancillary battlements and the Yūsuf I Gatehouse in
Villa Vieja, and the Shrine of Our Lady of Europa and Nun’s Well in the Tarfe area.55
Excavations which failed to yield verifiable medieval levels are ignored for the pur-
poses of this article, namely the excavations at Lover’s Lane, Convent House and Engineer
Lane. In addition, the medieval level (Level II) at Bray’s Cave only revealed itinerant use,
possibly by goat herders who sought shelter for themselves and their animals and con-
sumed various types of sea molluscs.56 On the basis of ceramic evidence found within the
cave, the authors argue for Marīnid and Naṣrid occupation (13th–15th century) as well as
Castilian-Spanish occupation (mid- to late 15th century).
A note on chronology: given the absence of radiometric dates, we dated sites using
ceramic typology. Various archaeological reports erroneously dated Marīnid and Naṣrid
pottery found in Gibraltar to the 14th century.57 Considering that the Naṣrid occupation
of the area dates from 1238 while Marīnid presence dates to 1275, Marīnid and Naṣrid
pottery found in Gibraltar and the adjacent area could well date to the 13th, not only the
14th century. What is more, given the tenuous grip on the Straits zone by the early Naṣrid
state (ad 1238–75) and the debatable level of urbanisation at Gibraltar during this period,
it would not be surprising to find Marīnid ceramics stratigraphically below Naṣrid
material.
The archaeological interventions at the Gate of Granada and Willis’s Road were
significant as they were located on, or near to, the oldest part of medieval Gibraltar known
as Villa Vieja.58 Of these, the general survey of Willis’s Road at a location near to the SE
wall of the fortress precinct proper yielded very little data. Likewise, an earlier intervention
in this area revealed two Spanish occupation levels from the 15th and 16th centuries
across three small, shallow test pits.59 Much more important was the excavation at the
Gates of Granada (Fig 4), one of two major medieval entrances to Gibraltar from the
north (the other was the Puerta de Tierra or Land Gate, now known as Landport Gate),
both of which are marked in early maps and sketches of the city.60 The Granada Gate
was also part of the extensive N flank defences that included the fortress precinct itself as
well as the ancillary walls down to the sea and southwards along the shore. The gates
opened onto the Villa Vieja district itself and are therefore among the oldest of Gibraltar’s
defences.61 The gate was heavily altered in the post-1704 British period.62
Three test pits of varying sizes and depths were dug down to natural at this location,
revealing a series of pre-1704 levels pertaining to the Castilian and earlier Moorish

50 Gutiérrez López et al 1998; Gutiérrez López et al 1996.

51 Blanes Delgado et al 1997.
52 Valerino 2005.
53 Valerino 2006.
54 Giles Pacheco et al 2001; Boivin et al 2009.
55 Gutiérrez López 1996.
56 Giles Pacheco et al 2001, 76–8.
57 Finlayson et al 1996; Finlayson et al 1997; Finlayson et al 2000; Giles Guzmán et al 2008a; Giles Guzmán et
al 2008b; Giles Guzmán and Giles Pacheco 2008; Giles Guzmán et al 2010; Gutiérrez López et al 1998; Gutiérrez
López et al 1996; Piñatel Vera et al 2001.
58 Respectively, Giles Guzmán et al 2008a; Giles Guzmán et al 2008b; Giles Guzmán and Giles Pacheco 2008;
Giles Guzmán et al 2010; and Giles Guzmán et al 2007.
59 Piñatel Vera et al 1999.
60 Bravo de Acuña 1627; Kagan and Macías 1986.
61 Giles Guzmán and Giles Pacheco 2008, 2.
62 Ibid, 29–30.
148 kevin lane et al

fig 4
Excavations on the northern defences and town of Gibraltar. (a) Map of northern defences and town;
(b) gate of Granada, Villa Vieja district showing the entrance and eastern gate wall, note juxtaposition of
architectural styles; (c) Barcina Gate, Barcina-Turba district showing Islamic walls and gatehouse;
(d) Atarazana, Barcina district showing inside of dry dock, main northern wall and stratified occupation
levels (L). Map from Bravo (1627), photos by C Finlayson.

occupations. There was little Castilian material in the higher stratigraphic level; what there
was suggested a 17th-century date. Of greater importance to us are the lower Moorish
levels that revealed a series of primary and secondary deposits with well-defined Naṣrid
and Marīnid material. This Marīnid material dates to the 13th and 14th centuries, further
supporting a conspicuous Marīnid presence in Gibraltar by the end of the 13th century.
Interestingly, there was no material from any earlier occupation, even though it is likely
that this gate would have been a major entrance into the Almohad town of 1160.
 myths, moors and holy war 149
A detailed architectural study of the gate categorically concludes that the construc-
tion was of Naṣrid and Marīnid manufacture.63 A similar style of construction was found
throughout the medieval castle walls apart from the aforementioned tapial wall (Fig 5) at
the Gate of Victory (Puerta de la Victoria).64 A 13th- to 14th-century construction date for
the majority of the main castle defences would in fact seem to be borne out by both the
historical sources and the archaeological evidence. This was further confirmed by an
inscription (Fig 6) recorded during the 18th century at the E gate of the central fortress
precinct (Gate 2 in Fig 7). The original inscription no longer exists.
This inscription has been erroneously attributed to Yūsuf I of Granada (1318–54)
when Gibraltar was still under Marīnid control.65 Revisiting the inscription provided
important insights into the construction of the town’s defences and the town itself. The
improved transcription and translation of the inscription is as follows:
(1) al-naṣr wa-l-tamyīz (?) wa-l-tamkīn / wa-l-fatḥ al-mubīn /
(2) li-mawlā-nā Abī ʿAbdallāh / amīr al-muslimīn /
(3) ibn Abī l-Ḥaǧǧāǧ Yūsuf / amīr al-muslimīn /
(4) ibn Abī l-Walīd / naṣara-hu llāh
(1) Succour, honour, strength / and clear victory /
(2) for our lord Abū ʿAbdallāh / commander of the Muslims /
(3) son of Abū l-Ḥaǧǧāǧ ibn Yūsuf / commander of the Muslims /
(4) son of Abū l-Walīd / may God grant him victory.
The use of the title amīr al-muslimīn or ‘commander of the Muslims’ is common for
the Almohads and Almoravids and was later adopted by the Marīnids and Naṣrids instead
of the older Umayyad title amīr al-muʾminīn or ‘commander of the faithful’. The three
royal names mentioned appear in this sequence only during the Naṣrid period between
1314 and 1391, so that the inscription names Abū ʿAbdallāh (Muḥammad V, 1354–
59/1362–91), son of Abū l-Ḥaǧǧāǧ ibn Yūsuf (Yūsuf I, 1333–54), son of Abū l-Walīd
(Ismāʿīl I, 1314–25).66

fig 5
Possible Almohad tapial
(rammed-earth) wall. Photo by
K Lane.

63 Ibid, 31–4.
64 Gurriarán Daza and Sáez Rodríguez 2002, 587, 608; Sáez Rodríguez 2007, 36; Márquez Bueno and
Gurriarán Daza 2008, 118.
65 Torres Balbás 1942, 200–1, yet this author did not have access to the original inscription, in James 1771, 409,
having to make do with fragmentary reinterpretations by Carter 1777, 28–35; and López de Ayala 1782, 114.
66 Norris 1961, actually mentions Muḥammad V in his little-read, yet instructive article but still tacitly seems to
accept Torres Balbás’s ascription of the gate to Yūsuf I.
150 kevin lane et al

fig 6
Islamic inscriptions. Top: Muhammed V inscription. Bottom: possible shrine inscription. From James (1771).

fig 7
Map of northern Gibraltar, showing major Islamic fortifications and city expansion. Map by K Lane, adapted
from Sáez Rodríguez and Torremocha Silva (2001, 187).

This new translation effectively ascribes the gate to Muḥammad V. This makes
perfect historical sense, given that this emir received Gibraltar back from the Marīnids
in 1374 and that he also destroyed the fortifications of Algeciras, thereby re-fortifying
Gibraltar as the only defended Muslim outpost on the bay.67 Norris in fact suggests that

67 Jiménez-Camino Álvarez 2012, 35.

 myths, moors and holy war 151
the present castle dates mostly, if not entirely, to the 14th century.68 The only evidence
that challenges this conclusion would be the Almohad tapial constructions mentioned
above, and a second, shorter, inscription described by James in the late 18th century. A
calligraphic interpretation of this dedicatory inscription of a possible small mosque or
shrine entrance places it in the Almohad 12th century, which links it to the foundation of
the town in 1160.69 Other possible Almohad structures are the lower foundations of the
castle and ancillary walls and towers; the old Moorish Wall in the Upper Rock; and a
‘Moorish’ wall at the entrance to St Michael’s Cave referred to in historical sources.70 Of
these, the latter no longer exists, while the former, originally known as the Wall of San
Raimundo, is now known to have been built by El Frattino in the late 16th century.71
Therefore, while the above does suggest the possibility of Almohad construction, it also
demonstrates that the bulk of Gibraltar’s Moorish architecture is essentially from the 13th
or 14th centuries. This has obvious implications for the dating of the town associated with
the fortress.
In the Barcina district, located directly below a natural escarpment and to the west
of Villa Vieja, we have further evidence which confirms a Marīnid/Naṣrid origin of the
first major town at Gibraltar (Fig 4). In this case, the material comes from a substantial
excavation undertaken at the present Casemates Square,72 and a smaller one conducted
at the Barcina Gate delimiting the Barcina and Turba districts.73
The Casemates area has seen major changes since the medieval period. The main
one is that this former urban area was partially levelled after the 1727 siege and com-
pletely after the Great Siege (1779–83). The area was turned into a parade ground and a
firebreak between the northern defences and the town. The N wall was strengthened and
the casemates added at this time. A study of the excavations conducted there has been
published elsewhere.74
Historical sources suggest that there might have been a tower here from the 11th
century onwards, although there is no archaeological evidence for this.75 Nevertheless,
considering the scale of the 1160 Almohad town we would expect something to indicate
that this area was in use during this period: this was the heart of the old town and, as the
later construction of an atarazana (‘dry dock’) at this site illustrates, the adjacent shore was
optimal for mooring ships. The atarazana in fact dominates the 2 m deep excavation across
four pits covering 382 sq m dug in 1998–99.
Only one of the walls of the atarazana was uncovered. It measured 40.8 m E–W
towards the Watergate entrance situated west of the entrance of the structure. The struc-
ture had a series of eight columns 1.7 m in width (with gaps between the pillars of 1.9 m),
and was built of limestone and sandstone. The majority of the walls abutting the structure
belonged to houses recorded on the 17th-century Bravo de Acuña map. The construction
technique of the structure is very similar to that of the La Barcina Gate, which might
suggest a similar date of construction.76 The construction of the Watergate to the west,
probably in the 14th century, would have limited access to the atarazana for all but the
smallest vessels, while expanding the urban core of the nascent town.

68 Norris 1961, 46.

69 Ibid, 46.
70 Ibid, 49.
71 Sáez Rodríguez 2006, 61.
72 Finlayson et al 2000.
73 Finlayson et al 1997; see also Sáez Rodríguez and Torremocha Silva 2001, 187; and Bravo de Acuña 1627 for
pictorial details on the gate and environs.
74 Piñatel Vera et al 2001.
75 Ibid, 222.
76 Finlayson et al 1997.
152 kevin lane et al
Although Piñatel Vera et al’s report suggests a mid-14th-century Marīnid date for
the construction of the atarazana, documentary evidence from the Crónica de Don Fernando
Cuarto suggests that it was constructed during the Castilian occupation of the town (1309–
33), as was the first major keep.77 The Castilian need for a fortified dry dock was evident,
given that Christian Gibraltar was completely surrounded by Muslim territory. The
contested waters of the Straits would have been the only ‘safe’ passage available for
provisioning the garrison in wartime.
In the mid-14th century the Marīnids constructed a seawall encircling the town from
its northern defences southwards to Rosia Bay. Unobstructed use of these atarazana along-
side an open beach might therefore have been possible for a little over 65 years. This
seawall was clearly needed: after the fall of Algeciras to Castile in 1344, Gibraltar was the
last peninsular port open to the Marīnids. Late Naṣrid occupation of the town (1374–1462)
would have seen a continued strengthening of these defences, especially in view of the
abundance of building material available after the razing of Algeciras.
While the short Castilian interlude does not figure stratigraphically in the highly
disturbed contexts around the atarazana, there is ample Marīnid and Naṣrid material to
suggest considerable human occupation, including a 14th-century mortared pavement in
test pit B as well as Marīnid and Naṣrid levels in test pits A and C. Across test pits A, B
and C, Castilian and Spanish material overlies the earlier Moorish levels. Test pit D did
not go beyond the Spanish levels. A detailed study of the medieval material reveals that
the Marīnid ceramics date to as early as the late 13th century, while the Naṣrid material
is of a more generically 14th-century type. This supports the theory that the Marīnids
established the first significant town at Gibraltar.
Two small test pits (test pit 1 located to the east, test pit 2 to the west) at the S
end of Casemates Square at the site of the Barcina Gate uncovered a very similar set of
deposits, Marīnid and Naṣrid ceramic (13th–15th century) overlain by Castilian wares,
including Columbia Plain (mid-15th–16th century) and blue Seville ware (17th century).
There are also five structural walls (M1–5) that belong to the curtain walls and gate
entrance dividing the Barcina and Turba districts (Fig 4).78 Of these walls, only one (M1)
was visible above ground. All these walls are constructed similarly of limestone blocks
cemented with lime, sand and clay. M1 also displayed later alterations in brick. They all
belonged to a single construction — curtain wall and gatehouse — but M5 in test pit 2
also revealed paved flooring, including ascending steps, which suggests that some kind of
room was associated with the structure, perhaps as part of the original tower or gatehouse
known as Torre de la Bandera (‘Tower of the Flag’) that was destroyed after the Great Siege
(1779–83).
Further south in the Turba district two sites contained important medieval levels.
These were the Saint Mary’s Cathedral and the Museum Courtyard sites.79 The Saint
Mary’s Cathedral excavation (known as MS1 and MS2) was situated on the site of a
medieval mosque dating from at least the Marīnid period. Following the Great Siege
(1779–83) and the cathedral’s reconstruction of 1800–10, the building was reduced by one-
third. Roadworks in the 1990s exposed this reduced third of the cathedral/mosque for
excavation, and a pre-1800 plan of the church was used to set the excavation trenches.80
The excavation uncovered three main structures: at the S end of the excavation an
unmortared, limestone-clad well (0.9 m diameter, 2.1 m depth) was cutting into the second
structure, a solid, 1.2 m wide wall running N–S from the well at a distance of 15 m with

77 López Fernández 2010, 60.

78 Finlayson et al 1997.
79 Respectively, Finlayson et al 1996; and Gutiérrez López et al 1998; Gutiérrez López et al 1996.
80 Booth 1776.
 myths, moors and holy war 153
an articulated corner on the N edge, built of limestone and sandstone. It also included a
1.5 m wide entrance flanked by two large semi-circular structures, probably the remains
of a portico entrance built during the subsequent Christian remodelling. Associated with
this wall are a series of intercutting burials and ossuaries, both inside and outside of the
structure. The wall itself is of similar construction to the Barcina Gate walls (see above),
suggesting a similar date of construction. A third structure, uncovered more fully during
the MS2 excavations, included a water channel made of bricks and capped by slabs of
limestone lying on an E/W orientation offset 1 m from the N wall of the church. It is
assumed to have been part of the water distribution system for the mosque’s Courtyard
of Oranges. This water channel was discovered in conjunction with a continuation of the
large N–S wall and a large pillar that cut into this wall as well as another water channel.
As with the second structure described above, post-medieval burials and ossuaries were
also uncovered here. The pillar was probably also part of post-Muslim period Christian
alterations to the structure, perhaps related to the tower-entrance that existed close by
during the Spanish period.81
Structure 1, the well, is interesting because it cuts across the mosque wall. The pres-
ence of a well fits with Muslim ritual requirements that dictate a series of ablutions prior
to prayer. What is unusual is that this well is recessed into the wall and open to both the
inside and the outside of the mosque. Perhaps its strange location has more to do with the
availability of water at this spot than any other consideration.
Analyses of the ceramic material recovered shows that the lower Muslim levels
were sealed by substantial Castilian and Spanish wares, which in the case of the well
(Structure 1), were used to infill the feature. A large proportion of this material is blue-
on-blue Seville ware. In conjunction with the rest, it gives a late 15th- and 16th-century
date for the assemblage. A Portuguese ceitil coin recovered from the well dates to 1438–
1557 and provides an ideal terminus post quem for the sealing, implying that it probably
occurred shortly after the Castilian conquest of Gibraltar in 1462. It has been suggested
that the adaptation of the site for Christian worship (on-going until the present day) was
preceded by a short period (1462–1502) of desecration of the mosque.82
The Moorish material mainly consists of 14th- and 15th-century Naṣrid water-
bearing wares such as Corded Ware and White Ware and very little Marīnid wares, thus
suggesting that the mosque was used principally during the Naṣrid period. Given that it
is only after 1333, under the Marīnids, that the seawall enclosing the Turba was con-
structed, it is likely that the pre-1333 occupation of this area of the town was very limited
since the area was exposed to attack from the sea to the west. The mosque was therefore
probably built after this date once the Turba emerged as a district in its own right. The
preponderance of Naṣrīd material over Marīnid is likely a consequence of their longer
occupation of the Turba area after it was enclosed by the seawall. No Almohad material
was found at this site.
The final excavation uncovering Islamic stratigraphy was at the Gibraltar Museum
during the restoration of the Moorish baths or ¬ammām that are to be found within the
museum building itself. The baths, long a tourist attraction, produced no new data. Much
more valuable was an excavation of a large trench conducted in the entrance courtyard
to the south of the museum proper.83 This location, close to the medieval covered water
canal system, was ideal for the maintenance of a bathhouse that remained in use until the
British period. Numerous remodelling phases, especially of the hydraulic infrastructure,
were evident both in the bathhouse and the courtyard, including British and Spanish era

81 Finlayson et al 1996, 7.
82 Gutiérrez López et al 1996, 423.
83 Gutiérrez López et al 1998; Gutiérrez López et al 1996.
154 kevin lane et al
floors associated with drains and canals. Below these were the Islamic levels that included
a limestone-clad well. In terms of the archaeological material uncovered the pattern was
similar to the cathedral excavation, a mix of mainly Naṣrid and some Marīnid material
overlain by later Spanish and British material. This assemblage did yield one possible
Almohad sherd, but it was so worn that a precise identification of the piece was not
possible. As with the cathedral excavations, the pattern seems to suggest minimal activity
in this area prior to the mid-13th century.
Further to the south at Europa Point was the area known as the Tarfe,84 which in
Portillo’s time still contained several buildings that may have dated to the Islamic period.
These included the Genoese Tower,85 the Fez Corral,86 the Shrine of the Our Lady of
Europa, and the reservoir known as Nun’s Well. Of these structures, only the last two still
exist.
An archaeological survey and subsoil material recovery exercise around the shrine
did not reveal artefacts older than the 15th–16th century. A substantial modern enlarge-
ment of the shrine probably severely disturbed any existing Islamic levels. Therefore, we
have no evidence to verify whether this might have been a zāwiya (Islamic school) dating
to the Almohad period. As noted previously, Nun’s Well has been tentatively dated to
the Naṣrid period based on its architectural similarities to other Naṣrid underground
cisterns.87

DISCUSSION
To return to the three questions we initially asked about the first permanent settle-
ment at Gibraltar, its subsequent evolution, and the role of the town in the history of the
Straits during the medieval period, it has become apparent that there was no permanent
settlement at Gibraltar during the period between 711 and 1160. In contrast to the his-
torical sources, archaeological research has uncovered very little from this period, suggest-
ing that there was at most a series of watchtowers at this location, perhaps including the
Genoese Tower in the Tarfe district.88 This demonstrates the relative insignificance of
Gibraltar as a population centre at that time. The urban centre in this area was Algeciras
across the bay, located in a more open and fertile location with good water supply and
an excellent port. To the west the small town of Tarifa would also have served to connect
both sides of the Straits. Gibraltar, with its rocky and thin soil and its oppressive weather,
would have been a comparably unsuitable setting for a permanent town.
The historical sources agree on 1160 as the date of the first town at Gibraltar: the
Almohad Madīnat al-Fat¬. Yet the archaeological findings would seem to challenge this
assumption. Furthermore, while it might be assumed that most Almohad architecture was
replaced with or buried by later constructions, the absence of any verifiable Almohad
archaeological levels and material from the excavations at Gibraltar precludes any
substantial Almohad presence in Gibraltar. On the contrary, we argue that, given the
rapidity of the Almohad conquest of southern Spain, the conditions that previously
existed along the Straits, namely full Islamic hegemony over the general area, were in
fact quickly re-established. This reduced Gibraltar once more to the status of a guarded

84 The name Tarfe derives from the Arab word ‘ṭaraf’, meaning ‘boundary’, ‘coast’, ‘end’ or ‘shore’ (Gozalbes
Busto 1998, 28, note 9).
85 Hernández del Portillo 2008 [1610–22], 71, claims that it dated to the Carthaginian period, but it was most
likely Moorish in origin.
86 The Fez Corral was interpreted by Hernández de Portillo 2008 [1610–22], 73, as a market set up by people
from this town during the Islamic period.
87 Gutiérrez López et al 1996.
88 Sáez Rodríguez 2001, 204–19; Sáez Rodriguez 2007.
 myths, moors and holy war 155
but weakly settled peripheral site opposite the real entrepôt on the bay, Algeciras, where
archaeology has revealed substantial deposits of Almohad material.89
As a final aside on this issue, the Arabic term medina/madīna or ‘town’ has been
shown to be fairly loose and does not necessarily imply a significant urban area.90 It could
easily comprise only a fortress and small adjunct out-housing area, as was the case with
the Islamic medina of Tarifa.91 Given the scarcity of Almohad archaeology at Gibraltar,
this could have been another example of this phenomenon: a rural castle (¬i½n) with a
reduced settled core functioning as protection for surrounding rural populations in a
densely populated and urban al-Andalus.92 In this scenario it is likely that the original keep
and the oldest parts of the fortress precinct date to this period (Fig 7). This probably
constituted the only major construction on Gibraltar aside, perhaps, from a small zone
of subordinate housing hugging the W fringe of the fortress in what would later become
the Villa Vieja district. The archaeological findings conclusively relegate the grandiose
Madīnat al-Fat¬ into the realm of myth, as Torres Balbás states concerning Almohad
Gibraltar: ‘[. . .] those constructions [Almohad], although claimed to have been built very
quickly, could not have been very important or of great strength’.93
The real founding of Gibraltar had to wait until the fall of the Almohads in 1231.
It is only after this date that the Islamic hegemony over the Straits zones was effectively
challenged as the Christian powers, especially Castile, exerted increasing pressure on the
region and transformed it into a palimpsest of conflicting interests and power intrigues,
especially during the Second War of the Straits (1275–1350).
The years 1231–75 are characterised by the turbulences of the third taifa period
which gave rise to the Granadine Naṣrid dynasty (1238–1492). We should not overesti-
mate Naṣrid power at a time when Islamic power in Spain was in flux and when the
survival of an independent Muslim kingdom was in doubt.94 That Muslim Spain contin-
ued was the result of Naṣrid political skills, renewed interest by the then paramount North
African state of the Marīnids, and factionalism among the various Christian powers. At
this stage continuing Christian conquests of Muslim territory made the Straits zone a
frontier between these two faiths. It is because of this that Gibraltar slowly came into its
own as an important fortified settlement on the northern shore of the Straits.
Although the northern Straits littoral was nominally under Naṣrid control until 1275,
their reach was in fact strongly limited by Castilian pressure along their whole frontier.
Given Naṣrid military and economic weakness at this point, it is unlikely that there was
much investment in Gibraltar (or, for that matter, in Algeciras or Tarifa). The situation
abruptly changed with the arrival of the Marīnids in force across the Straits in 1275. The
Naṣrids granted the Marīnids a large wedge of land that included Tarifa and Algeciras,
and the new owners were intent on consolidation, as the construction of al-Binya in
Algeciras clearly demonstrates, as a prelude to expansion.
It is this first period of Marīnid involvement in peninsular affairs to which the found-
ing of Gibraltar most likely dates. The most important fact supporting this claim is the
Castilian siege of 1309. Although Gibraltar had changed hands several times before, this
is the first time that a siege is attested. If the attack of 1309 was a siege, then there must
have been something, a substantial structure, to besiege. Although Hills’ assertion that
Gibraltar was built by Muslim refugees from Tarifa in 1292 cannot be confirmed, he is

89 Jiménez-Camino Álvarez 2012.

90 Mazzoli-Guintard 1996.
91 Sáez Rodríguez 2003.
92 Curta 2011, 379, based on Bazzana et al 1988.
93 Torres Balbás 1942, 213, our translation.
94 Fletcher 1992, 157–60.
156 kevin lane et al
probably very close to the truth of the matter.95 As Islamic Spain shrunk under Christian
pressure, Muslim populations were pushed towards areas still held by their co-religionists.
This exodus significantly increased the populations of the Granadine emirate and of
Marīnid northern Africa.96
Although 1292 may not be the exact date of Gibraltar’s foundation, it is likely that
it only predated it by a few years, as the Marīnids consolidated their hold on the N shore
of the Straits after 1275.97 López Fernández’s recent article shows that in 1309 Gibraltar
was still far from the mighty fortified town that it would become during the 14th century.98
Likewise, it is likely that Marīnid material in Gibraltar predates the Naṣrids, as has been
observed in the case of the Casemates Square excavations. By all accounts Gibraltar
probably comprised the castle precinct, northern defence walls, and the districts of Villa
Vieja and Barcina at this stage, the latter still without walled protection to the sea.
The brief Castilian interlude (1309–33) led to a further development of the town
with the construction of the atarazana (‘dry dock’) and a reinforcement of the northern
defences. The difficulty in attracting people to Gibraltar during this period is amply
documented;99 the town eventually succumbed to Muslim pressure and fell once again to
the Marīnids in 1333. At this stage, the struggle for the Straits followed a familiar pattern:
Tarifa was Christian, Gibraltar was Muslim and Algeciras was the town around which the
shifting frontier between the two sides pivoted. This was the point when Gibraltar really
came into its own. The conditions that previously made Gibraltar so unattractive as
a place for a settlement, namely its steep, rocky terrain, made it perfect for defensive
purposes. At the same time, the open geographical setting of Algeciras that previously
favoured it as a port for commerce made it increasingly unattractive as a fortified town.
To all intents and purposes, the real founder of Gibraltar was the Marīnid emir Abū
l-Ḥasan ibn ‘Uṯmān (1297–1351), who regarded a strongly fortified Gibraltar as a secure
foothold on the Iberian Peninsula, especially after the debacle at the Battle of Salado in
1340 and the loss of Algeciras in 1344. Historical accounts and archaeological findings
confirm this: the district of Turba saw a major expansion with the construction of the
seawall, and the castle precinct and defences were further augmented, including the pres-
ent main keep.100 Likewise, fortifications in the Tarfe district to the south probably secured
the area for a small settlement centred on the mosque (or school) and the water cistern
found there. The bulk of this construction occurred after 1333 and was probably effec-
tively over by the end of the reign of Abū l-Ḥasan in 1351. Marīnid power in Spain
slowly collapsed after this point. Yet this period also represented the moment when
Gibraltar eclipsed Algeciras as the pre-eminent town and fortification in the area.
The rising importance of Gibraltar received yet another boost with renewed Naṣrid
interest in the area in the period between 1369–74. Algeciras was razed, effectively making
the town of Gibraltar the controlling fortification of the bay and this portion of the Straits.
The dedication of one of the castle gates to Muḥammad V illustrates his influence on the
development of late medieval Gibraltar. It is likely that any surviving Muslim population
from the environs of Algeciras would have been relocated to Gibraltar and its hinterland,
thereby providing the necessary population base from which the town could sustain itself.
We would expect this period to usher in a further consolidation of the town, its people
and its defences. Apart from the Charles V wall built in 1540, these Marīnid-Naṣrid

95 Hills 1974, 51.

96 Torres Balbás 1942, 178.
97 Hills 1974.
98 López Fernández 2010.
99 Ibid, 62–3; see also López de Ayala 1782, document 1.
100 Ibn Battúta 1929, 312.
 myths, moors and holy war 157
defences probably continued to exist during the Castilian-Spanish period after 1462 and,
with some modifications, until the British capture of Gibraltar in 1704. Likewise, the
contours of the town, which settled around the three districts of Vieja Vieja, Barcina and
Turba with a possible outlier in Tarfe, were also established by this stage.

CONCLUSION
To sum up, the actual founding of a permanently settled town at Gibraltar took
place in the period 1275–92 under the Marīnids, with further construction and consolida-
tion occurring between 1309 and 1333 under Castilian rule; once more under the Marīnids
(1333–51); and finally under the Naṣrid ruler Muḥammad V (1374–91). The development
of a town at Gibraltar corresponded directly to increasing Christian encroachments in the
Straits area throughout the 13th and continuing until the 15th century. With the decline
of Naṣrid power in the 15th century both the defences and the town of Gibraltar were
soon neglected and it finally passed into Castilian hands in 1462.
The founding of Gibraltar charts an evolution in its role that mirrors that of the
Straits as a whole. This evolution ranges from early watchtowers before 1160 to the found-
ing of the Almohad ¬i½n and the eventual development of a fortified town at Gibraltar. It
also traces a fundamental change in strategic priorities: before 1160 the sea was regarded
as the direction from which Gibraltar was most likely to be threatened, but after 1160
Gibraltar and the other Straits towns faced a growing overland threat, which culminated
in the fluctuating Muslim-Christian frontier of the 13th–15th century.
What was the nature of this frontier? From a military standpoint three lines of
defence have been identified. The first line was composed of large urban settlements such
as Malaga or Granada, far from the frontier and acting as primary organisational bases
of operation; a second line consisted of fortified settlements close to the frontier as advance
logistical posts, including Tarifa and Algeciras; and a final line consisted of much smaller
watchtowers (Ðalāʾiʿ, Spanish atalaya) and rural castles (¬u½ūn).101
It was this pivotal second line of defence from which control over the large frontier
zones or marches (banda) was exerted, which characterised the nature of this Muslim-
Christian frontier. Gibraltar belonged to this second line. Furthermore, in contrast to the
commercial port of Algeciras and the Africa to Spain transit port of Tarifa, the growth of
Gibraltar obeyed a purely military logic that was dictated by the existence of the Christian-
Muslim frontier. Only the strategic need to control the approaches to the Straits made
the location of a well-defended town at Gibraltar viable. The town basically grew in
reaction to the growing need for stronger defences at Gibraltar. This is the reason why
this study, which concentrates on the expansion of Gibraltar’s fortifications, also traces the
development of the town.
This frontier cannot be viewed monolithically. Context and place matter: from a
military standpoint, there would have been quiet and active sectors which changed over
time with shifting politico-military priorities. Based on the strategic importance of the
Straits and their location at the intersection of the interests of three land powers (the
Marīnids, the Naṣrids and Castile) and their attraction as a target for various sea powers
(Portugal, Genoa and Aragon), it is likely that this zone constituted a particularly active
part of the frontier. At times the buffer zone between Christians and Muslims became a
‘widowed landscape’,102 denuded of all but military personnel.103 This was especially true
during the Second War of the Straits (1275–1350), when peace settlements and truces
were fraught and short-lived.
101 Garcia Fernandez 1987, 74–5.
102 Gosden 2004.
103 Garcia Fernandez 1987, 70.
158 kevin lane et al
In this context, one salient feature in the battle for dominion over the Straits and its
five principal towns — Tangier, Ceuta, Tarifa, Algeciras and Gibraltar — was the lack
of post-conquest accommodation between Christians and Muslims. Although alliances
existed between the various rivals at different times, conquest by the opposite faith, be it
Muslim or Christian, inevitably meant expulsion. In the case of Gibraltar, its capture in
1309 resulted in the expulsion of 1125 Muslims, while a similar episode in 1333 led to the
expulsion of the Christians, and in 1462 again of the Muslims.104 The other towns in the
zone suffered similarly. This can be seen archaeologically at Gibraltar in stratigraphical
layers that are composed almost exclusively from homogenous cultural material, be it
Christian or Muslim.
The bitter conflict for control of this strategic thoroughfare left little scope for
accommodation of a native urban population that could well become a fifth column, or
for creolisation and hybridity between people and cultures, at least not at this stage. Yet,
population expulsion normally only affected towns and strongpoints while rural popula-
tions were largely left intact after the initial conquest. The hinterland therefore often
presents a more diverse range of cultural material reflecting greater interaction.105 This
led to a situation in the 15th and 16th centuries in which Christian-occupied towns
existed side by side with a Muslim or crypto-Muslim rural hinterland, a truly liminal
landscape. It is the cultural hybridity engendered by the creation, consolidation and
negotiation of this post-conquest landscape that underlies modern Andalucian culture.106
While the military nature of the frontier has been rightly emphasised, other social
and economic factors should not be ignored. Military action in the form of raids, pitched
battles and sieges comprised only a small part of the over 200-year history of this fluctuat-
ing frontier zone. It was also the area through which tributes passed from Granada to
Castile, where rebels hid, hostages were exchanged and trade was conducted. This perme-
able frontier was also a major source of cultural contact between Christians and Muslims,
which left traces in Christian peninsular art and architecture107 and influenced the
emerging Spanish Renaissance and its subsequent Golden Age (1492–1681).108

acknowledgements
We thank the Government of Gibraltar, which, through their generous investment, made the
archaeological work on which this article is based possible. Further thanks go to everyone who
worked on and contributed to these various projects. Special thanks go to Ángel Sáez Rodriguez,
whose advice was both insightful and inspiring. Any omissions or mistakes remain those of the
authors.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abellán Pérez, J 2005, El Cádiz Islámico a través de
sus textos, 2nd edn, Cádiz: Universidad De Cádiz.
Al-Himyari 1963 [1461], Kitab ar-Rawd al-Mitar,
trans P Maestro González, Valencia: Anubar
Ediciones.
Ballesta Gómez, J M 2001, ‘La fortaleza de
Gibraltar y las torres de su costa (Siglos VIII al
XVI)’, Almoraima 25, 149–58.
Bazzana, A, Cressier, P and Guichard, P 1988,
Les châteaux ruraux d’al-Andalus. Histoire et archéol-
ogie des husun du sud-est de l’Espagne, Madrid:
Publications de la Casa de Velâzquez.
Blanes Delgado, C, Piñatel Vera, F and Lane, K
1997, Preliminary report of an Archaeological Investi-
gation at Line Wall Road (‘Lovers’ Lane’), Gibraltar,
Gibraltar: Gibraltar Museum.

104 Torres Balbá 1942, 178–9, 187.

105 López Amador et al 2011 report on excavations at numerous farmsteads (aldeas) with a mix of Muslim and
Christian provenanced material culture. Puerto de Santa María is located in the Cadiz province, near to Tarifa.
106 Moreno 2008.
107 Dodd 1992.
108 Jayyusi 1992.
 myths, moors and holy war
Boivin, N, Fuller, D, Stock, J et al 2009, ‘Bray’s
cave: summary of excavations and analysis of
finds’, in N Boivin, M Petraglia and C Finlay-
son (eds), Exploring Iberia-Africa Connections in
Gibraltar: A Collaborative Archaeological Project
with the Gibraltar Museum 2007–2009, Gibraltar:
Gibraltar Museum, 28–42.
Booth, W 1776, Sketch of the Spanish Church showing
the manner by which it may be divided into four parts
for entering of 70 Persons in each division mark’d A,
B, C and D exclusive of the Alters and Vaults belong-
ing to the same, Gibraltar: Bishopric of Gibraltar.
Bravo de Acuña, L 1627, Gibraltar fortificada
por mandato del Rey, Ntro. Señor Don Felipe III,
London: British Museum.
Carter, F 1777, A Journey from Gibraltar to Malaga,
I, London: T Cadell.
Connerton, P 1989, How Societies Remember. Themes
in Social Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Curta, F 2011, ‘The centrality of the periphery:
the archaeology of al-Andalus’, Early Med
Europe 19, 377–84.
Dawdy, S 2000, ‘Preface’, Hist Archaeol 34:3,
1–4.
De Luna, J C 1944, Historia de Gibraltar, Madrid:
Editora Nacional.
Dodds, J D 1992, Al-Andalus: The Art of Islamic
Spain, exhibition catalogue, New York: Metro-
politan Museum of Art.
Finlayson, C, Giles Pacheco, F, Blanes Delgado,
C et al 1997, Informe sobre la intervención
arqueológica en Main Street — 3 (MS3), Gibraltar,
Enero 1997, Gibraltar: Gibraltar Museum.
Finlayson, C, Giles Pacheco, F, Mata Almonte, E
et al 1996, Informe sobre la intervención arqueológica
en Main Street 1 y 2, Gibraltar: Gibraltar
Museum.
Finlayson, C, Giles Pacheco, F, Piñatel Vera, F
et al 2000, Informe Memoria de Excavación en
Casemates Square. Gibraltar, Gibraltar: Gibraltar
Museum.
Fletcher, R 1992, Moorish Spain, London: Phoenix
Press.
Garcia Fernandez, M 1987, ‘La Frontera de
Granada a Mediados del Siglo XIV’, Revista de
Estudios Andaluces 9, 69–86.
Giles Guzmán, F J, Finlayson, C, Finlayson, S
et al 2008, Excavaciones Arqueológicas en la Puerta
de Granada, Gibraltar: Gibraltar Museum.
Giles Guzmán, F J, Finlayson, C, Finlayson, S
et al 2010, ‘Excavaciones arqueológicas en la
Puerta de Granada de Gibraltar’, in E Mata
(ed), Cuaternario y Arqueología: Homenaje A Fran-
cisco Giles Pacheco, Cádiz: Diputación Provincial
de Cádiz, Servicio de Publicaciones: Asoci-
ación Profesional del Patrimonio Histórico-
Arqueológico de Cádiz, 311–21.
159
Giles Guzmán, F J, Finlayson, S, Giles Pacheco,
F, Finlayson, C and Valarino, C 2008, Memoria
de las Excavaciones Arqueológicas Realizadas en la
Puerta de Granada (Gibraltar). Tomo II: Inventario.
Estudio Cerámico Medieval, Gibraltar: Gibraltar
Museum.
Giles Guzmán, F J and Giles Pacheco, F 2008,
Memoria de las Excavaciones Arqueológicas Realiza-
das en la Puerta de Granada (Gibraltar). Tomo I:
Excavación Arqueológica, Gibraltar: Gibraltar
Museum.
Giles Guzmán, F J, Lojo Galán, J M, Pacheco, F
G et al 2007, Informe de los Trabajos en Prevención
Arqueológica Realizados en Willis’s Road (Gibraltar),
Gibraltar: Gibraltar Museum.
Giles Pacheco, F, Finlayson, C, Gutiérrez, J M
et al 2001, ‘Primer Sondeo Arqueológico en
Bray’s Cave: Campaña de Excavaciones 1999.
The Gibraltar Caves Project’, Almoraima 25,
73–80.
Gosden, C 2004, Archaeology and Colonialism:
Cultural Contact from 5000 BC to the Present,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gozalbes Busto, G 1998, ‘Una descripción de
Gibraltar y el Estrecho en el Siglo XVII:
Teixeira’, Almoraima 20, 23–8.
Gozalbes Busto, G 1999, ‘Gibraltar y el Estrecho
en las Fuentes Árabes’, Almoraima 21, 397–410.
Gundaker, G 2000, ‘Discussion: creolization,
complexity, and time’, Hist Archaeol 34:3, 124–
33.
Gurriarán Daza, P and Sáez Rodríguez, Á J
2002, ‘Tapial o fábricas encofradas en recintos
urbanos Andalusíes’, in Actas del II Congreso
Internacional La ciudad en al-Andalus y el Magreb
(Algeciras–1999) El Legado Andalusí, Granada:
IECG, 561–625.
Gutierrez Lopez, J M, Reinoso del Rio, M C,
Giles Pacheco, F et al 2001, ‘Nuevos estudios
sobre el santuario de Gorham’s Cave (Gibral-
tar)’, Almoraima 25, 13–30.
Gutiérrez López, J M, Giles Pacheco, F, Mata
Almonte, E et al 1998, ‘Excavación arque-
ológica en el Museo de Gibraltar: Una aport-
ación a los orígenes de la cuidad islámica’, in
M Lázaro Durán, J L Gómez Barceló and
B Rodríguez López (eds), Homenaje al Profesor
Carlos Posac Mon, Ceuta: Instituto de Estudios
Ceutíes, 297–318.
Gutiérrez López, J M, Mata Almonte, E, Finlay-
son et al 1996, ‘Gibraltar: medieval archaeol-
ogy. Primeras aportaciones de un proyecto de
investigación. Excavación arqueológica en el
Museo de Gibraltar’, I Actas del Congreso de
Fortificaciones de al-Andalus (Algeciras 1996),
Algeciras: Fundación Municipal de Cultura
‘José Luis Cano’, 417–32.
160 kevin lane et al
Harvey, L P 1992, Islamic Spain: 1250–1500,
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Harvey, L P 2006, Muslims in Spain: 1500–1614,
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hernández del Portillo, A 2008 [1610–22],
Historia de Gibraltar, Algeciras: Incografic.
Hills, G 1974, Rock of Contention: A History of Gibral-
tar, Worcester/London: The Trinity Press.
Housley, N 1992, The Later Crusades, 1274–1580:
From Lyons to Alcazar, Oxford: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Hughes, Q and Migos, A 1995, Strong as the Rock
of Gibraltar, Gibraltar: Exchange Publications.
Hurst, H and Owen, S (eds) 2005, Ancient Coloni-
zations: Analogy, Similarity and Difference, London:
Duckworth.
Ibn Battúta, A 1929, Ibn Battúta: Travels in Asia and
Africa 1325–1354, trans H A R Gibb, London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.
Ibn Sahib al-Sala 1969 [1200–10], Al-Mann
bil-Imama, trans A Huici Miranda, Valencia:
Anubar Ediciones.
James, T 1771, The History of the Herculean Straits,
now called the Straits of Gibraltar: Including those
Ports of Spain and Barbary that lie contiguous thereto,
vol I, London: Charles Rivington.
Jayyusi, S K (ed) 1992, The Legacy of Muslim Spain,
Leiden: E J Brill.
Jiménez-Camino Álvarez, R 2012, ‘Los orígenes
de la cuidad de Algeciras a través de la inves-
tigación arqueológica’, in L A del Castillo (ed),
Algeciras, historia viva. En su arqueología, documentos
y urbanismo, Algeciras-Cádiz: Ayuntamiento de
Algeciras y Diputación de Cádiz, 6–46.
Kagan, R I and Macías, F 1986, Ciudades del
Siglo de Oro: las vistas españolas de Anton van der
Wyngaerde, Madrid: El Viso.
Lightfoot, K 1995, ‘Cultural contact studies: rede-
fining the relationship between prehistoric and
historical archaeology’, American Antiquity 60:2,
199–217.
Lightfoot, K 2005, Indians, Missionaries, and
Merchants: The Legacy of Colonial Encounters on
the California Frontiers, Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Lightfoot, K and Martinez, A 1995, ‘Frontiers
and boundaries in archaeological perspective’,
Annu Rev Anthropol 24, 471–92.
López Amador, J J, Ruiz Gil, J A and Giles
Pacheco, F 2011, La Huella de Al-Ándalus en El
Puerto de Santa María, Cádiz, El Puerto de Santa
María: Ediciones El Boletín.
López de Ayala, I 1782, Historia de Gibraltar,
Madrid: Antonio de Sancha.
López de Ayala, P, del Pulgar, F and de Valera,
D (eds) 2010 [1923], Crónicas de los Reyes de
Castilla: Crónica del Rey Don Alfonso Décimo. Crónica
del Rey Don Sancho el Bravo. Crónica del Rey Don
Fernando Cuarto, Charleston: Nabu Press.
López Fernández, M 2010, ‘Gibraltar entre
Granadinos, Castellanos y Meriníes (1309–
1333)’, Gibraltar Heritage J 17, 56–91.
Lowenthal, D 1985, The Past is a Foreign Country,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Macfarlane, A 1977, ‘Historical anthropology’,
Cambridge Anthropol 3:3, 1–17.
Manzano Rodríguez, M Á 1992, La Intervención
de los Benimerines en la Península Ibérica, Madrid:
MCSIC.
Márquez Bueno, S, and Gurriarán Daza, P 2008,
‘Recursos formales y constructivos en la
arquitectura militar almohade de al-Andalus’,
Arqueología de la Arquitectura 5, 115–34.
Mazzoli-Guintard, C 1996, Villes d’al-Andalus.
L’Espagne et le Portugal à l’époque musulmane (VIIIe–
Xve siècles), Rennes: Presses Universitaires de
Rennes.
Moreno, I (ed) 2008, La identidad cultural de Anda-
lucía: Aproximaciones, mixtificaciones, negacionismo y
evidencias, Sevilla: Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
Norris, H T 1961, ‘The early Islamic settlement
in Gibraltar’, J Roy Anthropol Inst Great Brit
Ireland 91:1, 39–51.
O’Callaghan, J F 2011, The Gibraltar Crusade:
Castile and the Battle for the Strait, Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Piñatel Vera, F, Finlayson, C, Giles Pacheco, F
et al 1999, Intervención Arqueológica en Moorich [sic]
Castle Torre y Paramentos del Flanco Sur-Este,
Gibraltar, Nov.–Dec. 1999, Gibraltar: Gibraltar
Museum.
Piñatel Vera, F, Gómez Arroquia, M I, Giles
Pacheco, F et al 2001, ‘Las Atarazanas Medi-
evales de Gibraltar’, Almoraima 25, 221–38.
Ruiz Bravo, C (ed) 2011, Alijaranda: Revista
de Estudios Tarifeños — Número Monográfico
Conmemorativo del XIII Centenario del Desembarco
Árabo-Bereber del 711, Tarifa: Servicio de Publi-
cacion Excmo. Ayuntamiento de Tarifa.
Sáez Rodríguez, Á J 2001, ‘Almenares en el
estrecho de Gibraltar: las torres de la costa
de la Comandancia General del Campo de
Gibraltar’, Almoraima 16, 1–465.
Sáez Rodríguez, Á J 2003, Tarifa, llave y guarda de
toda España. Fortificación y urbanismo, Algeciras:
IECG.
Sáez Rodríguez, Á J 2006, La Montaña Inexpugna-
ble: seis siglos de fortificaciones en Gibraltar (XII–
XVIII), Algeciras: IEGG.
Sáez Rodríguez, Á J 2007, Las Defensas de Gibraltar
(siglos XII–XVIII), Malaga: Editorial Sarriá.
Sáez Rodríguez, Á J and Torremocha Silva, A
2001, ‘Gibraltar Almohade y Meriní (Siglos
XII–XIV)’, Almoraima 25, 181–210.
 myths, moors and holy war
Torremocha Silva, A in press, Algeciras Medieval
(710–1462).
Torremocha Silva, A and Sáez Rodríguez, Á J
1998, ‘Fortificaciones islamicas en la orilla
norte del Estrecho’, I Actas del Congreso de Forti-
ficaciones de al-Andalus (Algeciras 1996), Algeciras:
Fundación Municipal de Cultura ‘José Luis
Cano’, 169–265.
Torres Balbás, L 1942, ‘Gibraltar, llave y guarda
del reino de España’, Al-Andalus: Revista de las
Escuelas Árabes de Madrid y Granada 7:1, 168–216.
Résumé
Mythes, Maures et guerre sainte: réévalua-
tion de l’histoire et de l’archéologie de
Gibraltar et du détroit, 711–1462 par Kevin
Lane, Clive Finlayson, Uwe Vagelpohl, Francisco
José Giles Guzmán et Francisco Giles Pacheco
Quand on étudie l’histoire médiévale de Gibraltar
et celle de son détroit éponyme, on a tendance à
accepter d’emblée les récits historiques relatant la
lutte existentielle entre la chrétienté et l’islam pour
le contrôle de cette zone stratégique à travers les
siècles. Pour l’histoire de Gibraltar, ceci s’est traduit
par une occupation continue depuis au moins le
11ème siècle, voire le 8ème siècle, jusqu’à nos jours. Les
recherches de terrain effectuées à Gibraltar depuis
20 ans transforment cette perspective. Au lieu
d’un développement diachronique de la ville et des
fortifications, de nouveaux éléments suggèrent des
travaux de construction relativement tardifs, surtout
islamiques, réalisés principalement aux 13ème et 14ème
siècles, en réaction aux forces chrétiennes venant du
Nord qui gagnaient du terrain. Dans ce scénario, le
détroit serait devenu à l’époque un champ de bataille
très contesté, et aurait même été investi par certains
observateurs d’une signification religieuse, entre
les factions musulmanes et chrétiennes opposées.
L’archéologie de Gibraltar nous aide à élucider
l’évolution de ces différentes hégémonies pour
contrôler le détroit, qui allait culminer par la victoire
castillane du 15ème siècle.
Zusammenfassung
Mythen, Mauren und Heiliger Krieg: Neube-
wertung der Geschichte und Archäologie von
Gibraltar und der Meerenge, AD 711–1462
von Kevin Lane, Clive Finlayson, Uwe Vagelpohl,
Francisco José Giles Guzmán und Francisco Giles
Pacheco
Bei der Dokumentierung der mittelalterlichen
Geschichte von Gibraltar und der gleichnamigen
Meerenge besteht eine Tendenz, historische Berichte
für bare Münze zu nehmen, die vom existenziellen
Kampf zwischen Christentum und Islam um die
Macht in diesem strategisch wichtigen Grenzbereich
im Laufe der Zeiten erzählen. Für die Geschichte
Gibraltars beinhaltete das eine durchgängige Beset-
zung von mindestens dem 11 oder sogar dem 8
View publication stats
161
Valerino, C 2005, Archaeological Report — Urban
Report [Location: Back Entrance to the Convent],
Gibraltar: Gibraltar Museum.
Valerino, C 2006, Archaeological Report — Urban
Find [Location: Engineer Lane], Gibraltar: Gibral-
tar Museum.
Voss, B L 2008, The Archaeology of Ethnogenesis: Race
and Sexuality in Colonial San Francisco, Berkeley:
University of California.
Waechter, J D 1964, ‘The excavation of
Gorham’s Cave, Gibraltar 1951–54’, Bulletin
Institute Archaeol 4, 189–221.
Jahrhundert bis in die heutige Zeit. Feldforschung
in Gibraltar in den letzten 20 Jahren verändert nun
dieses Bild. Anstatt einer langsamen, diachronischen
Entwicklung der Stadt und der Befestigungen von
Gibraltar lassen neue Fundstücke auf relativ späte,
zumeist islamische Bautätigkeit schließen, die
hauptsächlich im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert als Reak-
tion auf die von Norden erneut eindringenden
christlichen Truppen durchgeführt wurde. In diesem
Szenario wurde während dieser Zeit die Meerenge
ein heiß umkämpftes Schlachtfeld zwischen muslim-
ischen und christlichen Parteien, dem manche
Beobachter sogar eine religiöse Bedeutung bei-
maßen. Die Archäologie von Gibraltar trägt dazu
bei, diese sich verschiebenden Muster der
Vorherrschaft über die Meerenge zu erhellen, die im
Sieg der Kastilier im 15 Jahrhundert gipfelten.
Riassunto
Miti, Mori e Guerra santa: riesame della
storia e dell’archeologia di Gibilterra e dello
stretto, 711–1462 d.C. di Kevin Lane, Clive
Finlayson, Uwe Vagelpohl, Francisco José Giles
Guzmán e Francisco Giles Pacheco
Nel documentare la storia medievale di Gibilterra e
dello stretto omonimo c’è la tendenza ad accettare
letteralmente i resoconti storici che si riferiscono
alla lotta esistenziale tra cristianesimo e islam per il
controllo di questa zona strategica. Per la storia di
Gibilterra ciò ha comportato un’occupazione inin-
terrotta fino ai giorni nostri a partire almeno dall’XI,
ma forse anche dall’VIII secolo. La raccolta di dati
sul campo condotta a Gibilterra negli ultimi vent’anni
sta trasformando questo scenario. Anziché trattarsi
di un lento e diacronico sviluppo della città e delle
fortificazioni di Gibilterra, dalle nuove testimonianze
emerge che in un periodo relativamente tardo furono
intrapresi lavori di costruzione prevalentemente da
parte islamica, per lo più durante il XIII e il XIV
secolo, per fronteggiare i nuovi invasori cristiani pro-
venienti dal nord. In quell’epoca lo stretto divenne
quindi un teatro di battaglia tra le fazioni musul-
mana e cristiana, ferocemente conteso e, secondo
alcuni osservatori, perfino investito di significato
religioso. L’archeologia di Gibilterra contribuisce a
chiarire il mutevole avvicendarsi delle egemonie per
il controllo dello stretto, culminate con la vittoria
della Corona di Castiglia nel XV secolo.