Una diferente ‘Plus Ultra’ - the Avís-Trastámara Kings of All Spain and the Indies (Updated 11/7)
- Thread starter Torbald
- Start date
You're right, which is why I specified there will inevitably be Dutch trading colonies. Hopefully the Spanish are keen enough to accommodate the entry if the Dutch - possibly selling them marginal/fringe trade posts to avoid waiting for them to take them by force, and also to mitigate overextension.
I Imagine the Spanish would also be wise to invest in Dutch trading companies early on, keeping a close eye on their expansion and possibly using Dutch shipping to make up for their maritime shortcomings.
The Portuguese retain their right to Brazil, Africa, and the East Indies as outlined at Tordesillas, and the Cortés of Castile/Aragon will only be dedicating enough military assistance as is to be expected in a regular military alliance at the time. Most of the aid given to Portugal by the other kingdoms will be indirect: Spanish gold and ships will be loaned to the Portuguese by the Crown and by Spanish investors so as to increase returns on the spice trade, which will greatly help the Portuguese enterprise overseas but will leave them in debt to Castilian/Aragonese entrepreneurs (which strangely enough might help Portugal's absorption into the realm. Xenophonte has the right idea - unity through business!
You're right about that, the Portuguese won't have the power projection to annex Indonesian kingdoms wholesale, and will have to expand in the region through religious conversion, intermarriage, some tactful diplomacy, and a stranglehold on naval chokepoints and trade entrepots.
But seriously, the Spanish activity in North Africa can decrease now (at least by the end of the 1530s), following which Spain is going to be looking primarily beyond Europe for quite some time.
The Fuggers are destined to show up, and they will be an engine for such endeavors. As for bonafide settled colonies, I think many of the German migrants (some of whom will be inspired to leave by the bloodshed and destruction of the imminent Reformation/Wars) will be absorbed into French/English/maybe Spanish colonies, but we'll see
Now that Castille and Aragon is in union with Portugal they will respect the treaty or Tordesillas because there will be no need, compared to OTL when they modified it in order for the Spanish to get parts of the East Indies, I think Papua would most likely end up spanish in this scenario..
I was planning on having the Portuguese ally themselves with Bali, given it's a counterweight to the other Muslim powers dominating the region. Portugal is going to develop a strategy of identifying the local, non-Islamic secondary powers and ingratiating itself with them (instead of going in guns blazing to every port it wants like it did IOTL).
I wonder what effect this will have on North African demographics, because the Genoese are definitely going to start implanting themselves on the Barbary Coast in much greater numbers than they did IOTL.
Also, concessions given to Genoese merchants by the Spanish in North Africa will probably greatly ameliorate relations between them, having been wounded by the embargo (although the embargo hurt relations, it was successful in providing a stopgap to Genoese market domination in Spain, with a great deal of Genoese businesses going under and others dissolved due to their activity in dealing contraband), which is much needed as the Spanish won't be able to take on the Ottomans without the Genoan navy.
Yessir - technically the fort that was built on Gibraltar (La Fortaleza de Santiago de Gibraltar)
Also yes, the Treaty of Toulouse detailed the succession of the Duchy of Brittany, being that it will pass to the successor of Louis XII upon Claude's death - however, that is not to say the Louis XII or his successor won't find themselves getting impatient with the lack of Brittany, especially given that the peace between France and Spain is tethered by the marriage of Claude and Miguel, so the death of either might open up hostilities very quickly...
As of 1506, Maximilian I and his Swabian League have officially been in a state of war with France over Italy. The Italian dispute might be settled in this war, or possibly the one that would immediately follow (if there is one). Spain might involve themselves later on, but it will only be to weaken France rather than protect their Italian possessions, as those have been confirmed by the French in the Treaty of Toulouse.
Yeah, I dont think that treaty is gonna last long....and lol the french arent gonna settle for it, if they were smart they would start warfare during the time Iberia is trying to conquer north africa. Your sucess seems a little to unrealistic and the ottomans should really be stomping in long ago if Miguel tried to take Berber lands.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/spanish-egypt.95262/#post-1760781 This is a similar thread about continuing the reconquista and how that would go.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/spanish-egypt.95262/#post-1760781 This is a similar thread about continuing the reconquista and how that would go.
Last edited:
Yeah, can't get those Frenchman to keep to themselves, especially in this century.
However, France and the Ottomans were both embroiled in pretty taxing wars while Spain was busy in North Africa (roughly from 1506-1530 for France, 1510-1535 for the Turks, all of which I'm going to cover in one of the next updates), so any movement against Spain was limited. Oruç Reis and Hayreddin are both still harassing the Spanish, but they were wrapped up in TTL's siege of Rhodes in the 1520s and most of their anti-Spanish activity has been in Southern Italy, Tripoli, Tunis, and Algiers, which haven't been covered in depth yet. A Spanish-Ottoman war ITTL starts in 1528, and will get it's own update.
As for Spanish success in North Africa, I feel I may have been a little misleading in the last update, especially with the final map. A united Moroccan state no longer exists, yes, but that doesn't mean Morocco has been by any means conquered by the Spanish. It's been broken up into some principalities that, while paying nominal obeisance to the Portuguese, are still Berber-Arabic and very much Muslim (not to mention there is still a capable, independent state in the Draa basin run by the Saadians). Cowing the Moroccans was a success, but it was incredibly costly and might not have been tolerated for very much longer, or without the inflexibility of Miguel and the bombastic victory at Meknes. Also, all of the ports that Castile/Aragon has gained on the Barbary Coast outside of Morocco were all gained by OTL Spain during 1500-1520 with little to no challenge (OTL Spain actually captured a few more than ITTL)
Also, the reason Morocco or elsewhere wasn't similarly battered IOTL is because of a few reasons that are different ITTL: 1) Portugal was given exclusive rights to conquer the Kingdom of Fes, and never did so because of a lack of interest, urgency, and manpower/funds, but ITTL they have the benefit of an Iberian Union and therefore of a king who can force Castile and Aragon to assist them, 2) the Spanish IOTL never invested too heavily in conquering the Maghreb either for similar reasons, and also because they had their hands full in Italy, France, the HRE, the Netherlands, etc, but without all of those distractions ITTL, and with a sufficiently strong-willed and crusade-bent king like Miguel, it's not unlikely for TTL to take a more involved stance on the Barbary Coast than they did in ITTL (Charles was able to mobilize 60,000 troops and just shy of 400 ships to capture Tunis in 1535, so I don't think it's too outlandish for ITTL Spain to commit the numbers it did).
I'll try to consider the effects of the other powers more though - something I've been bad At - so thank you for the advice!
To be honest I think the entire north african campain is a thing that will drain Iberia's resourses, let france take more land in Italy, get the ottomans pissed off and weaken the grip around the colonies. It would be better for Miguel to focus his revenues and attention to his empire and not carry out some ludicrus knight templar conquest that will only end up blowing up in his face sooner or later.
(...)
The Fuggers are destined to show up, and they will be an engine for such endeavors. As for bonafide settled colonies, I think many of the German migrants (some of whom will be inspired to leave by the bloodshed and destruction of the imminent Reformation/Wars) will be absorbed into French/English/maybe Spanish colonies, but we'll see
I wouldn't exclude the Habsburg Empire from having settler colonies too, provided they keep the Habsburg Netherlands intact (best case), though the OTL Spanish and later Austrian Netherlands with Zeelandic Flanders (Zeeuws Vlaanderen in Dutch), which is south of the Western Scheldt in order to keep Antwerp open.
If so, then I can't see, why they won't compete with England and France in such endeavours. These are likely to be separate from the more trade oriented companies. However all these migrants will create a market so to speak, so I can see own initiatives arise as well.
Depending on how the Empire emerges from such struggles, it (so under the flag of the Empire) and not just the Habsburgs could play a role. OTOH since it is likely, that colonial ventures will first develop in Low Countries (Habsburg), they like Portugal and Castille IOTL and ITTL will protect their areas of interest, influence and privileges from others in the union (in case of the Iberian Union, Aragon, which in turn will act in a similar manner in the Mediterranean).
North Africa wouldn't be directly profitable for the Spanish kingdoms for a long time, (presuming they continued to hold it and consolidate their holdings) but one shouldn't understate the indirect value in controlling piracy, and the strategic value in eliminating potential Ottoman allies in the Western Mediterranean. Further, with Carthage, Sicily, Malta, etc all under Spanish control, the Ottomans can be effectively barred from any potential intervention in the Western Mediterranean at all; while the Spanish kingdoms are still able to project power in support of Venice in the Eastern Mediterranean.
As was mentioned up-thread, North Africa could also provide a place to offer mercantile concessions to Genoa in particular in order to improve relations, and hopefully expand trade. Spanish influence in Italy could be further expanded by leveraging trade, commercial concessions, and even potential Italian settlement within North Africa as well.
The north africans are gonna push back the iberians. Its a different ball game with the new world than the berbers tribe.
The Berbers will be an issue for anyone in power in Morocco. But the key to containing their energetic behavior has always been to set one tribe against another. What Miguel should be attempting to do this. Even better to attempt to convert a tribe (A considerable expense) setting a possible domino effect example with the other tribes, especially if the Spanish are obviously the winning side. If there is anyway the Spanish can get the Berbers on their side they could possibly be like desert Cossacks.
I would agree with the criticisms and / or negative statements about the Iberian war effort in North Africa, if the extent or objective of both the current and future Iberian campaign in Africa and its occupation were all of Maghreb, but they are not.
When affirmations are made about both the resources (material and human) and (minimizing them explicitly or implicitly) the potential or real capabilities of a united Iberian kingdom ...
First, we must take into account and remember both the naval and military efforts deployed by Portugal in relation to its economy and demographic potential in America, Africa (East) and Asia. As well as those made by Spain (mainly by Castile) simultaneously in America and in the service of Habsburg dynastic politics in Europe for more than two centuries.
Secondly, given the above, can't be ignored the potentials and / or eventuals, economic and logistic capabilities of a united Iberian Kingdom (even if its constituent kingdoms retain their legislative / fiscal autonomy in their courts).
As well as its industry / tradition of shipbuilding, to build and improve its Navy of war.
As well as, for to recruit and deploy the famous Spanish Tercios (but, despite their name, they were not all Spaniards nor even, were all recruited in the Peninsula, the soldiers in the Spanish Tercios).
The Tercios were characterized by their mobility on the battlefield (infrequent for the epoch) and for their capacity to adapt to any situation. That, together with their efficiency and operative quality (for these epoch's European military standards) allowed them for gaining both a fame and respect, (by their enemies) from which them proved to be worthy, for more than 150 years, across the battlefields of the Europa.
In any case, the area of conflict is only in the north of Morocco and some key cities and the effective control is even smaller (ITTL) and in the case of Morocco is basically only in the north Mediterranean coast and part of its hinterland and part of the Atlantic coast with also part of its hinterland (although it seems, according to the TL narrative, doesn't extend neither very south by lack of interest nor towards the Moroccan countryside (at least by the medium term).
But it should also be taken into account, when analyzing the hypothetically possible Iberian expansion that once have been obtaining their objectives (conquer and occupy the traditional areas with greater political-economic interest and / or strategies) for the Iberian monarchy.
About this there would be no greater interest (in the medium term, at least) in investing or prioritizing the necessary resources for a continuous or permanent campaign both in the Moroccan interior or to extend the effective control beyond the respective hinterlands of the conquered/taken cities.
Except, I guess in Tunisia, where, because of their importance the strategic needs are likely, making that the effective control area would be more widespread than in the rest of the western (African) Mediterranean.
Where Iberian control would not extend (probably) far beyond the 'hinterland' (approximately and according to an interpretation of the geographic term, not very strict, of course).
Leaving the 'rest', under the control of tribesmen chieftain or petty kingdom which in exchange for their vassalage would they receive both military protection and (personal) funding as part of the Iberian political support for the safe continuation of their respective rule against possible threats.
Also in North Africa at the time, there were no political unity and no prospect, at least in my opinion, of overcoming the political stage of tribal hegemony or beyond its common identity as Muslims (predominantly Sunnis), was not very homogeneous, showing a great variety of manifestations according to the ethnic / tribal group that would control / conquer that region ( in whole or in part).
Nor did there exist (in my opinion, by it's modern meaning) a sense of belonging or 'national' identity beyond their respective ethnic groups and / or of the aforementioned tribal structures and their opposition /difference with respect to, in particular, the great Arabized cities of the North African coast.
As for the political aspect, after the destruction of the Moroccan 'sultanate', which was the only (and historically) supra-tribal political organization native to the Maghreb able to organize a resistance and / or a potential threat capable of rejecting or dissuading the Intervention and control in at least Morocco.
Regarding the Iberian monarchy's ability to govern a Muslim population, without alienating it or pushing it to flee the cities and / or a desperate resistance ... the, in many cases, decades of domination in OTL on the Islamic cities in Africa and previously for centuries, in the peninsula, could testify, that the Iberian Kingdoms possessed both the experience and the ability to make compromises and for to govern pragmatically their muslim subjects.
Of course, as any State policy...the above would ultimately depend on the way in which it is applied to the 'terrain' and its decision makers abilities as well as the capacity for resistance and its institutional / dynastic management of the ever present, religious and eventually social pressures against these kind of tolerance and/or pragmatic politics.
But it should also be noted that with a strong and prestigious monarchy by ITTL, the victories obtained and its ability to redirect to America and /or Asia... For the King to face the possible social pressure and religious zeal... allowing to diminish the possible importance / seriousness of the above mentioned pressures and their possible political consequences.
When affirmations are made about both the resources (material and human) and (minimizing them explicitly or implicitly) the potential or real capabilities of a united Iberian kingdom ...
First, we must take into account and remember both the naval and military efforts deployed by Portugal in relation to its economy and demographic potential in America, Africa (East) and Asia. As well as those made by Spain (mainly by Castile) simultaneously in America and in the service of Habsburg dynastic politics in Europe for more than two centuries.
Secondly, given the above, can't be ignored the potentials and / or eventuals, economic and logistic capabilities of a united Iberian Kingdom (even if its constituent kingdoms retain their legislative / fiscal autonomy in their courts).
As well as its industry / tradition of shipbuilding, to build and improve its Navy of war.
As well as, for to recruit and deploy the famous Spanish Tercios (but, despite their name, they were not all Spaniards nor even, were all recruited in the Peninsula, the soldiers in the Spanish Tercios).
The Tercios were characterized by their mobility on the battlefield (infrequent for the epoch) and for their capacity to adapt to any situation. That, together with their efficiency and operative quality (for these epoch's European military standards) allowed them for gaining both a fame and respect, (by their enemies) from which them proved to be worthy, for more than 150 years, across the battlefields of the Europa.
In any case, the area of conflict is only in the north of Morocco and some key cities and the effective control is even smaller (ITTL) and in the case of Morocco is basically only in the north Mediterranean coast and part of its hinterland and part of the Atlantic coast with also part of its hinterland (although it seems, according to the TL narrative, doesn't extend neither very south by lack of interest nor towards the Moroccan countryside (at least by the medium term).
But it should also be taken into account, when analyzing the hypothetically possible Iberian expansion that once have been obtaining their objectives (conquer and occupy the traditional areas with greater political-economic interest and / or strategies) for the Iberian monarchy.
About this there would be no greater interest (in the medium term, at least) in investing or prioritizing the necessary resources for a continuous or permanent campaign both in the Moroccan interior or to extend the effective control beyond the respective hinterlands of the conquered/taken cities.
Except, I guess in Tunisia, where, because of their importance the strategic needs are likely, making that the effective control area would be more widespread than in the rest of the western (African) Mediterranean.
Where Iberian control would not extend (probably) far beyond the 'hinterland' (approximately and according to an interpretation of the geographic term, not very strict, of course).
Leaving the 'rest', under the control of tribesmen chieftain or petty kingdom which in exchange for their vassalage would they receive both military protection and (personal) funding as part of the Iberian political support for the safe continuation of their respective rule against possible threats.
Also in North Africa at the time, there were no political unity and no prospect, at least in my opinion, of overcoming the political stage of tribal hegemony or beyond its common identity as Muslims (predominantly Sunnis), was not very homogeneous, showing a great variety of manifestations according to the ethnic / tribal group that would control / conquer that region ( in whole or in part).
Nor did there exist (in my opinion, by it's modern meaning) a sense of belonging or 'national' identity beyond their respective ethnic groups and / or of the aforementioned tribal structures and their opposition /difference with respect to, in particular, the great Arabized cities of the North African coast.
As for the political aspect, after the destruction of the Moroccan 'sultanate', which was the only (and historically) supra-tribal political organization native to the Maghreb able to organize a resistance and / or a potential threat capable of rejecting or dissuading the Intervention and control in at least Morocco.
Regarding the Iberian monarchy's ability to govern a Muslim population, without alienating it or pushing it to flee the cities and / or a desperate resistance ... the, in many cases, decades of domination in OTL on the Islamic cities in Africa and previously for centuries, in the peninsula, could testify, that the Iberian Kingdoms possessed both the experience and the ability to make compromises and for to govern pragmatically their muslim subjects.
Of course, as any State policy...the above would ultimately depend on the way in which it is applied to the 'terrain' and its decision makers abilities as well as the capacity for resistance and its institutional / dynastic management of the ever present, religious and eventually social pressures against these kind of tolerance and/or pragmatic politics.
But it should also be noted that with a strong and prestigious monarchy by ITTL, the victories obtained and its ability to redirect to America and /or Asia... For the King to face the possible social pressure and religious zeal... allowing to diminish the possible importance / seriousness of the above mentioned pressures and their possible political consequences.
Last edited:
The Fuggers are destined to show up, and they will be an engine for such endeavors. As for bonafide settled colonies, I think many of the German migrants (some of whom will be inspired to leave by the bloodshed and destruction of the imminent Reformation/Wars) will be absorbed into French/English/maybe Spanish colonies, but we'll see
Hey a Habsburg apologist such as myself can dream
Wouldn't it just be Freileben which just translates out as "Live Freely" or better yet Frei Menschen "Free People" be a better way to go since Freilebenere kinda works out as "Free Lancers." Granted my German translation skills are way more literal so I hope I helped a tad ha .
I you're looking for the equivalent of Freemen, then it's 'Freien' (free plural; Frei is German for free
) or more literally free people could be 'Freie Leute' (Free People).? Viriato was not a conqueror... he was the very opposite of a conqueror, a native rebel against foreign conquerors
I was more referring to Viriato of AH.com, who made a TL about a Portuguese South Africa (which is sadly on hiatus...)
corourke
Donor
Without more information, I'd call them "Freilebenden," (Free + Gerund of "to live"), i.e. "Those who live freely." And sorry if is rude to the other posters, but the other German advice posted in this thread doesn't seem very good.
if I had a bit more information about the philosophy of these people I might be able to suggest some alternative names for them, you can send me a PM
PS: great TL!