AH challenge: Hispanic India

Krall

Banned
This is not very difficult I think. We just need a stronger Spain. Historically speaking, after 1600 it´s very unlucky and performs badly in most areas, although it should have been capable of being a major power.

With a POD a bit before 1492, we could have a more tolerant Spain: Keep the jews there.

The jews left?

My area of history is WW2 and the British Civil War, so I don't know what you're talking about.

A more sensible economic policy. Initially missing colonial oppurtunities in America, a Spain more dependant on domestic trade and industries instead of having a government filthy rich but reckless.

I'm assuming their economic policy was moronic IOTL? Something like relying almost completely on their empire?

Better luck in wars during the 16th and 17th century.

No succession war.

Luck is something that can easily be changed with butterflies, and the succession war could easily be averted with a few royal deaths/lifes, perhaps a direct male descendant of Charles 2?

And there you go. You have a Spain capable of conquering India.

Kewl. Now make it conquer India. :)
 
The jews left?

My area of history is WW2 and the British Civil War, so I don't know what you're talking about.



I'm assuming their economic policy was moronic IOTL? Something like relying almost completely on their empire?



Luck is something that can easily be changed with butterflies, and the succession war could easily be averted with a few royal deaths/lifes, perhaps a direct male descendant of Charles 2?



Kewl. Now make it conquer India. :)


Well, the jews were persecuted and since they were mostly middle class, traders, scientists, craftsmen, Spain suffered for it a lot.

In IOTL yes, the economic policy was completely stupid and totally dependant on gold from South America. Their currency became nearly worthless due to an overflow of gold, and because of all this money Spain´s government was a reckless spender, pointless wars and huge churches, but no infrastructure.

Basically they didn´t get to participate in the industrial revolution when it came, and were very backwards despite having started out at the age of discovery as the richest and at times the most powerful kingdom in Europe.

I don´t know about conquestadores going to India in 15th-16th century although it would look cool to see them on backs of elephants with crucifixes.

I was more imagining the British way of doing it. They could beat Portugal in some war and claim their colonies in India. They might at an early point fight a difficult war for both sides with Britain and end up giving them some colonies in America against Spain having some monopoly on India. They might then at some point beat France in a war, maybe allied with Britain, or Prussia or Austria for various reasons. (borders spring to mind). At the end of that war they might take their possesions as well in India.

And so at the beginning of the 19th century, Spanish is prospering, owns the coastline of India and is playing the indians off against each other slowly gaining more and more territory.
 
I was more imagining the British way of doing it. They could beat Portugal in some war and claim their colonies in India. They might at an early point fight a difficult war for both sides with Britain and end up giving them some colonies in America against Spain having some monopoly on India. They might then at some point beat France in a war, maybe allied with Britain, or Prussia or Austria for various reasons. (borders spring to mind). At the end of that war they might take their possesions as well in India.

And so at the beginning of the 19th century, Spanish is prospering, owns the coastline of India and is playing the indians off against each other slowly gaining more and more territory.

They don't need to beat Portugal. You just need to make Portugal be united with Spain, what would give the Spanish even more resources. Make Miguel da Paz not dieing in 1500, or the Portuguese independence not happening in 1640. Portugal would be part of Spain, and the Portuguese colonies would become Spanish possessions.
 

Krall

Banned
I don´t know about conquestadores going to India in 15th-16th century although it would look cool to see them on backs of elephants with crucifixes.

Anything looks cool on the back of an elephant with a crucifix, my friend.
 
you could have the Iberian Union of the 16th and 17th centuries hold, and the kings integrate the two countries together (and would probably end up ruling from Lisbon)... this would greatly increase Hispania / Iberia's strength and give them a leg up in setting up trading posts / colonies in India (and better resist Dutch attempts at seizing them).
 

Hendryk

Banned
Because I've never seen it done.
Hope you don't mind, this challenge of yours has given me an idea. It's a spin-off of sorts, as it's one possible way among others of getting a Hispanic India. I've called it Cortes vs. Babur, and the POD is in 1474. I think that if 16th-century Spain focuses its might on India rather than the Americas because its expansion there has been preempted, you'll see a pretty big war between South Indian Spanish client states and the Mughal empire within a few decades...
 
Would the Hindu or Muslim religions survive at all?

Well, they survived the Portuguese....:D
But it would be interesting a kind of sincretism being developed, mixing Catholic and Hindu elements, as happened in Brazil with the African religions, or in Mexico with the native beliefs...
 
Because I've never seen it done.

Make a Hispanic country the main colonial power in India by 1900. Extra points for the Hispanic country not being Portugal or Spain [well, it can be called Spain or Portugal, but it can't be instantly recognisable as such].

Any POD after 1100 A.D.


On a similar note, what would the Spanish/Portuguese call India?


Krall

What about Ferdinand and Isabella being too busy with continuing their crusade against the Moors to pay much attention to a deranged Genoan. Columbus becomes Christopher who and the discovery of the Americans are put back by a generation or so. Spain continues its expansion southwards and occupies parts of N Africa before a long and bruising war with the Ottomans. It doesn't get involved in the Netherlands or Germany and concentrates on the Med. As such wins control of Sicily, Sardinia and most of the African coast west of Tunis, inclusive.

The Portuguese continue their exploration of the African coastline and discover a path to India. They build up a trading and military position as OTL and clash with the Ottomans who start driving them out of the Persian Gulf/Red Sea region. At this point for some reason there is an Iberian union. [Say marriage, a death in the Portuguese royal house, or even the Spanish]. This combines the militism of Castile and experience of fighting both Moors and Ottomans in the Med with the Portuguese trading links in Asia. The new monarch sees in expanded operations in the Indian Ocean and points east a way of both waging holy war, weakened the Ottomans by opening a second front and gaining control of very rich trade links.

As such, with the strength of a combined Iberia behind it along with growing territories in the Med a two front war sees the state at least hold its own in the Med while gaining a stranglehold on the oceanic route to India and eastern Asia. This gives wealth and prompts settlement of the Cape and also establishing bases throughout the region, both to control trade and to wage war on the various Muslim powers especially. In the Indian Ocean it reigns supreme and also keeps out rival European powers. By controlling access to the spices of Asia it not only generates a lot of wealth for itself but also weakened the economy of the Ottomans who had monopolised the overland route after their conquest of the Marmauke state [not butterflied in TTL].

Desire to prevent a Spanish monopoly along with rumours from deep sea fishermen plays a part in northern European powers discovering N America as they seek to find an alternative route to the riches of the east. They will however find little of value until the 1st explorers reach Mexico and the decaying Aztec and Mayan states - stricken by pandemics brought from Europe which have spread before them. As such while the Europeans find riches its exploitation is further delayed by the reduced wealth and disorder in the region. The conquest of the Inca empire by the French, operating from their base in Panama is delayed until say the 1580's. By which time the growing religious crisis in Europe as a slightly delayed reformation tears much of the continent apart disrupts European conquest of the Americas. [Its not enough to overcome the massive handicaps pre-Columbian America labours under but further reduces its importance and hence basically means that a Spain - will call it that for simplicity sake - already wealthy from the eastern trade has little to distract it from the eastern operations.

Basically presuming that without access to the new world gold and silver and with a deeper trading base Spain maintains a stronger economy. Settlement of much of the N African literal during the 16th century provides an outlet for surplus population and keeps military spirit strong.

By the late 16th century, while the Ottomans are on the defensive in the Indian Ocean Spanish interests in India are challenged by the growth of the Mughal empire expanding out of its northern heartland. The latter might be radicalised by the knowledge of a powerful Christian state operating in the southern ocean so might descend into more intolerant behaviour markedly earlier. Or if not it is still seen as a threat to Spanish interests. As a result it has reasons, both evengical and mercantile for deeper intervention into India. [Basically, if there is some way to moderate Iberian behaviour in the Indian Ocean that would be ideal. As it would enable them to ally with Indian/Hindu states against the Mughals. However I think that would be a big stretch].

Steve
 

Krall

Banned
Hope you don't mind, this challenge of yours has given me an idea.

That's kind of the point of AH challenges, of course I don't mind!

It's a spin-off of sorts, as it's one possible way among others of getting a Hispanic India. I've called it Cortes vs. Babur, and the POD is in 1474. I think that if 16th-century Spain focuses its might on India rather than the Americas because its expansion there has been preempted, you'll see a pretty big war between South Indian Spanish client states and the Mughal empire within a few decades...

Woot! Spin-off timeline!

I'm honoured, sir!
 
Er... yes?

This is what I have in mind: if the Spanish manage to present themselves, by deceit if need be, as potential allies of the hindu kingdoms against the growing Mughal empire--anywhere between 1561 and the early 17th century--then wouldn't said kingdoms eagerly let them in?

schmidt27a.jpg


schmidt28a.jpg

That "growing Mughal Empire" thing is a bit misleading. remember- this isn't an Empire in the European or Chinese sense- South Asian political theory never really had the idea of a unitary Empire. What you see there is the Mughals taking on troublesome leading maharajas and defeating them whereupon most of the other rajas in a particular region would simply swear allegiance and be left to their own devices in their little princedoms. Basically if you didn't resist the Mughals you'd probably be fine- if you did resist you'd be for the chop and a Mughal puppet would be set up to rule.
 
What's so strange about that?

I think he said that ecause the Hollands was Spanish (after Charles V) ?

But Keenir, Hollands was known that time for its religious tolerance and its considerable rate of individualism. Holland was a Spanish jewel of Europe for its economic importance. Hence the Spanish was rather careful when dealing with religious issues there. Well... not always... and that's why we got an independent lowlands now.
 
I think he said that ecause the Hollands was Spanish (after Charles V) ?

But Keenir, Hollands was known that time for its religious tolerance and its considerable rate of individualism. Holland was a Spanish jewel of Europe for its economic importance. Hence the Spanish was rather careful when dealing with religious issues there. Well... not always... and that's why we got an independent lowlands now.

I think the Jews only started to flee to Holland after they became independent, but I'm not sure.
 
Because the Hollands was Spanish (after Charles V) ?

Not quite; the expulsion of the Jews from Spain was a few years before the birth of Charles V, and Charles V didn't inherit Spain until 1516.

And even under Charles V, the Low Countries were still effectively a separate nation that happened to be under the same monarch as Spain, rather than a part of Spain or a Spain-based empire.

In fact, Charles V never actually ruled from Spain, and it was not until the reign of Philip II (who did rule from Spain) that the Low Countries would actually be under Spanish rule.
 
I think the Jews only started to flee to Holland after they became independent, but I'm not sure.

I recall reading somewhere that a number of Spanish and Portugese Jews settled in the Low Countries during the early 16th century, which would be before the Dutch Revolt, but I'm not too sure about this either.

But it would make sense, though - as Xeno pointed out, the economy of the Low Countries was thriving at the time, and it was certainly one of the more religiously tolerant parts of Western Europe.
 
Not quite; the expulsion of the Jews from Spain was a few years before the birth of Charles V, and Charles V didn't inherit Spain until 1516.

And even under Charles V, the Low Countries were still effectively a separate nation that happened to be under the same monarch as Spain, rather than a part of Spain or a Spain-based empire.

In fact, Charles V never actually ruled from Spain, and it was not until the reign of Philip II (who did rule from Spain) that the Low Countries would actually be under Spanish rule.

You could in theory even claim that under Charles V Spain was Dutch.
 
Not quite; the expulsion of the Jews from Spain was a few years before the birth of Charles V, and Charles V didn't inherit Spain until 1516.

And even under Charles V, the Low Countries were still effectively a separate nation that happened to be under the same monarch as Spain, rather than a part of Spain or a Spain-based empire.

In fact, Charles V never actually ruled from Spain, and it was not until the reign of Philip II (who did rule from Spain) that the Low Countries would actually be under Spanish rule.

As I've said that the Netherlands only came under Spanish rule AFTER the reign of Charles V. And I had edited my previous post.
 
Top