AH Challenge: Portuguese-Anglo Union

a thought, John of Gaunt's first child was Philippa, Queen of Portugal so maybe Henry IV dies with out heirs and leaves England to his nephew Edward of Portugal, anyways thats the closest i could find
 
The other way is for Charles ll to have at least 1 legitimate son with his wife. This would then complicate future English history as it would remove the Hanoverian succession and the glorious revolution.

I thought about that before too. After 1640 the Portuguese Courts approved a law stating that all the Portuguese kings, to be accepted, should be born Portuguese, in order to avoid a personal union again (it was just after the Portuguese independence from the Iberian Union). However, if Afonso VI and Pedro II die earlier and childless, making Catherine of Braganza the legitimate queen, than maybe she could change that in favour of her children with Charles II. But you still have the religious problem, as the king of England should be Anglican, and Portugal was a Catholic kingdom.

Other possibility would be something involving Richard III winning in Bosworth and marrying Joanna of Portugal, as was planned. Also, if that union had happened, Elizabeth of York was supposed to marry Manuel, Duke of Beja, who later became Manuel I of Portugal. That would be other possibility.
 
a thought, John of Gaunt's first child was Philippa, Queen of Portugal so maybe Henry IV dies with out heirs and leaves England to his nephew Edward of Portugal, anyways thats the closest i could find
John of Gaunt was also heir of Castile, which to me is a good POD for a Plantagenet Spain. John II, King of Castile and Duke of Lancaster sounds good to me.
 
John of Gaunt was also heir of Castile, which to me is a good POD for a Plantagenet Spain. John II, King of Castile and Duke of Lancaster sounds good to me.

Actually he wasn't heir of Castille, his second wife Constance of Castile was, and his claim came through this marriage. If he had become king of Castile then his heir to the Castilian Crown wouldn't be Henry IV (because he was born from his first wife, Blanche of Lancaster). His heir would be the princess Katherine, who IOTL married Henry III of Castille and united the claims.
 
I'm all for something like that. That's perfectly feasible. I only comment to point out that England doesn't have the military capacity, or indeed in this era the capacity to send soldiers, merchants or colonists to essentially assimilate or conquer the Portuguese Empire. It could send some, for sure. They might be able to take over a chunk of Brazil's ports, maybe, or some of Indonesia. But until about the middle of the 17th Century they just didn't have the potential to overrun an Empire. And overrunning the Empire would be the only way to persuade Spain to agree to see Portugal's "rightful claim to half the world" (because the Treaty of Tordesillas was essentially the Pope designating "God's greatest two kingdoms" to be rulers of ALL LANDS that weren't European) as exchangable.

Sorry if I seem a bit of a killjoy, or something. I'm just a stickler for doing things right. :eek:

I completely understand and tend to agree that the English would have a difficult time. My counter-argument would be that the Dutch during the 80 Years' War managed to pull off exactly such a total hostile take over of the Portugese colonial empire- they took Ceylon, South Africa, the East Indies, and nearly book Brazil- while at the same time battling the Spanish in the Netherlands.

So in a world where the English inherit the Portugese colonial empire in the 16th century (and thus without major chunks acquired by the Dutch) what kind of big ripples would get put out? Do people see South Africa and Brazil as the major English settler colonies in the 17th century onward? What will the inheritance do to English history?
 
I completely understand and tend to agree that the English would have a difficult time. My counter-argument would be that the Dutch during the 80 Years' War managed to pull off exactly such a total hostile take over of the Portugese colonial empire- they took Ceylon, South Africa, the East Indies, and nearly book Brazil- while at the same time battling the Spanish in the Netherlands.

So in a world where the English inherit the Portugese colonial empire in the 16th century (and thus without major chunks acquired by the Dutch) what kind of big ripples would get put out? Do people see South Africa and Brazil as the major English settler colonies in the 17th century onward? What will the inheritance do to English history?

If the English are busy in South America and India, would they still try to colonise North America? Under the scenario proposed England remains Catholic, and so there are no Puritans to migrate elsewhere. Also, with the possessio of the Portuguese route to Asia there is no need of trying to make an alternative Northwest or "across North America" route.
 
If the English are busy in South America and India, would they still try to colonise North America? Under the scenario proposed England remains Catholic, and so there are no Puritans to migrate elsewhere. Also, with the possessio of the Portuguese route to Asia there is no need of trying to make an alternative Northwest or "across North America" route.

I don't think North America is in the cards at all. Brazil is rich with sugar and other natural resources, and will be a magnet for English settlers, just as it was for Portuguese OTL. Brazil could well extend further down the coast then OTL, to OTL Buenos Aires, where there is also potential for a large settlement colony. South Africa offers an excellent climate and it would be in England's interest to have the area decisively English-owned, which means settlers, in order to secure the route east. I'm inclined to think that the English will engage in the same kind of empire-building they did OTL in India. I think that the Portuguese colonial empire could soak up the English settlers who OTL conquered North America and the rest of the British Empire.
 
I don't think North America is in the cards at all. Brazil is rich with sugar and other natural resources, and will be a magnet for English settlers, just as it was for Portuguese OTL. Brazil could well extend further down the coast then OTL, to OTL Buenos Aires, where there is also potential for a large settlement colony. South Africa offers an excellent climate and it would be in England's interest to have the area decisively English-owned, which means settlers, in order to secure the route east. I'm inclined to think that the English will engage in the same kind of empire-building they did OTL in India. I think that the Portuguese colonial empire could soak up the English settlers who OTL conquered North America and the rest of the British Empire.

But what happens to North America then? The French get it all? The Dutch can conquer some lands? BTW, with a Catholic England allied to Spain through much of the 16th century would the Dutch still manage to become independent from Spain?
 
If the English are busy in South America and India, would they still try to colonise North America? Under the scenario proposed England remains Catholic, and so there are no Puritans to migrate elsewhere. Also, with the possession of the Portuguese route to Asia there is no need of trying to make an alternative Northwest or "across North America" route.

The Portuguese trade route to Asia was slow, though. And that was a problem for them. That trade route was relatively well-known even before America was discovered. The thing was, it took 9 months to sail one way. No joking. Over a year in bad weather. And while everyone knew the earth was round as of centuries ago, they got their maths horribly wrong on the size of the earth. They thought China was 6,000 miles due west of Europe iirc - that would take about 2-3 months to sail, considering the weather and the route as well as the distance. By contrast, the route to China around Africa is almost 15,000 miles. There would still be the pressing desire to sail west - the reason the Portuguese didn't was because they handed over claims to that half of the globe to Spain. And I still think you'd get a bit of an "us and them" idea about the Portuguese territories. I'm not going to say there wouldn't or couldn't be cooperation. There clearly would, and in time the Portuguese areas would probably be assimilated fairly well. But I think that from the English you'd get an idea of "well, this colony and that one are Portuguese, they don't feel like true English territories. Sure, you'd get Englishmen there. You'd have merchants gradually taking over the trade as the ethnically Portuguese populations slowly intermingled with the English or just became less significant. You'd have English notables going to take over the running of areas. You'd probably have people being sent to the Portuguese colonies as colonists. You might get criminals deported. You'd get all sorts. But I think what you'd find is when Englishmen organised their own colonial ventures, they'd want to go to areas they viewed as virgin territory, where they wouldn't have to be "the new guys" and looked down on by people they viewed as the second class citizens. So I think you'd still get English colonisation of North America. It might be quite interesting, actually, if the Portuguese territories retained something of a Portuguese identity mixed with the English. If I were good at TL-writing, and if I knew where I was going with it, I'd almost suggest a TL coming on. But...anyway.

The thing, of course, is that you would still get a distribution of resources, so I doubt the English Empire (to distinguish it from the British Empire of OTL and from the Portuguese territories) would be as strong as RL. Though the French would likely still be very outnumbered in terms of settlers, perhaps we would be looking at neither England nor France being able to fully oust each other in colonial wars? A permanent divide, maybe, between the French north, south and west and the English eastern seaboard.

Of course, I could be wrong with any or all of that. But that's how I see it.
 
The POD I'm thinking of for the Anglo-Portuguese union is Mary Tudor, the daughter of Catherine of Aragon, overthrowing Elizabeth I's regency with the Pilgrimage of Grace after Henry VIII's death in 1536- Mary then marries the King of Portugal's brother Louis Aviz. When the senior Portugese line runs out in the late 16th century Mary and Louis' heir claims the Kingdom of Portugal and it colonial empire. All the following is based on this starting point.

The Portuguese trade route to Asia was slow, though. And that was a problem for them. That trade route was relatively well-known even before America was discovered. The thing was, it took 9 months to sail one way. No joking. Over a year in bad weather. And while everyone knew the earth was round as of centuries ago, they got their maths horribly wrong on the size of the earth. They thought China was 6,000 miles due west of Europe iirc - that would take about 2-3 months to sail, considering the weather and the route as well as the distance. By contrast, the route to China around Africa is almost 15,000 miles. There would still be the pressing desire to sail west - the reason the Portuguese didn't was because they handed over claims to that half of the globe to Spain.

During the time being discussed (late 16th century), the division of the world had already taken place. And Europe's sea-farers were collectively aware that the western route was much longer than Columbus thought and there were two continents in the way.

And I still think you'd get a bit of an "us and them" idea about the Portuguese territories. I'm not going to say there wouldn't or couldn't be cooperation. There clearly would, and in time the Portuguese areas would probably be assimilated fairly well. But I think that from the English you'd get an idea of "well, this colony and that one are Portuguese, they don't feel like true English territories. Sure, you'd get Englishmen there. You'd have merchants gradually taking over the trade as the ethnically Portuguese populations slowly intermingled with the English or just became less significant. You'd have English notables going to take over the running of areas. You'd probably have people being sent to the Portuguese colonies as colonists. You might get criminals deported. You'd get all sorts. But I think what you'd find is when Englishmen organised their own colonial ventures, they'd want to go to areas they viewed as virgin territory, where they wouldn't have to be "the new guys" and looked down on by people they viewed as the second class citizens. So I think you'd still get English colonisation of North America. It might be quite interesting, actually, if the Portuguese territories retained something of a Portuguese identity mixed with the English. If I were good at TL-writing, and if I knew where I was going with it, I'd almost suggest a TL coming on. But...anyway.

In the POD above the English have been long-term allies of the Hapsburg family, and would accept the division of the world already laid out. That means hands off North America, which is in Spain's half of the globe. So I don't see North American ventures. Brazil was already claimed, it will belong to this Anglo-Portuguese Kingdom, and it is relatively unsettled by Europeans. Plus it has all kinds of economic opportunities. The Portugese basically had this huge empire, with all kinds of potential, but the Dutch took most of the tasty parts while Portugal was in union with Spain. The English are being given a ready-made empire ready to be made more profitable. I don't think you'd get a lot of volunteers to undertake unprofitable ventures carving colonies out of the howling wilderness.

I think a good example to look at is the Dutch. The Dutch had no respect for Spain's claims, took a lot of Portugal Empire, and also started up a North American outpost. It did poorly, didn't attract many settlers, and ended up being grabbed by the English. The Dutch had so many other opportunities they didn't need to be bothered with the hard and unrewarding work of building new colonies on the unprofitable Atlantic coast of North America.

The thing, of course, is that you would still get a distribution of resources, so I doubt the English Empire (to distinguish it from the British Empire of OTL and from the Portuguese territories) would be as strong as RL. Though the French would likely still be very outnumbered in terms of settlers, perhaps we would be looking at neither England nor France being able to fully oust each other in colonial wars? A permanent divide, maybe, between the French north, south and west and the English eastern seaboard.

I think you'd see the French effort as per OTL. If the Dutch don't grab the Portugese colonial empire from the English, then I think you would see more incentive to carve colonies out of North America. Dutch tobacco farms in OTL Carolinas and Virginia. Of course the Dutch don't have the population to really do that kind of settling, but recruitment from Germany is an option (that I think they did OTL), so a French Quebec to New Orleans Crescent, with a German speaking effort on the Atlantic Coast.
 
Top