AHC: Less Spanish colonization
- Thread starter Taunay
- Start date
@Aluma @Vinization @BELFAST
Help?
I wonder, if the Inca Empire survives, would Argentina or Paraguay even exist?
Help?
I wonder, if the Inca Empire survives, would Argentina or Paraguay even exist?
Have Cortez and Pizzaro fail in their conquest, apparently in my opinion, they win because of pure dumb luck. Couple hundred conquistadors Vs probably hundred thousand warriors. That seemed implausible. Apparently it seems that that's just pure dumb luck
It seems that Spain here focus on the carrebean, going big on cash crops instead of mining ittl
The Colombus expedition goes even worse than in OTL, and though they do reach the Americas, Colombus and far more guys die en route from or back to Spain. Whoever is in charge after Colombus' death determines that they did not reach the East Indies at all, but someplace else entirely that didn't have much worth value to Europeans.
Isabel and Fernando aren't as eager to actually start any permanent settlements, though they do tacitly approve much less expensive voyages of exploration and mapping, there is never a Treaty of Tordesillas. While Spain would still colonize a large portion of the Americas, there would be little stopping other powers such as the French and English from funding their own expeditions on a larger scale, especially with the Spanish reaping less rewards from the land they end up getting.
Alternatively, Colombus' expedition is lost entirely at sea, so there is little incentive for the Catholic Monarchs to find any further expeditions unless they're able to take very little financial risk. The Portuguese then end up getting to the New World first and correctly recognize that they are absolutely not anywhere near Asia. More countries partake in expeditions and everyone gets a smaller piece of the pie.
Definitely agree on the less successful conquistadors thing. Cortes and Pizarro running into large, relatively centralized polities and rolling a ton of natural 20s en route to conquering them meant that the Spanish had more state infrastructure to work with, especially since they tended to put themselves atop existing hierarchies rather than establishing new ones.
While I don't necessarily disagree that Cortes and Pizarro had quite a lot of luck in their conquests; I wouldn't jump the gun in that it was all "pure dumb luck".
The Aztecs during their conquest of Mesoamerica had made a lot of enemies and said enemies were more than eager to rally behind the Spaniards to topple Tenochtitlan.
The Inca have been going through quite the hurdle of a succession crisis and civil war and said internal problems made the Inca extremely weak. Claimants went to the Spanish for help as a similar strategy was used in Mesoamerica to make use of various indigenous allies to seize Cuzco.
Paladín Wulfen
Kicked
I was summon here for these who speak without know all facts.
Cortes invaded the Aztec Empire, which had a policy of subjugating its neighbors in annual wars, comparable to those made in Ancient Greece. These wars (Floral Wars) gave the Aztecs an extremely bad reputation and relationship with their neighbors. Cortes applied a campaign similar to that of Caesar in Gaul by making friends with the enemies of the Aztecs in order to get auxiliary troops that were trained to fight in the Spanish way: squares of pikes and specialized troops with swords and shields. The Aztecs hardly killed in their wars, the objective was to take prisoners.
Cortes's greatest defeat was the retreat from Tenotichtlan (Mexico City) when the entire city rose up against them. According to the letters from Cortes to Emperor Carlos, Montezuma had bowed to the authority of the monarch but the Aztec people stoned the emperor to death.
Most Conquerors made use of advanced tactics, European weaponry at key moments, and good cavalry along with faithful war dogs that, although not mentioned, played a good role in protecting them from ambushes.
Cortes invaded the Aztec Empire, which had a policy of subjugating its neighbors in annual wars, comparable to those made in Ancient Greece. These wars (Floral Wars) gave the Aztecs an extremely bad reputation and relationship with their neighbors. Cortes applied a campaign similar to that of Caesar in Gaul by making friends with the enemies of the Aztecs in order to get auxiliary troops that were trained to fight in the Spanish way: squares of pikes and specialized troops with swords and shields. The Aztecs hardly killed in their wars, the objective was to take prisoners.
Cortes's greatest defeat was the retreat from Tenotichtlan (Mexico City) when the entire city rose up against them. According to the letters from Cortes to Emperor Carlos, Montezuma had bowed to the authority of the monarch but the Aztec people stoned the emperor to death.
Most Conquerors made use of advanced tactics, European weaponry at key moments, and good cavalry along with faithful war dogs that, although not mentioned, played a good role in protecting them from ambushes.
Maybe the Mapuche but the rest of Argentina would probably be colonized by Portugal
Makes sense. If the Aztecs had been able to defeat them, it could slow down Spanish colonization
Paladín Wulfen
Kicked
The mapuches managed for resist against the Spanish during centuries, it sounds you the Tercio de Arauco?
Nobody remember but the founder of the Guardia Civil is descent of Montezuma.
I think the best way is:
- Spanish conquests fail, Aztecs and Incas survive
- Due to no Spanish conquest, Mexico, Central America + Chile never become Spanish colonies
- Habsburgs don't take power, and Spain has a weak and inefficient monarchy, screwing their colonization efforts. This leads to
- Portuguese-Spanish war by the late 16th century. Portugal annexes the Platine region, Uruguay and Argentina never come into existence
Paladín Wulfen
Kicked
It was a Spanish Army dedicated to fight the Mapuches in Araucanía. Is considered the only standing army inside the Spanish Austria America.
As others have said, maybe have Cortes and Pizarro utterly and disastrously fail in their conquests. It may make some coming conquistadors a bit more caution and wary on trying to overthrow and conquer larger Amerindian empires
Would Argentina/the Platine region still be colonized by Spain without the Incas, in your opinion?
Probably not. As the Spanish conquered Southward from the Viceroyalty of Peru to Modern-day Argentina and Chile, and Patagonia and the Mapuche being uncolonized like OTL. However, it is possibly for some settlement in the Rio Dela Plata, as there was Spanish and Portuguese exploration there. Unless, the Spanish somehow circumvent the Inca entirely, and conquers through the Amazon but that’s unrealistic.