Aztec Empire: 1700 - 1900

[oshron]

hey, all. im still trying to work out my extensive ATL and would like to finish up with the aztecs. ive already done some pretty extensive work with help from around here in this thread, but discussion there kinda terminated around the time where the deaths of older historical figures would begin (mid-16th century, and namely gonzalo guerrero, cuahtemoc, and cortez). i'll give a brief overview of the ATL aztecs from their POD onwards:

• battle/siege of tenochtitlan: cuauhtemoc retreats with most of the aztecs and cortez seizes tenochtitlan
• about a year after the fall of tenochitlan, cuauhtemoc and the aztecs return and stage a resistance
• spanish invasion of the yucatan in 1526 prompts shipwrecked spaniard/assimilated mayan gonzalo guerrero to join the resistance. fellow shipwreck geronimo de aguilar also defects to the resistance.
• 1529-31: cortez delivers a serious defeat to the resistance (but their leaders survive) and is then dragged back to spain. by the time he returns, the resistance is up to speed again; meanwhile, nuno beltran de guzman attacks the chichimeca
• 1535: mixton rebellion ends in disaster and the surviving chichimeca also join the resistance
• some time after this, there is probably some kind of final battle where either cortez, guerrero, or both are killed in battle--never really worked it out that far

teh "Mayaztec Resistance" (because its a mix of many native peoples and not just aztecs, but aztecs and maya are the main components) would play a comparatively small role following the death of guerrero and the eventual passing of cuauhtemoc, but my intent is that they rise to prominence again about midway through the 1700s by becoming secret trade allies with countries opposing spain and in the 1840s gain independence with teh help of the united states. after that, they become allies of the americans and goad them into another war with spain in 1898 (in this ATL, spain doesnt grant its colonies independence)

any help here? i know theres a fairly large chunk of history missing, but its the 1700s period onwards where they start to rise to prominence again

 

[Jord839]

hey, all. im still trying to work out my extensive ATL and would like to finish up with the aztecs. ive already done some pretty extensive work with help from around here in this thread, but discussion there kinda terminated around the time where the deaths of older historical figures would begin (mid-16th century, and namely gonzalo guerrero, cuahtemoc, and cortez). i'll give a brief overview of the ATL aztecs from their POD onwards:

• battle/siege of tenochtitlan: cuauhtemoc retreats with most of the aztecs and cortez seizes tenochtitlan
• about a year after the fall of tenochitlan, cuauhtemoc and the aztecs return and stage a resistance
• spanish invasion of the yucatan in 1526 prompts shipwrecked spaniard/assimilated mayan gonzalo guerrero to join the resistance. fellow shipwreck geronimo de aguilar also defects to the resistance.
• 1529-31: cortez delivers a serious defeat to the resistance (but their leaders survive) and is then dragged back to spain. by the time he returns, the resistance is up to speed again; meanwhile, nuno beltran de guzman attacks the chichimeca
• 1535: mixton rebellion ends in disaster and the surviving chichimeca also join the resistance
• some time after this, there is probably some kind of final battle where either cortez, guerrero, or both are killed in battle--never really worked it out that far

teh "Mayaztec Resistance" (because its a mix of many native peoples and not just aztecs, but aztecs and maya are the main components) would play a comparatively small role following the death of guerrero and the eventual passing of cuauhtemoc, but my intent is that they rise to prominence again about midway through the 1700s by becoming secret trade allies with countries opposing spain and in the 1840s gain independence with teh help of the united states. after that, they become allies of the americans and goad them into another war with spain in 1898 (in this ATL, spain doesnt grant its colonies independence)

any help here? i know theres a fairly large chunk of history missing, but its the 1700s period onwards where they start to rise to prominence again

You had me til you got here. Butterflies, man! Butterflies!

IOTL the major reason for a lot of European colonization was based on how much silver and gold the Spanish got out of the Aztecs and Incas. Hell, the first European colonial outposts were more or less places to raid Spanish shipments of silver from. There's a whole lot less money coming in from the Americas if the Aztecs and other Mesoamerican Natives survive and hold out, so there will be less interest in colonization. There could still be colonization, especially with the fur trade in the north and tobacco(when it's discovered), but it may very well be a long time later and a far slower process than OTL. Regardless, the sheer amount of butterflies of there not being a Spanish Mexico pretty much means the US is gone before it ever exists let alone the revolutions of the 1840's.

Really, without the Aztecs getting conquered, everything in the Americas changes pretty damn quick.

 

[oshron]

i could always change that part. nearly everything about my ATL is still subject to change

 

[wolf_brother]

<snip>

Its funny how when I mentioned that in the original thread, I was promptly told how a change in New Spain wouldn't have any affect on French/British colonization of North American and the ARW

Seriously though, oshron, you're not going to be able to rely on OTL for guidelines for such a massive series of PODs ITL. Basically everything from 1550ish onwards is up in the air. Suffice it to say that Spain is not going to become the major power that it did OTL, and the other European powers will have less (read: none) of a reason to follow Spain's example - I could very will see this TL leading to weakened Spain in Europe that is attacked on several fronts.

As well, your OTL version of Mexico isn't going to be the only native group that does 'better' than ITL - by the time of your POD without major European intervention several states and statelets are going to be in much better position by the time of later European (or even Islamic African [Mali, Songhai, or the Ottomans]) intervention. A short-list would include the 'Iroquois' (Haudenosaunee), Mississippians, Pueblo &/or Navajo, Inca, Muisca and Mapuche.

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

I'm not touching the Aztec bit (yet), but unifying the Mayans won't be so simple. On the eve of the Spanish Conquest there were over a dozen small little Mayan "petty-states" as they are often called, and they were in a civil war between two factions: the Tutul Xiu and the Cocom. These were two families which were both big players in the now defunct Mayapan but a feud had started between them that lasted quite a while to say the least. The Spanish IIRC promised to assist the Xiu Maya whereas the Cocom resisted. The Cocoms might be able to rally more support though. While the Xiu claimed lineage from the rulers of the ancient city of Uxmal, the Cocoms were undeniably the rulers of the more recent Mayapan that the Tutul Xiu overthrew. That, and even if you were able to unify the warring Mayan factions, getting them to work with the Aztecs might be a tad bit difficult. They had a long-running distrust of the foreign Mexicans. And by long running I mean well over a thousand years. The Cocoms would even claim that the Xiu were descended from Mexican immigrants to denigrate them.

 

[archaeogeek]

Independent mexico, by itself, will likely only significantly affect the first wave of colonies; it did OTL anyway, since Canada took 70 years to have a single european settlement after they figured out that the "gold and diamonds" of Cartier were pyrite and (very pure) quartz. Ditto for the English; the cod fishing of the area was a much more important economic activity and there was a short lived settlement at red bay with up to 200 wintering there at its height, and up to thousands of people when it was summer.

The second wave, though, was not setting up gold mines, but plantocracies and settlement colonies, with no stable settlement until the 17th century in North America, while even if Peru holds, that still potentially leaves Spain in a position to take over New Grenada.

And of course, uniting the mayas will be hard, and the aztecs would have to conquer Tlaxcala and hope the plalce doesn't revolt, or they're pretty much screwed anyway.

 

[oshron]

the intent with the maya was that its originally just a warband led by Gonzalo Guerrero, who by then no longer held any loyalty to Spain, and other Maya would presumably follow suit basically with the whole "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" position. tensions would likely still exist, but over a few hundred years there wouldnt really be any mayans or aztecs left, just their generic interbred descendants which would claim both aztec AND maya descent. there's also a unifying force of religion that comes to be a mix of aztec, mayan, and catholic belief (the elements of catholicism being introduced by aguilar)

as for other native tribes, im not too sure. i had imagined that their fate in the US and canada would be virtually the same, but now that you mention it, maybe it WOULD be more realistic to have them better off. fewer and better reservations, maybe, and recognized micronations?

i think the promise of wealth in the new world (perhaps fueled by rumors and lies) would get more people to the americas than the stories of native attacks would get people to stay away.

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

the intent with the maya was that its originally just a warband led by Gonzalo Guerrero, who by then no longer held any loyalty to Spain, and other Maya would presumably follow suit basically with the whole "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" position. tensions would likely still exist, but over a few hundred years there wouldnt really be any mayans or aztecs left, just their generic interbred descendants which would claim both aztec AND maya descent. there's also a unifying force of religion that comes to be a mix of aztec, mayan, and catholic belief (the elements of catholicism being introduced by aguilar)

Uh, this doesn't seem very possible. Considering that despite massive plagues wiping out most of their populations, Spanish genocides decimating the remainder, and brutal occupation trying to stamp out every facet of their culture, the Mayans still possess a unique identity, speak their own languages, and in some places still worship the same old gods they had for millenia. I can see them eventually uniting with other Mayans and working with Aztecs, but the unification you describe would be impossible given their history. They don't exactly share a large border, the Mayans have a long history of animosity with the Mexicans, and the Aztecs themselves aren't even originally Mexican! Also, I don't buy Aguilar doing what Guerrero did. IOTL he didn't, so no reason for him to do so TTL. And in any case Guerrero isn't going to lead the entire resistance. He was highly regarded by the people who adopted him, the people of Chetumal, but they made him a war leader, a general, not a king. He would be a technical and strategic adviser, and would have some considerable influence, but not the biggest leader nor as high as any other lord or governor.

 

[oshron]

Also, I don't buy Aguilar doing what Guerrero did. IOTL he didn't, so no reason for him to do so TTL. And in any case Guerrero isn't going to lead the entire resistance. He was highly regarded by the people who adopted him, the people of Chetumal, but they made him a war leader, a general, not a king. He would be a technical and strategic adviser, and would have some considerable influence, but not the biggest leader nor as high as any other lord or governor.

OTL, i dont think anyone is quite sure what happened to aguilar, but the ATL reasoning is that not only did he wanted to help his old friend guerrero after seeing cortez was insane, but also because his usefulness had ended; by this time, la malinche (dona marina) is fluent in spanish as well, so cortez no longer has any need for aguilar as a translator

for guerrero, no, he isnt the ultimate leader--that still goes to cuauhtemoc--but he's part of a unifying force between the aztecs and mayans and one of his kids that he had with a mayan woman would be betrothed to cuautehmoc's heir (at the suggestion of guerrero to act as the unifying leader of both the mayans and aztecs). even if guerrero isnt really a king, i think by the time of his ATL death, he would be held in the same regard as one or even made one, especially after the invasion of the yucatan

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

Eh, again you are greatly simplifying politics and dynamics in the Mesoamerican world. They might work together once they get that the Spanish Conquistadors are a bunch of murderous thugs that you can't trust, but total unification would just be bizarre. And he would never be made a king, considering he has no noble blood. Sure, Mesoamerican societies were generally much looser in regards to class than feudal Europe, but going from slave to king is unthinkable, especially considering that before being a slave (slaves here were not from birth, just captives who could find ways out legally) he was still just a base commoner. That he was raised to such a high status in Chetumal was abnormal and mainly because of the unique circumstances they were in.

And I still don't buy Aguilar going to the Mayans. He was a devout Catholic, and seemingly repulsed by the native customs. He tried to get Guerrero to join Cortez and even if he was disgusted by what Cortez and company did, so was the rest of the entire friggin' Church and the King himself. But it's not like they went to the side of the natives.

 

[oshron]

Eh, again you are greatly simplifying politics and dynamics in the Mesoamerican world. They might work together once they get that the Spanish Conquistadors are a bunch of murderous thugs that you can't trust, but total unification would just be bizarre. And he would never be made a king, considering he has no noble blood. Sure, Mesoamerican societies were generally much looser in regards to class than feudal Europe, but going from slave to king is unthinkable, especially considering that before being a slave (slaves here were not from birth, just captives who could find ways out legally) he was still just a base commoner. That he was raised to such a high status in Chetumal was abnormal and mainly because of the unique circumstances they were in.

And I still don't buy Aguilar going to the Mayans. He was a devout Catholic, and seemingly repulsed by the native customs. He tried to get Guerrero to join Cortez and even if he was disgusted by what Cortez and company did, so was the rest of the entire friggin' Church and the King himself. But it's not like they went to the side of the natives.

not to sound rude, but did you read the original topic? there's also spanish deserters among the resistance (basically those who decided that cortez was insane early on and that teh natives were the lesser of two evils), and aguilar helps out with their religious needs as well as softening the natives' views on christianity

id post more, but ive gotta get to a class right now. ill leave you with this work-in-progress page that ive been recording teh ATL in in the meantime. there's other pages on it, but the one i linked is the only one relevant to this discussion

http://rplegacy-database.wikispaces.com/Aztec+Empire

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

Hmmm, seems okay I suppose, though I still believe the speed at which the Mayans unify with both eachother and the Aztecs is a bit dubious at best. And in any case, some names could use changing. I like the amount of Nahuatl names for provinces, but that the Yucatan is still called such is a bit odd. The Nahuatl name for that was Yokatlan I believe, and the Mayans themselves called it Uluumil Kutz Yetel Keh, The Land of Turkey and Deer. And the Mayan language would be more common than you think in southern regions. IOTL just about all the peasants under the rule of the Spanish in the Yucatan would speak Yucatec, and many Spaniards of the upper castes as well knew it, often from having Mayan nurses as children. Even well into the 1800's, after the Spanish were booted out, the situation was the same, and even when I went there a year ago quite a few signs were trilingual. The Spanish were far more incompetent than you'd think at the whole assimilation business, given that their boogeyman of paganism they tried to stamp out more fiercely than anything else is still present. So yeah, I'd think you'd also have to correct that bit about Spanish being common in Southern regions, although loanwords are certain to be prevalent.

 

[oshron]

thanks the reason spanish is a bit more common in OTL central america here (as opposed to OTL mexico) is because those regions remained spanish possessions longer than OTL mexico, where teh resistance was strongest. the reasoning there is that those regions are further annexed by the aztecs in the second and third spanish-american wars

 

[DaleCoz]

I'll admit I haven't read the original thread, but based on this one I have quite a few issues, of which I'll only go into one at this point: Aztec resistance: The Aztec 'empire' was actually just a city-state (or more properly a coalition of three city-states) that had managed to extort tribute of various kinds over a wide area of central Mexico. The vast majority of Indians outside of that city-state coalition either wanted to see it collapse, or were indifferent to its fate. The Aztecs were able to maintain power because (1) people were afraid of them, (2) They controlled a huge fleet of large canoes that could quickly transport warriors anywhere in the densely populated lake area where Mexico City is now located, and (3) They had established a system where tribute fed their armies as they traveled, giving them the ability to get a large army anywhere in the parts of Mexico they controlled.

The Spanish quickly negated (1). They were scarier than the Aztecs and more likely to win. They negated (2) by building a fleet of gunboats on the lake that destroyed the Aztec canoe fleet or made it impotent. They negated (3) by freeing the Aztec tributaries.

The Aztecs still made a pretty good fight of it because they were good fighters, very brave men. They were helped by the fact that the lake environment of their stronghold minimized the impact of cavalry and the urban warfare aspects of the fighting gave the defense an edge. If they had attempted to flee at any point before or during the siege, the Spanish would have simply rounded up any large, coherent groups with their cavalry, cornered them and quickly disposed of them, while the Spanish Indian allies tracked down and killed or enslaved smaller groups of refuges. The reality of the Aztecs fleeing would have caused their remaining Allies to desert them in short order.

As a matter of fact, the Spanish left a causeway open for a while, hoping that the Aztecs would attempt to escape over it because they would have been much easier to deal with.

 

[DaleCoz]

I don't see much of a way the Aztecs could have been the core of an Indian resistance in Mexico anywhere other than where they were. That doesn't mean that their situation was absolutely hopeless. If the unknown Aztec warrior who cracked Cortes's skull but didn't kill him had swung a little harder and actually killed him during the Spanish retreat from the capital, then things might have gotten dicey for the Spanish. They retreated to Tlaxcallan territory to regroup, but most of the Spanish rank-and-file, along with most of the leaders, were demoralized enough that they wanted to head to the coast. Cortes managed to squash that idea, which would have probably gotten his remaining men killed by an anti-Spanish Tlaxcallan faction that was watching for any Spanish attempt to leave the Tlaxcallans to the tender mercies of the Aztecs.

More Spanish would have come, obviously, but (a) Cortes was an exceptional leader, very good at prying open the latent conflicts in the Indian coalitions against him, (b) A Spanish total defeat would have strengthened the fear of the Aztecs that was one of their most potent weapons, (c) The Aztecs would have learned quite a bit about fighting Spaniards, while the next group of Spaniards would be starting from scratch.

The probable next Spanish leader to head to Mexico would have probably been a guy named Garay who had gotten rich as governor of Jamaica (then held by Spain). Historically he landed a large force in northeastern Mexico in an area not yet controlled by Spain, and had his army disintegrate out from under him, possibly with a little help from Cortes. He probably would have failed to conquer the Aztecs simply because he was bit of an incompetent. Each failure would toughen the Aztecs a bit, but the Spanish would probably keep coming, though it's conceivable that after two successive failures the next expedition would try to trade rather than conquer. Trading trinkets for gold isn't a bad deal. It's not as good as simply taking the gold, but a lot less likely to get you killed.

 

[oshron]

If they had attempted to flee at any point before or during the siege, the Spanish would have simply rounded up any large, coherent groups with their cavalry, cornered them and quickly disposed of them, while the Spanish Indian allies tracked down and killed or enslaved smaller groups of refuges. The reality of the Aztecs fleeing would have caused their remaining Allies to desert them in short order.

well thats where the POD is: instead of staying in tenochtitlan and waiting for the spanish to return, cuauhtemoc orders pretty much teh full retreat of the aztec civilization from the city (except for a few hundred defenders just to keep the spanish occupied). true alliances between teh aztecs and other natives would be as a result of basically demonizing the spanish and tlaxcalans, maybe even to a nazis-using-the-jews scapegoat type point (hey, no one said history had to be pretty )

read over the original topic when you get the time, itll make this discussion alot easier

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

Hmm, it might be better if you get the Anti-Spanish factions in Tlaxcala to be more influential. Like have the pro-Spanish Maxixcatzin get killed in battle against the Spanish before he gets a chance to retreat giving Xicotencatl the Younger a better position to dictate the Tlaxcalans from. I heard somewhere he was in favor of making a treaty with the Mexica against the newer invaders at one point. If Tlaxcala and the Mexica can put aside their differences, the Spanish would be in a very difficult position to say the least. Without the Tlaxcalans Cortez's campaign almost certainly would have failed utterly. Even the Totonacs would probably abandon the Spaniards or even turn on them to recover some degree of good will with the Nahua peoples that are now united.

 

[oshron]

Hmm, it might be better if you get the Anti-Spanish factions in Tlaxcala to be more influential. Like have the pro-Spanish Maxixcatzin get killed in battle against the Spanish before he gets a chance to retreat giving Xicotencatl the Younger a better position to dictate the Tlaxcalans from. I heard somewhere he was in favor of making a treaty with the Mexica against the newer invaders at one point. If Tlaxcala and the Mexica can put aside their differences, the Spanish would be in a very difficult position to say the least. Without the Tlaxcalans Cortez's campaign almost certainly would have failed utterly. Even the Totonacs would probably abandon the Spaniards or even turn on them to recover some degree of good will with the Nahua peoples that are now united.

well i was planning for the tlaxcala to be part of the groups that the aztecs demonize to be something along the lines of helping to unify the other natives. but again, nothing is set in stone just yet, so ill consider this. anti-spanish factions of tlaxcala sound like a pretty good idea. ill also look into the totonacs

the main idea is that the spanish colonization of the americas still pretty much goes through but the natives mostly survive and regain power later

 

[archaeogeek]

Demonizing the Tlaxcala might not work; Tlaxcala is powerful on its own and there's more bad blood towards the Aztecs than towards tlaxcala... If what you want is a Nahua state in the Mexican plateau, what about using this to have Tlaxcala mount its war on its own, remove the mexica early (or after killing off the spanish war party) and become the new "aztec" capital, hopefully being more united...

 

[oshron]

nah, i want to keep the POD being the fall of tenochtitlan