Can someone take Mexico before Spain does?

Have the Reconquesta drag past 1492 , which would probably need an earlier POD to allow for a stronger Grenada or weaker Christian kingdoms in Spain
This may allow other countries a look in.
Alternatively have the Iberian Peninsula remain under Islamic rule and have them colonise instead
 
OTL, Giovanni da Verrazzano was entrusted by Francis Ist of France to lead a Florida expedition in 1523, right in the middle of the Italian Wars. So, you can imagine a PoD which allows Verrazzano to sail earlier (like 1519 when Francis is really upset about the imperial election). France would not be in a position to attack Central Mexico, but, with enough funding, it might carve a chunk of lands north of the Mexico Gulf.
 
For example France, England, Ottoman Empire, Venice, Denmark?
Technically Spain didn't conquer Mexico - it was an unsanctioned expedition led by Cortez who later gifted his conquests to Spain.

I guess you could make the case for any adventurer from any nation to take Cortez's place but they would have to face the same challenges as he did and effectively be in a state of war vs the Spanish in Cuba. Holding on to their conquests once the Spanish realise the natives are defeated would be almost impossible.
 
Technically Spain didn't conquer Mexico - it was an unsanctioned expedition led by Cortez who later gifted his conquests to Spain.
Technically, it wasn't. See Cortez was sanctioned. By the town council of Veracruz. Which he just founded after he landed. Since the expedition with Velasquez was ended, so it wasn't anymore under Velasquez authority. It wall all part of Castillian Law, I believe. You can really see Cortez' legal education there. Sure it was disputable, but Cortes always made a point to give legal cover to his action.

It wasn't a gift to Spain. To the mind of Cortez, everything he conquered belonged to the king of Spain, so much so that he took care to reserve the king his royal fifth. Cortez never conquered Mexico in his own name. He and his men fought in the name of Spain and Charles I. In their mind, they were agents of the king.

Not to deny that he was an independent adventurer who wasn't all but independent during the conquest, but in name, it was a Spanish operation. So it was inaccurate that he just gifted Mexico to Spain. That would imply Cortes and his men didn't think they were fighting for the king of Spain the first place.
 
I'm curious about whether Spain really has a lock on the issue. Given that Mexico was first conquered by a lucky adventurer with a predominantly native army, I can't help but think that any European naval power could have done it.

Now, holding it, thats an entirely different matter.
Cortés journey started at Cuba and he could speak with the natives because previous expeditions created translators.Luckily sneaking to México and conquering for X country was basically impossible to anyone without Cortéz previous knowledge of the land and someone that could translate the language of the natives
 
A Question to @Bobble0000000000 , Why the question? Maybe other country would have treated and developt mexico better? how much of mexico? what become OTL New Spain? Current Mexico?

I asked the question out of pure curiosity, as per any alternative history scenario. Why did you think might be behind my question? For sure I wasn't thinking as far ahead as modern Mexico.
 
I asked the question out of pure curiosity, as per any alternative history scenario. Why did you think might be behind my question? For sure I wasn't thinking as far ahead as modern Mexico.
Sorry if sound rude or despective, but yeah an interesting question indeed.
 
Sorry if sound rude or despective, but yeah an interesting question indeed.

No, no it didn't sound rude. I was simply curious about why you asked the question about why I asked the question.

Off topic, if you perceived some kind of racist agenda behind my question - there is absolutely none at all. Full disclosure: I'm politically against The Wall and against Trump himself.
 
Sorry if sound rude or despective, but yeah an interesting question indeed.

No, no it didn't sound rude. I was simply curious about why you asked the question about why I asked the question.

Off topic, if you perceived some kind of racist agenda behind my question - there is absolutely none at all. Full disclosure: I'm politically against The Wall and against Trump himself.
 
No, no it didn't sound rude. I was simply curious about why you asked the question about why I asked the question.

Off topic, if you perceived some kind of racist agenda behind my question - there is absolutely none at all. Full disclosure: I'm politically against The Wall and against Trump himself.
Bingo, i joke in a spanish speaking forum how if klein venendig was sucessful our country might have to shut up about Venezuela

And the whole timing of this was like that, have been México colonized by someone give a damn the government might not bully and use México as scapegoat.
 
I'm curious about whether Spain really has a lock on the issue. Given that Mexico was first conquered by a lucky adventurer with a predominantly native army, I can't help but think that any European naval power could have done it.

Now, holding it, thats an entirely different matter.

Exactly.
 
Thank you to all here who have taken the time to explain why they find this ATL implausible. Let me come back at you again.

The 1497 English expedition led by Italian Venetian John Cabot (Giovanni Caboto) was the first of a series of French and English missions exploring North America.

In 1520–1521 the Portuguese João Álvares Fagundes, accompanied by couples of mainland Portugal and the Azores, explored Newfoundland and Nova Scotia.

In 1524, Italian Giovanni da Verrazzano sailed at the behest of Francis I of France, who was motivated by indignation over the division of the world between Portuguese and Spanish. Verrazzano explored the Atlantic Coast of North America, from South Carolina to Newfoundland, and was the first recorded European to visit what would later become the Virginia Colony and the United States. In the same year Estevão Gomes, a Portuguese cartographer who'd sailed in Ferdinand Magellan's fleet, explored Nova Scotia, sailing South through Maine, where he entered New York Harbor, the Hudson River and eventually reached Florida in August 1525.

From 1534 to 1536, French explorer Jacques Cartier, believed to have accompanied Verrazzano to Nova Scotia and Brazil, was the first European to travel inland in North America, describing the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, which he named "The Country of Canadas", after Iroquois names, claiming what is now Canada for Francis I of France.

Is it really so implausible that any of these OTL voyages couldn't have taken place prior to 1519, and couldn't have gone to Mexico before the Spanish did?
 
I'd invite you to leave political discussions for the political portion of the forum.

Excuse me: I have a right to reply. I was questioned why I asked this question. I replied. As I didn't see why I was being questioned, I gave a clarification. I also labelled it as off-topic, in good faith. If you care about conduct, I'd invite you not to presume to boss around your equals.
 
Excuse me: I have a right to reply. I was questioned why I asked this question. I replied. As I didn't see why I was being questioned, I gave a clarification. I also labelled it as off-topic, in good faith. If you care about conduct, I'd invite you not to presume to boss around your equals.

I politely gave you a recommendation. There is a reason why there is a political section on the forum. That is all.
 
Thank you to all here who have taken the time to explain why they find this ATL implausible. Let me come back at you again.

The 1497 English expedition led by Italian Venetian John Cabot (Giovanni Caboto) was the first of a series of French and English missions exploring North America.

In 1520–1521 the Portuguese João Álvares Fagundes, accompanied by couples of mainland Portugal and the Azores, explored Newfoundland and Nova Scotia.

In 1524, Italian Giovanni da Verrazzano sailed at the behest of Francis I of France, who was motivated by indignation over the division of the world between Portuguese and Spanish. Verrazzano explored the Atlantic Coast of North America, from South Carolina to Newfoundland, and was the first recorded European to visit what would later become the Virginia Colony and the United States. In the same year Estevão Gomes, a Portuguese cartographer who'd sailed in Ferdinand Magellan's fleet, explored Nova Scotia, sailing South through Maine, where he entered New York Harbor, the Hudson River and eventually reached Florida in August 1525.

From 1534 to 1536, French explorer Jacques Cartier, believed to have accompanied Verrazzano to Nova Scotia and Brazil, was the first European to travel inland in North America, describing the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, which he named "The Country of Canadas", after Iroquois names, claiming what is now Canada for Francis I of France.

Is it really so implausible that any of these OTL voyages couldn't have taken place prior to 1519, and couldn't have gone to Mexico before the Spanish did?
That's just it. It's all explorations. How many of them are actual settlements? The first actual attempt at an English settlement was at Roanoake in the 1580s, and the French much later.

A desire to explore does not equal the desire to conquer or occupy. An opportunity and ability to explore does not equal an opportunity and ability to conquer and occupy.

Cortez did not start off from Spain and conquer Mexico. He started off from Cuba. Which was conquered from a base of Hispaniola. Which the Spanish settled during the 1490s.

To me, a requirement for any conquest of the Aztecs would be a nearby base, where they can start off from, draw men, supplies, and reinforcement (and Cortes did receive reinforcements--from Velasquez' men who he defeated in battle).

Plus, they needed interpreters. Fr Geronimo Aguilar was one such man, who was captured by the Maya, and lived with them for eight years, and thus learned the language, and translated Maya to Malinche who knew both Maya and Nahuatl.How can, say an Englishman or Frenchman get into such a position, and later on chance upon a expedition from the homeland to conquer the Aztecs? The sheer distances from Europe make such a probability unlikely compared to the Spaniards, who were just over the sea in Hispaniola and Cuba and could easily get captured by the Maya and later on encounter expeditions from the islands.

It's not that the other European countries could not find and conquer the Aztecs. What's so implausible to me is that they do so before the Spaniards.

IMO, the best way for, say, the French to conquer Mexico is for Columbus to sail for France, and for France to settle Hispaniola and then conquer Cuba.

Really, whoever controls the Carribean simply had a too much headstart for any other competitor.
 
Last edited:
Assuming a PoD after Colombus, that gives us a window until 1520, let's see what's possible:

Portugal
Too busy with the Indies. They already had enough trouble gathering funds for the Gama expedition to go on a route they knew did not lead to spices (which was the main motivation)

Plus they will end up with Brazil via Treaty of Tordesillas, Portugal will be sated for a time and is a non factor.

France
Too busy with the Italian wars to project power overseas.

This is true.

England
Isn't it in the middle of a civil war? Doesn't have the fund or the might anyway

Nope, Henry VII (and later the VIII) were King. No Civil War, but it's more they didn't have the funding. Due to recovering from Civil War.

Italian Republics
No reason to go, they were doing enough money in the Mediterranean. At that point, the well hasn't dried up. If anything, they're too busy financing Portuguese armadas to the Indies.

Plus it's kinda pushing the boundaries of plausibility. It's feasible, but it's just not happening before 1519.

Morocco
Morocco is currently busy being stomped by a mix of Iberic knights.

Pretty much this, and not so much Iberic Knights as it is Portugal. Morocco wouldn't be in a position of strength until the end of the century, of which by then, the Iberian Nations would've already colonized nearly all of Latin America at this point.

Ottoman
Not a naval power yet, and focused on the Med anyway. When they get Egypt (1517) and start building a fleet (1527) they'll focus on the Indian Ocean, where the wealth is. Plus, it's super easy to bottle someone in the Med, especially if you're Spain and hold both end of Gibraltar

More ASB than anything else really. The Ottomans were already overstretched as it is, and that's just from the continguous holdings they had. Even if you consider the 1492-1519 period, the Ottomans are just too far from the Americas to really play the colonization game.

The Dutch
Well, technically they're Spanish at that time but if anything, they'll finance Portugal

Austrian, actually, they didn't flip to Spanish control until after Charles V & I.
 
Seems the dispute is strategy versus logistics. The OP wants Columbus and history to go according to OTL up until Cortez, and someone swoop in some where in between.... Britain and France aren't going to have the maps and knowledge to sail in to the Gulf of Mexico looking for rumors the Spanish never let them know about. And remember Cortez was helped by coopting the very expedition that was sent to retrieve him, giving him more men at a crucial point. Another nation isn't going to have that. Say a 300 man army of France takes Mexica... ok, the Spanish navy and colonies and supply lines are between you and home. How does France hold on to it, resupply it, send more administration and military, and send gold back? Same goes for anyone at that time. Even Portugal will have an issue, not to mention the two nations have more to lose by being in the same area of the world, best to have the Pope divide the world.. oh wait... yeah.
 
Top