Colonization delayed 50-60 years...

Hendryk

Banned
The trick is that thanks to the Reconquista, Spain (well, Castile and Aragon...) had a huge amount of soldiers sort of sitting around doing nothing, which lent itself ideally to colonizing the new world.
One can imagine that, without the Americas to colonize, Spain would focus on North Africa.

What if, in the ensuing seventy years, China discovers America? Were the Ming still sending out ships then?
No, unfortunately, they weren't.
 
If the discovery of the New World is delayed a few decades by the Portuguese spice trade and a continuing Reconquista, then the Reformation would probably delay it another couple decades, at least. In that case, I could probably see Scotland (if not in a union with England), England, Portugal, and the Dutch being the main colonizers of the New World.
 
Is this what your after?

First post, be nice!

Columbus makes it to the new world, but doesn't make it back to Europe (Whatever method you like here - killed by natives, ships sink in cariberean reefs, Disease, Doesn't feel like it...)

As a result, European monarchs choose not to fund any further expeditions west fearing another Colombus like failure. However, because Columbus makes it to North America, so does European diseases. This causes much turmoil in the Americas as many rulers die of these diseases (like how smallpox (atleast it is thought to be smallpox) killed Huayna Capac which caused an Incan civil war). That should delay European colonisation and give the American population a higher degree of immunity to western diseases.

Reconquista as many have pointed out - would probably continue into Morocco. During these conquests, conquistadors hear of "the golden city of Timbuktu". These conquistadors then go on to take the Songhai empire, areas along the Niger river are then farmed, surrounding areas are used to produce sugar, cotton etc. The local populations are used to as labour on these farms/plantations.

The Portugese continue to focus on India/Indonesia area of the world. Eventually the "roaring forties" leads to the discovery of Australia (atleast Western Australia). Rather than hitting the Simpson desert quite a few Ships hit the South West area (South of modern day Perth) to find an area appropriate for farming. As many ships hit this part of the coast - it is thought to be larger than it actually is.

There is increased focus on colonising India, South Africa and Indonesia now as Europeans see how rich Spain and Portugal have become. The Dutch break free of Spain and following the Iberian Union the Dutch take control over the majority of Portugese colonies. England and France focus on colonising SE asia/India, India gets divided up between various European powers and a surviving Mughal empire. It is about this point in time that Akbar the great comes to power. Akbar, seen as a liberator by the Indian populace, gains wide support and ousts European political entities from the subcontinent.

So this leaves Europe with SE asia (probably struggling to assert supremecy), Indonesia (largely Dutch), South Africa (Disputed) and Western Africa (Spanish). The kingdom of Denmark-Norway, having laid claim to Iceland and Greenland, looks further West, to the "edge" of the world. Eventually they "discover" the "new world".

Now, moving onto what could happen during this time in the Americas...

The Aztec empire temporarily becomes smaller as Tenochtitlan would be a rather large city which means it would be severly effected by new diseases. However, this is only temporary, as the Aztec retain its farmlands, producing lots of food, producing a larger populace. Taking advantage of Maya disintegration they expand Eastwards, however this also allows the Maya city-states of Ko'woj and the K'iche' kingdom of Q'umarkaj expand and halt the Aztec forces. However, Aztecs require the gathering of slaves to sacrifice, so they continue to war, however this puts incredible strain on the Aztec economy and eventually the Aztec empire disintegrates.

When Huayna Capac, the leader of the Inca (sapa inca) dies suddenly of one of disease, civil war ensues and as in real life Atahualpa "wins". (As happened in real life, as disease suddenly killed Huayna Capac causing the civil war which Atahualpa "won", then the Spanish came...). Atahualpa, being an ambitious militaristic person as he was, continues to expand the empire. They look again overseas (and also assume Túpac Inca Yupanqui did indeed go on a previous successful Pacific expedition) as they have by this stage met tough resistence/too difficult terrain to expand much more overland. They gain (or regain) control over Easter island, head West to (re)find Polynesia. However obviously not being able to control an area so far away they instead move to gain knowledge, leading to better navigational skills. Later rulers do consolidate the Andes, and build on the road system to the point where expansion is once again possible.

So Norway/Denmark is "first" to the Americas, but lacks funding/people for alot of colonies. So they create a few small colonies then rely on good relations with natives (particually the Iroquois). Portugal under the Iberian union doesn't figure now, Spain by this time has mismanaged its economy so much that expansion is very unlikely, leaving Great Britain, France, Dutch, Norway/Denmark, Sweden to colonise the new world. They mostly focus on North America and gradually move southwards. There is a new wave of disease brought on, however it is not as devasting as disease was in reality.

France and Great Britain put aside their differences to "block" Other countries from establishing colonies in the new world. The Dutch, having control over Indonesia for some time now, effectively buy their way around this "block". France and Great Britain do this until tensions in their competing colonies escalate to the point of war but don't ask me who would win...The Dutch focus on consolidating trading posts, and open a trade route to the Incan Empire through current Panama and Colombia. Sweden has their colonies starved to death or conquered. As "revenge" they choose to invade Denmark/Norway who after seeking Iroquois assistance, manage to get their colonies to survive.

Now I'm out of ideas...mostly because we have two important wars going on - France vs Great Britain and Denmark/Norway vs Sweden. Would Russia join Denmark/Norway to defeat the Swedish threat? Also a potential alliance between the Dutch and the Inca. Would Portugal try to take the poorly managed Spanish colonies or choose to colonise Australia? Basically there are too many variables now...
 
Now, moving onto what could happen during this time in the Americas.

The Aztec empire temporarily becomes smaller as Tenochtitlan would be a rather large city which means it would be severly effected by new diseases.
Wait, where do the diseases come from? the Danish-nowegian colonies up north? Because I think you'd be overstimating the rate of the spread of disease.

However, this is only temporary, as the Aztec retain its farmlands, producing lots of food, producing a larger populace. Taking advantage of Maya disintegration they expand Eastwards, however this also allows the Maya city-states of Ko'woj and the K'iche' kingdom of Q'umarkaj expand and halt the Aztec forces. However, Aztecs require the gathering of slaves to sacrifice, so they continue to war, however this puts incredible strain on the Aztec economy and eventually the Aztec empire disintegrates.
Wait, are the maya disintegrating from the disease? And how the Aztecs cross the hilly jungles of Oaxaca or the swamps of Tabasco? Why would they do it? why wouldn't the Mixtec and Zapotec villages there oppose them? I think you're overestimating the capacity of the Aztecs.

When Huayna Capac, the leader of the Inca (sapa inca) dies suddenly of one of disease,
Once again overestimating the speed of disease.

civil war ensues and as in real life Atahualpa "wins". (As happened in real life, as disease suddenly killed Huayna Capac causing the civil war which Atahualpa "won", then the Spanish came...).
The circumstances that led to Atahualpa controlling the throne are too butterfly prone for my tastes. Why would Ninan Cuyochi instea dof some other brother? There are a lot of times when Atahualpa was close to defeat, like when he got captured, and I think its more likely some other son would take the throne.

Atahualpa, being an ambitious militaristic person as he was, continues to expand the empire. They look again overseas (and also assume Túpac Inca Yupanqui did indeed go on a previous successful Pacific expedition) as they have by this stage met tough resistence/too difficult terrain to expand much more overland. They gain (or regain) control over Easter island, head West to (re)find Polynesia. However obviously not being able to control an area so far away they instead move to gain knowledge, leading to better navigational skills. Later rulers do consolidate the Andes, and build on the road system to the point where expansion is once again possible.
:confused:
Wait, wait, WHY? Why does he just go conquering off a group of tiny islands that are very far off, have no neccesary comodity, and present no threat to the Empire when there are many other problems he could be dealing with on the border that actually pose a threat.

So Norway/Denmark is "first" to the Americas, but lacks funding/people for alot of colonies. So they create a few small colonies then rely on good relations with natives (particually the Iroquois). Portugal under the Iberian union doesn't figure now, Spain by this time has mismanaged its economy so much that expansion is very unlikely, leaving Great Britain, France, Dutch, Norway/Denmark, Sweden to colonise the new world. They mostly focus on North America and gradually move southwards. There is a new wave of disease brought on, however it is not as devasting as disease was in reality.
the Iriqouis where fairly far inland and there rise to power is also very prone to butterflies. Why would people evin begin to settle the Americas without Spain's example. I tihnk you need more explanation here.

France and Great Britain put aside their differences to "block" Other countries from establishing colonies in the new world. The Dutch, having control over Indonesia for some time now, effectively buy their way around this "block". France and Great Britain do this until tensions in their competing colonies escalate to the point of war but don't ask me who would win...The Dutch focus on consolidating trading posts, and open a trade route to the Incan Empire through current Panama and Colombia. Sweden has their colonies starved to death or conquered. As "revenge" they choose to invade Denmark/Norway who after seeking Iroquois assistance, manage to get their colonies to survive.
:confused::eek::confused::eek::confused::eek::confused:
 
Do we need titles?

Ok ok...

Wait, where do the diseases come from? the Danish-nowegian colonies up north? Because I think you'd be overstimating the rate of the spread of disease.

That part I've gone back to what may have been happenning 1490 onwards. Diseases spoken of are those brought by Colombus...

Wait, are the maya disintegrating from the disease? And how the Aztecs cross the hilly jungles of Oaxaca or the swamps of Tabasco? Why would they do it? why wouldn't the Mixtec and Zapotec villages there oppose them? I think you're overestimating the capacity of the Aztecs.

Maya had been disintegrating for some before Colombus came (ie they became a bunch of city-states). Aztecs power is signifigantly increased by better farmland -> more food -> more population -> larger army. Aztecs need new places to conquer (need more slaves to sacrifice), so look to expand.

Once again overestimating the speed of disease.

Smallpox was the disease that probably killed Huayna Capac in reality. It spread to the Incan empire within 30 years of Colombus reaching the Americas. Now I'm having Atahualpa take the throne as thats what happened in reality. Ninan Cuyochi also died of disease (probably smallpox) so he's out of my thinking.

Wait, wait, WHY? Why does he just go conquering off a group of tiny islands that are very far off, have no neccesary comodity, and present no threat to the Empire when there are many other problems he could be dealing with on the border that actually pose a threat.

Ok, Túpac Inca Yupanqui brought back "trophies" from his journey. Atahualpa, being headstrong, seeks to outdo all previous rulers...He'd continue dealing with border threats...but for me he was more after glory than actually doing what needed to be done...

Why would people evin begin to settle the Americas without Spain's example. I tihnk you need more explanation here.

Spain has previously settled West Africa (after conquering it), exploited the land and its people, and became incredibly rich. Portugal had grown rich from its colonies, as had the Dutch. Now after these three countries growing rich from colonial expansion, wouldn't other power set up colonies elsewhere?

Yea that last bit was jumping ahead in time. Since its too difficult to predict where various colonies will be. Put we can probably assume that France and Great Britain, realising there geographic strength, would cut off other European powers from expansion. This allows France and Great Britain to build up there colonies, tensions rise over disputed areas, then war. Of the blocked countries, the Swedish colonies (which have been left largely defenceless due to not enough homeland support due to the "block") dissapeared, Dutch seek to trade so focus on opening a trade route to the Inca, Norway/Denmark colonies survive due to support from native populace (I used Iroquois here, replace with whatever native tribe you think would be most powerful)

hmmmmm it makes sense in my head!
 
No, you don't need to

Columbus did not bring disease with him, and the first Smallpox epidemic in OTL was around 1520. Columbus might have brought back Syphillis with him.

The Mayans are way too far away for the Aztecs, and they had a lot of other good targets availible like the Tarascans or the various villages inbetween the Aztecs and the Maya, or the Huastecs, reaslly its a very long list.
 
First post, be nice!

It's a bit too convergent. Why would the Iberian Union happen at all ITTL? The Reformation may have taken a different course. Calvin was not even born yet, and even the reformers in OTL might not be identical to OTL. No Reformation would probably mean no Eighty Years' War. Furthermore, the Dutch dominance of Indonesia is by no means set in stone. In fact, the Portuguese and Spanish had expensive claims over most of the region. Without the American colonies to distract them, they might be able to control the region.

Also, one generation is not enough to first recover from the devastating effects of disease (assuming it spreads from one man's brief landing, which is unlikely), which would destroy the native civilizations. Their children would not be immune to disease, it would take much longer.
 
The trick is that thanks to the Reconquista, Spain (well, Castile and Aragon...) had a huge amount of soldiers sort of sitting around doing nothing, which lent itself ideally to colonizing the new world.

I don't know too much about the time period, but it seems like both Portugal and England have much smaller populations, too...
Spain has not won since he left over American soldiers. The conquest of America was carried out thanks to a few soldiers who had the support of thousands of Indians opposed to the Incas and Aztecs (at least that is what happened in Mexico and Peru). Spain would never have conquered this land alone.
 
Yeah, my instinct would also be that Spain's reconquista spirit goes to North Africa instead of the Americas, perhaps conquers Morocco and then bogs down (however - knock-on effect - no Moroccan invasion of West Africa, and the Songhai Empire continues to rule there, which may remove or reduce the slave trade due to the lack of warring states selling each others' captives into slavery). Thus when the Americas are discovered, Spain won't be the predominant coloniser. Probably not Portugal either, because they'll be heavily invested in their round-Africa trade routes by then. The Americas in TTL might end up being dominated by England, France, and perhaps some of the German states.

In fact, in that time, european powers thought that Italy was the "center of the world" so if you delay Americas discovered, I think that Spain would continue distracted in Italy but now with more effort. In fact I think that was Italy and not America which distracted them from Africa.
 
In fact, in that time, european powers thought that Italy was the "center of the world" so if you delay Americas discovered, I think that Spain would continue distracted in Italy but now with more effort. In fact I think that was Italy and not America which distracted them from Africa.
I always thought that it was more a combination of the Netherlands and the Americas which distracted Spain. The Americas brought more gold which wrecked the Spanish economy, and the Netherlands involved them in an ~80 year rebellion upon which they focused most of their attention.
 
This thread is ridiculous. The premise was about delaying the discovery of the New World by merely half a century. So think about how Reformation Europe would have reacted to a whole new continent and extrapolate from there.
 
How off-topic people were in the first two pages of the thread wrt the op.
What, the speculation about North Africa? I don't think that that is too off topic, considering that the developments people had postulated were direct results of no discovery of the Americas. But if the topic were to be solely about the Americas (which I asked for in the OP, but I don't mind other discussion), then I would agree with you.
 
The Americas in TTL might end up being dominated by England, France, and perhaps some of the German states.
Doubt the Germans, as they were focused on the East. Without the distraction of the new world they may have more troubles with France.
 
I always thought that it was more a combination of the Netherlands and the Americas which distracted Spain. The Americas brought more gold which wrecked the Spanish economy, and the Netherlands involved them in an ~80 year rebellion upon which they focused most of their attention.
Well, I am concerned that when Spain had a chance to really settle in North Africa was at the beginning of the sixteenth century. At that time, the Muslim power was inferior. I think that was the distraction caused by the confrontation with France which allowed the emergence of the Barbarossa or that the Turkish influence was greater. At that time, human capital sent to America was not as important as what it would be later and with the Netherlands, the problems really began when Philip II was king. With Charles, a king brought up there, Holland was not a very serious problem. In fact Castillia proved more problematic for Charles that the Netherlands.
 
Top