Cortes and company destroyed but.......

Winnabago

Banned
There are so many things wrong with this. First off, the Aztec monarchy was not hereditary like you think, the emperors who took over after Motecuzoma IOTL (and there's no reason for it to be any different here) were competent and respected, unlike their predeccesor

My bad. It was actually his brother (who died of smallpox), and then his nephew (and remember, the Aztecs had Montezuma killed, why would they trust his relatives, in a family-oriented society?).

Anyway, all that “competent and respected” bit? Irrelevant. If the Spanish are besieging Tenochtitlan, the Aztecs are going to all have a common goal and mostly stand together. If the king is off with the army trying to recover the empire, and everybody is dying of smallpox, don’t you think people would say, “We killed the king with a rock and now his nephew says HE’S king? Lolno.”

OTL, Cuauhtemoc was trying to keep the city from being taken, not increase his popularity. Once Tenochtitlan isn’t under siege, he’s got to be popular or else the mob has him killed too. And again, that’s what the Aztec military was generally told to do at the time, it’s what they knew how to do.

Cortes’s army “completely gone” is ASB. Many of them had armor and/or horses, and people simply weren’t as good at killing each other back then. Some would almost certainly escape, and probably end up in Mesoamerican courts.
that doesn't really constitute holding it down well considering they only made it in due to being invited in by the emperor and got kicked out in a single night with the majority being killed.
When most of their army was away, and a guy with terrible political decision-making skills was in control.
And the Aztec Empire did not solely consist of Tenochtitlan, I have no idea where you got that from.

The Aztec Empire did not directly control almost all of its territory. OTL, most of said protectorated territory abandoned it, except for Tlatelolco. I imagine this would still be the case.

If Cuauhtemoc was “de facto ruler” he would be a very unpopular one. It’s not like his reign was going very well: smallpox killed the last king, Aztec people killed the one before that, it’s starting to seem like gods and men are against kings, some of his family was a bit too Spanish-friendly, provinces in revolt, etc.
 
My god, it's like you don't even have access to wikipedia. IOTL Cortes's army was almost completely wiped out. Armor doesn't help you when you fall into water, he lost countless men from drowning deaths during the retreat from Tenochtitlan. And the rest of your argument, besides the lack of historical understanding, revolves around the idea that people are useless simpletons. The Aztecs have no reason to distrust Cuauhtemoc to the point of rebellion, he's not Motecuzoma. And the troubles of his reign are lessening. The Spanish are defeated for the time being, smallpox is still ravaging but the people aren't being butchered in the streets by conquistadors and the armies of the Aztecs' enemies have been destroyed along with Cortes's force. This is not the situation that foments rebellion. Your argument also seems to revolve around the idea that the Aztecs don't know what diplomacy is. Cuauhtemoc doesn't need to go around snatching captives for no reason to prove himself, he's already famous at this point for being one of the men responsible for the victory over the Spanish, Tlaxcala, and the rebellious vassals. Even if he did have to go around snatching captives the Totonacs are just sitting there waiting to be punished for their rebellion. Tlaxcala is also at its most vulnerable with anti-Spanish factions gaining ground and proposing peace with the Triple Alliance.
 

Winnabago

Banned
Seriously? The army might have been mostly disabled, but wiped out is, frankly, impossible. It’s a bridge. People can walk over bridges, that’s what they are for.

You could hope for a death of Cortes, which would have destroyed the Spanish actual military effort. But destroy all the Spanish? You overestimate obsidian clubs.
The Aztecs have no reason to distrust Cuauhtemoc to the point of rebellion, he's not Motecuzoma.

He’s his nephew, and also apparently married one of the emperor’s daughters. That’s creating some serious ties to an emperor who was extremely unpopular.
“Yes, I know that Montezuma’s reign started with us ruling all Mesoamerica, and ended with us ruling only this city and Tlatelolco, smallpox killing everybody, foreign invaders massacring our noblemen, and rioting in the streets, and I am related to him and clearly approve of him because I married his daughter, but I got this! I swear! Just let me leave with my loyalists while we try to reconquer the empire! Don’t do anything feisty like you are currently doing, okay?”

And even that’s assuming he does reconquer the empire, like you imagine he will.
 
It was a very, very close call that the Spanish survived. And even when they escaped to Tlaxcala, the Aztecs begged Tlaxcala to kill the ruined Spanish army, which it very easily could have done.

As Hummingbird said, he's not Montezuma. And in this case, the situation would be improving. There's no reason they'd immediately revolt against Cuauhtemoc.
 
Again, having an advanced society means they are more able to organize a large resistance against the invaders, compared to the tribes in the north that usually went into battle against British and American armies with at best a couple hundred warriors for the large battles.

But IOTL, large, advanced empires were a far easier prey for the spaniards than the lesser tribes in, say, Northern Mexico or Chile.
 
Seriously? The army might have been mostly disabled, but wiped out is, frankly, impossible. It’s a bridge. People can walk over bridges, that’s what they are for.

You could hope for a death of Cortes, which would have destroyed the Spanish actual military effort. But destroy all the Spanish? You overestimate obsidian clubs.

Does it really matter if they are wiped out literally or not? I mean when you get down to it the army is functionally destroyed and Cortes is dead in a battle he OTL nearly lost. Does it really matter if they killed 1500 Spaniards or just 1400? The fighting force is still crippled and leaderless.
 

Winnabago

Banned
Does it really matter if they are wiped out literally or not? I mean when you get down to it the army is functionally destroyed and Cortes is dead in a battle he OTL nearly lost. Does it really matter if they killed 1500 Spaniards or just 1400? The fighting force is still crippled and leaderless.

Yes, it does. If they were crippled as a fighting force, and not willing to join a campaign anymore, they still have skills and items of huge value to a Mesoamerican lord.
 
I don't know what the hell you're going on about with the whole "Spanish couldn't have been wiped out" thing, they were only not wiped out because of luck. Metal weapons and armor don't make you invincible, especially when you were taken by surprise and are forced to run down a narrow causeway while loaded down with heavy equipment and looted treasure with thousands of other people stampeding around you while being attacked from three sides. A great many just died from slipping or loosing their footing, because once they fell off the causeway that was it, they drowned from being weighed down by that precious metal armor and stolen gold. And there were gaps created in the causeway too, like a drawbridge.

And for the hundredth time, there is no reason to revolt against Cuauhtemoc because of a vague relationship with him. Cuauhtemoc led the resistance against Motecuzoma, some stories claim he incited the crowds to pelting him with the stones that killed him, and he certainly had military experience and was not considered one to be weak in front of the Spanish. And the Spanish didn't conquer most of the empire, the empire still existed. They were invited into Tenochtitlan, they didn't go around conquering every town on the way. The Aztec Empire was not just a small part of the Lake of Mexico as you still seem to believe. Texcoco and Tlacopan are partners in the Triple Alliance and still exist, along with most of the other vassals. Only some vassals turned on the Aztecs, and those rebels just lost a good portion of their warriors. So did their chief rival Tlaxcala. Again, your argument is simply based on a very poor understanding of the subject at hand and hearsay, I've never argued with someone about Aztecs who knew this little.
 

Winnabago

Banned
I don't know what the hell you're going on about with the whole "Spanish couldn't have been wiped out" thing, they were only not wiped out because of luck.

Bullshit. They were on their way out, and the Aztecs were coming from either side and the city. All it takes is to run. You wouldn’t have an army afterwards, but that was the whole point of the POD.
And for the hundredth time, there is no reason to revolt against Cuauhtemoc because of a vague relationship with him

I like how you’re trying to deny how important family relationships, especially marriages, were back then. Marriage was a social and a political contract, especially with the upper classes. Marrying the emperor’s daughter puts the emperor in your family, and in your group of allies.

It’s why dynasties fall, not kings only. Power is removed from the family as well as the king.
And the Spanish didn't conquer most of the empire, the empire still existed.

Non sequitur. The empire, a system of tributaries, had all but abandoned the Aztecs, simply because the Spanish were such an excellent distraction.
Only some vassals turned on the Aztecs, and those rebels just lost a good portion of their warriors. So did their chief rival Tlaxcala.
If by “only some” you mean “all of them but Texcoco” then yes.
 
Actually, If a country is immuned to smallpox the less likely the Europeans will get a territory unless it is weak and underpopulated or simply that the nobles had no loyalty to their land, which happened alot in South East Asia, Mexica was doomed because of their non-immunity to the European diseases.
 
Top