Could an Earlier Reconquista be Continued into Morocco

Say the Castilians take over Granada instead or replace its monarch during the Castilian-Granadan War in the 1430s. Could the Castilians with the help of Aragon and maybe Portugal defeat the Moroccans and take important settlements off of them?
 
Well, why would the Iberian states go south of Tangiers/Ceuta?

They had no reason to; the main reason why they (re)conquered Granada, was to rid Iberia of Muslim states.

It's possible they could have staged an invasion: after all, the Ottomans aren't there yet, and at least Morocco's Mediterranean coast could have been seized, to secure the Straits of Gibraltar.

But past the coastline, neither the Portuguese nor Spaniards had any reason to take all of Morocco.
 
Well, why would the Iberian states go south of Tangiers/Ceuta?

They had no reason to; the main reason why they (re)conquered Granada, was to rid Iberia of Muslim states.

It's possible they could have staged an invasion: after all, the Ottomans aren't there yet, and at least Morocco's Mediterranean coast could have been seized, to secure the Straits of Gibraltar.

But past the coastline, neither the Portuguese nor Spaniards had any reason to take all of Morocco.

Well, Portugal invaded Morocco in the XVI century. Spain conquered a few coastal cities, as you say.They managed to occupy a few post, in both Morocco, Algeria and Tunes, but at a great cost. If, however, the locals had put les resistance, I do not see why not they would have expanded further. They just couldn't do so cause, unlike what happened in the New World, there wasn't a great technical or military gap, nor diseases that the locals weren't immune to.

They could do so for religious reasons, to "liberate" a land that was once Christian, to get closer to the sources of gold South of the Sahara, to get closer to the slave markets, to end slavery... there could be many motives or pretexts
 

Zlorfik

Banned
They could do so for religious reasons, to "liberate" a land that was once Christian
Maybe

to get closer to the sources of gold South of the Sahara, to get closer to the slave markets
Done already, navally

to end slavery
Let's not overestimate human kindness :p

They had plenty of opportunities to expand beyond the coast, and they didn't take them IOTL. Discounting the very, very late colonial period, that is. This ATL will have to start with inventing some compelling motive, as the means are already there and a suitable occasion is easily found.
 
Not only they could, but they were going to : Isabella's wills clearly states that Castille had to expand on both sides of the Mediterranean Sea, would it be only because IOTL Morroco was once part of Mauretania Tingitana that was itself part of the roman diocese of Spain.

You had other reasons:
- Crush Arabo-Berber control of western African trade roads, especially for the Sudanese gold that represented a huge part of the metallicorigin of European monetary
- Prevent any, more or less fantasmed, possibility of re-reconquista by Arabo-Berbers
- Crush Arabo-Berber piracy (it's why Spain conquered cities on North Africa coast up to Tunisia IOTL)
- Ensure coastal points for trade with southern Africa and Asia.
- It's true that, rather than ending slavery, Christians would takeover slavery trade roads for their own profit as they did in Mediterranean basin IOTL (basically, slave trade roads of XVth Castille are roughly the same than the Arabo-Berber's)

Of course, while all of that is quite plausible, it was soon more or less neglected in favour of Americas that were much, much more attractive.
 
Top