Gunpowder discovered later

[JanWellem]

Very good question. The Ottomans were famous for their artillery. I'm not sure how much of their military success depended on it.

Or would the Chinese be able to expel the Mongols since I'm uncertain to what extent their success depended on it either, mereley that they were using firearms.

 

[EnvarKadri]

Or would the Chinese be able to expel the Mongols since I'm uncertain to what extent their success depended on it either, mereley that they were using firearms.

The yuan dynasty would eventually fall the same way all chinese dynasties felt. Funnily enough having non han dynasties is convinient for the chinese in the long run. Look at how much territory modern China inherited from the Qing. Territories they wouldn't have gotten under the han Ming dynasty.
Of course even if the Yuan stay longer they are not gonna stay until 19th/20th century but looking at the Manchu ruling China for longer puts them at greater risk if sinofication.

 

[EnvarKadri]

Well, without artillery would Mehmet II, still would be able to take Constantinople? And, without gunpowder would much of the Ottomans fast advances/conquests would be butterflied and/or they could be more hard/slower than OTL?

I cant say for the balkans but in the siege of Constantinople cannons played a big role. How would the ottomans adapt to the lack of gunpowder? They could look west and adopt crossbows and heavier plate armors. Also they could try to become a naval power to block Constantinople supplies by sea. This could become an absurdingly long siege.
If they face more resistance in the balkans maybe they will adopt more agressive islamification policies and bring far more muslim colonists from the near east and the caucasus. Hell, without gunpowder we may see the crimean/golden horde start pressing from the north in the plains of Romania and Bulgaria.

 

[Xenophonte]

They could look west and adopt crossbows and heavier plate armors. Also they could try to become a naval power to block Constantinople supplies by sea. This could become an absurdingly long siege.

Would they? I would think that if either not forced to do it or 'd though that the possible advantages would be worth, I'd think that it would be unlikely. About the siege, specifically, I'd expect that if it isn't butterflied, that it would develop in similar ways to earlier Constantinople sieges. Also, IIRC, the Ottomans, if not a naval power in itself, such the Italian Merchants republics, they indeed had a respectable navy, that also played a very important role IOTL blockade of the Eastern Roman Capital.

 

[EnvarKadri]

It's worth pointing out that early on at least, most of the New World colonies were focused on making money and didn't have huge numbers of Europeans in them. So if the first person to try to conquer Mesoamerica gets killed instead of succeeding and getting extremely rich, a lot less people will try to follow in their footsteps for at least the next few decades, and European powers will focus mainly on expanding plantations in the Caribbean instead of the mainland (since the former would still make as much money as OTL while the latter would seem like a worse investment).

It's absolutely possible. Altho I think they will eventually hear if tails of the riches of mesoamerica and explore the region, likely trying to either trade, raid, extract tribute or all of the above the local polities. Also the spanish are still looking for a route to India and China. The spot for that is actually south of mesoamerica in panama.
The region south of mesoamerica is the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate_Area or https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isthmo-Colombian_Area . This area actually had spanish presence much earlier then mesoamerica if we count Venezuela as part of it.
Isthmo-Colombian area in light green:

I think early on like in otl spanish colonization will be limited to the caribbean and intermediary area but just like in otl those areas were a dissapointment to the conquerors dispate the gains by sugar plantations:

Even with a viable export product, the Spanish settlements in the Caribbean were economically disappointing. Nonetheless, in 1503 the crown established the Casa de Contratación (House of Trade) in Seville to control trade and immigration to the New World. It remained an integral part of Spanish political and economic policy during the colonial era.[28] It was not until the accidental Spanish encounter with mainland Mexico and subsequent Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire (1519–21) that Spain's dreams of wealth from the New World materialized.

Of course the expansion in the mainland was quite small and slow until the conquest of the aztecs. How fast it was and apparently effortless with so many things going right for Cortez in that campaign. I think if the conquest of mesoamerica is done slower, more peace meal like, having to give concessions in some areas, there is better chances for the survival of the native cultures (in greater numbers that is) and even better odds for the andes later on. The natives of the Isthmo-Colombian Area, Venezuela and Caribbean are likely not luckier then in otl bc of their characteristics:

The islands of the Caribbean were fairly densely populated with sedentary, subsistence agriculturalists, No complex hierarchical social or political system evolved there. There were no tribute or labor requirements of inhabitants that could be co-opted by the Europeans upon their arrival as subsequently happened in central Mexico and the Andean regions.

There is evidence of pre-Contact trade in the circum-Caribbean region, with an early European report by Peter Martyr noting canoes filled with trade goods, including cotton cloth, copper bells and copper axes (likely from Michoacan), stone knives and cleavers, ceramics, and cacao beans, used for money. Small gold ornaments and jewelry were created in the region, but there is no evidence of metals being used as a medium of exchange nor their being highly valued except as ornamentation. The natives did not know how to mine gold, but knew where nuggets could be found in streams. On the Pearl Coast of Venezuela, natives had collected large numbers of pearls, and, with the arrival of the Europeans, they were ready to use them in trade.[21]

You need to either be a more advanced settled civilization in the way of mesoamerica or the andes or be nomads of high mobility in the american mainland. Those groups are the ones who survived in general but the caribbeans seem to be particularly unlucky with this middle ground. Altho mestizos are the 1st minority in modern Dominicana so I guess they werent all eliminated.

The conquest of the colombia Andes also could be delayed as this happened after the conquest of the Incas and with conquistadors from Peru. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_conquest_of_the_Muisca

This 3 segments are quite interesting:

Latin American economy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Spanish colonization of the Americas - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Encomienda - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think a big divergence here is that the spanish crown in europe is weaker. Probably all kingdoms are weaker without gunpowder. Specially when it comes from projecting power an ocean away. It aint the same to send a boats to fight with cannons then without them. I think the risk of feudalization of spanish america is much greater here. I think if hacendados become actual feudal lords and have to think more long term about the exploitation of their lands the chances of indigenous survival are greater. Of course this also deepens of on whatever african slaves are available. And this depends on Portugal being as succesful in Africa as they were in otl without gunpowder.

Mesoamerican demographics could closer to those of bolivia or the philipines.

Another question is, what happens to spanish america if Spain isnt as fast a conqueror once the rest of the european empires show up?





This thread sent me to a real wikipedia rabbithole.

 

[johnreiter]

When gunpowder is finally invented in the early 1800s, how would firearms likely develop? Would they go through the same stages (such as matchlock to wheel-lock, to flintlock), or would they skip stages, now that they are being invented during the industrial age instead of the middle ages?

 

[EnvarKadri]

When gunpowder is finally invented in the early 1800s, how would firearms likely develop? Would they go through the same stages (such as matchlock to wheel-lock, to flintlock), or would they skip stages, now that they are being invented during the industrial age instead of the middle ages?

Wait, we stablished they wont be developed until the 19th century? I dont remember.

Well I guess if they are discovered by what in otl would be the period of the napoleonic wars then they would advance very quickly, since chemistry and ballistics are quite more advanced then in the 15th century. My guess from our point of view they would be skipping steppes. Also a lot depens on the previous developments until then. In a world were there is no cannons or mosquets until the 19th century how does warfare and its technology develop. It would be hard to speculate how will gunpowder impact warfare in the 19th century without first determining the trends in warfare until that point. After all technology is adopted in ways it counters the current tools of the enemy.

 

[johnreiter]

Wait, we stablished they wont be developed until the 19th century? I dont remember.

Well I guess if they are discovered by what in otl would be the period of the napoleonic wars then they would advance very quickly, since chemistry and ballistics are quite more advanced then in the 15th century. My guess from our point of view they would be skipping steppes. Also a lot depens on the previous developments until then. In a world were there is no cannons or mosquets until the 19th century how does warfare and its technology develop. It would be hard to speculate how will gunpowder impact warfare in the 19th century without first determining the trends in warfare until that point. After all technology is adopted in ways it counters the current tools of the enemy.

I picked the 19th century, because that was when the first experimental chemists began plying their trade, inspired by Lavoisier. However, I accept chemistry might happen later.

 

[garfieldleifrag]

When gunpowder is finally invented in the early 1800s, how would firearms likely develop? Would they go through the same stages (such as matchlock to wheel-lock, to flintlock), or would they skip stages, now that they are being invented during the industrial age instead of the middle ages?

If all other developments in chemistry are the same, it will go to caplocks straight away since mercury fulminate was discovered in 1800.