I made a pretty big one once. Fed me for about a week.
Chile was independent before Polynesia and New Zealand were claimed (officially) by France and Britain; an expansive Chile is certainly possible in the interval after independence (1827, if one counts the Chiloe Archipelago) and before the French and British establish their claims (French protectorate of Tahiti in 1842 and Treaty of Waitangi in 1840, respectively).
Obviously, if the French and British object, there is little the Chileans can do about it, but chronologically, it is possible.
Best,
They'd need quite a fleet to do that. In the second half of the century, they actually did have that, but prior to 1840, I'm not so sure. It's quite early for a small (in terms of population), freshly independent country full of social issues to go a-colonizing.
The conservatives had (more or less) ruled Chile from the end of the war of independence in the 1820s until the 1850s; the political scene in Chile in the 1830s after the 1829-30 civil war was stable enough that the Chilean conservatives ruled for two decades and fought and won the Confederation war with Peru and Bolivia in 1836-39, despite a population differential of 4 million to 1 million, and an economic differential of 3-1.
During the 1836-39 war, the Chilean fleet included some eight ships, ranging from impressed merchant brigs to several corvettes, including (eventually) the Libertad (24), Confederacion (22), Santa Cruz (20), and Valparaiso (20), and moved expeditionary forces ranging from 2,000 to 5,000 men into Peruvian and Bolivian territory.
So, yes, a Chilean movement "west" is unlikely, but not impossible.
Best,
more than 300 miles north of Lima.
6100 Peruvians and Bolivians were defeated by 4500 Chileans and 800 Peruvians. The commander was Manuel Bulnes, who served as president between 1841 and 1851, and previously had been responsible for the final defeat of the Mapuche tribes, which was definitely a hybridized "native/Western" culture, and so was a little more of a challenge than the typical resistant native culture of the era.
Sure, but it was more simply to illustrate that:
a) Chile was - reasonably - stable in this period, and so various "neo-colonial" adventures were possible; and
That's what I was getting at. They could mobilize their forces, and have a friendly environment support them.b) They could mobilize and support expeditionary forces beyond a naval landing party.
Yeah, but Chile and New Zealand (which would go under a different name ITTL) are so far apart that, once the independence wars begin, they'll split into two separate nations.What about a POD from 1570s where Juan Fernandez, with the open approval of Chilean Colonial authorities, did sail off towards the west, returns and his finds of a mountainous , fertile island with broad rivers is taken a bit more serious by the authorities who direct later colonist expeditions to sail there. If they arrive in the South Island they will find a largely under populated but potentially rich piece of real estate and with the addition of a European/South American food package be able to create a thriving if not prosperous colony. From such a base the rest of New Zealand and much of the South Pacific is open to exploitation. It would be 60-70 odd years before Tasman skirted West Coast and not until the 1770s that James Cook would be around. I'm certain though any earlier and sustained Chilean-Spanish colonisation would surely have inspired earlier outside interest.
In reality Juan Fernandez was sailing under the authority of Chilean Governor-General and not those of the Vice Royals of New Mexico or Peru so they would be calling the shots, at least in the early stages. This was at the time of native counter attacks in Chile who recaptured and destroyed numerous colonial centres and farms and there may well have been plenty of Colonists willing to make the move.