Reconquista continues to the Maghreb

Once the Spanish have started conquering the area,unless they are doing very badly they won't need a excuse.
will they spread along the coast or try to conquer blocks and "iberianize" them?
 
Didn't the concept of Ultramarine Algrave was created for the occasion?
It was self-appointed by king Afonso V but I suppose he eventually saught validation from the Pope.

"In fact, you're king of Algraves, but, we just found Algraves are both in southern Iberia and north Maghrib"

Kind of "forge claim" EUIII-way :D
Oh there wasn't any kind of claim that the kingdom of the Algarve continued overseas. It was a new kingdom conquered "fair-and-square" that combined with the old one produced a really cool title. The coincidence in names is that al-Gharb means "the West" in Arabic. I suppose the Tangier-Tetouan region already had that name before the Portuguese but I never read about it so it's possible that it was a forced coincidence mostly for the sake of aesthetics.
 
will they spread along the coast
That was OTL: the Portuguese west of Ceuta and eventually the Spaniards east of it.

or try to conquer blocks and "iberianize" them?
Christianize Morocco all the way to the Atlas would be a massive undertaking. The Portuguese seriously planned this but attempts to expand inland failed miserably. In order for this to be achieved the Spaniards must be in on this.
 
That was OTL: the Portuguese west of Ceuta and eventually the Spaniards east of it.


Christianize Morocco all the way to the Atlas would be a massive undertaking. The Portuguese seriously planned this but attempts to expand inland failed miserably. In order for this to be achieved the Spaniards must be in on this.


If the napolitan wars were prevented... probably Spain (Castille-Aragon) would see expansion in North Africa as a priority. Competition with Portugal could be transformed into some sort of cooperation against infidels (just as during the reconquista in the peninsula).
 
If the napolitan wars were prevented... probably Spain (Castille-Aragon) would see expansion in North Africa as a priority. Competition with Portugal could be transformed into some sort of cooperation against infidels (just as during the reconquista in the peninsula).

Yeap, by that time Portugal and Castile already had their zones of influence over the Kingdom of Fes sorted out between the two and everything.
 

Really interesting and glad to see that I was wrong.

So the inclusion of Mauretania as former Spain would have been included in Reconquista-demesne more or less in the same time that they gave a more important support to Grenada and that Portuguese tried to control the Sudanese road.
 
Why did the reconquista stop in Iberia? Arguably, the Maghreb was once a Christian land and probably still had a Christian minority at the timd. I read there were even pockets of indigenous Romance speakers until the 15thstate century.

The Reconquista did not stop, it just failed. Both the Portugese and Spanish attempted to conquer North Africa. Portugal was decisively defeated in the Battle of Alcácer Quibir in 1578. Spain was eventually defeated as well, but at times controlled or ruled multiple cities like Oran, Mers El Kébir, Algiers, and Tunis and others. Even today Spain still controls Ceuta and Melilla.

The reasons for the Iberians defeat can be classified in several categories.

1) The sea barrier aided the Spanish in regaining Iberia, and hurt them in conquering Africa. It was the exact opposite for the Muslims.

2) Spain and Portugal had other commitments and opportunities that took their focus off of controlling North Africa.

3) All of their conquests in North Africa were superficial and concentrated on the cities. They didn't seem to want the hinterlands that would have provided land and agricultural basis for settlement.

4) Too easy for their Muslim enemies to hide in the mountains to avoid them and attack Iberian ruled settlements as convenient.

5) The Ottoman threat put too much pressure on Spanish capability to control North Africa.

6) The population of North Africa was thoroughly Muslim. Christianity died early there. In contrast, Muslim Spain always had a large Christian population, and even those who converted to Islam often had Christian heritage they could fall back on once the wars went the other way. Christian Iberia had few potential collaborators in Africa.

7) For Spain, the critical time to control North Africa not only coincided with fighting the Ottomans, it also coincided with the Dutch Revolt. Their resources were too split.

If changes in the 16th Century had been different, it is possible that a permanent Christian presence in North Africa could have happened. If Portugal won Alcácer Quibir, and Spain got some breaks or didn't have to contend with rebellion in the Netherlands, or if Lepanto was followed up on better, it might have been enough for a long term Christian presence.

The odds were against it, but not so much to be implausible.
 
LSCatilina,

I remember that the Portuguese hired Italian law doctors to argue not only why were these wars justified but why should the King of Portugal have dibs on those conquests.

These learned opinions were not requested by Portugal but by the Pope. Its transcripts are available at the compilation "Monumenta Henricina", vol. 5, pp. 261, 266, 285 and 320.
 
I'll try to find it there. Thanks for the info.
You're welcome.

3) All of their conquests in North Africa were superficial and concentrated on the cities. They didn't seem to want the hinterlands that would have provided land and agricultural basis for settlement.

The Portuguese soon realized that they were going to be walled in. Most attempts to grow crops in nearby fields were frustrated by raids so the plan was to conquer more nearby cities and have a defensible border. The whole plan was to conquer all the way to Fes but some defeats curbed their enthusiasm.

Anyway, good points.
 
Top