The Spanish meet equals in South America

Let's say there's a timeline in which for some reason the South Americans have similar tech to Europeans and they are immune to European diseases. The invasions takes place in the late 1700s. How long would the Spanish Empire or the Spanish and Portuguese people be able to hold onto the region? In perpetuity like in OTL? Perhaps just 5 decades?

In this scenario the Spanish and Portuguese get 40 years before the French rock up and start tipping resources into resistance movements. The Spanish treat the South Americans with the same level of brutality as OTL.
 
I am not entirely understanding your question.

There exist only one South American nation with a European tech level (lets say without the same shipping technology, explaining why they never crossed an ocean), and the Spanish managed to conquer the Incas, Aztec, etc jut like OTL and manage to create an relatively large American Empire in the 1700's, just like OL and then meat the new guys?

Or do you mean that most of south America is of a European tech level at the moment the Spanish discover America?

What exactly do you mean? Also what exactly is the political situation of the Americas when Colombus discovers it?
 
If it's a unified country like the Inca or China, forget about it, the Iberians would get their ass beat. If it's a semi-unified country like Japan, then it would probably take decades to conquer it to begin with assuming they got really, really lucky. If it's a collection of smaller and less unified polities like the Philippines, they probably could conquer it over the course of a few decades.

But if Spain (and Portugal) doesn't have the Americas, then the course of Iberian and European history will be totally different since there's no influx of Latin American gold and silver, there's a lot less tobacco, sugar, etc. plantations, there's a lot less slave trade, etc.
 
@pompejus, @metalinvader665, I think I should probably explain a bit more. The vast majority of South America is at a European tech level when found by Spain due to a non European culture making first contact centuries ago, mining and food exports to booming civilizations in West Africa, East Africa, the Indian Subcontinent and Asia making South American nations wealthy and tech leaking into the region.

The entire South American population is 40 million, split among small bickering coastal states (average 3 million each), each with a unified central government, identity and culture. The two empires deploy military expeditions there whilst having no Asian, Indian Subcontinent or African empires or influence.

Due to globalized trade and information flow, the South Americans know their continent's, North America's, Central Africa's and Australia's situation. In my current draft the two empires have about 30 years before their expansion scares the South Americans into an alliance, 40 before they contact France, similarly scared nations in Africa as well as North America to fund resistance movements.

@metalinvader665 alright, a few decades to conquer the continent. If the Spanish use Amerindians slavery instead would they be able to hold onto the territory permanently? Perhaps just 10 years after the grand alliance? More? would it not get that far?
 
Last edited:
If we're dealing with similar tech levels then perhaps a parallel to European nations (or those of European descent) invading each other? The Spanish Netherlands only lasted 60 years. The Peninsular War was a debacle that only lasted 5 years. The American Revolution has a very small gap between the colonies deciding to revolt and Britain being pushed out. These didn't involve the occupiers enslaving the populace or sending their children to die in the mines, which vastly accelerates the decay of nations.

Want a non European example? Qin Dynasty trying to hold newly unified China under despotic rule. That didn't even last to the 20 year mark. If they try to keep expanding, which they will probably try, they will end up over extended too. Add to this that it is extremely hard to supply the military across an entire ocean. India would seem to be a counter example though. How did British manage to hold it for so long and might it be a better model for the South Americans?
 
@pompejus, @metalinvader665, I think I should probably explain a bit more. The vast majority of South America is at a European tech level when found by Spain due to a non European culture making first contact centuries ago, mining and food exports to booming civilizations in West Africa, East Africa, the Indian Subcontinent and Asia making South American nations wealthy and tech leaking into the region.

The entire South American population is 40 million, split among small bickering coastal states (average 3 million each), each with a unified central government, identity and culture. The two empires deploy military expeditions there whilst having no Asian, Indian Subcontinent or African empires or influence.

40 million sounds pretty low for an 18th century South America with European technology and immunity to European diseases. IIRC that's not much higher than South America's population was before European colonisation (the Inca alone had at least 10 million people when the Spanish met them). They'd certainly have an agricultural revolution brought about by globalised trade with new technology, agricultural concepts, and new crops (probably from tropical Africa and India) boosting the population. Most notably, the less populated areas OTL in much of Argentina and Uruguay might be revolutionised by this.

Due to globalized trade and information flow, the South Americans know their continent's, North America's, Central Africa's and Australia's situation. In my current draft the two empires have about 30 years before their expansion scares the South Americans into an alliance, 40 before they contact France, similarly scared nations in Africa as well as North America to fund resistance movements.

But if the Spanish and Portuguese are setting out to conquer them (which will look like early British expeditions in India more than the conquistadors), then they'd logically contact other European nations as a counterweight. Other European nations would logically do that by themselves, since one nation grabbing all that nice agricultural land (sugar, tobacco, coffee, etc.) and gold/silver mines wouldn't be good for them. India is a great example, with the French and British (among others) allying with Indian states. And there's other examples, like the Dutch attacking Spanish (and Portuguese, ruled under Spain at the time) colonies globally in the 17th century.

@metalinvader665 alright, a few decades to conquer the continent. If the Spanish use Amerindians slavery instead would they be able to hold onto the territory permanently? Perhaps just 10 years after the grand alliance? More? would it not get that far?

I don't see slavery happening, since that's bad PR. Britain couldn't have started their rule in India by enslaving everyone, African style. It would be like Indian or African colonisation, where native structures of oppression are borrowed by the colonial power and ramped up to unprecedented levels. And as seen in those regions, it will inspire plenty of rebellions. In theory, this would allow the formation of an "American 'Raj'" (what's "Raj" in Quechua or Tupi lol) where the Spanish or Portuguese could dominate the area for centuries.

If we're dealing with similar tech levels then perhaps a parallel to European nations (or those of European descent) invading each other? The Spanish Netherlands only lasted 60 years. The Peninsular War was a debacle that only lasted 5 years. The American Revolution has a very small gap between the colonies deciding to revolt and Britain being pushed out. These didn't involve the occupiers enslaving the populace or sending their children to die in the mines, which vastly accelerates the decay of nations.

I don't get what the OP means by "similar tech levels". Late 18th century Europe was the most advanced place on the planet. Indian states, the Ottomans, and the Qing were quickly falling behind. Are the South Americans like the Indian states (Mysore, Marathas, etc.)? Or are they actually equivalent to the Europeans in tech, maybe comparable to Meiji Japan vs Europe? We should remember too that Spain and Portugal demographically were pretty crap in the late 18th century, although there's a host of reasons for this and many relate to their colonial adventures which OP's scenario presumably don't have. But Portugal would be on par with a larger native state (according to OP) in terms of population, and if they don't have any tech advantage on them, will be quickly smashed. Spain would have significantly more (maybe 15-20 million?), but having 5-7 times as many people doesn't mean much if you can't raise a big enough army, get that army to the place, and continue to supply that army in that place. And that isn't much more than the Inca had OTL, now imagine the Inca fighting Spain with equivalent tech to the Spanish and immunity to their diseases.
 
For it not to be ASB, the most likely scenario is that Mexico is such a hard nut to swallow that it takes decades to absorb it, and to then spread into the Maya and Southern territories, that by this time travellers and merchants have both spread disease, and brought commerce to the Incas. Disease will run its course without Spanish intervention, and there will be huge upheavals due to population loss but it will settle down, whilst technology increases as knowledge and examples are brought into the country and whatever successor regime is able to begin construction, as well as gaining literacy, as we would understand it, and the ability to employ foreign advisors.

So, by the time Spain faces off against them in the 1700s its similar to how the Europeans had to deal with a China or Japan in the mid to late 1800s.
 
If it's a unified country like the Inca or China, forget about it, the Iberians would get their ass beat. If it's a semi-unified country like Japan, then it would probably take decades to conquer it to begin with assuming they got really, really lucky. If it's a collection of smaller and less unified polities like the Philippines, they probably could conquer it over the course of a few decades.

But if Spain (and Portugal) doesn't have the Americas, then the course of Iberian and European history will be totally different since there's no influx of Latin American gold and silver, there's a lot less tobacco, sugar, etc. plantations, there's a lot less slave trade, etc.
Actually, the Spanish can be expelled or prevented to Acquire Luzon, Mindanao and Manado, Visayas was just vulnerable at this point.
 
For it not to be ASB, the most likely scenario is that Mexico is such a hard nut to swallow that it takes decades to absorb it, and to then spread into the Maya and Southern territories, that by this time travellers and merchants have both spread disease, and brought commerce to the Incas. Disease will run its course without Spanish intervention, and there will be huge upheavals due to population loss but it will settle down, whilst technology increases as knowledge and examples are brought into the country and whatever successor regime is able to begin construction, as well as gaining literacy, as we would understand it, and the ability to employ foreign advisors.

So, by the time Spain faces off against them in the 1700s its similar to how the Europeans had to deal with a China or Japan in the mid to late 1800s.

Except for it won't be like China or Japan because niether of them had losses of 50% or greater of their population.
 
40 million sounds pretty low for an 18th century South America with European technology and immunity to European diseases. IIRC that's not much higher than South America's population was before European colonisation (the Inca alone had at least 10 million people when the Spanish met them). They'd certainly have an agricultural revolution brought about by globalised trade with new technology, agricultural concepts, and new crops (probably from tropical Africa and India) boosting the population. Most notably, the less populated areas OTL in much of Argentina and Uruguay might be revolutionised by this.


Sorry but the Inca Alone have some 15-35 million Before the Spanish Contact, and some 15 million after the plagues in the moment of the Spanish contact, the plague arrived to the land some 10-15 years before than the Spanish themselves, estimate in 1520, ,(different source and methodology of the calculus in :https://howtoperu.com/inca-population-estimates/), so even using the smaller source of 15 million before plagues, civil war, and conquest war, 40 million is ridiculous small for All Latin America, I´m including Mexico.

The Aztec state Alone have some 22 million of people, you have to take in account that Tenochtitlan alone have at least 200.000 people after the conquest by the Spanish and a Plague that killed at least 50% of the city population.

If anything 40 million people is for Mexico Alone, with a European level technology, you could easily boast the continent population to 200 million, and that is being conservative, by land km2 alone Europe is a 1/4 of the land area of America (10 530 751 km² VS 43 316 000 km²), European population in 1500 is some 70-100 million people ,and Asia Have some 250-300 millions, in the same epoch, wit slightly more land (44 541 138 km² V/S 43 316 000 km²).

And that is without Maize (2° more important cultivate in the world after rice), potatoes,(5°) yuca(7°) batatas(sweet potato 10°), and a long etc of native american sources of food


Edit: the ugly all quoted responce
 
Last edited:
Sorry about the late reply. Real busy at work and haven't had much time to get on AlternateHistory.com

@metalinvader665, ah right. I may have underestimated population growth. How about having South America have 40% the population of Europe? How about with @Lenwe's suggestion with a South American population double Europe's? Might South America perhaps become ripe for industrialization since they might have a high demand far excess of their population's ability to otherwise meet? I like the sound of that South America.

But if the Spanish and Portuguese are setting out to conquer them (which will look like early British expeditions in India more than the conquistadors), then they'd logically contact other European nations as a counterweight. Other European nations would logically do that by themselves, since one nation grabbing all that nice agricultural land (sugar, tobacco, coffee, etc.) and gold/silver mines wouldn't be good for them. India is a great example, with the French and British (among others) allying with Indian states. And there's other examples, like the Dutch attacking Spanish (and Portuguese, ruled under Spain at the time) colonies globally in the 17th century.

That sounds like an interesting situation. How badly would the European's collective resources be strained if North America and Central America had developed similarly, also with roughly 40% of Europe's population? Can the Empires of Europe still conquer the whole Americas? If they can't would they still try, in effect expanding their empires into oblivion?

So no slavery then. How long until the rebellions start? Like the idea of an "American Raj". Might such an entity escape the control of its founding nation and attempt to go it alone? Perhaps some Spaniard with delusions of grandeur and a large army of South American soldiers.

By similar tech levels I mean they have the same weapons tech as the Europeans. The POD is in the 1200's so by this point the butterflies have really stacked up. The timeline has taken a flying leap off the highway of familiarity. Most tech is invented outside Europe and the Europeans get tech the same way the South Americans do. It trickles in through trade. The premier European states are roughly parallel to the premier American state and the less developed South American states are equivalent to those in Europe. The entry points of the European tech flow goes through trade routes which means Spain, Portugal, South East Europe and Eastern Europe are entry points.

For it not to be ASB, the most likely scenario is that Mexico is such a hard nut to swallow that it takes decades to absorb it, and to then spread into the Maya and Southern territories, that by this time travellers and merchants have both spread disease, and brought commerce to the Incas. Disease will run its course without Spanish intervention, and there will be huge upheavals due to population loss but it will settle down, whilst technology increases as knowledge and examples are brought into the country and whatever successor regime is able to begin construction, as well as gaining literacy, as we would understand it, and the ability to employ foreign advisors.

So, by the time Spain faces off against them in the 1700s its similar to how the Europeans had to deal with a China or Japan in the mid to late 1800s.

@Grey Wolf, seems like a good scenario. How might that conflict play out? In my draft I had the culture that made first contact just not go for widespread invasion. They weren't to interested in conquest so far from their homeland at the time. Traders do frequent the region though and there are warships to protect their own merchant fleet during their travels. Even if this first contact culture doesn't go for invasion, don't know how plausible it is that the South Americans can go without an invasion from West Africa, which is now aware of their location. I suppose the West Africans have plenty of concerns in their own neighborhood such as protecting their own salt and gold mines or invasions from North Africa. They'd also have to attack the people this first culture is trading with when warships are present which might be a risky move.

Again I appreciate everyone's input. Thanks for contributing. Bit busy at work and couldn't check in lately.

@kasumigenx, alright so I guess the Spanish and Portuguese can lose quite some portions of their empire. Good for story plausibility.

@Legofan4, aye that will hurt their ability to fight but perhaps it would still leave a population that can be a pain to control? There might be a gap between what you can conquer and what you can hold reliably.

@Lenwe, that sounds pretty cool. A hugely populated South America. Experimenting with a concept. Let's say the tech advancement is boosted a globalized flow of information and trade as well as increased global population with the 1700's equivalent occurring in the 1480's and the period between the 1300's and 1480's being a compressed version of OTL's 1300's to 1700's? How would that affect the South American population? They'd certainly be less generations to repopulate the Americas. Could we still get a huge population?
 
Last edited:
Sorry about the late reply. Real busy at work and haven't had much time to get on AlternateHistory.com

@metalinvader665, ah right. I may have underestimated population growth. How about having South America have 40% the population of Europe? How about with @Lenwe's suggestion with a South American population double Europe's? Might South America perhaps become ripe for industrialization since they might have a high demand far excess of their population's ability to otherwise meet? I like the sound of that South America.

@Lenwe, that sounds pretty cool. A hugely populated South America. Experimenting with a concept. Let's say the tech advancement is boosted a globalized flow of information and trade as well as increased global population with the 1700's equivalent occurring in the 1480's and the period between the 1300's and 1480's being a compressed version of OTL's 1300's to 1700's? How would that affect the South American population? They'd certainly be less generations to repopulate the Americas. Could we still get a huge population?

Sorry @Matti23 , MAybe It was me the one that not Explain itself well, I´m Speaking that in ALL america (both north and south) you will have the Double of the European Population, Maybe 120-130 million in north and Centro america, and 70-80 Million in South America.
Here is the why of my Reasoning
Mexico, with Stone Age technology have some 22-30 million inhabitants by Itself, The Maya polities, have some 8-15 million, we could assume that in all the Caribbean( Cuba, Hispaniola, Jamaica, Antilles, etc) we have some 1-3 million people, and in North America with the Mississippian Polities, and the East coast agricultural complex, we would get some 8-18 million, and maybe a 1,5 million extra with all the nomadic groups in what is today Northern USA-Canada-California, so in all in all we have some 43 million peoples in North America with Stone Age technology. So elevate that number to 120 million with European level technology is not a Hair pulling proposition, specially with Iron Tools

The same apply in South america, but with smaller funding populations.
15-30 million Inca empire
5 million in Chile, 3-4 million Mapuche by Spanish Accounts
1,5-2 million in Paraguay, Argentina,Uruguay
8-20 million in the Amazon Basin
5-15 million in Colombia-Venezuela
 
@metalinvader665, ah right. I may have underestimated population growth. How about having South America have 40% the population of Europe? How about with @Lenwe's suggestion with a South American population double Europe's? Might South America perhaps become ripe for industrialization since they might have a high demand far excess of their population's ability to otherwise meet? I like the sound of that South America.

There's not a lot of coal (or oil) in South America outside of some deposits in central Chile and of course in Colombia and Venezuela along the border, so industrialisation won't be easy. Not sure about how good the South American rivers are for building watermills, compared to, say, many rivers in Britain or New England.


That sounds like an interesting situation. How badly would the European's collective resources be strained if North America and Central America had developed similarly, also with roughly 40% of Europe's population? Can the Empires of Europe still conquer the whole Americas? If they can't would they still try, in effect expanding their empires into oblivion?

Very strained, especially since no European country will want their rivals to expand too much in the Americas, which will influence alliances on both continents.

So no slavery then. How long until the rebellions start? Like the idea of an "American Raj". Might such an entity escape the control of its founding nation and attempt to go it alone? Perhaps some Spaniard with delusions of grandeur and a large army of South American soldiers.

That's certainly a possibility, but like in India, they need the right conditions to succeed long-term.

By similar tech levels I mean they have the same weapons tech as the Europeans. The POD is in the 1200's so by this point the butterflies have really stacked up. The timeline has taken a flying leap off the highway of familiarity. Most tech is invented outside Europe and the Europeans get tech the same way the South Americans do. It trickles in through trade. The premier European states are roughly parallel to the premier American state and the less developed South American states are equivalent to those in Europe. The entry points of the European tech flow goes through trade routes which means Spain, Portugal, South East Europe and Eastern Europe are entry points.

But what about tactics, organisation, and other important facets of how militaries function? If you have South Americans sending military missions to Europe or hiring European soldiers to organise/train/lead their armies (basically not too far from OTL South America in the 19th century with their large number of British, Prussian, etc. leaders), then they'll be more than a match for any European force. And that includes small countries like you mentioned, since remember that OTL Chile had a pretty solid army and navy (with the help of European advisors) at the turn of the 20th century despite having only 3 million people in the whole nation. Now, Chile had the advantage of good mineral reserves and good strategic position (especially before the Panama Canal), but not all nations of a few million people in the Americas are likely to be some banana republic.

The lack of European advantages seems like these South Americans might indeed be studying European militaries (or Asian, or whoever they perceive is the most advanced) to improve their own, and that means that invading them just became that much more difficult.
 
By similar tech levels I mean they have the same weapons tech as the Europeans. The POD is in the 1200's so by this point the butterflies have really stacked up. The timeline has taken a flying leap off the highway of familiarity. Most tech is invented outside Europe and the Europeans get tech the same way the South Americans do. It trickles in through trade. The premier European states are roughly parallel to the premier American state and the less developed South American states are equivalent to those in Europe. The entry points of the European tech flow goes through trade routes which means Spain, Portugal, South East Europe and Eastern Europe are entry points.

If you have the less developed states in South america have roughly the same level tech that the less developed states in Europe.
your the less developed in America have roughly a similar technology level of Russia? or maybe Finland? Crimean Khanate? Cossack?

If that is the case you will have a lot of bands of nomadic people in the North american Prairies, that will be a constant treat to the Mexico and Mississippi polities so they will boast the military tactics of these civilizations.

And the same in the Pampas , that don´t be a treat for the Altiplano, Chile and Amazons Civilizations, but probably will be indispensable to the land commerce in the region and the best source of fine horses. as you have a lot of Prairie, fine cattle, sheep and horse land, in South america,

naoa-pradera.jpg
 
@Lenwe, twice Europe's population for the entire Americas sounds like a pretty good population. How long might it be until the first revolts get off the ground?

I suppose all of the above. South America have their Russia, Finnish, Crimean Khaganate and Cossaks. Since the region heavily exports to external civilizations, might that skew the region's distribution of nations towards the more advanced end of the scale? Perhaps more Russias and less Khaganates. I was thinking that as more of the population gets devoted to creating exportable material such as minerals, less of the exporter nation population would be devoted to food. Increased demand for food imports would encourage those surrounding nations that might otherwise be nomadic to develop agriculturally and make their money feeding those exporter nations. They'd still be a few nomads to create problems and spur tech development.

I like the idea of some of these nomadic populations getting involved in trade. They'll be a good amount of variation, especially on those Prairie, fine cattle, sheep and horse land. Perhaps if those coastal nations invite them in to help with security we'll see their tech development accelerate and have the start of an alliance against any European invaders?

@metalinvader665, not much coal or oil but perhaps they'd start importing what they need? The rivers might be an interesting possibility. The Amazon for example is quite a large body a water.

Good to hear they'd keep expanding. Would be an interesting situation to have a vastly overstretched bunch of colonial powers trying to hold onto their vast domains. Perhaps an "American Raj" might try to get free without the right conditions? A bunch of extremely unstable colonies attempting to milk all the autonomy they can out of the central government back home? Collapsed colonies being reestablished by the central government or being absorbed into their neighbors?

The South and North Americans have military missions in West, East Africa, India and Asia. They're hiring training staff and consultants from these regions and adapting their tactics, organizations and other aspects from what would be this timeline's equivalent of Britain, France or the Netherlands. Imagine this program being similar to what OTL Japan was attempting to do when it modernized. The Europeans have deployed similar observers in those same locations too.
 
Thanks for the help everybody. Back from a stretch of work.

Wondering how likely it would be in such a scenario the governors of the Spanish/ Portuguese colonies could have their positions become hereditary? Perhaps with a ready work base of disease resistant Amerindians, well developed pre-existing infrastructure and minimal reach of the Empires beyond the Americas could Governors and leadership in the colonies could become so powerful that Spanish Imperial control begins to weaken?

In the current draft I've got the colonies transforming into Exarchates/Despotates as the amount of soldiers and capital raised by each individual colony dwarfs that of the central government.
 
Have some civilization-tier animals available for the natives to domesticate. Couple with some plants. Slow rise for a millennia or so. Serve well with fearsome bolt-action wielding Inca and Amazonians!
 
Top