Tolerant Spain TL Ideas

[AltoRegnant]

I'm toying with the idea that instead of OTL's 'be christian or be dead' idea that the Catholic Monarchs (Ferdinand and Isabella) pulled after the Granada War, they instead do something like Strip all pre-existing Islamic officials of rank, and charge a tax, but ultimately allow for the presence of all the Abrahamic religions to exist (at least until Protestantism shows up)

1. Is it possible or pretty ASB, considering it was at least a decent sized population booted out that there must've been a sizable economic problem?
2. What would the effects of this be on spanish colonialism and culture?
3. Could this result in some form of Protestantism becoming mainstream in Spain?

 

[Tempered Zen]

Well you'd have to heavily alter Isabel's personality. She was heavily into the whole Reconquista idea. A Joanist victory at Toro would be a possible POD, but that might not get the outcome you're looking for.

 

[Ivan Lupo]

I think an earlier precedent may have to have been set by a Reconquista king to convince the Catholic Monarchs to have a more lenient approach to non-Christians. Now, while it's entirely possible the butterflies changes everything so that Isabel or Fernando never exist, it's also possible to have low impact butterflies that merely set a subtle change and doesn't eliminate everyone out of timeline. If for instance someone like Fernando III didn't immediately expel all Muslims from the cities he conquered and allowed them to remain to run the bureaucratic elements of government and administration, a change like that could set a precedent for all subsequent monarchs to show more tolerance.

 

[HistoryMinor]

The Muslims win at Toulouse and push to the Loire, but their holdings in Europe still fall apart thanks to the Almohads. Moderate taifas link up Christians in the north that did not get help from French crusaders in this timeline.

That or Ramon Llull's are even more prefered by the Spanish crown. I don't know how his theories, but apparently they focused on unity and weren't racist.

 

[Jing0ist_Peasant]

A tolerant Spain would probably lead to more tolerant colonies. One of the main reasons Spanish new world turned out so bad was because it basically kept feudalism until 18th century. Unlike america people in spanish colonies had little independance from authority in madrid and were dontrodden by Church. If they are more tolerant, the colonies would turn out much better having more immigration and being more developed. Not to metion impact no expultion of Jews would have on the administration of Spain, especially they would help manage Spain's finances better after influx of Mexican and Peruvian gold+silver.

 

[Mightyboosh5]

A tolerant Spain would probably lead to more tolerant colonies. One of the main reasons Spanish new world turned out so bad was because it basically kept feudalism until 18th century. Unlike america people in spanish colonies had little independance from authority in madrid and were dontrodden by Church. If they are more tolerant, the colonies would turn out much better having more immigration and being more developed. Not to metion impact no expultion of Jews would have on the administration of Spain, especially they would help manage Spain's finances better after influx of Mexican and Peruvian gold+silver.

The idea that Spanish america was an absolutist colony, where peninsulare officials and clergy oppressed everyone else is a post independence invention.

In certain respects the spanish empire was remarkably tolerant, the idea of Fueros extended to the colonies and actually the empire was thought of in terms of independant kingdoms under a catholic monarchy, not simply a metropolitan spain ruling over colonies.

The greatest rebellions in the spanish empire took place after attempts to centralise under the bourbons, this indicates that early hapsburg rule was not as repressive as black legend narratives indicate.

I'm fairly new to this area of historiography but i do think many people have a warped view of spanish america influenced by the black legend.

Also the semi feudal backward economy doesent inherently imply that locals had little independennce from madrid, if anything they had a huge amount of independence because of the power of criollo land owners who monopolised local government power and were able to disregard orders from madrid.

 

[isabella]

A tolerant Spain would probably lead to more tolerant colonies. One of the main reasons Spanish new world turned out so bad was because it basically kept feudalism until 18th century. Unlike america people in spanish colonies had little independance from authority in madrid and were dontrodden by Church. If they are more tolerant, the colonies would turn out much better having more immigration and being more developed. Not to metion impact no expultion of Jews would have on the administration of Spain, especially they would help manage Spain's finances better after influx of Mexican and Peruvian gold+silver.

Spanish colonies were not really so intolerant and the church was not-so-really powerful there and actually protected and educated the natives while converting them so...
Corrupted and avid officers and governor existed everywhere and they were directly responsable for the majority of the bad things who happened in Spanish colonies and if they were caught they were removed and recalled in Spain and is not like who the native were treated better in North America than how they were in the Spanish area)

The idea that Spanish america was an absolutist colony, where peninsulare officials and clergy oppressed everyone else is a post independence invention.

In certain respects the spanish empire was remarkably tolerant, the idea of Fueros extended to the colonies and actually the empire was thought of in terms of independant kingdoms under a catholic monarchy, not simply a metropolitan spain ruling over colonies.

The greatest rebellions in the spanish empire took place after attempts to centralise under the bourbons, this indicates that early hapsburg rule was not as repressive as black legend narratives indicate.

I'm fairly new to this area of historiography but i do think many people have a warped view of spanish america influenced by the black legend.

Also the semi feudal backward economy doesent inherently imply that locals had little independennce from madrid, if anything they had a huge amount of independence because of the power of criollo land owners who monopolised local government power and were able to disregard orders from madrid.

Exactly. Black legends are the worst kind as they give us a totally wrong view of many things...

 

[Mightyboosh5]

Also to earlier points about reconquista precedent, there was precedent for tolerance of non Christian religions in Iberia

Look at how the Spanish royalty responded to the 1499 morisco revolt, it was not in expulsion and genocidal targeting, this only took place in the late 16th century. Local land owners in Granada tolerated Muslim and Arabic expression due to the economic power of these people

Spain was also known for tolerating Judaism aswell with Erasmus claiming he didn’t like Spain because it was full of Jews.

Really it was the centralisation of monarchical power and bureaucracy combined with the threat of ottoman and Barbary attacks that caused the ethnic cleansing of the 1500s. I’d say it takes a less centralised and more secure Spain to tolerate religious minorities

 

[Witteric of the West]

Also to earlier points about reconquista precedent, there was precedent for tolerance of non Christian religions in Iberia

Look at how the Spanish royalty responded to the 1499 morisco revolt, it was not in expulsion and genocidal targeting, this only took place in the late 16th century. Local land owners in Granada tolerated Muslim and Arabic expression due to the economic power of these people

Spain was also known for tolerating Judaism aswell with Erasmus claiming he didn’t like Spain because it was full of Jews.

Really it was the centralisation of monarchical power and bureaucracy combined with the threat of ottoman and Barbary attacks that caused the ethnic cleansing of the 1500s. I’d say it takes a less centralised and more secure Spain to tolerate religious minorities

A good starting point could be to keep the Ottomans from taking Egypt or from securing influence in the Barbary Coast

 

[Mister Mister]

Considering that they waged Reconquista for the last 800 years, I think it's hard to expect Spain to be much more tolerant.

 

[AltoRegnant]

A good starting point could be to keep the Ottomans from taking Egypt or from securing influence in the Barbary Coast

So perhaps have local north african states give notable help Granda, giving the catholic monarchs reason to take their land, limiting Ottoman expansion?

 

[Witteric of the West]

So perhaps have local north african states give notable help Granda, giving the catholic monarchs reason to take their land, limiting Ottoman expansion?

It would have to be a third party though, but at the time no one else comes to mind, considering the spanish hold on Southern Italy

 

[AltoRegnant]

It would have to be a third party though, but at the time no one else comes to mind, considering the spanish hold on Southern Italy

How do you mean? Wasn't Tunisia a decent player around this time? If they helped the Granadans, couldn't Spain take their land and limit the ottomans but cutting the Mediterranean in half? And wouldn't that give cause for at least some tolerance?

 

[Witteric of the West]

How do you mean? Wasn't Tunisia a decent player around this time? If they helped the Granadans, couldn't Spain take their land and limit the ottomans but cutting the Mediterranean in half? And wouldn't that give cause for at least some tolerance?

I mean in the scenario scenario where Spain chooses to push into North Africa. You'd need a Maghreb that is not strong enough to pose a serious threat, and not so weak that the Ottomans will make them basically tributaries, or have the main Eastern Mediterranean islamic power focus on Egypt and the Red Sea rather than moving westwards. A failure of the Ottomans to conquer Syria and Egypt could do the trick

 

[Gloss]

A more tolerant Spain would rather imply less expulsions and less paranoia about conversos, a totally tolerant Spain would be unlikely with such a late PoD.

 

[Ibn Chaldun]

I know it is a little behind your desired timeframe, but I would start with a more decisive outcome of the Valladolid debate (1550/1) in favor of Bartholome de las Casas. Have him argue in a more secular fashion, let the more tolerant policies towards native americans yield benefits ( e.g. more voluntary economic participation, assimilation etc.) and therefore have the Spanish administration encourage tolerant behaviour in their subjects - both in the new world and in the old.

With a little luck the expulsion of the moriscos (1609) could be avoided, allowing for a more diverse and integrated population in southern Spain longterm and facillate the route towards a tolerant Spain.

 

[Johannes Parisiensis]

Could no gold and silver from the Americas help with this? If the Crown is poorer than OTL then they wouldn't want to expel potential taxpayers, craftsmen and traders. OTL, when moriscos were expelled, local landowners complained they would lowe farmland; TTL, with no gold from the Indies, they would pay more attention to these protests.

 

[AltoRegnant]

Could no gold and silver from the Americas help with this? If the Crown is poorer than OTL then they wouldn't want to expel potential taxpayers, craftsmen and traders. OTL, when moriscos were expelled, local landowners complained they would lowe farmland; TTL, with no gold from the Indies, they would pay more attention to these protests.

That butterflies away almost all of new world colonialism

 

[AltoRegnant]

The idea of this one is that the Reconquista kings are more willing to acknowledge the strength the tolerance brought to the Muslims when they ruled, so they let the muslims be. This gives isabella the precedent of tolerance, but her religious zeal manifests in a tax, so do you guys think this is a good opener?


The Year is 1492; Granada has fallen to the Castilian Attackers, ending the centuries long crusade that would come to be known by one name across the globe: La Reconquista. Queen Isabella of Castile was many things- half of the Catholic Monarchs. Mother to the boy who would be King of Spain-the first of the title since the Visigothic monarchs from after the fall of Rome. She was a pious, zealous woman. A true christian devoted to taking back the Iberian Peninsula from the Moors. But she was not stupid. She knew that enforcing mass conversion on a population such as Granada would only spell revolt and depopulation. Further, there was a strong history of the Muslim states, and even during the reconquista itself, of legal toleration. Key word being legal. Thus, the Queen had one order


“As Christ, our Lord and Savior, said, ‘love thy neighbor.’ We, as lords of this realm holding people who all worship the Lord and Greatest One as the same God, are not fit to judge those who stray from the light. All peoples who worship the god of the old testament are welcome within the realms of castile, though those who do not follow the leadings of the Catholic Church must pay a monthly tax equal to ten percent of their earnings. This tax, La Cadena must be paid in coin.”

 

[Ivan Lupo]

If the New World still gets discovered that same year, would these Muslims and Jews be allowed to colonize their own island colonies with limited autonomy provided they swear continuing fealty to Isabel and Fernando? Or would their status as second class citizens prevent them from trying their luck across the ocean?