Was it faster to sail across the Pacific or Around Africa?

Doing some work on my TL, and I have a question. What is the Philippines essentially ends up in Portuguese hands, although Portugal is united with Spain (peacefully) through marriage in the early 16th century. The mid-16th century sees a reorientation of the Portuguese Empire and has some great effects on funding and manpower. With bases in the Philippines, Portugal has a good arm for trading with not only China and Japan, but also it's spice trade in Indonesia.

While the revenue and trade from India it's self would probably continue to sail around Africa to reach Europe, would it be easier for that trade centered around the bases in the Philippines to simply sail across the Pacific to Mexico, and then sent to Europe? Would that route be longer, or shorter? About the same? I know it took about four months to sail the Pacific, but not sure about anything else. I'm just wondering what would be more efficient, especially considering the Portuguese become involved in what is essentially an ATL form of the Manilla Galleons.
 
The travel from Lisbon to Goa lasted 7 or 8 months, when they were lucky and didn't miss the right time to avoid the monsoon. The ships were supposed to leave Lisbon around the second half of March or the first days of April in order to reach the Cape of Good Hope in July and arrive in India in September of October, but many could only reach Goa in November or December (as the ships started to be built larger and larger later dates became the norm).

For the "Flota de Las Indias", IIRC the travel to Mexico lasted around three months. So you have more four months to cross the Pacific, and the travel between Acapulco and from there the land route to Veracruz (I can't find information of how much time it used to take).

The only advantage that I could see for using the direct commerce between the Americas and Philippines is that both Mexico and Peru had something that Asian markets needed (silver and gold) while no product from Europe was more worthy than it. IOTL Portugal made huge debts in order to import copper (a metal much valuable in the Asian ports) that would than be sent to Asia. The problem is that this direct commerce between Mexico or Peru and Asia would be against the interest of the commerciants of Lisbon/Seville. In OTL Philip II even ordered that the ships from Acapulco to Manilla would be limited to two vessels each year.
 
I forgot about the Houses of Trade. Indeed, that does pose an obstacle to trans-Pacific trade. At any rate, it seems the take the same amount of time as sailing around Africa, perhaps a little bit longer. While it'd be interesting for the trade to be streamlined, with Mexican and Peruvian silver being sent to Asia to pay for Oriental goods, it's not going to happen with the cumbersome Trade Houses dictating policy--they are going to want to continue to hold a monopoly and as you said, commercial interests in Seville and Lisbon are going to be opposed for it.

All trade from the Portuguese colonies seem likely to continue going around Africa, then. Hmm.
 

cw1865

Overland

Would that route be longer, or shorter? About the same?

Overland transport is a problem. Before railroads and before Panama canal people would SAIL from NY to SF rather than take the overland route. Of course this is the entire length of the North American continent. Even aside from the distance, you also have to factor in loading/unloading {potentially port fees/customs even though you're eventually re-exporting and even though its really the same empire}

Only with modern unloading/loading equipment and containerization does any true potential exist for cutting sea times. A ship can unload in Long Beach, CA, unload containers onto a train and the train can bring them to Port Newark/Elizabeth and reload them onto another ship for delivery in Europe (and of course most ships would still take the Panama Canal)
 
Top