What if Cortes was never able to concur the Aztecs?

Hello everyone. This is my first post here and I'm working on a TL for a game that basically relies on Spain never getting a foot hold in North America. So I was trying that if Cortes never gets to concur the Aztecs then that would cut off their strength in the coming Americas.

My goal is to build a world where New France stays strong in America and will never sell off/loose the Louisiana Territory. I'm planning on having a French American Empire, separate from the Napoleonic Empire in France, by the Bourbons becoming exiled in the Caribbean. (That's kind of the end game I'm trying to get to for my game, 1810 ish)

I've been making notes for a while but I came across the board and thought I'd give it a try.
 
Hello everyone. This is my first post here and I'm working on a TL for a game that basically relies on Spain never getting a foot hold in North America. So I was trying that if Cortes never gets to concur the Aztecs then that would cut off their strength in the coming Americas.

My goal is to build a world where New France stays strong in America and will never sell off/loose the Louisiana Territory. I'm planning on having a French American Empire, separate from the Napoleonic Empire in France, by the Bourbons becoming exiled in the Caribbean. (That's kind of the end game I'm trying to get to for my game, 1810 ish)

I've been making notes for a while but I came across the board and thought I'd give it a try.

Please take into account of butterflies.
 
I'm new to this so please explain Butterflies.

The knock on effects of a failed Spanish conquest of Mexico would throw history wildly off. For instance, less Spanish gold means a weaker Spain in the 16th century; so maybe they lose chunks of Italy, or the Empire goes protestant. By 1800 Europe would look significantly different than OTL.
 
Cortez managing to defeat the Aztecs so quickly and thoroughly with so little is about as ASB as anything that ever actually happened, so there's no real difficulty in preventing that; but he was not the only Spaniard in the world, and the thousands more that are going to follow the scent of gold are still going to have to be accounted for.

Not to mention the fact that he took advantage of fault lines in Aztec culture that not even a victory over foreign invaders is going to patch over, and the effects of disease and religious disaffection, what you're more likely to get is more native resistance from unstable, unsustainable empires shattering into their sharper component parts- the Aztec and Mayans going the way of the Inca, who did a much better job of fighting back precisely because of the results of their own civil war.

So there are going to be more armed resisters, more interference from other European powers trying to grab some of the money of Latin America (would it still be called that?) for themselves, Europeans playing divide and conquer with the locals even though they might be more effective doing it the other way around, locals trying to turn the Europeans against each other-

you're looking at two sides, locals and incomers, with half a dozen factions on one side and half a thousand on the other, I reckon.
 
Ah, yes. I have not dived into Europe to much on my TL as of yet, but I do see where you are coming from. Yes, from my notes, Spain does become weak and becomes part of Portugal. Portugal does grow into an empire and expands to South America. As for Main Europe, I need to spend some more time on it but I've been totally sucked up on my French American Empire. I will do more research.
 
The knock on effects of a failed Spanish conquest of Mexico would throw history wildly off. For instance, less Spanish gold means a weaker Spain in the 16th century; so maybe they lose chunks of Italy, or the Empire goes protestant. By 1800 Europe would look significantly different than OTL.

Another possibility is Spain, without having to concentrate on colonial affairs, succeeds in keeping its Dutch possessions and thus eventually ends up in a sustained dominant position, possibly with a measure of control over France as the latter collapses from religious wars. Again, significantly different from OTL.
 
Another possibility is Spain, without having to concentrate on colonial affairs, succeeds in keeping its Dutch possessions and thus eventually ends up in a sustained dominant position, possibly with a measure of control over France as the latter collapses from religious wars. Again, significantly different from OTL.
Was Spain ever really concentrated on colonial affairs and neglected the European front?I was under the impression that it was the other way around,and that without the cash from the Americas,Spain would have never been able to sustain the bankrupting expenses it was undertaking to fight all the wars in Europe.On the other hand,without the gold from Mexico,and possibly even Peru depending on how things play out,it might mean much healthier economic development for Spain,as well as the fact that Spain might live within it's means and fight less wars.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
For instance, less Spanish gold means a weaker Spain in the 16th century

Not necessarily. Without the flow of gold and silver from the New World, Spain would escape the rapid inflation that end up plaguing the country IOTL. They might have been pushed into developing the revolutionary financial structures that so added to the power of Holland and Britain, rather than remaining stagnant as they ended up doing.
 
Was Spain ever really concentrated on colonial affairs and neglected the European front?I was under the impression that it was the other way around,and that without the cash from the Americas,Spain would have never been able to sustain the bankrupting expenses it was undertaking to fight all the wars in Europe.On the other hand,without the gold from Mexico,and possibly even Peru depending on how things play out,it might mean much healthier economic development for Spain,as well as the fact that Spain might live within it's means and fight less wars.

Ah, I think the following was what I meant:

Not necessarily. Without the flow of gold and silver from the New World, Spain would escape the rapid inflation that end up plaguing the country IOTL. They might have been pushed into developing the revolutionary financial structures that so added to the power of Holland and Britain, rather than remaining stagnant as they ended up doing.

So, yeah.
 
Not necessarily. Without the flow of gold and silver from the New World, Spain would escape the rapid inflation that end up plaguing the country IOTL. They might have been pushed into developing the revolutionary financial structures that so added to the power of Holland and Britain, rather than remaining stagnant as they ended up doing.

Another example of butterflies, though!
 
Does anyone have any key information on Hernan Cortes' administration in the immediate aftermath of the defeat of the Mexica? That's what puzzles me, we know that in the campaign Cortes and his men were primarily supported by Local Allies who did much of the fighting but there is not a lot of details on how or why they became Spanish subjects rather than deposing Cortes and ruling themselves.

Imagine, Cortes and most of his men killed at a important moment in the revolt, like the Noche Trieste, without a strong leader or their forces severely depleted the Spanish expedition would likely either be killed off, imprisoned by their local allies, or make their way back to Cuba. Of course though the rebellion against the Mexica would likely continue but instead we would likely see a more multipolar Central America as the various tribes and Kingdoms break away from the Mexica, form their own alliances, and so forth.

With the conquest of Central Mexico a dismal failure it may lead the Cuban administration to take a more cautious approach, like the Portuguese in India, setting up trading forts and influencing their own allies.

Edit:
Actually, one of my first stabs at a TL was on this subject. Things may have gotten a bit out of hand with the French but I am proud of the Christian/Mesoamerican syncreticism
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=153365
 
Last edited:
He had burned his ships, so there is no retreat to Cuba.

I think another important detail of Cortez' defeat would be who is captured. Yes, most of the foot soliders would be sacrifice bait, but what about skilled engineers, carpenters, professionals, or horses.

While I think the ultimate fate of the Aztecs would be a few more rounds of plague followed by social collapse and or conquest, how it played out would be effected by all of those things.

A 'collapsed' Mexico might be harder to conquer because the lack of central authority figure to behead would mean they were dealing with a collage of shifting alliances rather than (in comparision) a unified empire.

The Spanish (and other European powers) had a harder time dealing with that. It took them until 1672 to conquer the Mayan city states and the Pueblo of New Mexico managed to throw them out for a time.
 

Insider

Banned
Not necessarily. Without the flow of gold and silver from the New World, Spain would escape the rapid inflation that end up plaguing the country IOTL. They might have been pushed into developing the revolutionary financial structures that so added to the power of Holland and Britain, rather than remaining stagnant as they ended up doing.
I second that. No easy conquest of aztecs would do more good then harm to Spaniards. They would do better in the long run if after "rogue noble" fails his "mad scheme" they instead start to trade with aztecs, like french, dutch and english did with indians... the India indians...
:)( how to say it in english so it would sound nicer?)
 
Cortez managing to defeat the Aztecs so quickly and thoroughly with so little is about as ASB as anything that ever actually happened, so there's no real difficulty in preventing that; but he was not the only Spaniard in the world, and the thousands more that are going to follow the scent of gold are still going to have to be accounted for.



There might be a long wait for more Spanish in Mexico if Cortez hadn't survived. Nobody coming back of the first several ventures into Mexico leaves nobody spreading tales of wealth, means no smell of gold to draw adventurers. "Enter Mexico and vanish' does not attract tourists.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps a good chance to get rid of Cortés would be the Noche Triste going worse for the Spaniards, who get annhilated.

However... remember that, while the conquest by Cortés was going on, as the governor of Cuba, Diego de Velázquez, as branded him a rebel, Velázquez send Pánfilo de Narváez with an army to finish him.

What do I mean by that? That if Cortés got crushed, the Spaniards had the mean to try again.

After all, Cortés was the third guy trying to conquer Mexico. Kill him and you may turn him into some kind of Spanish Gordon and Moztecuma (or Cuauhtémoc) as the new Mahdi to be punished.

In short, after landing in Cuba, I don't see any single reason why Spain would not be interested in America and no defeat (not even a massacre) Would change that. They had the gold to keep Castille's ambitions going one.
 
Places like the *Gold* Coast also had the gold to keep Europe interested, yet the Akan kings thoroughly controlled European presence on their coastline even into the early 19th century. That was with much less human resources than the Aztec Alliance.

In any case it's probably better for Mesoamerican independence if the Aztecs collapse back into independent altepetl and altepetl leagues, forcing would-be conquistadors to fight every independent city with much fewer allies.
 
Places like the *Gold* Coast also had the gold to keep Europe interested, yet the Akan kings thoroughly controlled European presence on their coastline even into the early 19th century. That was with much less human resources than the Aztec Alliance.

In any case it's probably better for Mesoamerican independence if the Aztecs collapse back into independent altepetl and altepetl leagues, forcing would-be conquistadors to fight every independent city with much fewer allies.

Maybe that would force them to concentrate on conversion rather than conquest, affecting their views on what it means to convert pagans. And then decades later the missionary orders agree that starting different rites for different places is a good thing.
 
One butterfly, perhaps a minor one, might be treasure seekers, and later settlers, would divert their efforts to other parts of the Americas.
 
Top