What would happen if spain fails to conquer the native empires?

holycookie

The conquest of the Aztecs and Incas completely changed the power struggle in Europe, giving Spain an almost infinite wealth. Allowing the country to wage constant wars for control of Europe. If the conquest of the Aztecs and as a consequence of the Incas did not occur, how would that change Europe and the Americas?
Several attempts at colonies occurred in the otl that did not work, portugal tried to colonize the north of the USA, france tried to steal brazil from portugal several times in the beginning of the 16th century, germany tried to colonize venezuela, etc.
In Europe, the wars for control of Italy could change as well as the independence of the Netherlands. What else do you think could have changed and how does it change the world?
 
Taunay

Taunay

If we assume that no Inca conquest means no Argentina, then we could say that Portugal would've colonized the Prata basin and if you wank Portugal a lot more (Which is possible with a weaker Spain), we could see a Portuguese colony from the Andes to the Atlantic Ocean (Except for maybe Colombia and Venezuela, but I'm not sure)
 

Pauh the federalist

Avoiding the incan conquest is probably the easiest but if the aztch and myan conquests are also a failure (harder due to how exposed they are to a major trade hub but not impossible) the Spanish would probably be limited to the Caribbean islands and may focase on building off its ajacent Florida colonys to expand around the northern gulf of mexico from florida to texas and as far north as Georgia on the east coust and possibly further if they work up the central Mississippi interior like otl France and turn what was a historical Spanish secondary colonial concern after the 7 years war into possibly thier primary mainland colony long term operating off the river basin https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_(New_Spain)
 
Last edited:

octoberman

Banned
It's implausible because conquest very done by small private warbands. Once gold was discovered in hispaniolia europeans just assumed that gold was everywhere in the americas so those warbands will keep coming until the conquest happens. Native Americans were unable to locally mass produce metal weapons and breed horses or cattle enmasse so technological advantage of those warbands will presist. Incas and Aztecs are too few to fully incorporate their subjects so they will keep rebelling with european help.
 
Taunay

Taunay

octoberman said:
It's implausible because conquest very done by small private warbands. Once gold was discovered in hispaniolia europeans just assumed that gold was everywhere in the americas so those warbands will keep coming until the conquest happens. Native Americans were unable to locally mass produce metal weapons and breed horses or cattle enmasse so technological advantage of those warbands will presist. Incas and Aztecs are too few to fully incorporate their subjects so they will keep rebelling with european help.
Click to expand...
He didn't say no conquest, just that **Spain** specifically wouldn't do it
 

holycookie

octoberman said:
It's implausible because conquest very done by small private warbands. Once gold was discovered in hispaniolia europeans just assumed that gold was everywhere in the americas so those warbands will keep coming until the conquest happens. Native Americans were unable to locally mass produce metal weapons and breed horses or cattle enmasse so technological advantage of those warbands will presist. Incas and Aztecs are too few to fully incorporate their subjects so they will keep rebelling with european help.
Click to expand...
Now I'm curious, do you think that some form of the Inca or Aztec empire (or some native empire that replaces them) could survive or they are so disadvantaged that it is not possible?
 

Riain

Banned
The how is important; if the Conquistadors try to conquer OTL Mexico and show their hand as rapacious killers leading the locals to band together and defeat them then I think they could withstand the Spanish and other Europeans for decades, maybe a century. However I think much like the way the East India company took over India the Spanish would eventually become first a land power in the region then the dominant land power then the ruler. However this would take ages and give the locals time to adapt as well as recover somewhat from the disease outbreaks that ravaged them so regularly.
 

octoberman

Banned
unnaturalmilk said:
He didn't say no conquest, just that **Spain** specifically wouldn't do it
Click to expand...
but it is highly implausible for them survive conquistodors for a century the time required for England or France or Netherlands only people who contested Spain in Americas before they didn't have much orientation in a transatlantic navy
 
Taunay

Taunay

octoberman said:
but it is highly implausible for them survive conquistodors for a century the time required for England or France or Netherlands only people who contested Spain in Americas before they didn't have much orientation in a transatlantic navy
Click to expand...
Portugal also contested Spain. If the Spanish failed, the Portuguese would either want to hold a trade monopoly (Or even conquer) the Aztec Empire
 
Taunay

Taunay

octoberman said:
not much they foucused on orient. Portugese claims didn't reach Mezoamerica or Andes
Click to expand...
This would change if they saw an opportunity for trade. Even IOTL Portuguese explorers, even after the Inca conquest, still tried to find ways to Peru to trade with the region and its resources (Caminho do Peabiru)
 

octoberman

Banned
El_Fodedor said:
Did Portugal even have the manpower to hold the Aztecs and the Inca?
Click to expand...
It not a question of manpower OTL Aztecs and the Inca were conquered private warbands of few thousand spaniards and Portugal sent more settlers to Americas 16th, 17th centuries than anyother country in europe
 

El_Fodedor

Banned
octoberman said:
It not a question of manpower OTL Aztecs and the Inca were conquered private warbands of few thousand spaniards and Portugal sent more settlers to Americas 16th, 17th centuries than anyother country in europe
Click to expand...
Maybe, but Portugal suffered a lot of incursions from the French and the Dutch and the English. This would be only worse if they try to hold Brasil+Peru+Mexico, and Portugal has less manpower than Spain to fight the other europeans off.
 

EMT

Portugal's got 100 other commitments in Africa and the Indian Ocean. Settling distant lands ignored by the Spanish like Newfoundland or Argentina is one thing, pulling off a conquistador expedition in lands well west of the Treaty of Tordesillas is a whole nother thing
 
Taunay

Taunay

El_Fodedor said:
Maybe, but Portugal suffered a lot of incursions from the French and the Dutch and the English. This would be only worse if they try to hold Brasil+Peru+Mexico, and Portugal has less manpower than Spain to fight the other europeans off.
Click to expand...
They don't need to hold all three. Holding Brazil can already help them hold Peru if the Bandeirantes do their thing and the Spanish aren't there to stop them.
A Portuguese Mexico + a bigger Brazil isn't unlikely. Keep in mind Brazil expanded not because of Portugal but because of native Brazilians who engaged in expeditions, often with no support from their colonist
 
Taunay

Taunay

EMT said:
Portugal's got 100 other commitments in Africa and the Indian Ocean. Settling distant lands ignored by the Spanish like Newfoundland or Argentina is one thing, pulling off a conquistador expedition in lands well west of the Treaty of Tordesillas is a whole nother thing
Click to expand...
If Spain fails to conquer the Aztecs, Tordesillas is dead. Also I don't get why people think that either the Spanish or Portuguese gave a single shit about that treaty. If they did then why did Spain colonize the Philippines?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top