What would have happened if the portuguese had conquered japan?

Timeline after portugal conquers japan

I had asked for help with an alternate timeline earlier on. There are so many posts that i missed. Looking carefully though, i found a very heplful one. So I have decided to think up an alternate timeline after portugal conquers japan in 18 something.
 
I had asked for help with an alternate timeline earlier on. There are so many posts that i missed. Looking carefully though, i found a very heplful one. So I have decided to think up an alternate timeline after portugal conquers japan in 18 something.

You are right. This thread is about Portugal...If Portugal is going to conquer Japan ... what year? What forces? Maybe in 1550? Eighteenth century?
 
Colonialism in the 1500s is a diffrent beast from the colonialism of the 1800s. IN the 1500s it was basically extracting resources, the 1800s was all about setting up controlled markets. It would make little sense for the Portugese, or any others, to do anything differently from what they already did in the 1500s, selling guns at a profit and bringing back lots of good Japanese goods and gold. Not much to really extract from resource poor Japan (except maybe percelain - don't know much about Japanese porcelain production)

In the 1800s youød have to have a proper market for the Portugese to exploit in Japan and a good home industry to produce a lot of surplus goods for colonial comsumption, to keep the trade balance eternally in Portugese farvor. I don't know a lot about Portugal in the 1800s but it's my impression they suffered a lot from a lack of industrialization vis-a-vis the rising great powers of Britain and France, losing comparative advantages (Ridardo famously used the example of British cloth vs. Portugese wine in his theory). You'd have to greatly improve Portugese industry to the point where the European home market douldn't absorb its exports with serious inflation. If this is the case it makes sense to look for new markets, and Japan with its realtively high level of economic and social development might make sense as a target.

I'm thinking have the Portugese do better in the period between 1500-1800, improving industry and naval capacity, then have them intervene in Japan under some pretext and seize power. Thet may not keep the place forever, but the implications would be rather massive.
 
I think the key here is the aliance with England. Have Japan westernize earlier and become a regional force. They then attack English china and some small Portuguese islands in the pacific.

England calls in support from Portugal to help defend against the invasion. It ends with England and Portugal dividing Japan with England taking the two lower islands and Portugal taking the upper island.
 
Instead of Japan being conquered completely, A Portugal which has had a much more favourable history (I.e keeping Brazil, larger Portugese Africa) begining in the 19th century with acquiring minor concessions and ends up making Japan a de facto protectorate over a longer period of time might be something to aim for instead.
 
Last edited:
As for the OP. No, Portugal would not be able to engage in an outright conquest of Japan during the height of their empire. At best they could favor a faction of the feuding Samurai, possibly coupled with more missionaries and support to converts to establish a Catholic or a Catholic friendly regime that is in Porugal's favor. Possibly over time, as in centuries, Portugal might be able to erode away their power to break them down into a full on colony. This is still unlikely IMO, but not impossible.

And come on, isn't the Portuguese giving them Tempora enough? :p

What battle are you talking?
Maybe the Battle of Otumba? it was in Mexico, not in Peru.

Um, no. I'm very clearly talking about the Inca Rebellion against the Spanish. And having read plenty of Spanish colonial documents being frugal is not something they're known for.

Also going off what Namayan said, you clearly have an inflated view of the capabilities of Spain and so I have nothing more to say to you.
 
Also going off what Namayan said, you clearly have an inflated view of the capabilities of Spain and so I have nothing more to say to you.
If you do not know much about military history, you shouldn´t brother... only read little more.
 
Last edited:
I you think "failed" to be 200 years in the Low Countries fighting Britain, France, German States, Netherland, Denmark....... so Britain "failed" to be in South Africa or France in Algeria......

Um well, yea, they did; but that's besides the point.

First of all Spain didn't take over the Lowlands, they inherited them. The Lowlands reveled, and Spain, this Spain, the Spanish empire of the early modern period, failed to suppress it. If somehow Spain is able to take Japan (which it won't be able to, period, nor well it want to) it's going to face bigger, louder, stronger, more intense rebellions then in the lowlands, and much much further away, with much less to gain from fighting them.

Why don't we think up a pod where spain conquers japan instead of portugal?

Because that is even less likely, answers absolutely /none/ of the issues people have given you over the idea of Portuguese conquest, and contrary to Martin the Spanish were not superhumans who were simply better at everything then everyone.
 
Um well, yea, they did; but that's besides the point.

First of all Spain didn't take over the Lowlands, they inherited them. The Lowlands reveled, and Spain, this Spain, the Spanish empire of the early modern period, failed to suppress it. If somehow Spain is able to take Japan (which it won't be able to, period, nor well it want to) it's going to face bigger, louder, stronger, more intense rebellions then in the lowlands, and much much further away, with much less to gain from fighting them.

Exactly, Spain inherited the Lowlands like England inherited West of France... and what? inherited or not.. the issue is English bowmen won in Azincourt (1415) or in Crecy (1346) like Spanish infantrymen won in Glemboux (1578) or in Jemmingen (1568) or in Valenciennes (1656)...

failed to suppress

Also the Dutchmen, Englishmen and the rest of protestant Europe failed to drive out the Spaniards... Spain yielded Low Lands in 1714-1715 (after a civil war) to another Catholic Empire: Austria.

Because that is even less likely,

False. The spaniards fought japaneses... Portuguese not... Spaniards had plans to attack Nagasaki... portuguese not...It is so real that you can read them..."Portuguese and Spanish Projects for the conquest of Southeast Asia. 1580 - 1600 in Journal of Asian History. Vol.III.Nº 2.1969"

Yes, the Spaniards thought to take Nagasaki in Japan and Canton in China... to conquest Canton they thought it was enough 60 Spaniards as maximum.
about the Spanish campaign in Siam "Relacion y derrotero del Reyno de Çiam para el Rey Nuestro Senor" (Relation and course of the kingdom of Siam for the King, Our Lord")

Spanish were not superhumans who were simply better at everything then everyone.

The superhumans were japaneses... that failed in Philippines, Cambodia or Siam... and failed in Korea...40 soldiers beating 1.000 enemies is a feat.. 400 soldiers in Mexico, 13 in Peru, 35 in Bolivia, 200 in Taiwan..120 in Cambodia, 60 in Tonkin...16 in Chili...so begun the conquests.. a few soldiers. In Cambodia they fought for years against Khmer, Siamese, malay, japanese and chinese...in Phom Penh, in 1596, defeated 3.000 chinese (they were 60). Even in defeat they were fearful: Kinsale, December 12, 1601: ...Spaniards managed to destroy twenty guns and kill more than seven hundred English, but they had to return to the city, unable to cross enemy lines. Spanish casualties were relatively low, which encouraged the troops. The Spanish casualties were 20 KIA and 70 WIA...Englishmen 700 KIA, 20 Guns and hundreds WIA...
You say the Japanese infantry was better... I want sources, name of battles, actions...I would like you say me the name of the battle where the Japanese (samurai, ronin, ashigarus, wakos, mercenaries etc etc) beat the Spanish Army... Cambodia? Malaysia? Vietnam? Philippines? Where?

Nobody is superhuman but according to It was told by Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche, his brother, Friedrich told to her "The Spaniards.The Spaniards! ... These men wanted to be too much. "
They weren´t supermen but yes, they played to be Gods...only the Gods can think to conquest Cambodia with 100 men or China with 2.000

And this thread is about Portugal... How was Portugal going to conquest Japan? When? 1550? 1750? When?
 
Yes, the Spaniards thought to take Nagasaki in Japan and Canton in China... to conquest Canton they thought it was enough 60 Spaniards as maximum.

The original plan called for the conquest of Nagasaki (with a force of about 100/200 men). Using Nagasaki as an operating and supply base and
establishing alliances with local governors. When the army would have been reinforced from Philippines (maybe 500 spaniards and 10.000 japaneses), it would begin the advance on Kioto.

"Plans" like those only shows how low human intelligence can get.
 
I had asked for help with an alternate timeline earlier on. There are so many posts that i missed. Looking carefully though, i found a very heplful one. So I have decided to think up an alternate timeline after portugal conquers japan in 18 something.

You mean the 19th century? Good luck, Japanese protonationalism was in full swing by that period and I wouldn't be surprised to see a Korean-style 'Righteous Army' movement or something like that overwhelming 'barbarian' invaders.
 
Exactly, Spain inherited the Lowlands like England inherited West of France... and what? inherited or not.. the issue is English bowmen won in Azincourt (1415) or in Crecy (1346) like Spanish infantrymen won in Glemboux (1578) or in Jemmingen (1568) or in Valenciennes (1656)...



Also the Dutchmen, Englishmen and the rest of protestant Europe failed to drive out the Spaniards... Spain yielded Low Lands in 1714-1715 (after a civil war) to another Catholic Empire: Austria.



False. The spaniards fought japaneses... Portuguese not... Spaniards had plans to attack Nagasaki... portuguese not...It is so real that you can read them..."Portuguese and Spanish Projects for the conquest of Southeast Asia. 1580 - 1600 in Journal of Asian History. Vol.III.Nº 2.1969"

Yes, the Spaniards thought to take Nagasaki in Japan and Canton in China... to conquest Canton they thought it was enough 60 Spaniards as maximum.
about the Spanish campaign in Siam "Relacion y derrotero del Reyno de Çiam para el Rey Nuestro Senor" (Relation and course of the kingdom of Siam for the King, Our Lord")



The superhumans were japaneses... that failed in Philippines, Cambodia or Siam... and failed in Korea...40 soldiers beating 1.000 enemies is a feat.. 400 soldiers in Mexico, 13 in Peru, 35 in Bolivia, 200 in Taiwan..120 in Cambodia, 60 in Tonkin...16 in Chili...so begun the conquests.. a few soldiers. In Cambodia they fought for years against Khmer, Siamese, malay, japanese and chinese...in Phom Penh, in 1596, defeated 3.000 chinese (they were 60). Even in defeat they were fearful: Kinsale, December 12, 1601: ...Spaniards managed to destroy twenty guns and kill more than seven hundred English, but they had to return to the city, unable to cross enemy lines. Spanish casualties were relatively low, which encouraged the troops. The Spanish casualties were 20 KIA and 70 WIA...Englishmen 700 KIA, 20 Guns and hundreds WIA...
You say the Japanese infantry was better... I want sources, name of battles, actions...I would like you say me the name of the battle where the Japanese (samurai, ronin, ashigarus, wakos, mercenaries etc etc) beat the Spanish Army... Cambodia? Malaysia? Vietnam? Philippines? Where?

Nobody is superhuman but according to It was told by Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche, his brother, Friedrich told to her "The Spaniards.The Spaniards! ... These men wanted to be too much. "
They weren´t supermen but yes, they played to be Gods...only the Gods can think to conquest Cambodia with 100 men or China with 2.000

And this thread is about Portugal... How was Portugal going to conquest Japan? When? 1550? 1750? When?

First of all lets drop the Japan thing long enough to say that China was the most powerful state on the planet bar none at this point, and the idea that anyone honestly thought to take and occupy it with 6000 men is beyond me; but of course their have been duller plans.

Right, no one claimed the Japanese were superhuman here, not once have I seen anyone talk about Samurais dodging bullets and slicing through metal, so ease up on those accusations if you can.

Those numbers are incredibly skewed mind you, Pizarro with 13 men? The Inca was captured via ambushing anywhere between 3000-8000 non combatant, unarmed retainers with around 100 foot soldiers, 60 mounted troops, four cannons a handful of hackbut and a filthy dirty trickery.

And, as so many people have pointed out, a fortress repealing a large, mostly non-Japanese pirate raid is impressive, but non unprecedented, and doesn't even for a second work as a way to gauge how the Spaniards would fair in Japan against real infantry on a field.
 
There should be no debate here.
A standard European invasion of Japan would be a disaster. They are doomed.
Though naval technology in East Asia was pretty terrible (though, if there was a threat, the Japanese could adapt European ship design just fine, they made some moves in this direction IOTL). On land however.... Japanese guns at the time were on a par with those used in Europe, and they had a lot of them.
Combine this with having a manpower pool to draw on and even if the Spanish or Portuguese or whoever manage to win the first few battles, they're going down eventually.
The only possible chance of European incursion in Japan is if they are supporting one local faction over another. I don't see any part of Japan larger than a city (and that is pushing it) becoming a full colony however.
 
Conquest is probably impossible, but what the British did in India is certainly plausible, they've got a similar situation of fragmented local politics which could plausibly be manipulated by a foreign power on their soil.
 
Top