WI: Large Native State on the West Coast

I agree that it depends on what type of government they had and what their relationship with their neighbors is like. But since everyone keeps calling them the Cali Inca lets go with the more centralized government.

I think that it’s pretty likely that they’d have a lot of internal issues after the diseases set in. If the central authority is hit hard by the diseases like the Inca were there could be conflict or a loss of cohesion in the Cali Inca which could make fighting off conquistadors very difficult. As you said a depopulated nation won’t be able to easily hold down son much land so once the Spanish heard a rumor or two about gold they’d start moving in. Maybe at first they resist but like we saw with other native peoples guns won’t save them forever unless they can somehow produce them on their own and in large quantity.

Who are these conquistadors? A couple hundred Spaniards (like Pizarro, Cortes, de Soto, etc.) can be overwhelmed with 2-3K native forces no problem. Such forces shouldn't be hard to mobilise for a local governor or what the central emperor might demand if he doesn't want these people in his territory. The Spaniards will be pissing off the locals already by looting them for food and water. And after a few failed expeditions, the Spanish have no reason not to clamp down on outlaws and try and normalise trade and foreign relations. This is especially relevant by the 17th century when the Dutch and English and probably others will be around to trade with the Cali Inca.

This is why I think you need some straight up luck to win in a conquistador expedition. Sadly, history has few examples of major civilisations defeated by conquistadors for us to follow, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that it required a lot of luck. If we call them the Cali Inca, then hell yes will it require luck.
 
Who are these conquistadors? A couple hundred Spaniards (like Pizarro, Cortes, de Soto, etc.) can be overwhelmed with 2-3K native forces no problem. Such forces shouldn't be hard to mobilise for a local governor or what the central emperor might demand if he doesn't want these people in his territory. The Spaniards will be pissing off the locals already by looting them for food and water. And after a few failed expeditions, the Spanish have no reason not to clamp down on outlaws and try and normalise trade and foreign relations. This is especially relevant by the 17th century when the Dutch and English and probably others will be around to trade with the Cali Inca.

This is why I think you need some straight up luck to win in a conquistador expedition. Sadly, history has few examples of major civilisations defeated by conquistadors for us to follow, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that it required a lot of luck. If we call them the Cali Inca, then hell yes will it require luck.

And why couldn’t the conquistadors be lucky for a third time? Looking at OTL odds are that they would again be lucky and again find things to their advantage.
 
And why couldn’t the conquistadors be lucky for a third time? Looking at OTL odds are that they would again be lucky and again find things to their advantage.

History doesn't have great examples, granted, but how many times can you role a six on a typical dice? Assuming we aren't going for the pessimist approach toward Spanish success and suppose the conquistadors were rolling a 20 on a d20. Given how many things such a large Californian state could be, it's hard to say whether the conquistadors could win (IMO unlikely), shatter an empire (the most likely result of Cortes IMO), or simply piss off an empire while getting killed (the most likely result of Pizarro IMO).
 
I really don't think such an empire could survive for long. it is right by the American plains, which will act like Mongolia to its china. Their is also the fact that such an empire would be majorly weakened by the plague, perfect prey for nomads.
 

Chimera0205

Banned
I really don't think such an empire could survive for long. it is right by the American plains, which will act like Mongolia to its china. Their is also the fact that such an empire would be majorly weakened by the plague, perfect prey for nomads.
isnt there a giant fucking mountain range between them and the great plains?
 
I really don't think such an empire could survive for long. it is right by the American plains, which will act like Mongolia to its china. Their is also the fact that such an empire would be majorly weakened by the plague, perfect prey for nomads.

Check a map, the fertile area of California is shielded by mountains and vast desert, the imposing Great Basin, and said nomads (the future Apache, Comanche, etc.) have neither horses nor camels. And the Mongols never destroyed China the same way the Turks never destroyed Persia. If some Great Basin group somehow can conquer them, they'll assimilate quickly into their culture and form a ruling class.

Even after plagues and the introduction of horses, the Great Basin (and beyond it California), isn't horse country, and thus the Plains Indians will find it almost impossible to raid (and thus prefer TTL's far richer Mexican North, as they prefered the Mexican North OTL).
 
Who are these conquistadors? A couple hundred Spaniards (like Pizarro, Cortes, de Soto, etc.) can be overwhelmed with 2-3K native forces no problem. Such forces shouldn't be hard to mobilise for a local governor or what the central emperor might demand if he doesn't want these people in his territory. The Spaniards will be pissing off the locals already by looting them for food and water. And after a few failed expeditions, the Spanish have no reason not to clamp down on outlaws and try and normalise trade and foreign relations. This is especially relevant by the 17th century when the Dutch and English and probably others will be around to trade with the Cali Inca.

This is why I think you need some straight up luck to win in a conquistador expedition. Sadly, history has few examples of major civilisations defeated by conquistadors for us to follow, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that it required a lot of luck. If we call them the Cali Inca, then hell yes will it require luck.

You say that a couple of hundred conquistadors can be overwhelmed by 2-3K natives but that never seems to happen. These conquistadors are going to have better armor and better weapons. They'll have canons and horses-things the natives have never seen and have no idea how to fight with them. During the conquest of the Aztecs the Spanish were often greatly outnumbered but because of their guns and horses the Aztecs were defeated. I don’t see the Cali Inca being any different.
 

Chimera0205

Banned
You say that a couple of hundred conquistadors can be overwhelmed by 2-3K natives but that never seems to happen. These conquistadors are going to have better armor and better weapons. They'll have canons and horses-things the natives have never seen and have no idea how to fight with them. During the conquest of the Aztecs the Spanish were often greatly outnumbered but because of their guns and horses the Aztecs were defeated. I don’t see the Cali Inca being any different.

EARLY Guns are good for shock value but once the natives are desentised to them they are only marginally more effective then a bow. And the Spanish often didnt even wear there armor when fighting in mexico cause its so damn hot and humid so its doubtful how much that actually contributed. Also the spansih were far less outnumbered then your thinking cause they were greatly supported by native allys. Especially against the Aztecs. Also the Spansih almost did lose several battles against the inca and it was only through dumb luck or political bullshit that they were saved. Hell im pretty sure in one case the s0anish were LITERALLY saved by devine intervention when a fucking volcanoe went off and a Inca army that was kicking there ass took it as a bad omen. When people say pizzaro and friends constantly rolled 6s they arnt kidding.
 
EARLY Guns are good for shock value but once the natives are desentised to them they are only marginally more effective then a bow. And the Spanish often didnt even wear there armor when fighting in mexico cause its so damn hot and humid so its doubtful how much that actually contributed. Also the spansih were far less outnumbered then your thinking cause they were greatly supported by native allys. Especially against the Aztecs. Also the Spansih almost did lose several battles against the inca and it was only through dumb luck or political bullshit that they were saved. Hell im pretty sure in one case the s0anish were LITERALLY saved by devine intervention when a fucking volcanoe went off and a Inca army that was kicking there ass took it as a bad omen. When people say pizzaro and friends constantly rolled 6s they arnt kidding.

Ok this is going no where. All we’re doing is saying “yes it will happen” and “no it won’t happen”. I say the superior weaponry and the disease will allow the conquistadors to win the day like it had everywhere else and you say that the Cali inca will become used to the Spaniards ways and use their overwhelming numbers to overcome them. I get what your saying pizzaro only winning because of dumb fucking luck but that’s not how all Spanish victories were won. When the Spaniards were bogged down in Tenochticlan they were greatly outnumbered in some battles despite having native allies but won because of their guns and horses. And you keep saying they’ll grow used to and learn how to fight the Spanish but from looking at other wars the natives never do. And you also keep comparing a supposed invasion of the Cali Inca to the invasion of the real Inca, that without luck they’ll lose or that they’ll only invade with a small number of soldiers. Who’s to say that they won’t invade with a few thousand troops? With many many cannons and guns and horses, and maybe even some native allies from down south? I just can’t see the Cali Inca somehow being smarter and luckier than every other native culture the Europeans came into contact with.
 

zhropkick

Banned
Aren't conditions in the California Valley pretty similar to conditions in the Fertile Crescent of the Old World where agriculture developed? It seems like a pretty choice place to develop large-scale crop cultivation.
 

Chimera0205

Banned
Ok this is going no where. All we’re doing is saying “yes it will happen” and “no it won’t happen”. I say the superior weaponry and the disease will allow the conquistadors to win the day like it had everywhere else and you say that the Cali inca will become used to the Spaniards ways and use their overwhelming numbers to overcome them. I get what your saying pizzaro only winning because of dumb fucking luck but that’s not how all Spanish victories were won. When the Spaniards were bogged down in Tenochticlan they were greatly outnumbered in some battles despite having native allies but won because of their guns and horses. And you keep saying they’ll grow used to and learn how to fight the Spanish but from looking at other wars the natives never do. And you also keep comparing a supposed invasion of the Cali Inca to the invasion of the real Inca, that without luck they’ll lose or that they’ll only invade with a small number of soldiers. Who’s to say that they won’t invade with a few thousand troops? With many many cannons and guns and horses, and maybe even some native allies from down south? I just can’t see the Cali Inca somehow being smarter and luckier than every other native culture the Europeans came into contact with.
And i cant see any possible way that the Cali inca would be anywhere near as unluckily as the actual inca. If you cant see how redicoulously lucky Pizarro and friends got then your blind or ignorant. And i can EADILY see them being luckier than the others given how reducoulously unlucky they were. Your pretending as if luck has absolutely notjing to do wuth the Spansih conquest or that luck was only a minor factor while ignorijg that the conquest of the Inca at least was almost ENTIRELY luck. And ehat proof do you have that the Spanish would have sent an army. The royalty of spain made it repeatedly clear that they didnt want to fuck with other Soviergn kings witch is why few to none of the conquistadors recieved any actual goverment support. The fact that you think that spains first reaction to learning of a new native state will be to march there entire military up to fucking california through miles upon miles of unsubdued tribes and cross the fucking rockies is just baffling. Also while there are no examples of natives specifically dealing with europeans there are plenty of examples of similarly primitive societys adapting. Japan, Ethopia, etc.

U dont think guns and horses are as big pf an advantage as you think. If they were as UNBEATABLE as you say then how the hell did tribes like the northwest confederacy and the Siminole put up such a heavy fight against europeans despite only extemely limited access to firearms. How did a Zulu army armed mostly with swords and spears overrun a british army that had a FAR greater tech advantage than the spansih do over the aztece and inca.

Pre industrial revolution tech wasnt the end all be all for warfare. It was a nice advantage vut in no way was even a thousand year tech advantage the instant win button it is today. Good tactics and numbers mattered far more.
 
IMO the Cali-Inca might stop an early invasion from Conquistadores but they will not stop the diseases spread by The Conquistadores or their animals.So a later expidition might work for Spain over land and over sea,how is a weaken Cali Inca empire ready to resist such an attack
 

Chimera0205

Banned
IMO the Cali-Inca might stop an early invasion from Conquistadores but they will not stop the diseases spread by The Conquistadores or their animals.So a later expidition might work for Spain over land and over sea,how is a weaken Cali Inca empire ready to resist such an attack
Maybe with the guns and metal workers the steal from the first couple bands of conquistadors
 
IMO the Cali-Inca might stop an early invasion from Conquistadores but they will not stop the diseases spread by The Conquistadores or their animals.So a later expidition might work for Spain over land and over sea,how is a weaken Cali Inca empire ready to resist such an attack

1. Remoteness
2. Terrain advantages
3. Modernising their society--use gold to buy guns, animals, other weapons and tools
4. Trade with other countries--why should Spain be allowed to monopolise this trade?
5. Decline of Spain--new rivals and global commitments make large expeditions debateable.
6. Recovery--after the first few decades of epidemics, population will start increasing again as disease resistance improves and new agriculture technologies spread.
7. Foreign allies--why should the Dutch or English let Spain interfere in their operations in California? Especially since they'll probably own a few ports at that point.

Not saying they'll automatically survive if they last the first few decades, but their chances go up big time at that point.
 
So my money is that the Californians will fend off the first couple expeditions of conquistadors due to not having insanely bad luck. Then they will sit around for a while giving tribute to the Viceroy in Mexico to keep him from letting more conquistadors try to conquer them. Then somewhere between 1600-1650, the Spanish will send a big army of like 5,000 from Acapulco to conquer the heathens. They will win, but most likely just demand that the Yokut king convert to Christianity, swear fealty to the Spanish crown, let Spaniards settle in his lands, and send gold to the Spanish crown.

It would be closer to the situation of the Princely States in British India than that of the Mexicans or the Incas. I can see a Mestizo middle class developing(under native aristocracy and above native commoners) and when the colonies start to break off, a republic or empire of Yokutia being declared led by Mestizos who run most of the economy and military. They would establish Spanish as the official language and form a constitution. It would probably be a state that is constantly warring with Mexico and is fairly unstable as the Mestizo try to oppress the mostly native underclass like in Bolivia.
 
This is probably very ASB, but I'm reminded of the legend of California as written by Garci Rodríguez de Montalvo. He wrote about the "Island of California", which started the myth that the Spanish searched for.

Know that on the right hand from the Indies exists an island called California very close to a side of the Earthly Paradise; and it was populated by black women, without any man existing there, because they lived in the way of the Amazons. They had beautiful and robust bodies, and were brave and very strong. Their island was the strongest of the World, with its steep cliffs and rocky shores. Their weapons were golden and so were the harnesses of the wild beasts that they were accustomed to taming so that they could be ridden, because there was no other metal in the island than gold.

Obviously Black Amazons doesn't sound too likely (and might belong in a Wonder Woman comic), but a matriarchal Cali empire could work?
 
I don't think the Indian Americans had insane bad luck, yes especially the fall of the Inca's sounds ridiculous, but honestly even if the Inca was luckier and smarter in how they dealt with the Spanish, they would have fallen in the end.
 

Chimera0205

Banned
I don't think the Indian Americans had insane bad luck, yes especially the fall of the Inca's sounds ridiculous, but honestly even if the Inca was luckier and smarter in how they dealt with the Spanish, they would have fallen in the end.

And what proof do you have of that?
 
People tend to focus on the luck involved in historical Spanish victories. Early on it was the conquistadors emphasizing the odds against their success, in order to both bolster their reputations and make it seem as if God was on their side. Later, as the conquistadors stopped being portrayed as conquering heroes of God and more as the ruthless conquerors they were, the focus on the near-misses helped create pathos and sympathy for their native victims.

But realistically, even if Pizarro or Cortes died, someone else would follow (Almagro and Narvaez were already on their way when both were still in the midst of things, and the rumors of wealth would draw in others). The defeat of Hernandez de Cordoba in 1517 did nothing to spare the Maya from being invaded by Francisco de Montejo a decade later (nor did his reverses stop him from continuing his own campaign, which lasted decades). Indeed, each victory the Spanish won made their future conquests easier, as not only did disease spread to further devastate the population, but the previously conquered natives provided the Spanish with additional forces for future expeditions (as most of the later Spanish conquests saw their small forces of conquistadors supported by massive numbers of native warriors and porters from allied or conquered territories in Mexico or Peru) More generally, no state could realistically survive the loss of 90+% of its population from disease; there would be plenty of additional stress and division to take advantage of.

We see that the native groups that survived the longest had one of two things going for them: remoteness (such that no one thought it worth the effort to invade them) and/or nomadism (which rendered them extremely difficult to subdue, as there were no cities to target, and they could avoid or ambush punitive expeditions). The Cali-Inca will have neither, and their position means they will be discovered by the mid-1500s, and likely conquered within 50 years.

The Dutch and English remain irrelevant; neither is in a good position to intervene in California at this time (Drake's expedition to California was a one-off raiding effort, and even that cost him almost his entire fleet, worth it only due to the amount of loot; notably it was not repeated during the Elizabethan era). If the Cali-Inca somehow survived to the 1700s or 1800s it might be different, but that would require ridiculous levels of good luck. Even then, they would likely want to claim their riches for their own: the Princely States developed out of very different circumstances (and even then, the British East India Company had spent a century annexing as many native states as they could under dubious pretexts before the Government of India Act in 1858 changed the formal governance structure to favor puppet princes).
 
Top