WI: No Native American civilizations

[Tyr]

WI when the Europeans show up in the Americas they find no 'civilizations'.
By this I mean no Aztecs, Incas, et al. No pyramids. No cities beyond a small agricultural village level and no gold beyond trinkets.
Basically the whole of two continents never got far beyond a NE US native american level. They have agriculture and organisation but they've never took the next step.

 

[CarribeanViking]

No Spanish America, then; no exploitation colonies, there being essentially nothing to exploit, no native wealth to appropriate, no politics and power structures to undermine and usurp, no-one who's already done the hard work.

You would get a thin scattering of genuine settlements, colonies for the sake of having somewhere else to live, but the only people there would be farmers and planters, mining and the like would come very much later than @.

Which means there's no golden century, the power and financial clout of Spain is very much reduced, there's no feedback loops there, the conquistadors have nothing to conquer and there is a much poorer and crazier Spain changing the European balance of power, more interest in the actual Indies, ooo, lots of butterflies.

 

[jahenders]

It definitely has a big effect of colonization, most especially Spain and Portugal. Spain definitely winds up with fewer, smaller colonies and the overall pace is much slower, ditto Portugal. Spanish influence is reduced overall and they and Portgual likely don't sign the Treaty of Tordesillas, splitting South America. It's possible some other countries might establish more South American colonies with a vacuum between sparse colonies, perhaps France, England, etc.

The generally slower spread of European settlers could potentially mean that European diseases spread more slowly and lower density of natives would further slow the spread. Some natives might potentially have developed some immunity by more gradual exposure.

No Spanish America, then; no exploitation colonies, there being essentially nothing to exploit, no native wealth to appropriate, no politics and power structures to undermine and usurp, no-one who's already done the hard work.

You would get a thin scattering of genuine settlements, colonies for the sake of having somewhere else to live, but the only people there would be farmers and planters, mining and the like would come very much later than @.

Which means there's no golden century, the power and financial clout of Spain is very much reduced, there's no feedback loops there, the conquistadors have nothing to conquer and there is a much poorer and crazier Spain changing the European balance of power, more interest in the actual Indies, ooo, lots of butterflies.

 

[twovultures]

Possibly the entire two continents end up like California or Uruguay, with no modern equivalent of Bolivia with large Native populations and powerful Native political movements

Not likely, though. I think the Andes will be less disturbed in this timeline, and left largely uncontacted by Europeans for centuries. When European exploration does happen, European colonists are given to a surprise comparable to when Europeans first flew over Highland New Guinea, finding densely packed mountain valleys where the people have adopted bits of agriculture from the outside world but otherwise have developed almost independently of it.

Horse cultures will still develop as per OTL. They may even be more widespread, with nomadic cultures in the American southeast adapting horses for use in oak savannas to help increase their mobility for hunting and warfare. ITTL the term "civilized tribe" will be given to horse cultures instead of farming cultures.

 

[Timaeus]

No Spanish America, then; no exploitation colonies, there being essentially nothing to exploit, no native wealth to appropriate, no politics and power structures to undermine and usurp, no-one who's already done the hard work.

You would get a thin scattering of genuine settlements, colonies for the sake of having somewhere else to live, but the only people there would be farmers and planters, mining and the like would come very much later than @.

Which means there's no golden century, the power and financial clout of Spain is very much reduced, there's no feedback loops there, the conquistadors have nothing to conquer and there is a much poorer and crazier Spain changing the European balance of power, more interest in the actual Indies, ooo, lots of butterflies.

Of course, this also means the inflation that broke Spain won't happen.

And there's still the Spanish Netherlands.

 

[Prime Minister]

Possibly the entire two continents end up like California or Uruguay, with no modern equivalent of Bolivia with large Native populations and powerful Native political movements

Not likely, though. I think the Andes will be less disturbed in this timeline, and left largely uncontacted by Europeans for centuries. When European exploration does happen, European colonists are given to a surprise comparable to when Europeans first flew over Highland New Guinea, finding densely packed mountain valleys where the people have adopted bits of agriculture from the outside world but otherwise have developed almost independently of it.

Horse cultures will still develop as per OTL. They may even be more widespread, with nomadic cultures in the American southeast adapting horses for use in oak savannas to help increase their mobility for hunting and warfare. ITTL the term "civilized tribe" will be given to horse cultures instead of farming cultures.

In the same breath though. If colonisation happens at a much slower rate than in OTL, the steady prolonged contact with Europe could filter infprmatipn and advancments around the new world. We could see a few small European "pocket" colonies, and forming around them are great Native States inspired by what they have seen.

 

[NHBL]

Gold Rush

If the vast amounts of gold and silver aren't being used by the natives, then they are still in the ground somewhere. I don't know how concentrated the deposits were, but I would guess that they're not too hard to access...

So instead of conquistadors, you have prospectors...

 

[pa_dutch]

Possibly the entire two continents end up like California or Uruguay, with no modern equivalent of Bolivia with large Native populations and powerful Native political movements

Not likely, though. I think the Andes will be less disturbed in this timeline, and left largely uncontacted by Europeans for centuries. When European exploration does happen, European colonists are given to a surprise comparable to when Europeans first flew over Highland New Guinea, finding densely packed mountain valleys where the people have adopted bits of agriculture from the outside world but otherwise have developed almost independently of it.

Well, Paraguay's natives were hunter-gatherer and horticultural level societies yet Paraguay today is a largely mestizo country that still retains Guarani as its primary language. Native languages seem to have survived better in those places undesirable for European settlement, such as Patagonia, Nunavut, Greenland, and the Amazon.

 

[Admiral Brown]

It definitely has a big effect of colonization, most especially Spain and Portugal. Spain definitely winds up with fewer, smaller colonies and the overall pace is much slower, ditto Portugal. Spanish influence is reduced overall and they and Portgual likely don't sign the Treaty of Tordesillas, splitting South America. It's possible some other countries might establish more South American colonies with a vacuum between sparse colonies, perhaps France, England, etc.

The generally slower spread of European settlers could potentially mean that European diseases spread more slowly and lower density of natives would further slow the spread. Some natives might potentially have developed some immunity by more gradual exposure.

I don't see how this would affect Portugal, since the part that they colonized didn't have any cities nor anything of the sort, just several agricultural peoples. Portugal didn't discovered Brazilan mines till the XVIII century, and I don't see why they may not do this IITL.

Concerning Spain, colonizations may be delayed, and les Spanish conquerors might come if there are no stories of success as the ones of Cortes or Pizarro. Yet we must remember that colonisation started before civilizations were found. The Caribbean and Darien were settled when only people living in small agricultural villages with a fea gold ornaments were found. And yet the Spanish settled. That trend might have continued, till they are sure there's nothing else. And by then a significant part of the continent might be settled... maybe not as much as IOTL, but stil something significant.

As long as there is an agricultural people that produce a surpluss, as were the Taino in the Carribean, the Guarani in Paraguay ot the Huarpe in Mendoza (Cenret-West of Argentina), the Spanish mode of colonization can work. Where it doesn't work is when you have Hunter-gatherers Nomads that don't produce a food surpluss and can simply move inland when the Spanish come. That's why Buenos aires was abandoned the first time after 1540, and why Uruguay wasn't settled till the XVIII century, despite having great land for agriculture: there weren't native workers, and the Spanish who came weren't interested in agricultural tasks.

Less Spanish would probably come if there are no stories of success (from the point of viwe of the conquerors) as the ones of pizarro. But those few who come, and the descendats of those who were already in the Carribbean IOTL before civilizations were discovered, mibht still settle in most of where they did IOTL as long as there are agricultural peoples.

Of course, if few Spanish come, and there are less centralized societies, there might be more resistance, and the Spanish presence might be reduced. Areas that IOTL where the focus of great native resistance that eventually failed, such as the Quilmes revelion in OTL Northwestern Argentina, might have succedded in TTL, reducing the Spanish presence to the Caribean, Central America, and a few strongholds in South America

 

[Mr. pollos]

Of course, this also means the inflation that broke Spain won't happen.

This is very important. Without the price revolution, the global balance of power may remain the same for a few more centuries if not indefinitely.

And there's still the Spanish Netherlands.

All those conquistadores may try their luck in Spain’s European armies; we will also see a more populated Castile by as much as 1/3. So Spanish advantage in the golden century will be les marked but it will probably last longer.

If the vast amounts of gold and silver aren't being used by the natives, then they are still in the ground somewhere. I don't know how concentrated the deposits were, but I would guess that they're not too hard to access...
So instead of conquistadors, you have prospectors...

Could OTl California serve as an example?
There is probably a threshold of colonists you have to exceed in order to find the gold. Since there are less of them overall, it is going to be harder to reach those numbers.

 

[Admiral Brown]

Well, Paraguay's natives were hunter-gatherer and horticultural level societies yet Paraguay today is a largely mestizo country that still retains Guarani as its primary language. Native languages seem to have survived better in those places undesirable for European settlement, such as Patagonia, Nunavut, Greenland, and the Amazon.

In Patagonia they did survived till the XIX, but they are now almost all gone, except Mapundungun, the language of the Mapuche, which were originally fom Southern Chile, and weren't entirely hunter gatherers, since they had adquired from their Northern neighbours knowledge of agriculture and domestication of animals (Llamas), which might have made easy for them to adopt later European crops and animals.

For long-term survival (that is, till today), in South America at least, larger populations (which requires at leat horticulture) and some sort of arrangement with the Spaniards seem to be keay. Quecha, Aymara and Guarani are the languages more widely spoken. There are probably several languages spoken by tens of persons in "unconctated" tribes in the Amazon, but no one can guarantee those languages will survive into the XXIInd century. Aymara, Quechua or Guarani, on the contraty, have much greater chances of doing so.

 

[ennobee]

Of course you would still have tobacco, spices and furs, so settlements will eventually develop, but they will be more like Canada/French Louisiana with more traders and less explorers. Portugal might actually have a leg up here because they have experience in this kind of relations through their holdings in Asia. Later the Dutch would move in too. Eventually European-run plantations will develop, but overall, I would say 'real' colonization may be delayed by as much as 100 years, or aboit the some time colonization of Asia and Oceania started in earnest. Of course depending on what the butterflies will be we would have a completely different pack of players. Spain and Portugal because of their initial discoveries, but also the English, Dutch and French and possibly the Austrian Habsburg empire....

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

How the heck are you going to pull THAT off?

Plant domestication (first maize in mesoamerica, first chilis in south america) date back something like 9000 years.

OK, so there weren't cities for the first several thousand years, but you had Olmecs and such in mesoamerica 3.5kya, and south american civilizations followed not a whole lot later.

To prevent ANY native civilization in the Americas at the time of contact, you have to have some really major PoD, probably 5kya, certainly 4kya. That kind of change would render the whole world unrecognizable today - the Old World would evolve totally differently over that time span.

And what kind of PoD would do this? 2 massive meteor strikes? One in Yucatan and one in the Andes? Would THAT even do it? I don't think it would.


This is getting very close to ASB.

 

[twovultures]

It's close to ASB, but not quite there. Whatever genetic disaster occurred to teosinte to turn it into maize and the discovery of breeds of cassava and potatoes with the right gene combination to not be toxic are not inevitable. While some plant domestication is pretty much inevitable, the full domestication of the starchy staples that allowed Native American civilizations to develop are not.

 

[Driftless]

A couple of points:
* If there's no large scale political structures organizing societies, cities, etc; what's the relative level of overall Native American population by the OTL 1492AD? Relatively the same, or fundamentally different than OTL?

* IF there is no, or limited Conquistador rush into the Native population areas ITTL, how does that impact the rate of spread AND rate of population recovery from disease epidemics, such as small pox? i.e. ITTL, what's the expected Native American population circa 1600AD.

 

[twovultures]

A couple of points:
* If there's no large scale political structures organizing societies, cities, etc; what's the relative level of overall Native American population by the OTL 1492AD? Relatively the same, or fundamentally different than OTL?

Much smaller than OTL, an area like the Valley of Mexico would have hundreds of thousands where IOTL it had millions.

* IF there is no, or limited Conquistador rush into the Native population areas ITTL, how does that impact the rate of spread AND rate of population recovery from disease epidemics, such as small pox? i.e. ITTL, what's the expected Native American population circa 1600AD.

The diseases will not spread so far do to the smaller and more scattered population, so there may be relatively more Natives in 1600 relative to 1492 ITTL than OTL. However, population recovery will be quite possibly more difficult than OTL as hunter-gatherers (generally) have lower birthrates than farmers and environmental disruption caused by invasive species introduced by even limited European settlement will really cut into the ability of the Natives to feed themselves.

 

[Napoleonrules]

Northeast Native Americans were quite advanced politically. Powhattan's empire was not a loose tribe. The Iroquois were quite advanced politically and had subjugated quite an area in OTL; the Iroquois basically depopulated the entire area north of the Ohio River and east of the Illinois River in order to have a giant nature preserve to conduct their hunting expeditions in (the basis for later NY claims to the old Northwest Territory that they relinquished in 1782 to the Federal govt). The "civilized tribes" of the South; the Mound Builders; the "tribes" of California, Oregon, and Washington; Pueblos; they all had quite sophisticated cultures that if the White Man was slowed in exploring, conquering, and settling due to a lack of big targets like Mexica and Tawantinsuyu... PERHAPS enough time can elapse for them to create some sort of stronger resistance.

A lot of those "plains Indians" were not native to the plains (most of the tribes we think about were moved there from east of the Mississippi when they had very different cultures) and they didn't have the culture of horses (obviously) and everything else we stereotypically associate with the Plains (having a use for every part of the buffalo did not mean you used every piece of every buffalo, and they DIDN'T). The existence of the Great American Plains is an artificial human construction, not the result of natural fires. Natives would intentionally start prairie fires to keep the prairies as prairies and more directly to drive huge herds of buffalo off cliffs (they were quite wasteful actually); they knew they needed the prairies to keep having huge herds of buffaloes and had to keep the forests from encroaching. A smaller native population in the rest of the Americas could have butterflies on the native populations elsewhere. Likewise the Amazon was home to huge complex civilizations that treated the area as a giant produce farm; Amazonia has such wide diversity BECAUSE of human intervention and slash and burn technology creating the diversity and putting the ashes into the soil and planting diverse plants; there were larger populations in Amazonia than there were in North America, and rivaled Mexica densities. These civilizations collapse slower without big European populations spreading disease long before direct contact; we might have direct contact in ATL with large civilizations in the Amazon. Civilizations we consider to be kingdoms and Empires.

In order to truly consider an ATL you have to dispel the myths and "gentle" and well-meaning stereotypes about Native Americans.

 

[twovultures]

Northeast Native Americans were quite advanced politically.

The Powhatans and Iroquois had complex (I wouldn't say "advanced") politics while the M'ikmaq and the Innu had somewhat less complex politics. ITTL the Pueblo, Mound builders etc. would be most definitely butterflied away, with societies more like the Inuit or California natives and less societies like the Powhatan or the Natchez.

 

[Tyr]

How the heck are you going to pull THAT off?

Plant domestication (first maize in mesoamerica, first chilis in south america) date back something like 9000 years.

OK, so there weren't cities for the first several thousand years, but you had Olmecs and such in mesoamerica 3.5kya, and south american civilizations followed not a whole lot later.

To prevent ANY native civilization in the Americas at the time of contact, you have to have some really major PoD, probably 5kya, certainly 4kya. That kind of change would render the whole world unrecognizable today - the Old World would evolve totally differently over that time span.

And what kind of PoD would do this? 2 massive meteor strikes? One in Yucatan and one in the Andes? Would THAT even do it? I don't think it would.


This is getting very close to ASB.

The New England natives I mentioned as an example of the most developed people's that will be found in the Americas had farming but not cities.
Old world history too is abound with people's that had agriculture but hadn't really developed into big organized religion and monument building.

 

[Napoleonrules]

The problem with your premise that there were agricultural societies that didn't make monuments or complex religions and complex politics ignores that those agricultural societies were either- a) barely agricultural because of climate. b) barely agricultural because they hadn't been agricultural very long

Even Easter Island went on to do monuments and complex politics. It is an inevitability. You'd have to come up with some real good reason why fertile lands and good crops such as potatoes and maize don't lead to civilizations.