WI no Spanish conquest or settlement north of 25th parallel in Mexico before 1700

[raharris1973]

What if the Spanish did not start any settlements or missions in northern Mexico, New Mexico, Texas or California until 1700. This doesn't prevent explorations like Coronado's

If the Spanish are just getting started north of the 25th (which is about 100 miles south of Brownsville, Texas) from 1700 onward, will they end up with New Mexico, Texas and California, before any other power, or will others, like the French, or Russians, or British get settlements there first?

 

[FillyofDelphi]

What if the Spanish did not start any settlements or missions in northern Mexico, New Mexico, Texas or California until 1700. This doesn't prevent explorations like Coronado's

If the Spanish are just getting started north of the 25th (which is about 100 miles south of Brownsville, Texas) from 1700 onward, will they end up with New Mexico, Texas and California, before any other power, or will others, like the French, or Russians, or British get settlements there first?

Well, you might see the French presence in Texas (As an expansion of Louisiana) via exploration and the establishment of fort-trading posts along the riverlands. As such, you could see more Franco-Spanish spatting over the region as both started cranking up their colonization efforts around the same time... conveniently right as the War of Spainish Succession starts and the new Bourbon monarchy can't afford to alienate their patron (Then again, poor Franco-Spanish relations might result in the throne never being offered to a Bourbon in the first place, butterflying away the conflict). This means either a larger French America (Which it will still lose) or Spain keeping a stronger position in Continental Europe and, as a result, weakening the Hapsburg branch of the dynasty.

As for the Pacific Coast... that's trickier

 

[raharris1973]

As for the Pacific Coast... that's trickier

Spain is still your favorite to get there first?

 

[raharris1973]

As for the Pacific Coast... that's trickier

Or is Britain your favorite?

Or Russia?

 

[Arkenfolm]

That's pretty big, since it means the Spanish will never get the important silver mines of Chihuahua like in Parral. And without those mines, there's no need or desire to make buffer colonies like Nuevo México or Tejas.

I could imagine the French will take a bit more of an interest in Texas, but their control will only be nominal, as it was in the rest of Louisiana. New Mexico and California would probably fall under Spain's control if they for some reason expand their empire in the 1700s. But perhaps the Pueblo Indians might put up a bit more resistance than in OTL if they are subject to conquest over a century after they were in OTL, and some alt-Pueblo Revolt might succeed completely in throwing out the Spanish.

Since we have this alternate colonisation of the Southwest, we'll also have a lot slower diffusion of horses into the Great Plains which will have important ramifications on later interactions between Euroamericans and Indians as well as lead to a different political landscape on the Great Plains in general.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

Or is Britain your favorite?

Or Russia?

Personally? Russia isen't in a logistical position to colonize the region to any reasonable extent (especially as relations with Britain chill as the 19th century goes on), and the British still have enough of a continent that needs settling to make California not particularly desirable. The thing is, if you're getting their by sea California is pretty much the LEAST accessible place to get to from Western Europe. I imagine the region will be like Oregon; in a weird limbo between The British, Russia, The U.S.A, and Mexico for some time, but with American settlers eventually winning out in the mid to late 1800's.

 

[twovultures]

Since we have this alternate colonisation of the Southwest, we'll also have a lot slower diffusion of horses into the Great Plains which will have important ramifications on later interactions between Euroamericans and Indians as well as lead to a different political landscape on the Great Plains in general.

For the southern plains, I'm thinking the Pawnee and their Caddoan cousins take over along river valleys with French guns, and from there spread across the plains when they've had a little more time to obtain and breed French horses, and are driven from concentrated river settlements due to European epidemics.

In response to attacks from these new nomads to the West, the Pueblo are more receptive to the Spanish and try to help the Spanish set up forts and towns as buffers to Plains raiders after 1700 AD-the Spanish settlement is later but on stronger initial footing ITTL.

Edit: Not sure what happens to the Apache and Navajo in this scenario. It's possible that with a resurgent, Euro-colonial backed Pueblo culture and pressure from the Pawnee coming from the east they migrate north, stealing horses from the Spanish and Pawnee as they do so. It's quite a shift in location, but their ancestors pulled off even more impressive feats of migration after all.