WI: Portugal settled in La Plata / Argentina

The initial Spanish settlement in Argentina at Buenos Aires failed in the 1530/40s and another attempt wouldn’t be made for about 40 years. What if the Portuguese had founded a settlement on the Rio de la Plata during this time period? Assume they are able to hold on to it.

What does a Portuguese Buenos Aires do for Portuguese control of the Brazilian interior? What about the rest of OTL Argentina? Paraguay? Uruguay?

Can all of this territory stay in one country after independence if Portuguese and Brazilian history follows a similar path in OTL?

What would this alt Mega Brazil be like economically?
 
IMHO, it might attract some settlers that might want to engage in non-export agriculture, and it's possible that slows down the exploration of the interior, but not much, the bandeirantes would still want to explore OTL's Brazil's interior. Long term, it would be slight more geographically isolated from the power centres in Brazil might have a greater chance of becoming independent.
 

Lusitania

Donor
The issue is that even if Portuguese did establish a colony in Rio de la plata. The Portuguese would be subject to losing it to Spain during the Iberian Union. In 1640 when Portugal become independent the various overseas governors chose to either be loyal to Portugal or Spain. If during the Iberian the Spanish emigration begins to outnumber the Portuguese then good chance it stay part of Spain.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
The issue is that even if Portuguese did establish a colony in Rio de la plata. The Portuguese would be subject to losing it to Spain during the Iberian Union. In 1640 when Portugal become independent the various overseas governors chose to either be loyal to Portugal or Spain. If during the Iberian the Spanish emigration begins to outnumber the Portuguese then good chance it stay part of Spain.

But why would Spanish settlement outnumber Portuguese during this time? Wasn't Portugal seeing more emigration to the Americas anyway?
 
Last edited:

Lusitania

Donor
But why would Spanish settlement outnumber Portuguese during this time? Wasn't Portugal seeing more emigration to the Americas anyway?
The issue is that there are only so many of the Portuguese to go around. During the 16th century India trade and cash crops of Brazil were the priorities. At most a few hundreds settlers would of been settled there. While Portuguese and Spanish crowns were administered separately, it was still governed by sane king. The colonies might of been transferred to viceroy of Peru instead of Brazil.
 
The issue is that even if Portuguese did establish a colony in Rio de la plata. The Portuguese would be subject to losing it to Spain during the Iberian Union. In 1640 when Portugal become independent the various overseas governors chose to either be loyal to Portugal or Spain. If during the Iberian the Spanish emigration begins to outnumber the Portuguese then good chance it stay part of Spain.

Maybe we couple this with the Cardinal King naming an heir. IIRC Rainunccio Farnese was the actual legitimate descendant with the best claim to inherit after the Cardinal King. Maybe he names him heir and we avoid the Spanish inheritance
 
The Portuguese had colonies in Sacramento, a few alterations and you could get Portuguese Cisplatina easily, maybe more.

I think there's a good chance of these territories remaining united, because the River Prata itself is the only real big obstacle between Brazil and La Plata.
It was able to keep control of Grão-Pará, which is farther from Rio than from Lisbon, and full of jungle and pretty much only reachable through the sea.

IMHO, it might attract some settlers that might want to engage in non-export agriculture, and it's possible that slows down the exploration of the interior, but not much, the bandeirantes would still want to explore OTL's Brazil's interior. Long term, it would be slight more geographically isolated from the power centres in Brazil might have a greater chance of becoming independent.

True, the Bandeirantes would keep at it because they wanted to find gold, and these territories are too far into the middle of the continent for the Spanish to assume effective control. 'sides, the rivers all meet the sea on the brazilian coast, so its easy to simply go downstream;

There might be a fight when the Spanish realize the Portuguese are pretty much torching Tordesillas, but Geography will probably stop it from being more than a big ol' colonial skirmish.

Maybe we couple this with the Cardinal King naming an heir. IIRC Rainunccio Farnese was the actual legitimate descendant with the best claim to inherit after the Cardinal King. Maybe he names him heir and we avoid the Spanish inheritance

Which is pretty much the easiest Turbo-Portugal POD ever. No inheritance means a more powerful Portugal, no useless wars against the Dutch and the English, etc. The French will still have to be kicked out of the North, however.
 
While I agree that the Portuguese won’t have to fight useless wars against the Dutch and English, they might still have to fight against the Spanish if they try to claim inheritance any was as they did in OTL.

But this always could provide the opportunity to ally with the English and Dutch against the Spanish and help them snipe away at Spanish colonies.

Maybe we see Portugual snap the Philippines?
 
I am confused. Did Spain try to take over Brazil directly during the Iberian union? If not, why would a Portuguese Platine dominion be any likelier to fall?
 
I am confused. Did Spain try to take over Brazil directly during the Iberian union? If not, why would a Portuguese Platine dominion be any likelier to fall?

The Iberian Union is considered a national tragedy by the Portuguese, because it shackled Portuguese interests to the Spanish crown. The Portuguese's focus was on the rest of the world, other than Spain, England, the Pope, the Ottomans and attempts at Reconquista, they didn't really care much for Europe at all.

The Spanish, on the other hand, especially after Spain became part of a vast Hapsburg Empire in Europe, were very much entangled with European affairs.

So the Dutch attacks upon Portuguese holdings, for example, can easily be considered attacks upon Spain, as part of the war between the Spanish and the Dutch.
Sure, Portugal benefitted from things like Tordesillas being pretty much ignored, but it lost its independence and liberty to set its own political policy.
Portugal was never the same, and it never managed to recover from the experience.
 
The Iberian Union is considered a national tragedy by the Portuguese, because it shackled Portuguese interests to the Spanish crown. The Portuguese's focus was on the rest of the world, other than Spain, England, the Pope, the Ottomans and attempts at Reconquista, they didn't really care much for Europe at all.

The Spanish, on the other hand, especially after Spain became part of a vast Hapsburg Empire in Europe, were very much entangled with European affairs.

So the Dutch attacks upon Portuguese holdings, for example, can easily be considered attacks upon Spain, as part of the war between the Spanish and the Dutch.
Sure, Portugal benefitted from things like Tordesillas being pretty much ignored, but it lost its independence and liberty to set its own political policy.
Portugal was never the same, and it never managed to recover from the experience.

I am aware of the history of the Iberian union. I just do not understand why a Portuguese Rio De la Plata could be at risk of being peeled off from Lisbon. Did Portugal lose any territories to Spain?
 

Lusitania

Donor
I am aware of the history of the Iberian union. I just do not understand why a Portuguese Rio De la Plata could be at risk of being peeled off from Lisbon. Did Portugal lose any territories to Spain?
Yes the most famous was Ceuta conquered by Portuguese in 1415 but the garrison and captain decided to stay loyal to Madrid instead of Lisbon. So st very least the same could happen here.
 
Chances are if the Spanish conquered the Inca, a LOT of smuggling and trade upriver, and worse Spanish-Portuguese relations
 
Yes the most famous was Ceuta conquered by Portuguese in 1415 but the garrison and captain decided to stay loyal to Madrid instead of Lisbon. So st very least the same could happen here.

That was an isolated African territory. Were there any precedents in America?
 
That was an isolated African territory. Were there any precedents in America?

There might have been if there'd been actual trade ties between the others' colonies. IOTL there wasn't, whereas I imagine that one or the other of La Plata and Peru are going to be mightily tempted to defect given the right circumstances if their prosperity is compromised. Odds are, that the one doing the defecting would be La Plata which would be far more dependent on Peruvian trade than vice versa.
 

Lusitania

Donor
While we have been speculating a lot about potential Portuguese colonies in buenos Aeres area in the early 16th century it actually was not allowed per the Treaty of Tordesillas signed between Portugal and Spain. The treaty actually limited Portugal to the eastern most part of Brazil. The Iberian Union in 1580 allowed the Portuguese for first time to go beyond the treaties limits.

While other countries ignored the treaty it allowed both Iberian countries to maintain peaceful relations while both explored and settled their respective zones of control.
 
TBH the Iberian Union was a disaster to Portugal, but it was a gift to Brazil, just like Napoleon was a gift to Brazil centuries later. There is no need to avert the Iberian Union, in fact without the Iberian Union Brazil will be much smaller, it just needs to be a sizeable Portuguese population and a Portuguese governor in Buenos Aires to make La Plata go with Brazil and Portugal. After all, Buenos Aires was very isolated, and it developed a lot during the Iberian Union because it had a friendly port in Rio de Janeiro and a friendly coast in Brazil as a whole, after the union they became isolated again, today the Platine region would be even more developed if the Portuguese had controlled it since the 17th century, the same goes for the Brazillian interior.
 

Lusitania

Donor
TBH the Iberian Union was a disaster to Portugal, but it was a gift to Brazil, just like Napoleon was a gift to Brazil centuries later. There is no need to avert the Iberian Union, in fact without the Iberian Union Brazil will be much smaller, it just needs to be a sizeable Portuguese population and a Portuguese governor in Buenos Aires to make La Plata go with Brazil and Portugal. After all, Buenos Aires was very isolated, and it developed a lot during the Iberian Union because it had a friendly port in Rio de Janeiro and a friendly coast in Brazil as a whole, after the union they became isolated again, today the Platine region would be even more developed if the Portuguese had controlled it since the 17th century, the same goes for the Brazillian interior.
Yes but by the Treaty of Tordesillas they could not expand to Rio de la plata. So how do we butterfly that away and if we do what are the implications on the Iberian Peninsula.
 
Yes but by the Treaty of Tordesillas they could not expand to Rio de la plata. So how do we butterfly that away and if we do what are the implications on the Iberian Peninsula.

But the thing is, the Portuguese did ignore the Treaty in OTL and founded settlements in Brazil outside of it and ‘justified’ it by drawing the map of These settlements to be on the right side of the line by extending the land on the map when it wasn’t so in reality.

Not to mention Spain ignored the Treaty by way of the Philippines.

The Treaty was a guideline more than a rule.
 
Top