Assuming Spain coerced Portugal into allowing Spain to operate in what became Indonesia, how would a Spanish conquest of Indonesia have progressed? How successful could Spain be at spreading the Catholic faith in Indonesia? Could the Spanish language replace the various Indonesian languages as the language of commerce—I know in OTL that the Dutch used one of the Indonesian languages instead of Dutch but the Spanish would likely operate far differently than they did.
WI: Spanish Indonesia
- Thread starter Sevarics
- Start date
-
- Tags
- east indies indonesia spain spanish
Koprulu Mustafa Pasha
Gone Fishin'
Spanish Indonesia would look either smaller (with the the Pagan parts of Indonesia and the Philippines) or be conquered by some other power, willing to tolerate the other religions. Spains success in spreading Catholicism is largely among small weak and most likely Pagan chieftains.
Unless Spain refrains from their ultraconservative stance, their stay in Indonesia is short or reduced to a small part.
Unless Spain refrains from their ultraconservative stance, their stay in Indonesia is short or reduced to a small part.
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
Spanish and Portuguese Christians managed to spread Catholicism throughout the entire Iberian peninsula. Also, they colonised and ruled Muslims in the Philippines regardless of their seeming inability or apparent lack of effort to convert them.
Moreover, what is not known as much is that the Spaniards held the capital of Brunei for a few months and forced the Sultan into fleeing. This is what secured their position in the Philippines, and they were unable to keep this conquest because of an outbreak of either smallpox or malaria (don't really remember which disease) and not wanting to commit so many troops so far away while also breaking the Treaty of Tordesillas (not only Brunei but the Philippines themselves were on the Portuguese side of the demarcation line).
Koprulu Mustafa Pasha
Gone Fishin'
Spreading Catholicism in Iberia is not problematic as a decent share was Catholic, including in conquered areas. Most Muslims were driven away in the period after Las Navas de Tolosa. It is not like all of the converted with success. Only after the fall of Granada, Muslims were more or less converted.
The Philippines were not entirely Muslim. It was divided among Pagans, Muslims and Hindus. I think there might have been Buddhist as well. Conquest of Indonesia is not ASB. I mean, the Dutch were successful after all. But the Dutch were also quite liberal with religious issues which lacked with Spain for at least until the mid to late 18th century. Something that will thwarth their theoretical rule.
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
You overrate the power of Islam in preventing rule by the Spaniards. We see Christians successfully ruling over Muslim populations for centuries - Sicily and the Crusader states come to mind, it's not just Iberia. The population of the whole of Indonesia during this period for instance was smaller than that of Mexico. The Bruneian Sultanate itself had less population than the Aztec Empire, even less than the Inca Empire for that matter, and the Spaniards took their capital with relative ease. So while they may not convert the populace to Catholicism, there's no reason Islam prevents the Spaniards from ruling at least Borneo for a comparable amount of time over which they ruled the Philippines. People also overrate the degree to which Spaniards wanted to convert people. The survival of both Native American and African religions in Latin America, to the point that many want at least the latter to be recognised as world religions shows how Spaniards could be somewhat tolerant if it allowed them to keep their colonies.
Last edited:
Koprulu Mustafa Pasha
Gone Fishin'
You overrate the ability of the Spanish then. Sicily and the Crusaders States are not the same as Spanish Rule. Example: Sicily and the Crusaders had somewhat tolerance of the Muslims. The Muslims were not big and conversion was not swift, especially not in Crusader Levant. Sicily had not a majority Muslim Population, so ruling over them is easier. Spain is different. Spain is overzealous in their religion and expressing that in heavily populated and Muslims of more than four generations. If Spain is going to enforce its religious policy they won't be easily ruling over Indonesia, let alone convert masses. Especially in an era which they have bigger rivals: the Dutch in the 17th century and the British in the 18th century. Both who the Islamic Elite would prefer over the overzealous Spanish Rule.
As I mentioned before and countless of times: Spain ruling over Muslim region is NOT impossible. Read again, NOT impossible. But their policy on religion is what makes it likely or not and for how long. If they are a bit pragmatic then there is no issue. But over the large time they were not. And this is the difference between the Crusader States and Norman Sicily. They were pragmatic most times hence why ruling over Muslims was easy. So was the VOC and so was the EIC. The difference. So if they take over some port in Java, lets say Jakarta, they rule it as OTL with a strict religious rule then the odds of the locals supporting the VOC and the EIC is much likelier. This is not even counting on the help the Ottomans gave to Aceh because it was threatened by Portugal.
North America is pretty irrelevant in these matters.
Grey Wolf
Donor
Nobody seems to have taken into consideration the one main thing about Indonesia - that it is made of islands, with lots of sea
Unlike a cohesive land empire, Indonesia's native populations cannot really act to reinforce each other if Spain controls the sealanes, or at least dominates them
Unlike a cohesive land empire, Indonesia's native populations cannot really act to reinforce each other if Spain controls the sealanes, or at least dominates them
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
You have to provide evidence that Spain is "overzealous in its religion", and this is contradicted by how Latin America is a multi-religious landscape. You also have to provide evidence that religious intolerance or in fact brutality in general somehow makes a state incapable of ruling over a population. That's why the American case is relevant, because it shows Spain is capable of ruling over different religions.
Koprulu Mustafa Pasha
Gone Fishin'
Provide evidence: existence of the Spanish Inquisition. Expulsion of Jews and Muslims after conquering Granada. Expelling the Moriscos regardless after converting to Islam during the reign of Philip III. Philippines turning into a country of 85%+ Catholicisim as well as most of Latin America until independence. Philip II willing to make not even the slightest concession in the Low Lands because he does not feel to tolerate any Protestants in his realm. If this is not enough then there is no point in discussion.
How was Latin America multi religious? The Evangelist groups only entered Latin America after independence from Spain. If there were pagans as late as the 1800s it is likely because Spain could not reach them. Kinda hard when the landscape is big and people live in remote areas and jungles.
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
The Spanish Inquisition cannot be compared to the brutality of Crusader massacres like the Albigensian Crusade or the massacres of Non-Latin Christians, Jews and Muslims during the First Crusade. The Spaniards didn't fully expel the Muslims until the 17th century.
Except it took them three centuries to do so in both of them, the opposite of a swift conversion and even then in the Philippines syncretism is still strong while there's still a large Muslim minority.
The issue of Holland transcended religion. During the Italian Wars Spain didn't make any accommodation with equally Catholic France for decades until they ended. Spain still tried to make as few concessions to the French, even after the French remaining Catholic, even after the rise of Cardinals Richelieu and Mazarin. Spain also did make accommodations with Protestant England after the death of Mary I. Although they ended up invading England, this was over the issue of the English attacking Spanish colonies and supporting Spain's European enemies. They didn't invade England the moment Elizabeth ascended and declared England Protestant again. Also, since clearly you just don't mean Philip II, we have over-Catholic Charles V sacking Rome to punish the Pope. What a good Catholic indeed.
Sorry but it's clear you're overstating your case, especially because you clearly are ignorant about Latin America. You also keep failing in producing evidence that religious intolerance will somehow make the Spaniards unable to keep Indonesia. You only keep saying religious intolerance somehow fails in keeping territories without providing examples of this occurring. Showing examples of religious tolerance keeping territories is not the same as showing examples of religious intolerance failing to keep territories.
Because indigenous religions like the Mayan religion and the religion of Pachamama still exist and because African religions like Santería and Vodun still exist, and they were influential during the Spanish colonial period with the Spaniards tolerating them. They weren't small either. Sorry, but again, you clearly don't know what you're talking about when it comes to Latin America. Mayans for instance tried to create a separate state in Quintana Roo during the 19th century. Before them, we have the rebellions of Tupac Amaru and Tupac Katari of the 18th century inspired by the Inca religion. During the Cold War, we see guerrillas influenced by indigenous religions. Today the cult of Pachamama is recognised in the constitution of Bolivia, and it is widely followed in Peru and Ecuador too. Heck, we see Mayan elites and Spaniards themselves creating and preserving Mayan religious texts like the Chilam Balam and Popol Vuh, which are still used today by Mayans in Mexico and northern Central America, and in the latter Mayans are no small minority but make up almost half the population. Meanwhile, the African religions of Latin America are so followed they have been proposed as world religions. At best, you can say religious intolerance is feasible with a multi-religious landscape. You also have this idea that the Spaniards swiftly converted Latin America, but three centuries is not swift and seeing how Latin America to this day is still multi-religious, it's clear the Spaniards largely failed.
So again, religious intolerance is no obstacle to keeping a territory, nor were the Spaniards overzealous with their religion to the point they would give up holding a territory because the locals don't become Catholic. Nor is Islam going to make Muslims magically able to oust the Spaniards because they don't want to be Catholic.
Last edited:
POD: Somehow Phillips of Spain wins the eighty years, or by making impossible for the English to fund the Dutch, a successful Spanish Armada etc. Union with Portugal holds the keys to the east trade and trade factories and forts are established in the Maluku like the Tidore one. Dominicans, Jesuits etc. start appearing and a slow conversion could exist but locally. Spain would have to counter centuries of English and Dutch incursions, but the POD I had established could do that for some decades, but IMO a Spanish Indonesia would be divided by "trucial states" rather than effective control, and only exit, in its maximum extension by the early 20th century.
Portuguese rule over their Asian enclaves with Muslim populations was extremely short-lived due to the reasons @Koprulu Mustafa Pasha presented. Catholic colonial empires were simply unable to tolerate other religions as the Dutch were; look at how the Netherlands ruled Brazil shortly before the Portugese expelled them.
Alarico Rodríguez
Banned
Malacca lasted 150 years, hardly what I would call "extremely short lived" and it wasn't the local Muslims who expelled the Portuguese, it was the Dutch who did. Depending on who you ask, we have Portuguese enclaves in India where they ruled a mixture of Muslims and Hindus that lasted well into the 20th century. Muslim Mindanao was conquered by the Spaniards and the Spaniards had to be expelled by the US rather than the local Muslims. That wasn't the only part of the Philippines with a Muslim population. The Portuguese also held Ormuz for well over a century, and again, it wasn't the local Muslims who expelled them from there, it was the English. Spaniards today still hold territories in North Africa like Ceuta and Melilla. They held Oran for about two centuries. The Portuguese (and later Spanish) also held Tangier for nearly two centuries, until it was passed to the English.
Actually, the Portuguese did not force the Pagans to convert, it is only the muslim ones that they do, an example would be East Timor.
Not exactly East Timor, but East Timor remained Pagan until recently, what Portugal did try to convert is Ternate which has a Muslim population.
Koprulu Mustafa Pasha
Gone Fishin'
Yeah, I wrote that wrong. I meant to say: East Timor wasn't Muslim to begin with. At least we can agree on that.
That is why I say Luzon is better off if it gets under Portuguese suzerainty, they will not touch the pagans like the Spanish do.
I actually believe swapping Luzon with the Spice Islands with Portugal was the original plan of the Spanish prior to its split with Portugal since parts of Luzon and some surnames had Galician/Portuguese names.