WI The Reconquista Continued

That is easily said. It also ignores the fact that North Africa has largely hostile Islamic Arab/Berber population who will not sit down an resist as hell. The reconquista also needs Christians to populate the newly aquired lands against hostile Muslims,

I've wondered how it might lead to a Conquista had the Berbers remained 'Christian' and not reached a stable accommodation with the Muslims of the region? That is the Berbers ally with Spain in their own effort at Reconquista of NW Africa
 

Lusitania

Donor
The best scenario would of been for an agreement with Portugal where they kept Morocco which they controlled large part of coast and Spain controlled Algiers, Tunisia and Libya. If both countries able to subdue the coast at first then slowly move inland.
 
I've wondered how it might lead to a Conquista had the Berbers remained 'Christian' and not reached a stable accommodation with the Muslims of the region? That is the Berbers ally with Spain in their own effort at Reconquista of NW Africa

If the Berbers remained Christian the odds are that they would undergo a more horrible situation with the Banu Halil being even more hostile. But Iberia might be freed up earlier as Andalusian Rulers tend to use Berbers as their military. Remaining Christian outrules that. You could say, Morocco and Algeria minus Kabyle might remain Christian from 1200 onwards. For how successful it will be I can't tell. But it is a better situation for the Christians than OTL.
 

Lusitania

Donor
If the Berbers remained Christian the odds are that they would undergo a more horrible situation with the Banu Halil being even more hostile. But Iberia might be freed up earlier as Andalusian Rulers tend to use Berbers as their military. Remaining Christian outrules that. You could say, Morocco and Algeria minus Kabyle might remain Christian from 1200 onwards. For how successful it will be I can't tell. But it is a better situation for the Christians than OTL.
The biggest problem for both Iberian countries is the whole discrimination against conversos. To be able to assimilate the berbers and convert the people of North Africa they have to integrate them into Portugal and Spain.

Most important both countries were weakened by the expulsion of Jews who settled into Netherlands and Ottoman Empire. Strengthening both of the Iberian countries rivals.
 
I'm going to write my best case scenario:

1492-1495: Castille takes over the Rif region. The geography allows it to be defended from Moroccan attacks. They populate the area with Iberians while also pressuring the locam hostile Berbers to leave. This starts immediately after Granada. Starting a campaign like this towards Muslims will not go unnoticed by the Ottomans. So Cem is still alive and Bayezid II hands are tied. To secure the region it will take no less than a decade at best. It will also require some unethical decisions.

1500-1520: Castille and Aragon take over Algerian Coastal Cities: As OTL. Moving in the interior is not an option now. But owning the cities is halfway there

In 28 years, Spain has the Rif and some decent numbers of cities in Algeria. Barbaros Hayreddin and his brothers and friends surprisingly die at sea during a storm. No effective Muslim Pirate to counter the Spanish and offer his conquests to Suleiman.

1600-1650: Spanish North Africa pretty much integrated with Spain itself. Local powers will try to fight Spain. The region is still largely coastal + Portuguese Moroccan Cities.

By 1820 if Spain is strong enough they can march towards the interior. But as I wrote this, this scenario would require some luck that the members on this board would consider ASB. These kinda things happen rarely.
 
The biggest problem for both Iberian countries is the whole discrimination against conversos. To be able to assimilate the berbers and convert the people of North Africa they have to integrate them into Portugal and Spain.

Most important both countries were weakened by the expulsion of Jews who settled into Netherlands and Ottoman Empire. Strengthening both of the Iberian countries rivals.

I have to agree with this, the Reconquista/Crusade for North Africa has to show that there are some benefits to integrate rather than being expelled to the nearest muslim areas.
I wonder if encouraging Iberian conversos to move to the New World would be a way.
 
I have to agree with this, the Reconquista/Crusade for North Africa has to show that there are some benefits to integrate rather than being expelled to the nearest muslim areas.
I wonder if encouraging Iberian conversos to move to the New World would be a way.

With Spain more focused on North Africa, would it potentially allow other European powers to potentially take more of OTL Latin America (e.g. British Argentina/Chile/Uruguay, Unified Dutch Guyanas, ATL Brazil with access to the Pacific, etc)
 
I'm gonna be honest, I take issue with the notion that European conquest of the New World was somehow "inevitable". The series of events that lead to Spain's spectacular conquests of the Native empires were incredibly fortuitous, or heck, almost miraculous. You'd be hard-pressed to recreate those conditions in this new timeline, especially with all those conquistadors instead being diverted to North Africa. With no massively successful takeover of American territory, other European powers would not be (nearly as) tempted to make territorial gains of their own. Sure, disease is going to greatly weaken and destabilize native societies all over, but I seriously doubt the Euro's will be in a position to exploit that, at least not until long after the moment has passed and the locals have begun to recover.
 
I'm gonna be honest, I take issue with the notion that European conquest of the New World was somehow "inevitable". The series of events that lead to Spain's spectacular conquests of the Native empires were incredibly fortuitous, or heck, almost miraculous. You'd be hard-pressed to recreate those conditions in this new timeline, especially with all those conquistadors instead being diverted to North Africa. With no massively successful takeover of American territory, other European powers would not be (nearly as) tempted to make territorial gains of their own. Sure, disease is going to greatly weaken and destabilize native societies all over, but I seriously doubt the Euro's will be in a position to exploit that, at least not until long after the moment has passed and the locals have begun to recover.

I would agree with you on the case of the Inca, the Aztecs I feel were more of the "you've created the conditions for your own demise from the very beginning." I agree, that with regards to the fact with conquistadors in North Africa, the focus would be on North Africa. In fairness to your argument, I will admit that in such a scenario, the Aztecs wouldn't necessarily fall to Spain in an inevitable conquest, but that's just me.

Long story short, Spain was better off focusing on one thing at a time, and the New World would be seen as more profitable than the religious crusades that is conquering and converting North Africa to Catholicism.
 
I'm gonna be honest, I take issue with the notion that European conquest of the New World was somehow "inevitable". The series of events that lead to Spain's spectacular conquests of the Native empires were incredibly fortuitous, or heck, almost miraculous. You'd be hard-pressed to recreate those conditions in this new timeline, especially with all those conquistadors instead being diverted to North Africa. With no massively successful takeover of American territory, other European powers would not be (nearly as) tempted to make territorial gains of their own. Sure, disease is going to greatly weaken and destabilize native societies all over, but I seriously doubt the Euro's will be in a position to exploit that, at least not until long after the moment has passed and the locals have begun to recover.

I can buy this for the Incas and even the Aztecs. But North America had about 2m population north of the Rio Grande. There's no way you don't get European settlements there. And once you do, the technology differential is bound to mean takeover.

Plus the industrial revolution is driven by other internal reasons so as long as that's not prevented, it will cause 19th century colonialism.
 

Lusitania

Donor
Reconquista is only possible with the profits of colonialism. In the Portuguese side it was able to use the $$ from trade in west Africa during the 15th century to fund additional attacks in Morocco.

For Spain to do similarly in Algiers, Tunisia and Libya it would needed profits from new world. Iotl it used them to finance wars in Europe. So here it could of used it to expand its holdings. Conquering one town and city along coast at a time. Using its Italian and Aragon dominions to do so since they were excluded from new world anyway.
 
I don't know that Spain can do this AND be so involved in Central Europe AND be so involved in the Philippines and the New World.
 

Lusitania

Donor
I don't know that Spain can do this AND be so involved in Central Europe AND be so involved in the Philippines and the New World.
It can’t, Europe’ have to be on back burner. It can’t be in Europe spending $$$ without the profits from new world, so we have to substitute North Africa with Europe. Loose Philippines or new world you limit Spain’s ability in Europe or in this case North Africa.
 
It can’t, Europe’ have to be on back burner. It can’t be in Europe spending $$$ without the profits from new world, so we have to substitute North Africa with Europe. Loose Philippines or new world you limit Spain’s ability in Europe or in this case North Africa.
So, we may need a POD or butterfly preventing the Hapsburg inheritance of the Trastamara realms.
 

Lusitania

Donor
So, we may need a POD or butterfly preventing the Hapsburg inheritance of the Trastamara realms.
Yes Hapsburg centered Spanish $$$ and resources in Europe. It would of been completely different Europe without Spanish $$ and different Spain without Hapsburg
 
It can’t, Europe’ have to be on back burner. It can’t be in Europe spending $$$ without the profits from new world, so we have to substitute North Africa with Europe. Loose Philippines or new world you limit Spain’s ability in Europe or in this case North Africa.

So, we may need a POD or butterfly preventing the Hapsburg inheritance of the Trastamara realms.
I think the New World colonies are enough for Spain.

No, this will butterfly the Spanish conquest of the Philippines since the Ottomans and Bruneians might have butterflies ITTL and the Bruneian Empire gets propped up by Ottomans..
 

Lusitania

Donor
I think the New World colonies are enough for Spain.

No, this will butterfly the Spanish conquest of the Philippines since the Ottomans and Bruneians might have butterflies ITTL and the Bruneian Empire gets propped up by Ottomans..
The thing is the that for Portugal and Spain to have any chance of conquering North Africa they need to not attack Jews, and conversos. Thus reducing Dutch snd Ottoman strength.

Philippines is important for Spanish access to Chinese market. Maybe they not conquer all.
 
Have la Baltraneja emerge victorious so *Spain is the union of Castille and Portugal rather than Castille and Aragon (no clue what this does to Aragon or Italy, probably means the French get pieces of both IMO). Turning their backs on Europe they avoid the Habsburgs, instead focusing on first North Africa (as OTL but more successful) and then the New World and beyond.
*Spain's capital is probably Seville (or Lisbon for that matter). Absent involvement in Europe I think they can manage most of what both empires did OTL overseas and a bit more besides.
 
The Maghreb would mostly be "Westernized" before the 17th century. This would give Maghrebi Spanish time to diverge from that of the northern Peninsula. Maghrebi Spanish would develop into its own language differentiable from Spanish yet still semi-intelligible especially the more Western region of the Maghreb

I think this is unlikely. Castilian Spanish will surely be the literate language, used by the ruling classes. The common people might speak a creole (or continue to speak Darija) but that will not be the dominant language of society, especially if it remains under Spanish rule continuously to the XX century.

Maghreb Spanish will probably have a distinctive accent and some different vocabulary but will still be recognizable as Spanish.
 
I can buy this for the Incas and even the Aztecs. But North America had about 2m population north of the Rio Grande. There's no way you don't get European settlements there. And once you do, the technology differential is bound to mean takeover.

To be fair we're pretty far from certain of the population of North America pre contact. 2m is the lowest estimate I've seen, but the highest is 18 million, with numerous historians coming up with numbers in between. I personally take David Henige's position that pretty much all the current estimates rely on applying arbitrary formulas to extrapolate from random numbers found in unreliable historical sources.

I think this is unlikely. Castilian Spanish will surely be the literate language, used by the ruling classes. The common people might speak a creole (or continue to speak Darija) but that will not be the dominant language of society, especially if it remains under Spanish rule continuously to the XX century.

In situations where you have just two languages coming into contact (in this case, Spanish and Arabic) you don't really see Creole formation IIRC. Creoles happen as the result of one superstrate combined with multiple substrates, which for example can happen by importing slaves that speak numerous African languages to a French ruled colony to give a French-superstrate creole with Kikongo and Fon substrates. Without a significant amount of linguistic diversity, you usually just see people switching languages completely from Arabic to Spanish as they move up the social hierarchy, or perhaps code-switching between the two depending on the social context; but creole formation doesn't seem plausible.
 
Top