WI Roman Hispania is ISOT to an alt 1392 Spain, overwriting all lands of the Christian Kingdoms of Iberia?

[raharris1973]

What if Roman Hispania, from the the date of the death of Julius Caesar in 44 BC, is ISOT to an alt 1392 Spain, overwriting all lands of the Christian Kingdoms of Iberia?

So, this replaces all of 1392's "Spain" (including the Balearics) and Portugal except for the Nasrid Emirate of Granada, with the Roman provinces of Hispania Citerior (equating to Renaissance Aragon basically) and Hispania Ulterior (the rest of the peninsula, to the Atlantic) with the exception of the still "barbarian" controlled lands long the northern coastal Cantabrian sea and lining the Pyrenees.

The preamble to this Act of ASB is a supercharged anti-semitic movement in 1390-91 of Friar Menendez, associated with the historic pogrom of 1391 taking hold across the grassroots clergy and laity of the Iberian Christian Kingdoms of Iberia, that in this ATL, compel their rulers to issue laws basically equivalent to the 1492 Alhambra decrees, demanding Jews....and also Muslims, immediately convert or quit the country. The decree is made in 1392 with its month or months-long deadline and the non-Christians make their choice under duress, with the great bulk of those refusing to profess conversion moving down to Granada and Morocco (especially the Muslims) and some to Italy, but scarcely any to France because I think that Kingdom recently did a Jewish expulsion, was torn by war and disorder and was partly occupied by Jew-expelling English.

So, the purification of Christianity for believers by the end of 1392 backfires due to ASB influence, as these Christian Kingdoms all vanish (of course not to mass death, but to a happy place, for them...read on), replaced by pagan, Roman (and pre-Roman barbarian Hispania that never knew the Lord.

It is not even 1400 yet, and the prime-moving countries of Europe's Age of Discovery, both around Africa to Asia, and west to the New World, are now gone, replaced with a land which, whatever other features it has, is far more primitive in the arts of sailing, metallurgy, and ignorant for now of gunpowder, as well as Christianity and Islam.

This Hispania is not necessarily trivially populated or materially impoverished however. Nor militarily weak. It has efficient Roman military and administrative systems. While about 1400 years out of date its peoples' immune systems should be pretty robust, and not terribly "naive" to fourteenth and fifteenth century endemic and pandemic diseases like the peoples of the Americas and Oceania would be. Their folk have centuries upon centturies experience with dense settlement, livestock, agriculture, food storage, and the microbes and pests that come with it. Of course, recurring bouts of *bubonic plague* that circulate about Europe in these decades will give them a walloping, just like they did contemporary populations, but it is no extinction-level event. So, it is no given that this Roman Hispania would be demographically swamps by Renfest era types, nor even necessary politically or militarily conquered quickly, or at all. But certainly they will be culturally and economically and spiritually shocked by the experience. As will uptimers. For them, this will just be more icing on the cake of a rough century.

What is the maritime exploratory and political world of Europe looking like by the 1492-1500 era? Have France, Granada, or Morocco made substantial territorial conquests into Hispania? How are Christian, Islamic and potentially Jewish proselytizing efforts doing in Roman or indigenous downtime ruled parts of Hispania where a Christian or Islamic enforcing and endorsing authority is lacking?

Are North Africans, Italians, or Northwest Europeans picking exploratory or colonial "slack" doing things the Iberians of this world are not doing? If so, by when? 1550? 1600? 1700? 1800? How is European and global development proceeding in the decades and centuries when this Iberian exploratory/colonial "slack" is not getting picked up, or is possibly being "unfolded at a far more "leisurely" pace?

 

[OwenM]

I feel like Granada and France probably make some conquests but possibly not the whole thing.
I also do wonder how secure the Roman rule over the Iberian population would be at the time in the first place....

 

[raharris1973]

I feel like Granada and France probably make some conquests but possibly not the whole thing.
I also do wonder how secure the Roman rule over the Iberian population would be at the time in the first place....

Not a bad estimate.

The Romans might give their neighbors a good scare for awhile with their sheer aggression, ruthlessness, and having their $hit together in a way the medieval folk might not have. The French have more time, space, and people to recover from any early setbacks or mistakes than the Granadans.

On security of Roman rule, I would say it is best entrenched on the eastern coast, in Hispania Citerior, basically the equivalent of Aragon - which might get invaded by forces from Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, loyal to the Aragon's Crown. Roman authority would be least secure in the far west of Hispania Ulterior or the Estremadura region of Spain and Portugal, or what was Lusitania in later Roman times.

One thing, among other, like introduction to endemic plague, that could throw the Romans off a bit would be their reappearance in a globe and atmosphere of 1392 probably places them in a global climate with year round temperatures at least a few degrees celsius cooler than where they came from, which could be bad for comfort and agriculture and livestock and human health.

 

[raharris1973]

Reasonable to say, 200 year delay in remaining West European exploitation of the Cape Route to trade around Africa, and to reach India and the Far East? So that would place the imitation of the Dias voyage, proving Africa is surrounded by water, this time performed by an Englishmen, Frenchman, Dutchman, or possibly a Dane, or a Scot, is finally performed in 1687, and the first big trade haul coming back from India, in imitation of Vasco Da Gama, comes back in 1698?

Likewise a 200 year delay in voyaging straight west into the Atlantic to reach Asia by going west? So the first return voyage reporting the inhabited Americas, in the Caribbean, Brazil, or Newfoundland, happens around 1690-95?

Or would discoveries by Europeans happen earlier, with less delay from OTL, like 150 years late, so the 1630s and 1640s? Or a mere century late compared to OTL, so the 1580s and 1590s?