• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Discovery of the Americas delayed: does Spain take the Reconquista to North Africa?

Hendryk

Taken back control yet?
Published by SLP
Location
France
From my admittedly superficial knowledge of early modern Spanish history, it would seem that one reason Spain's conquest of the Americas was so violent was that its nobility was still in Reconquista mode after completing the expulsion of the Muslims and Jews from the Iberian peninsula, and hungered for more land to claim. So, if for whatever reason the "official" discovery of the Americas was delayed by a few decades, would Muslim North Africa be the main target of its expansionist drive? It seems that immediately after the fall of Granada, the Spanish crown saw the weak polities of the Maghreb as ripe for conquest:

After the Catholic Monarchs' conquest of the Nasrid Kingdom of Granada in 1492, their Secretary Hernando de Zafra compiled information about the sorry state of the north African coast with the prospect of a potential territorial expansion in mind, sending field agents to investigate, and subsequently reporting to the Catholic Monarchs that, by early 1494, locals had expelled the authority of the Sultan of Fez and had offered to pledge service. While the 1494 Treaty of Tordesillas put Melilla and Cazaza (until then reserved to the Portuguese) under the sphere of Castile, the conquest of the city had to wait, delayed by Charles VIII of France's occupation of Naples.
 
Even with the discovery of the Americas, the Spanish did try on the regular occasions to take forts and cities along the Maghrebi coast. In a situation where there isn't gold and easy targets to be found across the Atlantic, you'd probably see more efforts but I'm not sure they'd be that much more successful than OTL.
 
I think I saw an ASB "what if Columbus was right" scenario with no Americas which has this happen. Of course, one big difference would be the lack of gold and silver from the Americas pouring into the Spanish treasury, for better and for worse, which might limit their ability to actually achieve any lasting reconquest.
 
I think I saw an ASB "what if Columbus was right" scenario with no Americas which has this happen. Of course, one big difference would be the lack of gold and silver from the Americas pouring into the Spanish treasury, for better and for worse, which might limit their ability to actually achieve any lasting reconquest.
Perhaps, once they have a secure foothold in the Maghreb, they decide to check if the famous gold that Mansa Moussa spent so lavishly a century and a half earlier is still to be found further South?
 
Perhaps, once they have a secure foothold in the Maghreb, they decide to check if the famous gold that Mansa Moussa spent so lavishly a century and a half earlier is still to be found further South?

I feel like "Spaniards either get chewed to hell and back by the Sahel or wind up assimilating and for Extra Irony Points converting to Islam" would be fun.
 
bunch of Don Santiagos and Senor Yisidros taking the Shahdada and Muhammed Ibn Ysidro as a high ranking minster at the court of Songhay would be a fun one.
 
The reconquista not extending to the Maghreb had as much to do with the Spanish being dragged into Central European politics as it did with the discovery of the Americas.

But even OTL, Portugal brought the fight to North Africa. It was mostly coastal areas though - good for controlling trade and serving as waypoints for expeditions elsewhere.

1677036835935.png1677036861028.png

A major motivator for taking Ceuta OTL was that it was a northernmost terminus of the Trans-Saharan trade routes. But Portugal taking Ceuta merely meant another city (like Tangier) got it in place. Trying to control the entirety of the trade could justify taking the whole of Morocco.

If King Sebastian had succeeded in putting a Portuguese-aligned Sultan on the Moroccan throne, Portugal could have gotten its Moroccan lands back and perhaps more (such as the whole of the Rif) - giving them firm control over the northern routes of the Saharan trade. Over time, those toeholds in Morocco extend to an entirely Portuguese Morocco west of the Atlas Mountains and extending along the coast down into the OTL Spanish Sahara. Perhaps some Tuareg (whose religious practices are rather heterodox, though muslim, because of the nomadic lifestyle) embrace Christianity in order to curry favor with their trade partners.
 
Last edited:
Eh I don't think Portugal would want to conquer Morroco, even if they could get allies who don't want to be Ottoman vassals. The Portuguese MO was very rarely outright conquest, the Portuguese generally had outposts everywhere. But with no New World colonies perhaps Spain tries to get in on Portuguese action in Africa and Asia, however, I still don't think it would be conquest. Not without it being very risky and draining to a much poorer Spain.
 
My understanding of the Spanish side of that part of history is very limited, but I always had the impression the Spanish re-conquered everything they thought belonged to them. If that is the case, however, they might find it hard to justify a major invasion of North Africa even if they feel the urge to push back the Muslim threat as much as possible. The further they travel from Spain itself, the harder it will be to maintain the offensive in a time when the Ottomans and Muslim world in general was far closer to Europe than in the 1800s. It’s possible the Spanish will find it harder to do more than secure lands closer to the coast and resettle them (and try to convert the locals).

If the Spanish do not have American gold, it’s possible they will develop much more flexible social and economic structures. As I understand it, the influx of gold from America overwhelmed the Spanish system and taught them some very bad habits, the myth of apparently limitless wealth ensuring they didn’t learn how to spend and invest properly. Without that money, they may do better. They may learn tolerance for Jews and Muslims were willing to be reasonably loyal to the monarchs. The uprisings in Spain, pitting the towns against the great nobles in 1520-1521, may go differently, although this would be after Isabella and Ferdinand, both of whom were very competent )certainly when compared to their successors).

However, the French will also be growing in power, and the Spanish will not have the influx of gold to counterbalance the French. This means they’ll probably be unable to wage war against the Dutch, or England, if that happens in this timeline. In fact, if the Spanish don’t develop ways to use what little they’ve got, Spain might lose power much quicker than in the original timeline. The Spanish would probably try to sell their North African conquests as a resumption of the Crusades, and get the Pope to support them, but times had moved on a little and Martin Luther is on the verge of throwing down the gauntlet to the Pope. In this world, it’s possible the Pope would back the Spanish and use it to convince European aristocrats to support them too, but it’s also possible it could make the Reformation a great deal worse (at least from the Pope’s point of view) as the North Europeans might want some guarantee the money and resources would be spent wisely.

Truthfully, however, the influx of gold from America was so huge, and it had such a big impact, it is difficult to predict what would have happened without it.
 
Even with the discovery of the Americas, the Spanish did try on the regular occasions to take forts and cities along the Maghrebi coast. In a situation where there isn't gold and easy targets to be found across the Atlantic, you'd probably see more efforts but I'm not sure they'd be that much more successful than OTL.

Beyond trying to crush the Dutch, a lot of the rest of the loot the Spanish got went into those attempted conquests.
 
Back
Top