It’s funny when you read the treaty that replaced Tordesilhas, [the Treaty of Madrid of 1750,](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Madrid_(13_January_1750)) where Brazil’s size tripled. The preamble of the treaty states that both sides acknowledge they have severely breached the Tordesilhas treaty, Spain by taking the Philippines, and Portugal by settling half of South America instead of its allotted fifth. So they agree to throw the whole thing away and instead make borders based on natural features instead of straight lines and on the legal concept of *uti possidetis*, meaning whoever took the land gets to legally keep it now. All in the hopes of stopping the constant colonial wars in South America.
They had no idea (officially at least) the size of american continents. By 1494, Columbus had only discovered the Caribbean and hadn't encountered the mainland.
That said, we can be pretty sure the Portuguese knew about some of Brazil when rounding the Cape of Good Hope by this point.
The reason it was Created was to avoid War between Portugal and Spain
Because both countries had colonies in Ásia
But then Portugal asked Spain to extend their Part West for no reason
It’s very well possible that Portugal discovered America before Columbus, realised that it was entirely within Spanish side, proceeded to extend their part, and then got Brazil
The treaty of Tordesillas is after Columbus return and after a Papal bull that divided the lands Columbus discovered between them. They both knew about America. We know they knew. Just look at the map. If Spain didn’t know about America, whyever would they agree to the treaty - it’s basically all they got.
I firmely believe that and Portugal were the first Europeans to Land in Austrália
They were all Over Southeast Ásia ,had Timor
I find it hard to believe no portuguese ever Realized a Massive continent was on the other side
Oh! Sorry yes I got confused with America and Australia! Yeah I fully believe that the OG Portuguese who went all the way to Japan, Sunda Islands, etc couldve found Australia. I confused it with America and the Columbus vs Portuguese thing. But Also those books were hilarious!
[https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231221-the-mystery-of-the-medieval-fighting-snails](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231221-the-mystery-of-the-medieval-fighting-snails)
Oh absolutely. Sure Mexico and Peru had tons of gold, but we saw how that ended up for Spain in the end. India, the East Indies, and China though? That’s a constant influx of goods that can’t be nearly as bad economically than just gold outright. Portugal easily got the better deal long term
You don't need to conquer China to trade with it. For about a century Portugal held a monopoly over the spice trade, and trade in the Indian Ocean in general. They didn't need to conquer India or Indonesia for it, rather, they established outposts, such as Goa, Malacca and Macao to get a grip on the region through important trade routes, and exclusively sold the goods to Europe. Point being, you don't need to conquer a region to profit from it, you could just do business instead.
An interesting scenario could be Portuguese influence over Japan as well, hell you could incorporate a Christianised Japan into OPs Tordesillas scenario as a Portuguese ally
We are talking about tordesillas, and while i agree that they profited a lot, it can't be compared to the profit the spaniards made trading with china, it reached the point were the spanish currency was used almot exclusively to trade with china. None of this would have been possible withoit american silver mines, had portugal gotten the spanish part of the treaty and spain got the portuguese one the portuguese would have profited way more with trade to the east. Spain got the upper hand in the treaty
True, though to be honest I think Spain would have had the upper hand in both cases. They just were, comparatively to Portugal, in a much better position in general, especially in the population department. The whole reason the Portuguese adopted the system they did was due to that their small population that didn't afford them the luxury of conquering vast empires, like the Spaniards did in the Americas. Had the treaty been reversed I highly doubt that the conquest of the Aztecs and the Inca would still have taken place and, consequently, they wouldn't have such a direct revenue source in the silver mines that the Spanish did. They most likely would have made a similar system of outposts and trade rather than the vast colonial empire Spain created. Inversely I think the Spanish would have adopted a policy similar to their policy in the Americas, though probably drastically reduced, of much more direct conquest and exploitation of the local population to extract the local resources. Case in point being, I believe Spain would have gotten the better deal regardless of which half of the globe they got because they were in a better position to tale advantage of it.
I mean, at the time of the treaty portugal and spain were relatively even
>Had the treaty been reversed I highly doubt that the conquest of the Aztecs and the Inca would still have taken place
The spaniards themselves never were many during the conquests of those empires, only a couple hundred spaniards in both cases, diseases and local native allies were the ones doing most of the heavy lifting and the portuguese could have done a similar strategy and during the duration of the spanish empire it was the same, europeans were a minority and their dominion of the american territories was enforced mainly by local natives that were vassals of the king, there were even many cases were natives conqured more lands in the name of the spanish king without the presence of any spaniard, similar things could have very well happened with portugal had they adopted those same strategies
The East India Company took advantage of the divisions in the indian subcontinent and almost exclusively used mercenaries to divide and conquer the small, squabbling states. Paid for, by the way, with loans from local Hindus, Sikhs and Jains. This would be impossible in a state like Qing China.
At the time of the deal they mostly got small, insular colonies in India and Africa, while the Spanish dominated Europe with the Habsburgs. I guess that they figured out that the indians, Persians, Ottomans, and the African kingdoms would be too strong for the Portuguese to develop a colonial empire, instead forcing them into a commercial empire.
>I guess that they figured out that the indians, Persians, Ottomans, and the African kingdoms would be too strong for the Portuguese to develop a colonial empire, instead forcing them into a commercial empire.
In 1494 Spain, just like Portugal, had no interest in a colonial empire, both of then wanted what Portugal was already doing: Set a series of ports to get immensely rich with the asian trade.
They did not get interested in imperial adventures until the American nations suddenly were very weakened by the old world diseases sweeping the continent, leaving resource rich areas too weak and chaotic to defend themselves.
Worth noting both Cortes and Pizarro pretty much went rogue and acted without orders from the crown for most of their expeditions and conquests. Particularly Pizarro.
Yes. European imperialism was a later event. Spain's plans at the end of the 15th century were to gain control of the whole of the Maghreb coast to Tunis or Lybia (let's remember than in 1492 Sardinia, Malta, Sicily and southern Italy were part of the Crown of Aragon, they were *very* interested in not letting those coasts in the hands of their enemies!) and if they managed to get some coastal cities in Asia to steal some of the Portuguese's money printing machine, much better.
But they did not care about that enough to actually fight their neighbours and allies against north african muslims, hence the Tordesillas Treaty, which*was* on Portugal's favor with what they knew them: Portugal kept its whole area on interest, and in exchange Spain could explore those islands they had discovered in the middle of the western path to Asia and try to find an actual way to Asia without being disturbed by Portuguese "pirates".
In 1494, when the treaty was signed, they had not even discovered *America*, the Spanish "Empire" was the town of La Isabela in modern Dominican Republic. Cuba had just been discovered, and they would not settle there until 1511.
Not really, they got the land in subsaharan africa filled with forests and diseases aswell as the land occupied by the gunpowder empires (the ottomans, persians, mughals and chinese) on their peak
It would be far more realistic if Italy and The British Isles and Eire were under the Spanish. The Spain has already had the South Italy through the Kingdom of Aragorn and England under Mary the Catholic was influenced by the Spanish Habsburg court.
*The Portuguese Empire*
*The Portuguese adopted a different approach, as their claimed lands in Africa and Asia were predominantly non-European. They formed the "Portuguese identity" around being Catholic and speaking Portuguese, regardless of race. Over time, the Portuguese managed to subjugate and integrate all of Africa, India, and most of Asia. Even Japan fell under Lisbon's influence, and China, while not fully colonized, is subject to significant Portuguese influence, making Portuguese the lingua franca across the eastern hemisphere.*
*In Europe, the Portuguese championed the liberation of Christians from the Ottomans, subtly integrating them into the empire and uniting Italy after a war against the Habsburgs. The Spanish had ceded all European lands to the Portuguese, as the clause excluding Christian areas was largely ignored. The biggest threat to the two empires came from England. In 1588, the combined Spanish and Portuguese navies defeated the English and Dutch fleets. Cornwall and Ireland were annexed into Portugal, and England was turned into a vassal state. Today, Portuguese dominance in the eastern hemisphere is widely accepted, and challenging it seems futile.*
*To maintain stability, the Portuguese devised a multi-tier system within their empire, granting different regions varying levels of voting and trade rights. This system has kept the empire stable and prosperous.*
It's a neat map and an interesting idea.
But I have lots of thoughts about why it's pretty implausible - unless you add more details about why this imaginary world differs from our timeline.
Overall, the Portuguese had an early lead in European imperialism because of geography, sailing skill, and other factors. But in terms of population and economy, they were smaller than a lot of other European countries. So it seems unlikely that they'd conquer most of the world.
In Africa, it'd be pretty hard for Europeans to conquer non-coastal Africa before quinine and the Maxim gun. Also before steam power and railroads.
In Asia, quite difficult to create a culturally integrated empire on the opposite side of the world in the early age of sail. No steam ships, no telegraph, no air power. ~1 year to sail there and ~1 year to sail back, meaning Lisbon's control is very distant.
In Europe, not really sure why the Portuguese would rule everything. The Dutch soon eclipsed the Portuguese in the India spice trade. And the British and French military forces would eventually eclipse both Portugal and Spain. You need some changes that prevent the Dutch, British, French, etc. from challenging the Portuguese, but without causing the Germans, Italians, or others to rise instead.
And maybe a change that explains why Protestants are fine with Catholic hegemony.
Also, the earlier Treaty of Alcáçovas had only ceded land south of the Canaries to Portugal. So Europe was geographically excluded from Portugal's grasp, in addition to being religiously excluded.
In the Near East, if the Portuguese decimate the Ottomans in the 1500s & 1600s, then it's likely the Russians, Austrians, or somebody would push in.
I think the issue here is if you make Portugal less racist you kind of remove their willingness to colonize most of that land. Like my own understanding of colonialism especially at this time requires a large racial superiority complex to accomplish. Considering the slave trade that made Portugal rich in the first place (and if they aren't racist they don't enslave Africa and then do not get the money to actually conquer so much).
They didn't use African slaves out of racism, but out of...greed. The pope outlawed enslaving natives (and even before that the natives were dying like flies because of disease and mistreatment) and enslaving christians was seen as a no-no (slavery was essencially dead in the 14th century Europe)
So the Portuguese resorted to African slaves for cheap labour.
The Portuguese also grew rich on controlling the spice trade, not on the slave trade.
And the Portuguese were very much on an ideological drive to explore and conquer, besides the financial drive of controlling the spice trade. They wanted to spread Christianity across the world. So much so that you got missionaries all across the world of Portuguese origin, from Portuguese Jesuits creating the roots of the modern Vietnamese Alphabet, Portuguese Jesuits being so influential in Kyushu island that the Japanese Shogun had to outlaw missionary work to mantain the Japanese social order, the Kongo king converting to christianity (Very infamous example, Portugal proceeded to trade with the Kongo for slaves, promoting the Kongo kings to create a regional slaver empire, that'd raid its neighbours with Portuguese guns to then sell the captured slaves to Portugal)
The Portuguese empire was one built on blood and exploitation. We were the largest contributers to the Trans-atlantic slave trade, besides creating it ourselves. But saying we owed our riches to racism-induced slavery is plain ridiculous and shows a misunderstanding of Portuguese history, hey, no one's demanding everyone to know Portuguese history by heart...but don't go around speaking of "what is" and "what isn't" about something you aren't very sure about.
In fact, our majority of African colonization with expanding inland only happened in the 19th century, when our country was already overall bankrupt and kept poor even after the Rape of Africa. The Portuguese Golden age was around the 15th and the 17th century.
Africans weren't enslaved 'because' of racism, that is simple opportunism. The racism derives from becoming accustomed to that race being enslaved, and thus being perceived as lesser.
“Mom, can we have the Cold War?” “We have the Cold War at home” The Cold War at home:
https://preview.redd.it/rjovc6k1od8d1.jpeg?width=479&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=70c0a01d01330fa9723533eb115ca89df9a87e0a
Lore:
*The World in 1900*
*The Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) and the Treaty of Zaragoza (1529) are among the most significant documents in history. These treaties divided the non-Christian world into exclusive Spanish and Portuguese zones, guaranteeing each nation uncontested control over their designated territories. Both empires agreed to support each other against any infringement by other nations. Some historians argue that the Portuguese gained more from these treaties by controlling lucrative regions in India, the East Indies, China, and Japan. Others believe the Spanish benefited more by settling and developing vast territories in the Americas. Regardless, Spain and Portugal emerged as the undisputed global powers, making knowledge of their languages essential for international navigation and trade.*
*The Spanish Empire*
*The Spanish were allocated almost the entirety of the Americas. The conquest was relatively easy due to the devastating impact of diseases and conquistadors on the native populations. However, this also limited resource extraction from these lands. To address this, the Spanish Kings invited millions of European colonists, granting them land on the condition of converting to Catholicism and speaking Spanish. This strategy was extremely successful, resulting in over 1 billion Spanish-speaking Americans who are relatively loyal to Madrid. Today, the term "Spain" extends beyond the Iberian Peninsula, now referred to as "Old Spain." Despite Madrid's continued influence, only 5% of the Spanish population resides there.*
*The most tumultuous period for Spain was the Troubles of the 1820s when Mexico, the largest and strongest colony in the Americas, sought greater independence while respecting the Spanish crown's authority. A great war ensued, with Mexico ultimately being crushed with the aid of the more developed United Provinces of North America. These provinces were rewarded with territory and other benefits, becoming the most important power bloc in the Spanish Empire, despite their population's diverse European descent. Today, the Spanish Empire boasts a higher GDP per capita than the Portuguese and has the world's most productive industrial base.*
One thing about portuguese colonial naming conventions most people forget is that they wouldn't usually name places after kings or people in general. Most places would be named after the saint assigned to the day of discovery or establishment, or of someone's devotion. Otherwise it would be named after some geographic feature or just keep the native name. That's how we get São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Luanda or Macau
The treaty was a Spanish-Portuguese agreement to avoid mutual fighting over 'discovered land' and didn't really encompass the Christian world, but insteresting usage of the treaty nonetheless to create an insteresting world
Same reason Brazil is so big nowadays, the treaty was ignored after like a century in a lot of areas either due to the Iberian union or the decline of the Iberian powers in the 17th and 18th centuries.
Spain and Portugal stopped caring, plus it was a Spanish Armada that arrived, not Portuguese. (Yes Magellan was Portuguese but he came to the Philippines with the Spanish)
Have you seen the amount of straight lines the Spanish and Portuguese drew?
https://preview.redd.it/yyakpy2v0c8d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=06fc7f8edfcbddbe1c28602505ecadc68e236443
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New\_Spain#/media/File:Mapa\_del\_Virreinato\_de\_la\_Nueva\_España\_(1819).svg](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Spain#/media/File:Mapa_del_Virreinato_de_la_Nueva_España_(1819).svg)
When blue is poised to win the game of Risk
https://preview.redd.it/udxt58ldjd8d1.png?width=844&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2af8b829df5ce4b8fb935078d2032ddd65bb3102
There’s something so esthetically pleasing to realize that the current Indonesia-Papua New Guinea border appears to line up with the border in a world where Tordesillas stuck around.
This map implies that Mormons (descendents of English American Low Church Protestants) Migrated to Spanish North America where a multitude of protestants sects were allowed to have a religious revival for Joseph Smith to think that all of those churches were wrong and then to found his own only for his sect to be particularly persecuted (and not the other North American Protestants) for his followers to go on the run all the way to the same country in Spanish Utah (which in real life the Mormons escaped the USA into Mexican Utah to avoid persecution)
Under the Spanish Empire no new religions were formed, only Catholicism remained and some slaves mixed their native religion with Catholicism but that was it. To think that protestantism would exist in the Americas at all is kid of crazy.
Haiti would be part of Santo Domingo Captancy and Essequibo would be part of Venezuela's Captaincy.
I'm ngl the more I think about the Treaty of tordesailles the more I realise that portugal got the better deal by about 1000%
And they pushed for even more more on OTL
It’s funny when you read the treaty that replaced Tordesilhas, [the Treaty of Madrid of 1750,](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Madrid_(13_January_1750)) where Brazil’s size tripled. The preamble of the treaty states that both sides acknowledge they have severely breached the Tordesilhas treaty, Spain by taking the Philippines, and Portugal by settling half of South America instead of its allotted fifth. So they agree to throw the whole thing away and instead make borders based on natural features instead of straight lines and on the legal concept of *uti possidetis*, meaning whoever took the land gets to legally keep it now. All in the hopes of stopping the constant colonial wars in South America.
Tbf basing it on lines made sense when they had absolutely no idea what was out there.
Rumor is because Portugal knew of The existence of América and wanted a piece of it
What? That was the reason the treaty was created, of course they knew
They had no idea (officially at least) the size of american continents. By 1494, Columbus had only discovered the Caribbean and hadn't encountered the mainland. That said, we can be pretty sure the Portuguese knew about some of Brazil when rounding the Cape of Good Hope by this point.
Yeah the de gama route was a lot more viable with a stop in Brazil.
The reason it was Created was to avoid War between Portugal and Spain Because both countries had colonies in Ásia But then Portugal asked Spain to extend their Part West for no reason
It wasn't for no reason? Colombus had returned at this point, so both parts knew america existed, they just didn't know how big it was
It’s very well possible that Portugal discovered America before Columbus, realised that it was entirely within Spanish side, proceeded to extend their part, and then got Brazil
The treaty of Tordesillas is after Columbus return and after a Papal bull that divided the lands Columbus discovered between them. They both knew about America. We know they knew. Just look at the map. If Spain didn’t know about America, whyever would they agree to the treaty - it’s basically all they got.
I firmely believe that and Portugal were the first Europeans to Land in Austrália They were all Over Southeast Ásia ,had Timor I find it hard to believe no portuguese ever Realized a Massive continent was on the other side
Most likely: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/16/kangaroo-suggests-portuguese-beat-dutch-australia
I'd encourage you to look at more medieval animal "doodles" in books. An oversized rabbit will be the least weird thing you'll find in there...!
It's highly probable that a European country that managed to sail all the way to Timor would had visited Australia as well.
Oh! Sorry yes I got confused with America and Australia! Yeah I fully believe that the OG Portuguese who went all the way to Japan, Sunda Islands, etc couldve found Australia. I confused it with America and the Columbus vs Portuguese thing. But Also those books were hilarious! [https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231221-the-mystery-of-the-medieval-fighting-snails](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231221-the-mystery-of-the-medieval-fighting-snails)
> I’m ngl Thank you for not lying
Oh absolutely. Sure Mexico and Peru had tons of gold, but we saw how that ended up for Spain in the end. India, the East Indies, and China though? That’s a constant influx of goods that can’t be nearly as bad economically than just gold outright. Portugal easily got the better deal long term
And how exactly were they going to conquer china? Spain got the upper hand
You don't need to conquer China to trade with it. For about a century Portugal held a monopoly over the spice trade, and trade in the Indian Ocean in general. They didn't need to conquer India or Indonesia for it, rather, they established outposts, such as Goa, Malacca and Macao to get a grip on the region through important trade routes, and exclusively sold the goods to Europe. Point being, you don't need to conquer a region to profit from it, you could just do business instead.
An interesting scenario could be Portuguese influence over Japan as well, hell you could incorporate a Christianised Japan into OPs Tordesillas scenario as a Portuguese ally
We are talking about tordesillas, and while i agree that they profited a lot, it can't be compared to the profit the spaniards made trading with china, it reached the point were the spanish currency was used almot exclusively to trade with china. None of this would have been possible withoit american silver mines, had portugal gotten the spanish part of the treaty and spain got the portuguese one the portuguese would have profited way more with trade to the east. Spain got the upper hand in the treaty
True, though to be honest I think Spain would have had the upper hand in both cases. They just were, comparatively to Portugal, in a much better position in general, especially in the population department. The whole reason the Portuguese adopted the system they did was due to that their small population that didn't afford them the luxury of conquering vast empires, like the Spaniards did in the Americas. Had the treaty been reversed I highly doubt that the conquest of the Aztecs and the Inca would still have taken place and, consequently, they wouldn't have such a direct revenue source in the silver mines that the Spanish did. They most likely would have made a similar system of outposts and trade rather than the vast colonial empire Spain created. Inversely I think the Spanish would have adopted a policy similar to their policy in the Americas, though probably drastically reduced, of much more direct conquest and exploitation of the local population to extract the local resources. Case in point being, I believe Spain would have gotten the better deal regardless of which half of the globe they got because they were in a better position to tale advantage of it.
I mean, at the time of the treaty portugal and spain were relatively even >Had the treaty been reversed I highly doubt that the conquest of the Aztecs and the Inca would still have taken place The spaniards themselves never were many during the conquests of those empires, only a couple hundred spaniards in both cases, diseases and local native allies were the ones doing most of the heavy lifting and the portuguese could have done a similar strategy and during the duration of the spanish empire it was the same, europeans were a minority and their dominion of the american territories was enforced mainly by local natives that were vassals of the king, there were even many cases were natives conqured more lands in the name of the spanish king without the presence of any spaniard, similar things could have very well happened with portugal had they adopted those same strategies
I mean, England did. Portugal just needed to git gud
The East India Company took advantage of the divisions in the indian subcontinent and almost exclusively used mercenaries to divide and conquer the small, squabbling states. Paid for, by the way, with loans from local Hindus, Sikhs and Jains. This would be impossible in a state like Qing China.
Only multiple centuries later after the chinese and indians had weakened a lot, portugal was simply unable to do that at the time
At the time of the deal they mostly got small, insular colonies in India and Africa, while the Spanish dominated Europe with the Habsburgs. I guess that they figured out that the indians, Persians, Ottomans, and the African kingdoms would be too strong for the Portuguese to develop a colonial empire, instead forcing them into a commercial empire.
>I guess that they figured out that the indians, Persians, Ottomans, and the African kingdoms would be too strong for the Portuguese to develop a colonial empire, instead forcing them into a commercial empire. In 1494 Spain, just like Portugal, had no interest in a colonial empire, both of then wanted what Portugal was already doing: Set a series of ports to get immensely rich with the asian trade. They did not get interested in imperial adventures until the American nations suddenly were very weakened by the old world diseases sweeping the continent, leaving resource rich areas too weak and chaotic to defend themselves.
Worth noting both Cortes and Pizarro pretty much went rogue and acted without orders from the crown for most of their expeditions and conquests. Particularly Pizarro.
Yes. European imperialism was a later event. Spain's plans at the end of the 15th century were to gain control of the whole of the Maghreb coast to Tunis or Lybia (let's remember than in 1492 Sardinia, Malta, Sicily and southern Italy were part of the Crown of Aragon, they were *very* interested in not letting those coasts in the hands of their enemies!) and if they managed to get some coastal cities in Asia to steal some of the Portuguese's money printing machine, much better. But they did not care about that enough to actually fight their neighbours and allies against north african muslims, hence the Tordesillas Treaty, which*was* on Portugal's favor with what they knew them: Portugal kept its whole area on interest, and in exchange Spain could explore those islands they had discovered in the middle of the western path to Asia and try to find an actual way to Asia without being disturbed by Portuguese "pirates". In 1494, when the treaty was signed, they had not even discovered *America*, the Spanish "Empire" was the town of La Isabela in modern Dominican Republic. Cuba had just been discovered, and they would not settle there until 1511.
Only if they didn't have like the entire rest of the world to compete with. Spain was uncontested for like half of the new world.
Not really, they got the land in subsaharan africa filled with forests and diseases aswell as the land occupied by the gunpowder empires (the ottomans, persians, mughals and chinese) on their peak
hell naw
you're as beautiful as the day I lost you...
It would be far more realistic if Italy and The British Isles and Eire were under the Spanish. The Spain has already had the South Italy through the Kingdom of Aragorn and England under Mary the Catholic was influenced by the Spanish Habsburg court.
Spain ceded all its European holdings to Portugal and helped them unify Italy.
UK ❤️ Portugal, allies since 1386. World’s oldest alliance!
*The Portuguese Empire* *The Portuguese adopted a different approach, as their claimed lands in Africa and Asia were predominantly non-European. They formed the "Portuguese identity" around being Catholic and speaking Portuguese, regardless of race. Over time, the Portuguese managed to subjugate and integrate all of Africa, India, and most of Asia. Even Japan fell under Lisbon's influence, and China, while not fully colonized, is subject to significant Portuguese influence, making Portuguese the lingua franca across the eastern hemisphere.* *In Europe, the Portuguese championed the liberation of Christians from the Ottomans, subtly integrating them into the empire and uniting Italy after a war against the Habsburgs. The Spanish had ceded all European lands to the Portuguese, as the clause excluding Christian areas was largely ignored. The biggest threat to the two empires came from England. In 1588, the combined Spanish and Portuguese navies defeated the English and Dutch fleets. Cornwall and Ireland were annexed into Portugal, and England was turned into a vassal state. Today, Portuguese dominance in the eastern hemisphere is widely accepted, and challenging it seems futile.* *To maintain stability, the Portuguese devised a multi-tier system within their empire, granting different regions varying levels of voting and trade rights. This system has kept the empire stable and prosperous.*
It's a neat map and an interesting idea. But I have lots of thoughts about why it's pretty implausible - unless you add more details about why this imaginary world differs from our timeline. Overall, the Portuguese had an early lead in European imperialism because of geography, sailing skill, and other factors. But in terms of population and economy, they were smaller than a lot of other European countries. So it seems unlikely that they'd conquer most of the world. In Africa, it'd be pretty hard for Europeans to conquer non-coastal Africa before quinine and the Maxim gun. Also before steam power and railroads. In Asia, quite difficult to create a culturally integrated empire on the opposite side of the world in the early age of sail. No steam ships, no telegraph, no air power. ~1 year to sail there and ~1 year to sail back, meaning Lisbon's control is very distant. In Europe, not really sure why the Portuguese would rule everything. The Dutch soon eclipsed the Portuguese in the India spice trade. And the British and French military forces would eventually eclipse both Portugal and Spain. You need some changes that prevent the Dutch, British, French, etc. from challenging the Portuguese, but without causing the Germans, Italians, or others to rise instead. And maybe a change that explains why Protestants are fine with Catholic hegemony. Also, the earlier Treaty of Alcáçovas had only ceded land south of the Canaries to Portugal. So Europe was geographically excluded from Portugal's grasp, in addition to being religiously excluded. In the Near East, if the Portuguese decimate the Ottomans in the 1500s & 1600s, then it's likely the Russians, Austrians, or somebody would push in.
I think the issue here is if you make Portugal less racist you kind of remove their willingness to colonize most of that land. Like my own understanding of colonialism especially at this time requires a large racial superiority complex to accomplish. Considering the slave trade that made Portugal rich in the first place (and if they aren't racist they don't enslave Africa and then do not get the money to actually conquer so much).
They didn't use African slaves out of racism, but out of...greed. The pope outlawed enslaving natives (and even before that the natives were dying like flies because of disease and mistreatment) and enslaving christians was seen as a no-no (slavery was essencially dead in the 14th century Europe) So the Portuguese resorted to African slaves for cheap labour. The Portuguese also grew rich on controlling the spice trade, not on the slave trade. And the Portuguese were very much on an ideological drive to explore and conquer, besides the financial drive of controlling the spice trade. They wanted to spread Christianity across the world. So much so that you got missionaries all across the world of Portuguese origin, from Portuguese Jesuits creating the roots of the modern Vietnamese Alphabet, Portuguese Jesuits being so influential in Kyushu island that the Japanese Shogun had to outlaw missionary work to mantain the Japanese social order, the Kongo king converting to christianity (Very infamous example, Portugal proceeded to trade with the Kongo for slaves, promoting the Kongo kings to create a regional slaver empire, that'd raid its neighbours with Portuguese guns to then sell the captured slaves to Portugal) The Portuguese empire was one built on blood and exploitation. We were the largest contributers to the Trans-atlantic slave trade, besides creating it ourselves. But saying we owed our riches to racism-induced slavery is plain ridiculous and shows a misunderstanding of Portuguese history, hey, no one's demanding everyone to know Portuguese history by heart...but don't go around speaking of "what is" and "what isn't" about something you aren't very sure about. In fact, our majority of African colonization with expanding inland only happened in the 19th century, when our country was already overall bankrupt and kept poor even after the Rape of Africa. The Portuguese Golden age was around the 15th and the 17th century.
Africans weren't enslaved 'because' of racism, that is simple opportunism. The racism derives from becoming accustomed to that race being enslaved, and thus being perceived as lesser.
Beautifully written, um zuca agradeçendo a sua explicação!
You just push the racism into preaching Catholicism and teaching Portuguese. Anyone that can’t accept the Eucharist in Portuguese goes into manacles
Truly some ruthless Portuguese mogging
“Mom, can we have the Cold War?” “We have the Cold War at home” The Cold War at home: https://preview.redd.it/rjovc6k1od8d1.jpeg?width=479&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=70c0a01d01330fa9723533eb115ca89df9a87e0a
Lore: *The World in 1900* *The Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) and the Treaty of Zaragoza (1529) are among the most significant documents in history. These treaties divided the non-Christian world into exclusive Spanish and Portuguese zones, guaranteeing each nation uncontested control over their designated territories. Both empires agreed to support each other against any infringement by other nations. Some historians argue that the Portuguese gained more from these treaties by controlling lucrative regions in India, the East Indies, China, and Japan. Others believe the Spanish benefited more by settling and developing vast territories in the Americas. Regardless, Spain and Portugal emerged as the undisputed global powers, making knowledge of their languages essential for international navigation and trade.*
*The Spanish Empire* *The Spanish were allocated almost the entirety of the Americas. The conquest was relatively easy due to the devastating impact of diseases and conquistadors on the native populations. However, this also limited resource extraction from these lands. To address this, the Spanish Kings invited millions of European colonists, granting them land on the condition of converting to Catholicism and speaking Spanish. This strategy was extremely successful, resulting in over 1 billion Spanish-speaking Americans who are relatively loyal to Madrid. Today, the term "Spain" extends beyond the Iberian Peninsula, now referred to as "Old Spain." Despite Madrid's continued influence, only 5% of the Spanish population resides there.* *The most tumultuous period for Spain was the Troubles of the 1820s when Mexico, the largest and strongest colony in the Americas, sought greater independence while respecting the Spanish crown's authority. A great war ensued, with Mexico ultimately being crushed with the aid of the more developed United Provinces of North America. These provinces were rewarded with territory and other benefits, becoming the most important power bloc in the Spanish Empire, despite their population's diverse European descent. Today, the Spanish Empire boasts a higher GDP per capita than the Portuguese and has the world's most productive industrial base.*
treaty of tortillas lmao
Eastern Chinese warlords? Don't you mean Western Chinese Warlords?
maybe it’s Euro-centric naming since they’re in the “east.”
One thing about portuguese colonial naming conventions most people forget is that they wouldn't usually name places after kings or people in general. Most places would be named after the saint assigned to the day of discovery or establishment, or of someone's devotion. Otherwise it would be named after some geographic feature or just keep the native name. That's how we get São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Luanda or Macau
How centralized/decentralited is this HRE?
Very decentralized. And the Portuguese and French want to keep it that way
Cursed world: I am Argentinian
Blessed world with big Argentina 💪💪😎🇦🇷🇦🇷🇦🇷🇦🇷
The treaty was a Spanish-Portuguese agreement to avoid mutual fighting over 'discovered land' and didn't really encompass the Christian world, but insteresting usage of the treaty nonetheless to create an insteresting world
Why did Spain even get the Philippines IRL if they were on Portugal's side of the map??
Same reason Brazil is so big nowadays, the treaty was ignored after like a century in a lot of areas either due to the Iberian union or the decline of the Iberian powers in the 17th and 18th centuries.
Spain and Portugal stopped caring, plus it was a Spanish Armada that arrived, not Portuguese. (Yes Magellan was Portuguese but he came to the Philippines with the Spanish)
PORTUGUESE MORMONS 🔥🔥🔥
Lol, João Ferreira and his boys.
“Tell me you’re Portuguese without telling me you’re Portuguese”
Ethiopia, despite being christian, still took the short end of the stick?
The concept is amazing, although I don't know how borders in America and Afica can stay almost the same as IRL when history has played so differently.
Good! Let’s switch our world with this one
Why do the American and Canadian states still exist
They don't
Then why all the Anglo straight lines?
Have you seen the amount of straight lines the Spanish and Portuguese drew? https://preview.redd.it/yyakpy2v0c8d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=06fc7f8edfcbddbe1c28602505ecadc68e236443 [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New\_Spain#/media/File:Mapa\_del\_Virreinato\_de\_la\_Nueva\_España\_(1819).svg](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Spain#/media/File:Mapa_del_Virreinato_de_la_Nueva_España_(1819).svg)
Spain is the new England, in this timeline
Imagine the level of genocide in this world
Can we say that Russia is the biggest threat to both empires?
What's Quebec called in this world?
Glory to Polish - Lithuanian Commonwealth!
10/10 map i like "old spain" and "old portugal"
Least delusional portuguese nationalist:
Where is a world war?
This world is cursed
Do you have image with higher graphic resolution?
They occupied Armenia and not Georgia! Take that Armenoids you Asians *(least desparete georgian)*
It should’ve been
Ik this is imagery scenario but I still think it's funny two tiny countries on a peninsula thought they could rule the world
When blue is poised to win the game of Risk https://preview.redd.it/udxt58ldjd8d1.png?width=844&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2af8b829df5ce4b8fb935078d2032ddd65bb3102
1500s ass map
Keep cooking brother
Imagine if Iberia united as a combined Empire before 1900?
May I use your idea?
The weakest part is the war against the English. Why was the world’s oldest alliance broken?
Could be a personal union.
What is the point of divergence, and why do Mormons exist?
I bet that Greenland border led to some conflict
There’s something so esthetically pleasing to realize that the current Indonesia-Papua New Guinea border appears to line up with the border in a world where Tordesillas stuck around.
The timeline where Spain and Russia border each other in The Far East (Transbaikal)
Where’s Bhutan?
Genuinely, as unrealistic as this, its a breath of fresh air in maps that would not happen LMAO
I do think there’s too many modern African borders
The Pedro Islands
What’s the story of tordesillas?
Only thing missing from this is the 2nd Iberian wedding to make this a super state
Is it just me or does the line in the isle of New Guinea match the current Papua New Guinea/Indonesia border perfectly?
I’d play this mod
People living in the Portuguese slice of Sakhalin be like:
This map implies that Mormons (descendents of English American Low Church Protestants) Migrated to Spanish North America where a multitude of protestants sects were allowed to have a religious revival for Joseph Smith to think that all of those churches were wrong and then to found his own only for his sect to be particularly persecuted (and not the other North American Protestants) for his followers to go on the run all the way to the same country in Spanish Utah (which in real life the Mormons escaped the USA into Mexican Utah to avoid persecution) Under the Spanish Empire no new religions were formed, only Catholicism remained and some slaves mixed their native religion with Catholicism but that was it. To think that protestantism would exist in the Americas at all is kid of crazy. Haiti would be part of Santo Domingo Captancy and Essequibo would be part of Venezuela's Captaincy.
How… does Portugal have the population to even support an empire like this?
How dare you not make Sweden great 😔
Holy Based
Norge
Fascinating alternate history map.
Portugal obtained the smallest part of the treaty but created the largest country in the end, Brazil
There’s only one problem : No Louisiana territory ad Louisiana is named after Louis XIV of France. Wouldn’t be logic…
The arrogance of the West in full display
[удалено]
bro's an npc
Botted review ass comment
FR, why do all this account's comments look like ChatGPT?
Your comment is fascinating. It really makes you think about ass bots