Hey [s]/pol/[/s] /his/,
how backwards do you think Europe would have been by 1900, if it hadn't discovered the New World in 1492? When you think about it, Spanish aside, it took 100 years for them to even get into a good momentum of colonizing it anyways.
So in this alternate history they don't discover it in 1492, because either the reconquista ends, or Christopher Columbus misses the continent and comes back empty handed, or he dies, etc. Something happens.
Maybe they discover the New World, but much later, by at least 200 or 300 years, and then you have that same, or a similar delay for people getting into the whole colonization business. Not to mention attitudes towards colonization might be entirely different after another 200 or 300 years.
Also keep in mind that the renaissance and enlightenment eras were partially fuelled by the discoveries of the new world. We're talking Europe without the integral crop of potatoes. A Europe sans mass-produced, cheap sugar. Inaccessible coffee due to no cheap plantation coffee. No tobacco. Somewhat more expensive imported cotton from India. The European economy would lack the mountains of South/Meso America gold and silver that funded Spain and others. No cassava (terribly important in other old world colonies), no maize.
What do you think it would be like?
they would be muslims way quick bro
overrun
v
e
r
r
u
n
There's no way to push the discovery that far. Fishermen and whalers were already getting closer and closer to Labrador and Newfoundland, and the Portuguese independently discovered the eastern tip of Brazil just a few decades after Columbus while they were sailing around Africa and got blown off course.
>>810051
>Also keep in mind that the renaissance and enlightenment eras were partially fuelled by the discoveries of the new world
[Citation needed]
>>810169
If the peninsula hadn't been retaken entirely, Portugal as it came to be would not exist. Maybe the Basque fishermen in question would have had a hard time discovering the new world if a resurgent North Africa/Muslim Spain was harassing them by land or with piracy.
>>810562
And how would Columbus not discovering the New world have made Spain Muslim again?
>>810051
All their resources would have been poured into Afrika and Asia would be entirely subjecated. Prince Henry the Navigator was hitting up that coast long before the new world was discovered
>>810592
Which resources?
There is a good reason Europeans tried their best to get to the Indian Ocean, while Asian peoples didn't give a shit about getting to Europe.
>>810606
An earlier carving up of Afrika and possibly splitting it between Spain and Portugal much like the Americas were. See a rapid built up of autonomous States there rather than the slow 300 years Americas took. Resources like man power not trading for shells
>>810568
Read the fuckin' op, christ. Columbus departing for the New World is directly related to the reconquista. A scenario for a delayed discovery of the Americas would probably stem from a failed reconquista.
>>810625
How could that happen?
Africa had empires with muskets, and diseases that Europeans couldn't survive.
The only place where that is remotely plausible is South Africa, and it actually happened.
The Europeans that actually colonized Africa were already wealthy from owning the Americas, controlling world trade, and had undergone the industrial revolution. If they could have done it earlier, they would have.
>>810645
Europeans proved they could survive, much of the south Virginia and Carolinas that were colonized were in inhospitable swamp land, many did die but they eventually built that up
>>810632
And at what point would it have failed?
Would the rebellion of Asturias have failed?
Would the Christians have lost at Los Navaras De Tolosa?
>>810051
Let's see
>Withou aztec and incan gold, the wars of Charles V would have lasted a lot less, Netherlands would have become indepence a lot earlier.
>Witiouth potatoes, all of northern Europe would be a lot less populated and developed. Maybe they would have become much more aggresive in return.
>Im not sure about this, but maybe the protestant reform wouldnt have happened. The discovery of america exposed the catholic church as wrong about galileo and other heretics, undermining their authority on earthly matters.
>Withou USA and Canada, Britain would have to colonize somewhere else. Maybe South Africa gets much larger, populated and white because of this. Maybe Australia too.
>West Africa and Asia would have been rekt harder and earlier.
>>810655
They were kept out by gunpowder armies as well as diseases.
Much of south Virginia and the Carolina's were depopulated before European colonization, and they needed a labor force of Africans to survive.
>>810666
>The discovery of america exposed the catholic church as wrong about galileo and other heretics,
How?
>>810666
Honestly those gloves would be great for burritos if they had a tortilla version. You could just stuff them inside and then seal it up.
>>810666
>>West Africa and Asia would have been rekt harder and earlier.
No.
>>810674
They kept saying that the earth was flat and so the sun and the planets revolved around it and it was the center of the universe.
Proving the world was round crashed all of this into the sea of dumb ideas and proved that many of the people the church called "heretics" actually had the right ideas.
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth would be even richer thanks to being main seller of grain.
>>810705
My hypothesis is that, without America to make coffe, sugar and spice plantations (plus the free gold), the Iberians would have gone harder on west africa and indonesia in search of places to make this plantations.
>>810710
>Catholic Church
>Believing the earth was flat
>Columbus discovering it was round
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>810710
Anon go open a history book to read how wrong you are.
>>810718
And they wouldn't have been successful in conquering them.
Mali had access to muskets too. Europeans didn't just keep simple trading posts in Africa, as they completely cleansed the Caribbean, out of a sense of politeness, it was because they couldn't conquer West Africa.
>>810051
Well, they had already revolutionized naval shit by being able to go around the Horn of Africa to directly trade with China and India cause the Muslims wouldn't let them through anymore so not that much desu.
>maize
irrelevant
>muh taters
relevant
>Christopher Columbus misses the continent
he did miss the continent, he found a couple islands in the Caribbean. Vespucci before him was the one to find the mainland.
>Also keep in mind that the renaissance and enlightenment eras were partially fueled by the discoveries of the new world.
lol
>>810683
>describing a pita
>>810761
All youre saying is wrong m8. wtf.
>>810745
Jesus Christ., the Greeks discovered it more than 200 hundreds before the birth of Jesus Christ.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth#Hellenistic_astronomy
>>810761
As another poster mentioned, a lot of Northern Europe heavily relied on the potato to keep their population count up.
American gold was integral in Spain's rise to power. The balance of power in Europe would have been completely different.
The Enlightenment would have been completely impossible without the discovery of the Americas. The Renaissance benefited from the tremendous wealth and important agricultural products extracted from the New World. Do you think the Italian banks would have become so prosperous without Spanish and Portugese clientele?
>>810771
Having a book and believing a book are two different things.
>>810782
What book are you talking about?
>>810562
Portugal not existing wouldn't mean people wouldn't be circumnavigating Africa. The only difference it makes it that someone else discovers Brazil instead.
>>810910
And delays it by a few decades, at least, if not a century. The other point made in OP is that the conditions of the reconquista uniquely made colonization a consideration. Who knows what Europeans would have thought to do even 50 years later? It might have resulted in something much more bizarre, like vassalization of Mesoamerican states.
>>810952
>Encountering a bunch of savage Human sacrificing Heathens stuck on the stone-age hated by most their neighbors
>Not crusade them
>>810952
There would still be push to colonize from other powers, especially since the plagues swept through and depopulated massive portions of the Americas. Pushing it by a couple decades would have big changes in terms of who colonizes and where, but it wouldn't be a massive change away from colonizing altogether.
>>810051
technological progress would have been a bit slower, though I think you are overstating its impact
>no sugar and coffee No tobacco. Somewhat more expensive imported cotton from India
This was only for the wealthy so it can't be said to be a source of calories that allowed workers to move from the fields to the mines and factories.
>potatoes
potatoes actually didn't become widespread in Europe until the late 18th century
>gold and silver
Gold doesn't teach you about the laws of thermodynamics or how to develop a reliable piston valve. Inflation robs it of most of its value, in economic terms it just shifts purchasing power to whoever mined the gold.
The lack of cheap cotton would certainly have had a bit of an impact on early industry, the lack of a need to develop better ships also, though these are not the only industries.
The investment needed to support a scientist like Louis De Geer working on something is minute compared to the economy at large. It was only until dedicated R&D well into the industrial revolution that it began to compose a significant proportion of expenses. Technology doesn't seem strongly correlated to economic productivity or the size of the population, it has a role in creating the conditions for progress to thrive and a higher population means a greater number of potential breakthroughs, the lack of colonies was not essential for this though.
>>810962
I'm not sure I agree. I think that the idea of colonization directly related to the reconquista. Britain and co. were only copying the Spaniards, really. It mightn't have been their first thought. In those decades of difference, too, you might have massive changes of fortune for the people who would have had the resources to colonize.
What if the caravel was constructed by the Ancient Romans at 24 BC? Would there be a Roman America? If so, how long will that last if other people of the ancient world had this technology?
>>810795
Medieval Christians didnt believe ancient greek shit. When they started to do it, its called the renaissance.
>>812057
>he actually believes that
It's not like St. Augustine was celeberated for combining scripture with Greek philosophy or anything
>>810710
>being this retarded
People knew the earth was round since Erasthothenes calculated it's circumference. That knowledge was at no point lost and continued through the Middle Ages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth
Case in point pic related is from a 12th century manuscript.
The thought of allowing Aztec science to further itself gets me hard
>>812642
Future Mexico City, 1650 AD
>You see Quetzecoatlaoan with this new and improved obsidian knife design you can simultaneously kill a slave AND rip his heart out in one swift movement!
>Truly our civilization has never been at a higher point Nauolotlactl!
yeah no
Maybe the Incas or Mayas
>>812057
>>810632
>>810632
>Columbus departing to the New World is directly related to the Reconquista
No, it isn't you faggot, by 1492 the remains of the Cordoba's Caliphate had been already divided into the Taifas' kingdoms, of which only remained the Nasrid Kingdom of Granada, which was weak as hell and basically was cucked into taxes.
>Source: I is spainish
You've been playing too much EU4, man.
>>812652
the Mayas has incipient writing. Imagine if they had become a literate people, like the Jews of Mesoamerica without the genocide victimization part. Hyper literate, sophisticated population that emphasizes learning. Maybe they would have done the science.
