Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Speculative History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Speculative History Speculative History Forum - Alternate History, What If Questions, Pseudo History, and anything outside the boundaries of mainstream historical research


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 30th, 2016, 06:18 AM   #31
Academician
 
Joined: Nov 2016
From: Must I specify?
Posts: 50

Quote:
Originally Posted by martin76 View Post

Spanish sources: a lot... Japanese named Spaniards Wo-cou. .
No, stop twisting facts. The term literally meant "Japanese bandits", which was what the Chinese used to refer to Japanese pirates in Ming times. It had nothing to do with the Spaniards. Don't make things up along the way.
timtimwowo is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 30th, 2016, 06:34 AM   #32

Edric Streona's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Japan
Posts: 1,472

Yes. Woko are pirates. Sea scum.
Though some will be lords looking to make a fast buck their crews would be bandits and rogues.
Edric Streona is offline  
Old November 30th, 2016, 07:11 AM   #33

Asherman's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: May 2013
From: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 2,287
Blog Entries: 34

Martin, You are on topic here, and almost alone in believing that Spain might have conquered Japan in the mid-16th century That must be uncomfortable, but you have to realize that this Forum is specifically for speculation, and almost anything is open for discussion and the facts mean little. How does one do that? Well, not by inventing facts nor condemning others for not sticking to facts. Speculative threads, I think, are more dependent on how trends can lead to alternative results.

Spain did not invade and conquer Japan, but neither was Spain at the time the ruin it was after it lost Mexico. The Aztecs were over matched in technology and military doctrine. Spain roused the already existing hatred of many tibes for the Aztecs, and so Spain was not at a manpower disadvantage. Where Spain was able to successfully colonize the local populations, they were as weak before the Spanish as the Aztec had been.

Spain and Portugal approached colonization from a different perspective than other early colonial powers like Britain, France, and the Netherlands. To Spain, the New World existed to be exploited for the benefit of the home country. Native populations were the peon and slave labor to extract the wealth to be shipped back to Madrid. Pacific possessions were desirable for Spain as refit and supply stations for Spanish treasure ships sailing from the rich western coasts of South and Meso-America. The longer and more arduous Pacific voyage avoided the pirates and buccaneers of the Caribbean. Hence the occupation of the Philippines and the attempt to dislodge the Dutch from the Spice Islands. Brunei would have been very important to Spain, yet they were unable to dominate it. In the mid-16th century Brunei was far from being even close to the military power of Japan.

Japan is in the Northern Latitudes and far from the optimal line from Lima to Barcelona. Japan in the mid-16th century was still strongly isolationist, but things were changing. Very few Westerners were allowed inside. Christian missionaries, including Spaniards, at first made sizable converts, but the ruling houses reacted by a purge. Not interested in Western Religions, the conservative rulers of Japan reverted to isolation that lasted up until the American's arrived with impressive technology in the early 19th century. Japan already had firearms, but they were regarded as an ignoble way to fight battles. Bushido ruled, and the ruling class were determined to maintain tradition over trade that had little to offer. If the Japanese faced Europeans with firearms, it wouldn't have taken them long to build effective large effective musket units.

In a speculative thread, why would Spain contemplate an invasion of Japan? What rational, or idea would motivate such a move? Would not Spanish assets be better used elsewhere to greater benefit of Spain? I should think that would be a more productive approach on your part, but what do I know?

Other elements to consider have already been made by regular visitors to this thread, but mostly they seem to boil down to the improbability of even a modest Spanish success. Distance, naval deficiencies, and numbers of effective soldiers on each side are relevant. What is the largest invasion force could Spain have gathered in the mid-16th century and where would they have been drawn from? Spanish possessions were spread in a thin net around the whole globe, wouldn't withdrawal of any appreciable forces from those possessions have risked uprisings, revolt and revolution? Logistics would have been a major problem, because of distance and the obsolete ship designs that the Spanish held onto almost to the end. Where would the invasion force have been situated that was at least as close to Japan, as Spain was to England? How might Spain have fared against China, Korea, or Okinawa? The invasion would have been ruinous, even with the vast treasures taken from the New World.

In the real world, Spain focused stealing the low hanging fruit of the Americas and enslaving the population. Japan is not known for its abundant resources, so much as its stubborn attachment ot traditions. And so on...

As a passionate believer in Spain and its importance to history, why argue that Spain would have a high probability of conquering Japan in the mid-16th century. Wouldn't it make more sense to argue that the Spanish had better sense than to attempt such a foolish thing that could never render a profit as large as the cost?

I know that you are writing in a difficult second language, and most members will be patient and understanding if you choose a less than optimal word. What is less forgivable, Martin, is the tone of your posts that are argumentative and dismissive of any opinion that doesn't conform to your own. That approach is going to make you increasingly persona non-grata to the community, and your credibility and ability to communicate will be lost. Take care to listen and open-mindedly think about posts before getting emotional and jumping down people's throats. There isn't a "hooligan" in every thousand of our members, and you don't want a reputation of being one ... do you?

Play nice, and don't attract my attention again.
Asherman is online now  
Old November 30th, 2016, 08:54 AM   #34
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: Spain
Posts: 4,455

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naomasa298 View Post
Brunei wasn't aiming to conquer Spain. It was the Spanish who invaded Brunei, not the other war around. And it was the Spanish who retreated.
No.. before writing you should be informed about Brunei campaign. you should know Philippines (some areas belonged to Brunei and Spaniards beat Brunei and conquered Manila.. and Brunei NEVER drove Spaniards out from Asia).

As everybody can read here: El Sultanato de Brunei and the 1578 campaign was a Military victory...The Spanish Army (400 Peninsulares, 1.500 Filipinos and 300 Borneos natives) took BRUNEI on April 16th 1578 (Not an elucubration but a fact.. a fact). and the Spanish Army NEVER LOST A BATTLE in Brunei Campaign!
Brunei Soultan HAD TO RUN AWAY from Brunei to Jungle interior...first to Meragang and when Meragang was held in Spanish hands, he had to run away to Jungle.

What I read here...it is malice, evil...Evil as when it said the Brunei Army destroyed the Spanish Army.. or Brunei Army was better than Spanish Army. or when you said Spanish Army lost the war militarily...
SHOW HERE the NAME OF THE BATTLE the SPANISH ARMY WAS ANNIHILATED IN BRUNEI.. the name of the Battle..
Of course you wont... you will Use any excuse, divert attention, but you will not say the name of the battle.. why? BECAUSE IT IS FALSE...The Spanish Army was Beaten by Brunei Army...FALSE. Spanish Army DIDN´T LOST ANY BATTLE IN BRUNEI...and you know.. How is designed who says something wrong...and he knows he is telling something wrong... Do you know how´s called?

De Sande ceremoniously took possession of Brunei, marching with his troops in battle array through houses belonging to the Sultan and
through sections of the town, cutting branches from trees, entering the mosque and establishing his quarters en a large house; all this symbolized his taking possession in the name of the King of Spain. He ordered the construction of a fort and various buildings so that a Spanish presence could be made permanent [...] However, illness ―probably dysentery or cholera―struck the Spanish camp [...] The Spanish were so weakened that they abandoned their settlement and returned to Manila.
Before doing so, they burned the mosque, a high structure with a five-tiered roof. They took with them Pengiran Seri Lela’s daughter [...] Some Bruneians, including Pengirans Maharaja di Raja and Seri Lela, returned and collaborated with the Spanish and the daughter of Seri Lela married the Christian Tagalog, Don Augustin de Legazpi of Tondo.


The Spanish Army was in Brunei for 72 days!!! NEVER it was expelled from Brunei...When Naomasa said Brunei Army beat Spanish Army.. simply it is ... a very malicious evil.

The Spanish Army took Brunei...defeated the armed opossition and controlled the City and areas around... After 72 days in Brunei...attacked by Cholera.. the Army Back to Manila...


Waiting the NAME OF THE BATTLE... Spanish Army was annihilated by Brunei... I know, I know you NEVER WILL WRITE the name of that non-existing battle.
martin76 is offline  
Old November 30th, 2016, 09:10 AM   #35
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: Spain
Posts: 4,455

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asherman View Post
Martin, You are on topic here,
Thanks Asherman. You are polite.

Thanks again for your clarification concepts. Thanks very much.

Regards.
martin76 is offline  
Old November 30th, 2016, 11:50 AM   #36
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: Spain
Posts: 4,455

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asherman View Post

Spain and Portugal approached colonization from a different perspective than other early colonial powers like Britain, France, and the Netherlands. To Spain, the New World existed to be exploited for the benefit of the home country..
It is clear you never read nothing about the Empire.. Whilst British-Dutch were brutal and symbol of extermination...The Spanish Empire published Las leyes de Burgos (Burgos laws) protecting indians at early XVI Century...
Whilst British (and Dutch) stablished their racist states.. the Indians studied in the Spainsh Universities.. the OLDEST universities in America...(With difference)...So. when you talk about stealing you are talking about British in India-Nigeria-Malaysia...Burma... right?

Quote:
Spain focused stealing the low hanging fruit of the Americas and enslaving the population.
FALSE...Spain built the first road in North and South America (not British and of course not Dutch).. the first harbours, the first cities, the first universities, the first churches, the first cathedrals. the first hospital, the first Charity institution etc etc etc...
And never enslave population.. as British did.

Click the image to open in full size.

For sure you are going to prove BRITISH built Universities in America sooner than Spaniards....... Real Cédula del Rey Emperador Carlos (King-Emperor Charles Royal Law stablishing the oldest University in America)...

Nobody built more cities in America and universities than Spaniards...nobody...
martin76 is offline  
Old November 30th, 2016, 12:27 PM   #37

Tulius's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2016
From: Portugal
Posts: 1,097

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asherman View Post
Spain and Portugal approached colonization from a different perspective than other early colonial powers like Britain, France, and the Netherlands. To Spain, the New World existed to be exploited for the benefit of the home country. Native populations were the peon and slave labor to extract the wealth to be shipped back to Madrid. Pacific possessions were desirable for Spain as refit and supply stations for Spanish treasure ships sailing from the rich western coasts of South and Meso-America. The longer and more arduous Pacific voyage avoided the pirates and buccaneers of the Caribbean. Hence the occupation of the Philippines and the attempt to dislodge the Dutch from the Spice Islands.
Asherman, although I usually agree entirely with your posts, I must say that the sentence “To Spain, the New World existed to be exploited for the benefit of the home country” seems quite misleading/biased. In general we can say that for the European countries the colonies existed to be “exploited” for the benefit of the home country, but even that is an overgeneralization.

The expansion of the first European sea powers, Portugal and Spain, was quite different, I would say dramatically different, and the subsequent sea powers, Netherlands, Britain and France was also different from the first ones, probably more due the fact that they were not the first ones than to anything else, but in the end the colonies and the colonization process were and endeavour for the benefit of the respective home countries, if was not that way I have many doubts that they were undertook. Humans generally do things for their own benefit. Not only the Spanish humans, or the Portuguese, the Dutch, the British, and the French humans.

As for the interest of Spain in the Spice Islands was not to refit treasure ships but for the importance of the spices itself, importance that today due mostly the existence of the refrigerator we tend to forget. The Portuguese and then the Spanish were the first Europeans to arrive to those waters (that had already an intense sea commerce), long before the existence of the Netherlands.
Tulius is offline  
Old November 30th, 2016, 01:25 PM   #38
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: Spain
Posts: 4,455

Mr Asherman that according his profile, he lives in ALBUQUERQUE...funny.. a city stablished by SPANIARDS.. not by anglos...in 1707 in the Camino Real (Royal trail).. whose name come from ALBURQUERQUE.. in Badajoz, Extremadura (Not in Yorkshire not in Oxfordshire) he thinks because he is the Forum owner, he can INSULT and to MANIPULATE the History of Spain and the history of the Empire...
he always write "stealing" "Steal" with Spain...never with USA.. of course.. never with Britain, never with Netherland...
martin76 is offline  
Old November 30th, 2016, 01:47 PM   #39
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,737

First Road? That is stretching it - did not the Inca make roads? These same roads are still used today in South America.

Did not the Aztec have cities with schools to educate their upper-classes? Which would count in my book as a University. The school and the books were burned by the Spanish.

Did not the Maya have temples? Which would count as cathedrals.

The Inca made many discoveries in medicine. They performed successful skull surgery, by cutting holes in the skull to alleviate fluid buildup and inflammation caused by head wounds. Many skull surgeries performed by Inca surgeons were successful. This would count as a hospital with doctors.

Spain did use slaves or a system of entrenched servitude :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encomienda

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repartimiento

now back to the original post - Spain vs Japan. Where in I ask why? Would not the troops be more useful to contain the American possessions, cleaning the seas of pirates, fighting European wars, or for another bite a the "let us invade England" apple.
kazeuma is offline  
Old November 30th, 2016, 01:59 PM   #40

Asherman's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: May 2013
From: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 2,287
Blog Entries: 34

Tulia, I was writing to clarify when interrupted and lost it all. Sorry, but you are correct finding a route to the Spice Islands and the riches of the Orient spurred exploration, and Spain hit the jackpot in Mexico, South and Meso-America. 16th century gold was the equivalent of Oil to OPEC, it made the Spanish Monarchs fabulously wealthy without their having to do more than cart it away. Other nations were jealous and protestant. Portugal and Spain were both in the Southwestern Pacific before others, but it was the Dutch who pretty much sewed up the Spice trade in modern day Brunei. Spain held on to the Philippines until the Spanish-American War when they became possession of the US.

The Pacific route for Treasure Fleets from the west coasts of America were safer from pirates and buccaneers, but the longer voyage took its toll. Those Spanish outposts were important to repair and replenish the Fleets for their next journey home. In retrospect, the Pacific route was probably better in theory than in practice, and Spain began to lose its hold there pretty early.

Trying to be succinct in a couple of short sentences, trying to stay on topic I believe led to some misunderstanding.
Asherman is online now  
Closed Thread

  Historum > Themes in History > Speculative History

Tags
conquest, japan, spanish



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Western conquest of Japan Fernando Perla Asian History 4 September 17th, 2016 04:47 PM
What caused the fall of the Aztec/Maya before the Spanish conquest? BosnianHistorian European History 1 January 8th, 2015 03:54 PM
Spanish conquest of the Americas and the European conquest of Africa CyrusTheGreat European History 3 August 14th, 2014 07:27 PM
The Spanish conquest of Central America Linnaea American History 5 June 15th, 2014 10:43 AM
Japan's conquest of the Ainu and invasion of Hokkaido unity Asian History 111 May 7th, 2014 11:14 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.