AHC: "Cortez" figure somewhere in Europe during Black Death

[Admiral Matt]

The initial effects of the Bubonic Plague on 14th century Europe were huge and dramatic. They were also remarkably similar in demographic terms to the 16th century measles/smallpox epidemics in Mesoamerica and the Andes.

But in the former, we can speak of the reduction of class barriers and the opening up of societies that followed. "Surviving commoners had more power and sometimes rights" is not a very controversial take. Parts of Europe were making outlandish, unprecedented advances within two centuries.

In the latter, the dying coincided with mass warfare driven by an outside force less affected by disease. The consequences included cultural annihilation, but also a much greater human catastrophe: early Spanish attempts at management of American empires coincided with a once-a-millennium drought to kill three out of four people in a salmonella epidemic probably vectored through the new overlords' introduced pigs.

Could something equivalent have befallen part of Europe, and how?

I am particularly thinking of a POD in the Mongol successor states. OTL the division was actually worse than it would be a few generations later, with the Golden Horde split, the eastern Mongols occupied in China, and the next notable unifier (Timur) yet to appear. But those aren't inevitable in all TLs.

Moreover, the Mongols were inevitably among the early victims of Plague while being close neighbors to some of the latest-struck regions. Hungary wasn't fully hit until 3 years after the last Mongol states had been overrun. For Lithuania, the upper Baltics, and most post-Rus vassals of the Mongols, it was 5 years. And Poland avoided ever being fully swamped in our TL, if memory serves.

Thoughts?

 

[Admiral Matt]

I'm estimating some general factors based on embarrassingly little research at this stage, but for reference, here's how the Black Death moved through Europe. I'd single out 1346 (Golden Horde in Crimea), 1348-49 (Hungary), and 1351 (post-Rus states and Baltic).

Spoiler: Plague by Month

 

[DJ03]

well, part of Cortes' success was, in his own opinion, from his ability to improvise
Todorov says that the conquistadores' success is due to their greater initiative compared to the natives' lack of it, which he claims were rooted in two much different cultures and in particular hermeneutical approaches: where the aztecs interpreted facts to understand how things would play out, the spanish (and expclly Cortes) interpreted them to understand how they could make use of things
I don't know where a similar dynamic can be replicated in the old world

 

[Admiral Matt]

To that compare where this falls within the Mongol era:

Spoiler: Mongol States

In the 1260s, the full Mongol Empire has divided, and the Golden Horde dominates the western steppe and most of the old Rus is annexed or vassalized. But in the 1280s this further splinters into the western Blue Horde and eastern White. The former invades Hungary, Poland, and the Ilkhanate all on their lonesome in that decade, has further raiding aggression abroad (while the Lithuanians drive them out of central Rus), and apparently invades Poland 1344-48. It's around 1380 that the two western hordes reunite and start being called the Golden Horde again, as the Timurid Empire is forming.

I cannot attest to the perfect historicity of these youtube videos, and indeed I can confirm a couple errors mentioned in their comment sections, but as a reference point I think they suggest this is worth discussion.

The Golden Horde, had it not split (or been reunited earlier) would have had more manpower. They had opportunity to be a few years post-Plague when Central Europe went into the worst of the crisis. If we suppose a Timur-like figure reunites the western steppe by conquest in the early 1300s, that the Golden Horde reconstitutes itself early, or that it simply never splits....

An example scenario would be a partial west-central Mongol reunification, combined with a severe internal conflict in a western neighbor: Hungary, Poland, or Lithuania. Louis the Great was too competent and charismatic by half, so assume he dies from his constant risk-taking, or doesn't inherit in the first place. If a POD a while in advance can contrive a succession dispute, the Mongols could invade up the Danube despite severe manpower losses of their own. The big obstacle is Hungary's prodigious castle system, but if you're supporting a claimant to the throne and can throw plague victims over the walls, conquest would be difficult but plausible. Assuming Poland is still a mess, momentum from vassalizing Hungary could allow a further northern invasion. Maybe outflanking their main rivals by heading for the Vistula, or alternately an alliance with the Baltic martial orders against Lithuania?

This would hardly leave them ruling some sturdy imperial state, more like king of the ashes. But that's sort of the point.

 

[saluto]

Sickness among the indigenous was massively important for Cortez, but so was his ability to hijack an enormous rebellion against the Triple Alliance. While the Spanish played their part it was really the rebellious subject cities which did the major fighting during the war. For instance during the siege of Tenochtitlan you’re talking about 3000 Spanish aligned with potentially 200,000 Tlaxcaltecs allies, against an Aztec force of similar size.

I’m not sure who would play the role of the Aztecs in this TL. Potentially a surviving Roman Empire? But that requires a POD far beforehand.

 

[Admiral Matt]

well, part of Cortes' success was, in his own opinion, from his ability to improvise
Todorov says that the conquistadores' success is due to their greater initiative compared to the natives' lack of it, which he claims were rooted in two much different cultures and in particular hermeneutical approaches: where the aztecs interpreted facts to understand how things would play out, the spanish (and expclly Cortes) interpreted them to understand how they could make use of things
I don't know where a similar dynamic can be replicated in the old world

I think that frames things as overly philosophical.

I'd argue the dynamic was more than Cortez was leading something equivalent to a piratical voyage, or better yet one of those mercenary armies in late medieval Europe that took off on its own to loot and pillage as an independent player. The clock was naturally ticking because of the nature of his group. He had to burn those boats.

The Triple Alliance was an imperial government thinking in terms of millions, alliances, and decades. And not thinking in terms of mass deaths, metal armor, gun ambushes, etc.

But more importantly... why do we need that dynamic in particular? The essential question is - can you get a significant military force that's no longer vulnerable to Plague invading during a severe Plague outbreak?

Seems like you could.

 

[Admiral Matt]

Sickness among the indigenous was massively important for Cortez, but so was his ability to hijack an enormous rebellion against the Triple Alliance. While the Spanish played their part it was really the rebellious subject cities which did the major fighting during the war. For instance during the siege of Tenochtitlan you’re talking about 3000 Spanish aligned with potentially 200,000 Tlaxcaltecs allies, against an Aztec force of similar size.

I’m not sure who would play the role of the Aztecs in this TL. Potentially a surviving Roman Empire? But that requires a POD far beforehand.

Ehhhh.... Surviving Rome might help if you want to engineer a Turtledove-style overly parallel conquest of the whole continent. That's definitely not the terms of the discussion. Never mind the thousand years of butterflies.

We can set that idea aside.

The question is:

Could something equivalent have befallen part of Europe, and how?

Part of Europe. Literally just Hungary or only Lithuania's Rus holdings would be enough and merit consideration. On the extreme end, perhaps Hungary, Poland, and most of the Lithuanian empire.

For Hungary an immune army could perhaps negotiate castles full of people vulnerable to Plague, but I agree with you that a nasty internal conflict would vastly improve the odds, allowing alliance to one faction or another.

For Lithuania, while the most formidable opponent in the region, allies (or "allies") are the easiest thing in the world. They were the last pagan state in Europe and had genocidal militarized states right on their doorstep, supported by much of northern Europe, which sent swarms of crusaders regularly on pillage vacations. I'll note that the crusader states in the Levant tried to work with the Mongols against the Muslims (and sometimes against Christians IIRC).

For Poland the period is a good one to raid, due to a lack of centralized state capacity. It's not an easy one to do anything that would hold land though, because a strong Hungary and Lithuania were dominant presences on its borders. But were Lithuania or Hungary to be conquered first, and were Mongols and mercenaries rallying to an initially successful cause, perhaps dominating or conquering Poland would be plausible.

 

[Arkenfolm]

Couldn't you say that was the Lithuanians given their great wave of expansion in the 14th century that saw them go from the most powerful Baltic tribe to conquering most of the Russian principalities and their rulers becoming kings of Poland and later Hungary?

 

[Admiral Matt]

Couldn't you say that was the Lithuanians given their great wave of expansion in the 14th century that saw them go from the most powerful Baltic tribe to conquering most of the Russian principalities and their rulers becoming kings of Poland and later Hungary?

Huh.

Huh! That is a very good point. I had better think on that. Good for them not causing an Aztec/Hebei style population collapse, if we accept that interpretation.

 

[CHKeeley]

Todorov says that the conquistadores' success is due to their greater initiative compared to the natives' lack of it, which he claims were rooted in two much different cultures and in particular hermeneutical approaches: where the aztecs interpreted facts to understand how things would play out, the spanish (and expclly Cortes) interpreted them to understand how they could make use of things
I don't know where a similar dynamic can be replicated in the old world

I’m not really sure I understand the need to go into “innate cultural differences” to explain the successes of Cortes and the Conquistadors. They came at a very advantageous time with generally superior weapons and armor backed by a powerful alliance of pissed off neighboring polities/former subjects, fighting against an empire ravaged by disease, and they had a bit of luck. The idea that there was an inherent lack of initiative in indigenous culture when compared to European ones which can explain their subjugation kinda sets off my spidey senses to be entirely honest.

 

[Aluma]

I know today Scandinavia is conflated with Europe a lot, but considering how it's Viking Age incarnation was a completely different civilisation from the christian roman/goth/frank one I wonder if you could get a Cortez and Pizarro from them?

Like just have one of their atempts at conquering England succeed and then have a conflict analogous to the Hundred Year War where the Alt-England "wins" by conquering France and suddenly Western Europe is within the hands of the "pagan aliens" from the frozen lands that lie beyond

 

[Aluma]

If you wanna make the situation even more extreme you could have a Successful Vinland as the POD as well with the re-estabilishment of contact happening during the Black Death
Some kind of Norse America showing up with a few of it's pillagers wrecking havoc on the continent wouod be a interesting role reversal

 

[Strategos' Risk]

What if somehow the Mongols and other easterners had greater immunity to the bubonic plague compared to the Europeans?

I suppose that is already the premise of the OP but I am reiterating it here in more specific terms- maybe it can be a setting conceit similar to how in The Years of Rice and Salt the plague is just somehow a more deadly strain.

 

[DJ03]

The idea that there was an inherent lack of initiative in indigenous culture when compared to European ones which can explain their subjugation kinda sets off my spidey senses to be entirely honest.

if you're afraid Todorov was trying to argue in favour of a supposed superiority of european cultures, fear not, because he doesn't fall in that trap
'The Conquest of America' is not a book of colonialist apologia, in fact, good portion of it is dedicated to an analysis of the destruction of mesoamerican people and cultures