Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-6876762-20130303211712/@comment-9159780-20130506055514

I believe the greatest "alternative scenario" that would have effected the entire Spanish Aztec historical timeline would have happened in Cuba even before Cortes's departure. Governor Diego Valezquez de Cuellar had originally just wanted to set up a trading port for trade with the the natives of what is now Mexico. But fearing Cortes might overstep and replace Valezquez's authority (which he immediately did upon landing in Mexico)  he attempted to replace him with Luis de Medina. Cortes's brother-in-law intercepted Medina and killed him. Cortes, thus forewarned headed off on his expedition anyway. And the rest, as they say, is history.

Had Medina led the expedition and the ensuing early finds cemented Havana as the center of control for the unified region, it is in all likelyhood, given enough time, that when Spain established New Spain the capital would have been in Havana instead of Mexico City and the two surviving nations of Mexico and Cuba might have remained as one nation.

Also as the original plan was to just establish a trading port, while desease would have still decimated  perhaps millions, a small trading port would probably have lessened the amount.

As early Havana led expeditions to the Yucatan took some 170 years to control the Mayan areas there is a good chance that the Aztec line might have also taken a much longer time to fully control.

The eventual riches of gold and silver from Mexico and sugar wealth from Cuba over the coming centuries could have made the united country much more economically stable. Then the oil of the 20th century even more. It might also have led to a much more advanced naval fleet in which to keep constant contact between the two regions.

Even today, a united Cuba/Mexico with its capital in Havana would have offered a very different possibility for the history of the last 100, 70, even 20 years.