Local Diseases

[Megas Methuselah]

While the sedentary peoples in Central and South America would have probably held the Spanish at bay at first, I think that they, along with those in what is now Canada and the US would eventually have been worn down by the Europeans' superior firepower,

Superior firepower? The conquest of the Aztec Empire had little to do with guns, and was largely a success due to native allies and disease.

and in the North also by the destruction of their sources of food.

What do you mean?

It would have been more brutal and taken a lot longer, but we would have done it eventually.

If disease was non-existent amongst the Native Americans, then the situation may have mirrored Africa and India. Trading colonies and so forth that would have eventually developed into a total claim/conquest on the two continents. Then eventual independance, mass expulsion of whites, and many, many wars. The natives would likely never have developed into minorities, but it is exceedingly difficult to imagine a world where the whites wouldn't have a couple continents in which to run away from their mess in Europe.

[Mediolanicus]

Superior firepower? The conquest of the Aztec Empire had little to do with guns, and was largely a success due to native allies and disease.

And horses, don't forget the horses...

[Klearchos]

Thanks for the responses guys. I understand that the situation with the diseases in Eurasia was totaly different from that in the Americas during the european colonization.
Let my ask a (slightly) different question now: What about the various toxins and parasites found in food and water. For example, tha natives of one land might be used in consuming a species of mushroom or some certain root, but for a foreigner it could be lethal. Same goes for the water.
I guess such things cannot be clasified as "diseases", for they are not transmittable, and immunity can be acquired only by generations-long consuming of that toxin.
Any thoughts on that?

(Of course, that would have lethal results for the first couple of waves of foreign soldiers, since they would learn to avoid some certain igredients after a while)

Also, my knowledge of biology is (obviously) not the best. :P Let me know if the things I'm saying are wrong.

[bobbin]

It wouldn't really work like that, if there was a plant that was toxic enough to kill someone, the locals would just not eat it in the first place.

It would be pretty stupid of them to bilndly continue eating something lethal for generations until someone developed resistance.

As for parasites, they are different because your body's immune system doesn't work on that scale, it's the reason nobody is resistant to things like tapeworms or headlice.

[Mediolanicus]

Thanks for the responses guys. I understand that the situation with the diseases in Eurasia was totaly different from that in the Americas during the european colonization.
Let my ask a (slightly) different question now: What about the various toxins and parasites found in food and water. For example, tha natives of one land might be used in consuming a species of mushroom or some certain root, but for a foreigner it could be lethal. Same goes for the water.
I guess such things cannot be clasified as "diseases", for they are not transmittable, and immunity can be acquired only by generations-long consuming of that toxin.
Any thoughts on that?

(Of course, that would have lethal results for the first couple of waves of foreign soldiers, since they would learn to avoid some certain igredients after a while)

Also, my knowledge of biology is (obviously) not the best. :P Let me know if the things I'm saying are wrong.

Back then, everyone would have been used to eating and drinking slightely contaminated water.

So, that was not as much a problem as you have now when say a Western European starts drinking non-bottled water in India.

[Klearchos]

I see, thanks bobbin and Mediolanicus

[Badass Buddha]

Superior firepower? The conquest of the Aztec Empire had little to do with guns, and was largely a success due to native allies and disease.

As you said, it would have happened later, but they eventually would have come back with larger, better equipped, and more advanced armies that would have won.

What do you mean?

In the US at least, our greatest challenge came from the nomads in the central plains, who relied on the buffalo for food. Because the trigger-happy (US) Americans slaughtered the buffalo almost to extinction for the lulz (those of you who played Oregon Trail know what I'm talking about), the nomads were crippled. While this phenomenon was not limited to the central plains people, it was especially pronounced there due to their reliance on a single animal, whereas other groups relied on a variety of animals and plants or practiced agriculture. Of course, for this to happen, it's assumed that the Europeans would have already subdued/annihilated the groups on the East coast and have large colonies there in order to be in a position to make furthur inroads, but I do not think that it is an unreasonable assumption, seeing how the European goods were in such demand, who would refuse a request for a "trading post/enclave".

If disease was non-existent amongst the Native Americans, then the situation may have mirrored Africa and India. Trading colonies and so forth that would have eventually developed into a total claim/conquest on the two continents. Then eventual independance, mass expulsion of whites, and many, many wars. The natives would likely never have developed into minorities, but it is exceedingly difficult to imagine a world where the whites wouldn't have a couple continents in which to run away from their mess in Europe.

I'm kind of picturing a situation more like apartheid-era South Africa.

And horses, don't forget the horses...

Actually, once the Aztecs and Inca stopped being afraid of them, I can't imagine them being very useful. The realms of the Aztec and Inca consisted mainly of extensive jungles and mountain ranges, where horses are craptacular.

It would be pretty stupid of them to bilndly continue eating something lethal for generations until someone developed resistance.

Yeah, that would be pretty stupid. *Knocks back a bottle of Jack Daniels and takes a drag on a cigarette before ordering Fugu*

[Nirvanish]

Sorry to go off topic again Klearchos but I feel I should mention a great book which details the effect of disease in war. Its called "The Illustrious Dead" by Stephan Talty. The book chronicles the impact of Typhus on Napoleon's Grand Army as it marches into Russia. I found the book in mp3 format( I need some way to cope with a long commute) and it is fantastic. If I happen to find the torrent I will link it on here.