>>17904716
>lucky
midwit take. You can look at any significant historical event or battle and claim it all came down to luck, especially if, in retrospect, you analyze the events like a domino effect leading to unpredictable outcomes that might seem like the product of fate. However, each domino had to be pushed, and each fall triggered a reaction from the parties involved. How they reacted, based on the resources and knowledge they had at the time, is what truly matters.
The Spaniards knew how to manage extremely scarce resources and make full use of their technological and political advantages to defeat the Aztecs (and this comes from someone who admires the Aztec Empire). Blaming it solely on diseases, for example, is unreasonable, because without alliances with other peoples, without the technological and military superiority to secure such alliances, and without the courage to ultimately carry out a military confrontation despite all the initial disadvantages, none of it would have been possible
Even taking everything into account, it was by all measures an impressive feat. It is about making the most of the few advantages that arise and using them at exactly the right moment. The plague and disease would have been useless if they had not attacked at the right time. Therefore, that same skill, passion for conquest, and drive for exploration would probably have yielded positive results in other scenarios and parts of the world, regardless of luck