WI: Charles V took a second wife?

In 1539 Isabella of Portugal, wife of Emperor Charles V, died. Charles never remarried. Supposedly he did this out of his deep love of his wife. Now what if he had been persuaded to take a second wife to help secure the succession (Charles only had one son, Philip II). Now who would this be? And how would this effect history? Would Charles divide his empire into further pieces, giving the Burgundian inheritance to a son by his second wife? How could this effect the Habsburg succession? If this second Spanish line effect a war of succession?


Mary of England- Charles' first cousin, daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon. Could cement an alliance between England, Spain and the Empire
Margaret of France-youngest daughter of Francis I, could be used to cement peace with France
Elisabeth of Austria- Daughter of Charles' brother Ferdinand,
Maria of Portugal-daughter of his sister Eleanor by Manuel I of Portugal.

If Charles V remarries, I doubt it would be one of his nieces. Despite all the inbreeding amongst the Habsburgs, the first uncle-niece marriage in the family wasn't until Philip II married Anna of Austria in 1570--and that took a great deal of maneuvering on his part to secure the dispensation from Pope Pius V, who was never fully comfortable with doing so. As far as Mary I of England is concerned, that wouldn't be possible until her accession in 1553. By that time, Charles V was an old man and, quite frankly, an exhausted one, hence the preference for Philip II in OTL.

Margaret is an interesting candidate. She was betrothed to Philip II, I believe as part of the Truce of Nice in 1538, but the precontract was later annulled after war broke out between France and the Emperor again four years later. This is a good window of time. Perhaps in this scenario, Charles V decides to wed Margaret himself, seeing as she's four years Philip's senior and already of age at this point (he'll probably still go through with a match with the Avis for his son as in OTL). I can't see this changing the diplomatic situation of OTL much, though. The truce will still most likely fail.

Alternatively (and perhaps more realistically), you could also have Charles wed her as part of the settlement of the Treaty of Crépy (1544). By that time, Philip II is already married, so it would probably make a great more deal of sense. This means that François' son, the Duc d'Orléans, is still precontracted to Ferdinand I's daughter, Anna of Austria, and promised the Duchy of Milan, while, in this scenario, Charles then weds Margaret to cement the agreement.

Considering Margaret was in her late thirties when her OTL marriage took place, that may account for her low fertility. In this scenario, if she and Charles manage to produce a son (probably born ca. 1546-1550), he'll most likely be given the Low Countries. That is probably going to have HUGE consequences and many butterflies. Alas, I'm not well versed enough in the history of the Low Countries to offer much more than the following:

This hypothetical son, we'll call him 'Charles III of Burgundy', will be around only 8 to 12 years old when his father dies. If he's raised in the Netherlands, he won't be seen as a foreign ruler like Philip II was in OTL, and he'll also have far more of an understanding of his subjects there (read: a likely continuation of his father's policies). I can easily see the Estates insisting that the boy be brought up there and not in Spain. I'm not sure who his regent will be, perhaps Margaret of Parma? If so, she'll have far more of a free hand to dictate policy than Philip II gave her in OTL, and, in my opinion, that is definitely for the best, considering he and the Duke of Alva basically botched the job royally.

Amitiés,
Endymion

That makes since about the uncle-niece marriage but I wouldn't count out Mary I completely. In the eyes of the Catholic world she was legitimate and if Henry VIII thinks that such a marriage could help then he would do it in a heartbeat.

So Margaret seems to be the best choice for a second wife.
The best time would be after the Treaty of Nice. S0 the marriage would take place between 1540 and 1542. So lets say "Charles III" is born in 1544 that would make him eleven in 1555 when Charles divides his realms.

So this "Charles III" would rule the Netherlands and Franche-Comte (I assume that it would go with the Burgundian inheritance rather then Spain). As for a Regent, why not his mother? I mean OTL Charles V's wife Isabella functioned as Regent for many years in Spain so why not have a French Princess in Flanders?

First of all an interesting topic.

I agree, that Margaret seems to be the best option and I also agree that, if they would have a son, then he could end up with the Burgundian Inheritance. Philip II would keep the Spanish kingdoms and Milan (he was invested with the duchy of Milan since IIRC 1540).
Even IOTL Charles did came to the conclusion, that uniting 'Spain' and 'Burgundy' did have some issues.
However IOTL Charles V and Ferdinand I eventually fell out over the succession in the HRE, where Charles would have preferred to have his line gaining the succession to the Empire (so Philip II instead of Maximilian II). One of the objections was that Philip would have the same handicap as Charles, he would be too much in Spain, which wouldn't be good for the HRE and vice versa.
However if Charles V would have had a second son with the Burgundian Inheritance as a potential powerbase, then this son would be a much more acceptable candidate as potential future king of the Romans; Charles V and Ferdinand I will still have a falling out though ITTL. In fact ITTL Charles V might even postpone his abdication, until his second son is an adult too, especially is that would secure him the succession in the HRE.
The prince-electors probably will be looking forward to the gifts of Charles V and Ferdinand I...

Regarding the name, instead of Charles, other options could be Maximilian (would be same name as the heir of Ferdinand though), Francis, John (though given the history with John Parricida that wouldn't be a real option), maybe even Frederick (after the father of Maxmilian I) etc., though Charles does seem like a good choice.

Emperor Constantine said:

That makes since about the uncle-niece marriage but I wouldn't count out Mary I completely. In the eyes of the Catholic world she was legitimate and if Henry VIII thinks that such a marriage could help then he would do it in a heartbeat.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree. I don't think that after his divorce from Catherine of Aragon that Henry VIII had any real intention of going through with a marriage for Mary, at least not while he only had a sickly son standing between her and the Crown. Yes, the Catholic world saw her as legitimate, but that's precisely why I think he never went beyond dangling her about as a possible prize for France or Spain. She was just too dangerous to give away in such uncertain times.

Emperor Constantine said:

So this "Charles III" would rule the Netherlands and Franche-Comte (I assume that it would go with the Burgundian inheritance rather then Spain). As for a Regent, why not his mother? I mean OTL Charles V's wife Isabella functioned as Regent for many years in Spain so why not have a French Princess in Flanders?

Click to expand...

It depends greatly on the character of Marguerite and her relationship with Charles V. Charles trusted Isabel and, by all accounts, probably even truly loved her. Portugal was also a secure ally and you have to remember that there was a strong tradition in the Iberian kingdoms of queens serving as regent, at least while their husbands were abroad (for instance, the Queen of Aragon had a longstanding constitutional right to summon the Cortes in her husband's absence or incapacitation. I'm not certain of what the precedents were in the Low Countries. Obviously there were several female regents and rulers in their own right, but it really all depends on who the Estates will accept and work best with. Remember that they still had a great deal of power, and after nearly a century of war with France, Marguerite may not be the most popular choice. It really all depends on the circumstances.

Janprimus said:

>snip<

Click to expand...

Yes, the breach will definitely occur between Charles and Ferdinand ITTL. Charles will likely be far more insistent that his second son succeeds Ferdinand as king of the Romans after his death than he was with Philip in OTL. Ferdinand of course is already king of the Romans, so the drama will be played out after Charles' death. If Charles does not abdicate, I personally see him living out his last days in the Low Countries, preparing the succession for his son. He was always Flemish at heart, despite his later adoption of Spain as a second homeland. This will mean that his younger son will probably take possession of his inheritance under better circumstances than his elder brother in OTL. After all, a native prince will be very pleasing to the Estates to begin with. With Charles V remaining in Flanders in his final years, his subjects will probably feel that THEIR prince has also returned to them and be all the more optimistic about their future. Charles V, quite frankly, understood the people and institutions of the Netherlands FAR better than Philip and knew how to please him. I see no reason why a capable heir with a similar upbringing there couldn't also do just as well, if not better (considering he won't be overstreched like his father and the Estates will feel more that their taxes are being spent on THEIR interests and not those of a foreign land).

Amitiés,
Endymion

This should be a timeline.

If I decide to take this up what books should I look up?