WI Joseph-Ferdinand of Bavaria didnt die in 1699?

Joseph-Ferdinand was born in 1692 as the son of the Elector of Bavaria Maximilian II Emmanuel and Maria Antonia of Austria daughter of Leopold I Holy Roman Emperor... At birth he was proclaimed as Prince of Asturias and was chosen by the degenerated Charles II as his heir... In OTL he died a year before his inbred great-uncle Charles II of Spain.... His untimely death lead to the "Second partition Treaty" which proclaimed Philippe Duke d' Anjou King of Naples and Sicily and Duke of Milan while all the others titles went to Leopold's son Charles (future Charles VI Holy Roman Emperor)...
However in OTL the Treaty was not accepted by Leopold and Louis XIV violated it by installing Philippe King of Spain as Philip V... A fact which lead to the War of Spanish succesion...
WI Joseph-Ferdinand doesnot predeceases Charles II and inherits the Spanish Crown in 1700 at the age of 8? Maybe under the Regency of his father or some other Habsburg...
Could the Habsburgs hold Spain under their banner? Or this leads to a new War of Spanish Succesion? Any thoughts?

Here are my thoughts for this scenario. Have him survive, but under the regency of the Council of Castile and the Aragonese cortes? Then marry him to a princess who will clean out the young king's gene pool (by her simply being less related to him than previous Spanish queens to their husbands) like the Infanta Francisca of Portugal, Isabella Farnese, Maria Carolina Sobieska (also niece of the former queen, Maria Anna von der Pfalz.

Another option is because the Hapsburgs didn't trust Max II because he was very buddy-buddy with old Louis XIV (his sister had been married to le Grand Dauphin), send the Archduke Charles to Madrid to act as regent (unlikely since Karl was only 18 in 1703) or even let the HRE Leopold I appoint his sister-in-law, Maria Anna von der Pfalz as regent (equally unlikely since the Spanish hated her and the German entourage she brought with her). Therefore Council of Castile is most likely.

Joseph Ferdinand isn't a Habsburg, he's a Wittelsbach. Also, wouldn't Joseph Ferdinand's father be the most likely Regent? He can claim to not be affiliated with either great power and would be unlikely to cause tension in Spain. He was Governor of the Spanish Netherlands after all,so it's not like he was an unknown to the Spanish Court. As for a possible bride, I would suggest a Portuguese match as the most likely.

JonasResende said:

Here are my thoughts for this scenario. Have him survive, but under the regency of the Council of Castile and the Aragonese cortes? Then marry him to a princess who will clean out the young king's gene pool (by her simply being less related to him than previous Spanish queens to their husbands) like the Infanta Francisca of Portugal, Isabella Farnese, Maria Carolina Sobieska (also niece of the former queen, Maria Anna von der Pfalz.

Another option is because the Hapsburgs didn't trust Max II because he was very buddy-buddy with old Louis XIV (his sister had been married to le Grand Dauphin), send the Archduke Charles to Madrid to act as regent (unlikely since Karl was only 18 in 1703) or even let the HRE Leopold I appoint his sister-in-law, Maria Anna von der Pfalz as regent (equally unlikely since the Spanish hated her and the German entourage she brought with her). Therefore Council of Castile is most likely.

Click to expand...

Elisabetta Farnese (who OTL became Queen of Spain as second wife of Philip V) would be a really interesting choice and an useful match for strengthen the Spain supremacy in Italy (she was the heiress of Parma and the most likely heiress for the Tuscany)

Even when Joseph-Ferdinand of Wittelsbach (Bavarian branch) would have succeeded Charles II of Spain (Spanish Habsburgs), then it would not have been inconceivable, if France, Austria and maybe Savoy would have considered the Spanish Italian possessions (Sicily, Naples (with state of Presidi), Sardinia and Milan) and the Spanish Netherlands as potential areas for 'compensation'.

Especially the Bourbons and the Austrian Habsburgs and this could also involve third parties, like the duchy of Lorraine & Bar, which could pass to France and in compensation, its ruler might be compensated with Milan or maybe the Spanish Netherlands etc.

Alternatively Austria might be interested in Bavaria, which ruler the father of Joseph-Ferdinand could be compensated with one of the Italian Spanish possessions or the Spanish Netherlands, which would later be re-united with Spain. (However such a swap, like when it was later suggested IOTL, could meet with opposition in the HRE.)

Savoy traditionally interested in Milan, but since it isn't a European Great Power, but more a Medium Power would probably will have to content with what is left in Italy (if they receive anything major at all). Like later IOTL this might very well be the relatively unimportant kingdom of Sardinia.

All in all there might still be a conflict even when Joseph-Ferdinand would survive. Regarding his regency his father Maximilian II Emanuel is a likely choice, but there could be a role for the Council of Castille too.
Finally Elisabeth Farnese could be an interesting choice as a potential bride or a Portuguese Infanta, but due to dynastic considerations a Bourbon princess (maybe Orléans branch) or an Austrian archduchess are still possibilities too.

Regarding possible brides, assuming that Joseph Ferdinand needs to marry young (before or around 20), in order to secure the succession (and excluding butterflies):

There would be no Portuguese princess available. Unless Infanta Teresa Maria doesn't die in 1704 as IOTL, then the only other daughter of Peter II (princess Francisca Josefa) would be only 11 when Joseph is already 18. They could marry if the Wittelsbachs believe that they could wait for it, but I'm sure they would do it.

As Habsburg options, there would be Archduchess Maria Magdalena, sister of Joseph I or (in the case of a later marriage) his daughter Maria Josepha.

Among the French, the main branch of the Bourbons had no princess, but the Orleans had to offer Marie Louise Élisabeth d'Orléans or her sister Louise Adélaïde d'Orléans.

Then there is Elisabeth Farnese of Parma, as an Italian option.

"Among the French, the main branch of the Bourbons had no princess, but the Orleans had to offer Marie Louise Élisabeth d'Orléans or her sister Louise Adélaïde d'Orléans."

The Spanish might object to both ladies since while paternally they descend from the kings of France and Spain, their mother is the delightful Francoise-Marie, Mlle de Blois (ie youngest daughter of Louis XIV and La Montespan - ergo a bastard [albeit a legitimized bastard]) which would count against them. All of their sisters who married foreign princes (Charlotte Aglae and Louise-Elisabeth) married during their fathers tenure as Regent. Louise-Diane, the youngest, was fobbed off with the prince de Conti, while Philippine-Charlotte was IIRC sent back to France when the Duc de Bourbon packed Infanta Mariana Vitoria back over the Pyrenees.

Also AFAIK the daughter who became Abbess of Chelles was refused by James III because of her mother's birth (not that his maternal grandmother Laura Martinozzi boasted an impressive pedigree)

Duke Maximilian will do whatever is needed to become D. José's Regent. He dreamt of making the Wittelsbacher a major European House and will not willingly cede his position to a Habsburg foe. Besides, Maximilian already has a power base in the Low Countries, as he is the Governor of the Spanish Netherlands, and could find a potential ally in Louis XIV, who would certainly support the Prince of Asturias over a Habsburg Archduke.

Emperor Constantine said:

Joseph Ferdinand isn't a Habsburg, he's a Wittelsbach. Also, wouldn't Joseph Ferdinand's father be the most likely Regent? He can claim to not be affiliated with either great power and would be unlikely to cause tension in Spain. He was Governor of the Spanish Netherlands after all,so it's not like he was an unknown to the Spanish Court. As for a possible bride, I would suggest a Portuguese match as the most likely.

Click to expand...

It isn't about Max Emanuel (Joseph Ferdinand's father) being from neither great power. Leopold I IIRC had forced his daughter on her deathbed to renounce her rights to the crowns of Spain with the intention that he would have a greater say over his grandson's regency.

Also, Max Emanuel's sister was married to Le Grand Dauphin, son of Louis XIV. His brother the archbishop of Cologne was likewise rather pro-French even if he did owe his appointment to the archbishopric to Leopold I. However, in the OTL War of the Spanish Succession both Bavaria and Cologne sided with France against Austria.

I remember reading somewhere that Max Emanuel was put out because in his life time he saw his fellow secular electors in Hanover, Brandenburg and Saxony gain royal crowns (Britain, Prussia and Poland), therefore he tried for the imperial dignity at the elections when Leopold I died; a trait he later passed on to his son, HRE Karl VII. Another thing, his role as governor of the Spanish Netherlands ended in 1700 with the death of Carlos II - probably as a result of Leopold being afraid of his royal-imperial ambitions.

JonasResende said:

"Among the French, the main branch of the Bourbons had no princess, but the Orleans had to offer Marie Louise Élisabeth d'Orléans or her sister Louise Adélaïde d'Orléans."

The Spanish might object to both ladies since while paternally they descend from the kings of France and Spain, their mother is the delightful Francoise-Marie, Mlle de Blois (ie youngest daughter of Louis XIV and La Montespan - ergo a bastard [albeit a legitimized bastard]) which would count against them. All of their sisters who married foreign princes (Charlotte Aglae and Louise-Elisabeth) married during their fathers tenure as Regent. Louise-Diane, the youngest, was fobbed off with the prince de Conti, while Philippine-Charlotte was IIRC sent back to France when the Duc de Bourbon packed Infanta Mariana Vitoria back over the Pyrenees.

Also AFAIK the daughter who became Abbess of Chelles was refused by James III because of her mother's birth (not that his maternal grandmother Laura Martinozzi boasted an impressive pedigree)

Click to expand...

I wouuldn't count them out too soon. Even though even the Orléans and other princely branches of the Bourbons had qualms marrying Louis XIV's brood of bastard daughters, despite legitimization, he always knew how to sweeten the pot. His father and mother received the Palais Royal, while the Duke of Orléans favorite was given 100,000 livres. The Duke of Chatres (the OTL Regent, Philippe II) received a far sweeter deal: a 2 million livre dowry. Of course it was not paid until the end of the Nine Years War, but Louis was quite generous with those who married his legitimated daughters, especially.

Given Spain's economical situation at the end of the Habsbutg reign (Charles II's Queen was forced to pawn pieces of the crown jewels merely to cover household expenses), a large influx of French money might be quite welcome. After all, despite lacking a national bank, the French Livre in the 18th century was a strong currency. If there is a marriage to a King involved, the pot might be sweetened even further. Elizabeth d'Orléans, for instance received a dowry of 4 million. I'm sure her mother's reputation figured little into the marriage; she was a Princess of the Blood by marriage. Her illegitimatacy was nearly unimportant following her marriage.

Pride is one thing, but money does talk, especially in cash strapped Spain. Charles II's second bride wasn't a large blue blood, but rather a scion of the House of Pfalz-Neuburg chosen because of how fertile how parents were. I'm not saying walls were collapsing and royals would marry their stablehands, but for although Louis XIV's bastards were relieved, they made attractive marriage partners because of a mix of money and titles. They all married with the high scions of the French nobility--that is the Princes of the Blood, scions of the royal dynasty themselves. Daughters received dowries worth millions, while the boys were endowed with titles and estates. Their children went on to make even better marriages, armed with the legitimacy that came from their parents own unions, not to mention the money and titles lavished by Louis XIV and well... they weren't bad catches at all.

A French marriage would be entirely possible. It was scandalous that Louis XIV's bastards were raised to high positions within the French court, essentially breeding into the ranks of those who claimed the right of a Prince du Sang. But their children were hardly scandalous. They were considered royal and had massive amounts of money. A perfect catch, really, and a a newly crowned King of cash-strapped Spain ain't about to ignore that.

The Spanish court is strapped for cash. Joseph Ferdinand becoming king isn't going to magically fix things. He's still going to inherit a poor country with a broken system,

ByzantineCaesar said:

Duke Maximilian will do whatever is needed to become D. José's Regent. He dreamt of making the Wittelsbacher a major European House and will not willingly cede his position to a Habsburg foe. Besides, Maximilian already has a power base in the Low Countries, as he is the Governor of the Spanish Netherlands, and could find a potential ally in Louis XIV, who would certainly support the Prince of Asturias over a Habsburg Archduke.

Click to expand...

I didn't mean, that there have to be a conflict, but Louis XIV like Leopold I will firstly have the interest of their house & realm in mind.
Besides the first partition treaty between France and England was written with Joseph-Ferdinand as the main Spanish heir.
However that bilateral treaty didn't take in mind the wishes and demands of others like the Spain, Austrian Habsburgs, the house of Savoy and the Wittelsbach Bavaria.
So IMHO ITTL there still is room for a conflict to slightly alter the provisions in that treaty.

Of course, a prime example is the war of the Palatinate successiuon - where even though there was an heir, Louis XIV still went to war in the hopes of getting something in the name of his sister-in-law Liselotte von der Pfalz. Therefore I can't see Louis sitting back at Versailles even IF (and a very big if) he does get a quasi-illegitimate granddaughter as queen; there's still Burgundian inheritance and Naples, the duchy of Milan, the states of Presidi &c that he could carve off for Anjou and Berri. And so what that he's signed the treaty of (can't remember if London or the Hague came first) with William IiI; he also promised he would acknowledge the Williamite succession in London and then promptly defaulted on that agreement when James the Beshitten died in '01. Alternatively he could go to Leopold I and sign a treaty with him for the partition of the rest of the Spanish empire (unlikely, but since we're letting an Orleans princess go to Spain, why not). Then a Franco-Austrian alliance splits Italy and Burgundy between them, while England, Portugal and Spain support D. Jose's claims. Then when the war's over Austria and France can have a falling out among thieves about their recentt spoils of war, and the war would start from scratch just with your belligerents changing sides - or Spain can follow the policy of OTL D. Fernando VI, and if Walpole (or someone like him) is PM in London, England won't be jumping in

Here's a plan of the planned partition of the Spanish Empire.



As people can see the Wittelsbach would get most, with the Bourbons gaining the two rich kingdoms of Naples and Sicil, and the Habsburgs only getting Milan.

of course the deal isn't bad for the Habsburg. With Milan in their hands, they're in a good position to dominate North Italy, while giving the Southern Netherlandsand Spain to the Bavarians would pull them out of Bourbon orbit, in fact they would go from a French ally to the main enemy of France. For the Habsburg this would give them pierce to continue their wars against the Turks, and we would likely see even greater losses from the Ottoman side in the early 18th century (I expect Austria to conquer the entire Wallachia, Bosnia, Moldavia and Dobruja). The weaker position in the HRE would also push the Habsburg to keep their alliance with Brandenburg-Prussia (by supporting their claim to Jülich-Berg)

The Bourbons gain Naples ands Sicily, but it leave them without allies, the Wittelsbach is now hostiles, Sweden will use the first 20 years of the 18th century on a long war, which result in them being reduced to a ruin of their former glory. Saxony and Brandenburg have both to much to lose by seeking conflict with the Habsburgs.

The Wittelsbachs are the big winners, they have two of the potential richest domains of the HRE (Belgium and Bavaria), they have gotten Spain, its colonies and Sardinia. But on the other hand, suddenly they're in the big league, their alliance with the French are gone, and in any conflict with the Habsburgs they will risk that everybody jumps thems, unless they bribe them first.

As for potential we have the French messing in the Great Northern War to keep Sweden a useful ally, beside that we have Polish, Austrian and Jülich-Berg Succession crisises lurking in the 1730-40ties.

OK so I did some research and in Charles II's will Cardinal Luis Manuel Fernández de Portocarrero,Archbishop of Toledo was named Governor-Regent of Spain with a Board/Council to support him.IDK if this was ment to last for the entire minority or just until the new King and his father arrived. Also what would happen with Bavaria itself? I assume that it would have gone to a second son but I can't seem to find anything about it. Finally what kind of monarch was Elector Maximilian II? Would he be able to tackle the massive financial problems Spain had? Not to mention the military problems that Spain suffered from. According to spanishsuccession.nl, the main Army in Spain only numbered 17,000 compared to France which had 200,000 and even Prussia, a second rate power, could field 40,000. So either way, the new Regent would have a huge mess to tackle

Agreed. But if Max II were to be the kind of ruler (like OTL D. Fernando VI and Carlos III) he could save Spanish finances (with the help of a valido like the OTL Marquis d'Ensenada). But on the other hand the Wittelsbach could start treating Spain and its Empire much the same as the Wettins treated Poland - as a cash cow

JonasResende said:

Agreed. But if Max II were to be the kind of ruler (like OTL D. Fernando VI and Carlos III) he could save Spanish finances (with the help of a valido like the OTL Marquis d'Ensenada). But on the other hand the Wittelsbach could start treating Spain and its Empire much the same as the Wettins treated Poland - as a cash cow

Click to expand...

That along the lines I was thinking. Though I don't really know how Spain could be a cash cow with it being so horribly in debt.

ingemann said:

Here's a plan of the planned partition of the Spanish Empire.

As people can see the Wittelsbach would get most, with the Bourbons gaining the two rich kingdoms of Naples and Sicil, and the Habsburgs only getting Milan.

of course the deal isn't bad for the Habsburg. With Milan in their hands, they're in a good position to dominate North Italy, while giving the Southern Netherlandsand Spain to the Bavarians would pull them out of Bourbon orbit, in fact they would go from a French ally to the main enemy of France. For the Habsburg this would give them pierce to continue their wars against the Turks, and we would likely see even greater losses from the Ottoman side in the early 18th century (I expect Austria to conquer the entire Wallachia, Bosnia, Moldavia and Dobruja). The weaker position in the HRE would also push the Habsburg to keep their alliance with Brandenburg-Prussia (by supporting their claim to Jülich-Berg)

The Bourbons gain Naples ands Sicily, but it leave them without allies, the Wittelsbach is now hostiles, Sweden will use the first 20 years of the 18th century on a long war, which result in them being reduced to a ruin of their former glory. Saxony and Brandenburg have both to much to lose by seeking conflict with the Habsburgs.

The Wittelsbachs are the big winners, they have two of the potential richest domains of the HRE (Belgium and Bavaria), they have gotten Spain, its colonies and Sardinia. But on the other hand, suddenly they're in the big league, their alliance with the French are gone, and in any conflict with the Habsburgs they will risk that everybody jumps thems, unless they bribe them first.

As for potential we have the French messing in the Great Northern War to keep Sweden a useful ally, beside that we have Polish, Austrian and Jülich-Berg Succession crisises lurking in the 1730-40ties.

Click to expand...

I seriously doubt whether the Habsburgs would agree to that it isn't a bad deal, especially considering the fact that they weren't even involved in the first partition treaty (BTW neither were Spain or Bavaria), which essentially was a trilateral treaty between France, England and the Dutch Republic, but also since they too claimed the entire Spanish inheritance (Savoy also claimed a part).
Though the only two territories left for Austria would be Sardinia and the Spanish Netherlands, if one of these would be added, then it might have been more acceptable. Alternatively Bavaria is interesting for Austria too.

Savoy another claimant, traditionally was interested in Milan, but given its status it would have depended on the Great Powers.

They might use its empire as a cash cow much as Isabel Farnese did. She used money that couldve been put to better use in involving Spain in wars she couldn't afford simply to prop HER sons D. Carlos first on a throne in Florence, then in Parma and finally in Naples. Then another war was used to secure D. Felipe's succession to Parma. Bavaria might do the same - ie using the Spanish colonies to finance an opulent life be it at Nymphenburg or Buen Retiro

And Isabel got the name of "the shrew of Spain" because of her dominance of D. Felipe V and using him to waste the money coming in from the colonies in Italy

JonasResende said:

They might use its empire as a cash cow much as Isabel Farnese did. She used money that couldve been put to better use in involving Spain in wars she couldn't afford simply to prop HER sons D. Carlos first on a throne in Florence, then in Parma and finally in Naples. Then another war was used to secure D. Felipe's succession to Parma. Bavaria might do the same - ie using the Spanish colonies to finance an opulent life be it at Nymphenburg or Buen Retiro

And Isabel got the name of "the shrew of Spain" because of her dominance of D. Felipe V and using him to waste the money coming in from the colonies in Italy

Click to expand...

True those are good points. I guess Maximilian II could use Spain's treasury to forward his ambitions to become Holy Roman Emperor. I wonder if even with Joseph Ferdinand on the throne, would a war break out? After all Spain was against dividing up it's empire and they weren't consulted in either partition treaty.Also what would his regal name be? Jose I, Fernando VI or Jose Fernando? After reading this thread I really hope someone makes a TL with this POD.

Looking at the various partition treaties, there also were alternatives considered.

A reason why the legitimate claims of the duke of Savoy were mainly ignored, especially during the negotiations of the first partition treaty, was that the duke of Savoy hadn't lived up to his alliance with England & Scotland and the Dutch Republic (the king-stadtholder William III seemed to have been angry at him).
However France seemed to have been interested in the lands of Savoy and during the negotiations for the second partition treaty an option was discussed to award France with Savoy (with Piedmont) in exchange the duke of Savoy was to be compensated with Naples and Sicily, if he would decline they would offer this deal to the duke of Lorraine.
This seems likely since the duke of Savoy seemed to have been obsessed with Milan.

Anyway there are more options than the final OTL partition treaties, if the Spanish European possessions (outside Spain) are going to be divided ITTL.