For a spoiled brat like Fernando, that is a bit out-of-character but understandable - though I would doubt that the Queen would be any more liberal than Fernando. Plus, I doubt that whatever remained of the partido Fernandista would have the end of it vis-à-vis the liberals.
Emphasis added. The reformers have the same hope of ATL's Maria Carlota as they did of OTL's Maria Cristina. Those hopes might well have been dashed in the same way had she been Regent, but with Carlos as regent...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-nineteenth_century_Spain said:In 1830, at the advice of his wife, Maria Christina of Bourbon-Two Sicilies, Ferdinand decreed a Pragmatic Sanction that had the effect of fundamental law in Spain. As a result of the sanction, women were allowed to accede to the Spanish throne, and the succession would fall on Ferdinand's infant daughter, Isabella, rather than to his brother Carlos. Carlos - who disputed the legality of Ferdinand's ability to change the fundamental law of succession in Spain - left the country for Portugal, where he became a guest of Dom Miguel, the absolutist pretender in that country's civil war.
Ferdinand died in 1833, at the age of 49. He was succeeded by his daughter Isabella under the terms of the Pragmatic Sanction, and his wife, Maria Christina, became regent for her daughter, who at that time was only three years of age. Carlos disputed the legitimacy of Maria Christina's regency and the accession of her daughter, and declared himself to be the rightful heir to the Spanish throne. A half-century of civil war and unrest would follow.
[edit] The Carlist War and the Regencies (1833-1843)
See also: First Carlist War
Carlos Maria Isidro, Infante of Spain, the leader of the Carlist cause and pretender to the Spanish throne.
After their fall from grace in 1823 at the hands of a French invasion, Spanish liberals had pinned their hopes on Ferdinand VII's wife, Maria Cristina of Bourbon-Two Sicilies, who bore some marks as a liberal and a reformer. However, when she became regent for her daughter Isabella in 1833, she made it clear to the court that she intended no such reforms. Even still, an alliance of convenience was formed with the progressista faction at court against the conservatives, who backed the rebel Infante Carlos of Spain.
As for Ferdinand and his ministers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_VII_of_Spain said:During his last years Ferdinand's energy was abated. He no longer changed ministers every few months as a sport, and he allowed some of them to conduct the current business of government. His habits of life were telling on him. He became torpid, bloated and horrible to look at.
I have no clue. I didn't even know who you were talking about when I first read this. Googling "Francisco de Paula" I got far more hits on a Columbia statesman than the Infante, and the Wiki article says little to nothing about him.That, of course, leaves open one question: now that the Infante Carlos is legit in terms of succession, what becomes of the Infante Francisco de Paula? Yes, he was basically so much of a sleazebag that some people in the Escorial believed that he was Godoy's son (I'm not joking - compare the portraits of Godoy and the Infante and you'd see the resemblance), but he would probably have some use somehow.
Oh. Besides which, he was born 1794, which is just after the PoD, so he'll be some different anyway.
We have a legitimate heir, with Carlos (the brother of the dead king) being a (probably more competent than his brother) ruler as regent. I think that IF the liberals had decided to revolt, they would have done it in the name of the young king, with the intent of installing one of theirs as regent. I don't THINK there's really room in the political landscape for a successful revolt by a younger son/uncle. If that's what you meant?
Britain at this time is actively supporting 'liberal' governments. I haven't posted anything on Portugal yet, but the War of Two Brothers goes differently, and Portugal is a liberal constitutional monarchy, partly as a result of British military support. She's also providing a safe base for liberals who fled Spain. Taking all that into account, and the fears that Spain has about British intentions re: Florida, AND that Spain doesn't want to get dragged into an Anglo-American war they see coming, and the cancelling of an alliance makes all the sense in the world to me.Honestly, if he valued the alliance with the UK during the Napoleonic Wars, I'd doubt he would let relations sink that low, let alone cancelling an alliance that would be potentially valuable.
Spain is not at the moment actively hostile to Britain, but relations are at a low ebb.
I don't know pro or con what Carlos's opinion of Britain was during the Napoleonic wars, but I do know that a lot of Spaniards were very prickly about their relationship. ...
I don't think Mexico is where many go. Even if they went during a time when the government was relatively liberal, it could literally change over night.It wouldn't be that much of a win-win if some of them managed to escape to México - which would make things very interesting, for sure. But yeah, sounds like Carlos to me.