AHC: Keep Spanish Habsburgs Around As Long As Possible

If Charles II of Spain had never been born, or died before taking the throne, could the Spanish Habsburgs have remained after 1700 with a different heir? Could the dynasty somehow be even more inbred, yet still fertile enough to carry on?
 
You'd probably need to stop all the inbreeding from the start, but if, for some reason, that kinda stuff floats your boat, then there are a couple of solutions. Your OP seems to assume that Carlos II caused the end of the dynasty, and that isn't really true. If he had died young or never been born, then the Spanish Habsburgs would have remained until 1683 (if you accept Infanta Maria Teresa's renunciation as null) or 1673 (if you don't). Any diligent student of history will tell you that both 1683 and 1673 are technically earlier than 1700.

So if we want Spain to continue in the Habsburg sphere of influence, then having Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria survive is a decent solution, and it only works if Carlos II lives. However, if Carlos II doesn't exist, then the two claimants are the Queen of France and the Holy Roman Empress. Margarita Teresa has the legal right, but it isn't obvious that she's not going to have a son, so the French will do anything to prevent another HRE-Spain personal union. Hence, War of Spanish Succession 1665-???? and the Habsburgs probably lose. However, if they win and Margarita Teresa has a son or more, then OP is satisfied (although there is a new branch of the Spanish Habsburgs).

If Carlos II lives AND Joseph Ferdinand lives, Spain avoids the Bourbons but the Spanish Habsburgs are still extinct, so I don't know whether having a HRE vassal on the throne counts for OP.

If you want the male-line descendants of Charles V on the throne, then one of: John of Austria, Archduke Charles (1607-1632) or Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand (1609-1641) have male issue, who then marry their legitimate cousins and gain a right to the throne in the event of a choice like OTL 1700 - a kind of back-up Bavarian. I suppose John of Austria the younger would be the best choice if Carlos II died young - legitimise him and you avoid war AND the extinction of the family.

Obviously, the best solution is to have Carlos II father a child. Or 'father' a child ;) The only drawback is that you never need a warming pan in Madrid :cool:
 
If they stopped the inbreeding, they wouldn't be proper Habsburgs, now would they? :p

The false child of Charles II was an idea I hadn't considered. I don't know how the queen would fool the Spanish court when the baby is born reasonably healthy. . .

Did the Habsburgs legitimize potential heirs in this time period? That sounds like the best way for the Habsburgs to hang onto the throne.
 
If they stopped the inbreeding, they wouldn't be proper Habsburgs, now would they? :p

The false child of Charles II was an idea I hadn't considered. I don't know how the queen would fool the Spanish court when the baby is born reasonably healthy. . .

Did the Habsburgs legitimize potential heirs in this time period? That sounds like the best way for the Habsburgs to hang onto the throne.

Carlos II's second wife was more distantly related to him than most, so it wouldn't be absolutely implausible for her to have a healthy child - especially in the days before genetics became widely accepted. Maybe guilt could be assuaged by letting John the Younger father the child as a sop to Salic law.

Legitimating an heir was a major undertaking. It ipso facto insults the church - "I purposefully disobeyed my solemn vows of fidelity and I'm so unashamed of my sin that I'm going to ask all of Christendom, including the Pope, to just quietly ignore it" - and the hereditary principle of the grandeza. Three bastards rose to Iberian thrones in my knowledge: Joao of Aviz was elected King after he defeated the Castilians in a war of succession; Antonio of Portugal tried to do the exact same thing but fled to the Netherlands a year or two later; Henry of Trastamara murdered his half-brother for the throne. Thus, in exceptional circumstances, a strong bastard can seize the throne, but rarely have an inherited right to it. John the Younger seems to fit the mould, but the question is whether Philip IV would risk censure (and the anger of his crazy-plotting wife) to make him the heir. My personal favourite option would be Archduke Charles having children who marry cousins to their hearts' content, but the political battle between John the Younger and his step-mother would be too good to miss.
 
D. Juan José tried to get himself legitimated by his dad when the old boy was on his deathbed. D. Felipe was so angry at the suggestion that he rose from the bed and started whacking JJ with his cane! Though, I should mention that JJ's suggestion for legitimization was that he marry his half-sister.:eek:

Earlier, though, D. Felipe had toyed with the idea of marrying JJ to a Mazarinette (Marie or Hortense Mancini) but decided against it (can't remember why)
 
Top