AHC: Marry Thou Happy Austria

Your challenge is if you choose to accept it is this:

Has anyone else noticed how much more regularly the varying branches of the house of Bourbon marry amongst each other (including those lovely uncle-niece matches)? Not only that, but for the most part, they seem to be unaffected by this.

In the space of four generations (Louis XIV to Louis XV/Carlos III/Filippo I), the Bourbons ruled not only France, but Spain, Naples & Sicily and Parma, too.
In the space of four generations (Maximilian I to Philip II/Maximilian II), the Habsburgs acquired Burgundy, Spain-Naples-Sicily, Hungary-Croatia-Bohemia, (temporarily England) and Portugal in addition to Austria.

The Bourbons flourished between 1700 and 1900 in spite of constant intermarrying between the branches - including uncle-niece matches.
Between 1500 and 1700 the Habsburgs lost Burgundy, Portugal, nearly Naples and finally Spain (plus almost losing Bohemia, and then winning back Hungary only to nearly lose it again) with constant intermarrying between the two branches - including uncle-niece matches.

Thus, the challenge is, let the Habsburgs survive in like manner over 200 years (1545 (birth of D. Carlos) - 1741 (birth of OTL Josef I)).

Points if by 1600 Burgundy and at least one other royal kingdom besides Spain is under male-line Habsburg rule.
Bonus points if that lasts to 1700.
Extra bonus points if it can last to the present.

NOTE:
Karl V is not allowed to marry again or have any more sons than Felipe II survive (otherwise it wouldn't be much of a challenge now would it?:D).

And the Habsburgs are not allowed to inherit any new territories nor are the thrones of one of the cadet branches allowed to be in personal union with any other throne (i.e. Spain-Burgundy; England-Naples; Austria-Burgundy etc.) (Austria+Hungary+Bohemia is the exception)

While this may be a Habsburg wank (not really sure, since they controlled all of those territories OTL:confused:), it may not be a screw to any other country (England, France etc).
 
Maybe the rules are somewhat confusing? Besides at one point the Austrian Habsburgs also held the duchy of Württemberg (Ferdinand I), and if Isabella and Albrecht had surviving male issue, the Burgundian Lands would de facto have passed from the Spanish to the most senior of the Austrian branches.
Now I can see the value of the rule prohibiting unions with France or England, I don't see any issue with reshuffling the various titles and territories held by the same dynasty. Besides how is Hungary-Bohemia-Austria, any different from Castille-Aragon-Burgundy-Milan?
It doesn't have to happen, but provided the scenario is plausible enough, I don't see, why it shouldn't be possible at all.

As for no England or France screw, they may not lose more, but they could do worse than IOTL. For instance France nibbled away quite some territories from Spain-Burgundy, I don't consider Spain-Burgundy holding onto Roussillon, Franche-Comté, Artois, now French Flanders and Hainaut (parts of it stayed Spanish/Austrian and are now Belgian Flanders and Hainaut) or at least more of it to be a France screw.
Now if Spain-Burgundy managed to conquer, the duchy of Burgundy proper, the Provence etc. that IMHO would be a France screw.
 
Your challenge is if you choose to accept it is this:

Has anyone else noticed how much more regularly the varying branches of the house of Bourbon marry amongst each other (including those lovely uncle-niece matches)? Not only that, but for the most part, they seem to be unaffected by this.

In the space of four generations (Louis XIV to Louis XV/Carlos III/Filippo I), the Bourbons ruled not only France, but Spain, Naples & Sicily and Parma, too.
In the space of four generations (Maximilian I to Philip II/Maximilian II), the Habsburgs acquired Burgundy, Spain-Naples-Sicily, Hungary-Croatia-Bohemia, (temporarily England) and Portugal in addition to Austria.

The Bourbons flourished between 1700 and 1900 in spite of constant intermarrying between the branches - including uncle-niece matches.
Between 1500 and 1700 the Habsburgs lost Burgundy, Portugal, nearly Naples and finally Spain (plus almost losing Bohemia, and then winning back Hungary only to nearly lose it again) with constant intermarrying between the two branches - including uncle-niece matches.

Thus, the challenge is, let the Habsburgs survive in like manner over 200 years (1545 (birth of D. Carlos) - 1741 (birth of OTL Josef I)).

Points if by 1600 Burgundy and at least one other royal kingdom besides Spain is under male-line Habsburg rule.
Bonus points if that lasts to 1700.
Extra bonus points if it can last to the present.

NOTE:
Karl V is not allowed to marry again or have any more sons than Felipe II survive (otherwise it wouldn't be much of a challenge now would it?:D).

And the Habsburgs are not allowed to inherit any new territories nor are the thrones of one of the cadet branches allowed to be in personal union with any other throne (i.e. Spain-Burgundy; England-Naples; Austria-Burgundy etc.) (Austria+Hungary+Bohemia is the exception)

While this may be a Habsburg wank (not really sure, since they controlled all of those territories OTL:confused:), it may not be a screw to any other country (England, France etc).

The point in fact is that the french Bourbons were much more Habsburg than Bourbon. Louis XIV of France was the son of a Habsburg mother and was married to a Habsburg wife.

What makes you believe that the Bourbons flourished is just that they enforced male primogeniture through the Salic Law and that they had surviving male lines.

If we set aside the misleading appearances of the Salic law, then we may consider that the elder Capetians lost the throne of France in 1328 (extinction of the elder capetian male line), that the elder Valois lost it in 1498, that the elder Valois Orleans lost it in 1515, and that the Valois Angouleme lost it in 1589.

The only difference between the Habsburg and the Bourbon is that :
- the former transmitted the crowns through the elder female line when the elder male line became extinct ;
- while the latter transmitted the crown through younger male line when the elder male line became extinct.
 
And in any case both Milan and Burgundy were for long time in personal union with Spain... And the only time Burgundy was given to someone different from the King of Spain had a big chance to go to the main Imperial line...
 
Maybe the rules are somewhat confusing? Besides at one point the Austrian Habsburgs also held the duchy of Württemberg (Ferdinand I), and if Isabella and Albrecht had surviving male issue, the Burgundian Lands would de facto have passed from the Spanish to the most senior of the Austrian branches.
Now I can see the value of the rule prohibiting unions with France or England, I don't see any issue with reshuffling the various titles and territories held by the same dynasty. Besides how is Hungary-Bohemia-Austria, any different from Castille-Aragon-Burgundy-Milan?
It doesn't have to happen, but provided the scenario is plausible enough, I don't see, why it shouldn't be possible at all.

I was more referring to completely strange bedfellows like if we take Philip II's titles when he married Mary I (and although the marriage contract stipulated that their son would get Burgundy), he was king of Naples married to the queen of England. True, he never visited Naples that I'm aware of, and ruled through a series of viceroys, but the idea of Naples and England being in personal union or somesuch is just odd.

So Portugal-Spain is acceptable. Spain-Naples is also okay. Naples-Portugal or Naples-England not happening.

Sorry if this didn't make much sense.
 
I was more referring to completely strange bedfellows like if we take Philip II's titles when he married Mary I (and although the marriage contract stipulated that their son would get Burgundy), he was king of Naples married to the queen of England. True, he never visited Naples that I'm aware of, and ruled through a series of viceroys, but the idea of Naples and England being in personal union or somesuch is just odd.

So Portugal-Spain is acceptable. Spain-Naples is also okay. Naples-Portugal or Naples-England not happening.

Sorry if this didn't make much sense.

Ah, ok. No, Naples was clearly designated in the wedding contract of Philip and Mary as part of Carlos' inheritance, so that kingdom will not became united to England
 
Ah, ok. No, Naples was clearly designated in the wedding contract of Philip and Mary as part of Carlos' inheritance, so that kingdom will not became united to England

It also ensured that Philip wouldn't be 'outranked' by his wife, basically Charles (Carlos/Karel) V gave this part of Philip's inheritance a bit sooner (in practice only the title).
 
It also ensured that Philip wouldn't be 'outranked' by his wife, basically Charles (Carlos/Karel) V gave this part of Philip's inheritance a bit sooner (in practice only the title).

Yes, Philip needed to have the same rank of Mary before marrying her and Philip only titles at the time were that of Prince of Asturias (and the others as heir of Karl) and that of Duke of Milan
 
Top