AHC/WI: Different division of Charles V's inheritance. All Imperial territories go to the Emperor.

Wasn't most of Philips war debt Netherlands related? And he doesn't need Milan with no Netherlands

what does Milan benefit Spain without the Netherlands?

It does not have to benefit Spain, what matters more, if it's benefits, the House, which rules Spain. Dynastically leaving Italy to the Spanish cousins, makes quite some sense. They will maintain a nominal stake in the Empire with Milan, which Charles V valued very much; moreover the richer Spanish branch will maintain a bigger a stake in maintaining the French threat.

Also Philip was invested with Milan, before he succeeded his father in the Burgundian Netherlands. I don't think Philip II would have liked, that his father gave too much away from his, not Spain's, his, inheritance, away. Now the Burgundian Lands as a dowry for his sister could be done, or Milan, in exchange for the Burgundian Lands. Karel (Charles/Carlos/Karl) V would never give both away, and deny his branch a stake in the Empire. In fact for a while he fancied his son Philip as successor of his brother Ferdinand.
IMHO dynastic interests still trump national interests in this age.
 
It does not have to benefit Spain, what matters more, if it's benefits, the House, which rules Spain. Dynastically leaving Italy to the Spanish cousins, makes quite some sense. They will maintain a nominal stake in the Empire with Milan, which Charles V valued very much; moreover the richer Spanish branch will maintain a bigger a stake in maintaining the French threat.

Also Philip was invested with Milan, before he succeeded his father in the Burgundian Netherlands. I don't think Philip II would have liked, that his father gave too much away from his, not Spain's, his, inheritance, away. Now the Burgundian Lands as a dowry for his sister could be done, or Milan, in exchange for the Burgundian Lands. Karel (Charles/Carlos/Karl) V would never give both away, and deny his branch a stake in the Empire. In fact for a while he fancied his son Philip as successor of his brother Ferdinand.
IMHO dynastic interests still trump national interests in this age.
Ok but didn't the op state that if you have to get rid of Philip for this to happen that's ok? also what real benefit do the Spanish branch get from Milan without the Netherlands?
 
It does not have to benefit Spain, what matters more, if it's benefits, the House, which rules Spain. Dynastically leaving Italy to the Spanish cousins, makes quite some sense. They will maintain a nominal stake in the Empire with Milan, which Charles V valued very much; moreover the richer Spanish branch will maintain a bigger a stake in maintaining the French threat.

Also Philip was invested with Milan, before he succeeded his father in the Burgundian Netherlands. I don't think Philip II would have liked, that his father gave too much away from his, not Spain's, his, inheritance, away. Now the Burgundian Lands as a dowry for his sister could be done, or Milan, in exchange for the Burgundian Lands. Karel (Charles/Carlos/Karl) V would never give both away, and deny his branch a stake in the Empire. In fact for a while he fancied his son Philip as successor of his brother Ferdinand.
IMHO dynastic interests still trump national interests in this age.

That would make sense if France's interests in the empire had been in northen Italy. That was simply never the case: the French only wanted Milan because their target was Naples, which provided them with the power projection they desired. That is all the "stakes in the empire" the Spanish needed, as the French did not have a navy large enough to either defeat the Spanish one nor to land a full army in Southern Italy. The other territories of the Empire the French may want are perfectly accessible without setting foot in Milan, and you can bet the Spanish wont move a finger if Lorraine is invaded.
It is not a matter of national interests trumping dynastic ones, it's about the fact that without Milan, the Netherlands were inaccessible, and without the Netherlands, Milan was pointless.

Ultimatelly, Charles V's priorities seem to have laid domination of Italy, and in his homeland, Flanders. It seems to me that he would had done anything he could to prevent it from falling into heresy, and had he understood how ill-positioned Spain was to do that, he wouldn't had split the inheritance the way he did.
 
Last edited:
Well the inheritance wasn't split at one point. Ferdinand got the Austrian Hereditary Lands including the share Charles V was entitled to in 1521, though arguably between 1519-1521 there was at least nominally joint-rule in the Austrian Hereditary Lands, which unlike Castille, Aragon & 'Burgundy' followed that 'German' tradition. However at the same time Ferdinand initially wanted more, which probably means the Burgundian Inheritance and the Habsburg Candidacy for the Imperial Throne, since Charles V had already succeeded to thrones of the Crowns of Castille and Aragon in 1516. The duchy of Milan wasn't on the table yet. Still Ferdinand getting the entire Austrian inheritance was already a sort of concession from Charles' point of view, it was a practical one, since it made governing easier and it strengthened the position of Ferdinand as an ally for his brother in law Louis II, king of Bohemia and Hungary, against the common Ottoman threat.

Charles V invested his son Philip as duke of Milan in 1540, so before Charles V abdicated in 1555.
By the point of the abdication of Charles V the only things on the table were Castille & Aragon, and the Burgundian Inheritance. There's no doubt his son would get Castille & Aragon, so this leaves the Burgundian Inheritance. Charles V would be adamant about the fact, that Burgundy stays in the family, so it would pass to his daughter Mary and her husband, his nephew Maximilian II, under the condition, that if Mary were to die childless, the Burgundian would revert to Philip II. The downside of the Burgundian Inheritance is a more direct threat from potential French expansionism, however it does add a large source of income, if managed well, and who knows future colonial endeavours, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.
Moreover again I can't see Charles V stripping Philip II from Milan, if Philip II already loses the Burgundian Inheritance, also technically Philip II would need to give up Milan, which IMHO is unlikely too. However IOTL Philip II did give the Spanish Netherlands to his daughter Isabella and her husband Albrecht (a son of Maximilian II and Mary), which would have become hereditary for their line, if the had surviving male children, ITTL Milan would be a good territory for this.
Alternatively Milan might at one point shift to the Austrian branch as a dowry, when a Habsburg Spanish Infanta, marries the oldest, and thus main heir, Habsburg Austrian Archduke. It's a big if, but it might be that the ruler of Spain finds, it's not worth the trouble any more, whereas the Austrian branch would definitely be interested in Milan. I just can't see the Austrian Habsburgs gaining the Burgundian Lands and Milan in 1555; now if Ferdinand for some reason inherits the Austrian Hereditary Lands & the Burgundian Lands in 1519/1521, and he becomes Elected Holy Roman Emperor in 1519, then I can see Milan ending up with his branch, since it is an Imperial Fief, though to capture it Spanish help would be needed, so it would pass to TTL Maximilian II & Mary. Actually Ferdinand being elected Emperor in 1519 instead of Charles, might help to establish a Castille-Aragon and Austria-Burgundy division.
 
With or without Milan, they would be much richer, but also will be directly faced by an Ottoman and a French threat....
 
With or without Milan, they would be much richer, but also will be directly faced by an Ottoman and a French threat....
Well the French threat might be difficult but did the French have any interest in Milan by 1556? Also what makes the ottoman threat more dangerous then otl? The Netherlands and milian are nowhere near the empire.
 
Well the French threat might be difficult but did the French have any interest in Milan by 1556? Also what makes the ottoman threat more dangerous then otl? The Netherlands and milian are nowhere near the empire.

You're wrong in 1556 both the duchy of Milan and the Burgundian Netherlands & Franche Comté were still a part of the Empire, granted by that point the latter (all the Burgundian Lands) had an autonomous position akin to the Lands of the Bohemian Crown and the hold on many parts of northern Italy often was nominal, OTOH most like Milan and Mantua were technically Imperial fiefs.
The Ottoman threat can become more dangerous, since now France can force them into a two front war.
 
You're wrong in 1556 both the duchy of Milan and the Burgundian Netherlands & Franche Comté were still a part of the Empire, granted by that point the latter (all the Burgundian Lands) had an autonomous position akin to the Lands of the Bohemian Crown and the hold on many parts of northern Italy often was nominal, OTOH most like Milan and Mantua were technically Imperial fiefs.
The Ottoman threat can become more dangerous, since now France can force them into a two front war.
Um the empire I ment Milan and the Netherlands aren't near was the ottoman not holy Roman. Also the ottoman and Hapsburgs were already fighting at this point so that won't change and with the added reasources of these new inheritance can't the Austrian Hapsburgs fight off the French? It's not like the French can go all in on these places right?
 
Um the empire I ment Milan and the Netherlands aren't near was the ottoman not holy Roman. Also the ottoman and Hapsburgs were already fighting at this point so that won't change and with the added reasources of these new inheritance can't the Austrian Hapsburgs fight off the French? It's not like the French can go all in on these places right?

With The Empire I usually think about the HRE in this era and region, my fault. It will serious boost their chances against the Ottomans, however in a two front war, they will need their Spanish Habsburgs cousins to stand a chance, when faced with France and the Ottomans at the same time.
 
With The Empire I usually think about the HRE in this era and region, my fault. It will serious boost their chances against the Ottomans, however in a two front war, they will need their Spanish Habsburgs cousins to stand a chance, when faced with France and the Ottomans at the same time.
How much cooperation was there between france and the Hapsburg? And why wouldn't Spanish branch not help in situation?

Edit: I mean ottomans
 
Last edited:
How much cooperation was there between france and the Hapsburg? And why wouldn't Spanish branch not help in situation?

Might depend on another question which is which claims do the French focus on more? The claims to the Nederlands which are closer to Paris and more of a threat (this is pre-Vauban and his forts) or their claims to Italy for aggrandisement and wealth. Or maybe the Habsburgs see it as a zero-sum game realising loss of land from one to France only makes the other more susceptible.

Honestly if Ferdinand got the Nederlands & Milan outright it'd be fantastic. Maximilian II would keep Austria+Bohemia+Hungary, Ferdinand II of further Austria would get the neds (though his marriage will likely have to change) and Charles II would get Milan. We'd have 4 branches of House Habsburg, I worry for the intermarriages but with 4 lines it's possible there maybe a lot less of them.

Even if they went to Maximilian II via Maria. Then we've got Rudolf in Austria+Bohemia+Hungary, Ernst in the Nederlands & Matthias in Milan.
 
With The Empire I usually think about the HRE in this era and region, my fault. It will serious boost their chances against the Ottomans, however in a two front war, they will need their Spanish Habsburgs cousins to stand a chance, when faced with France and the Ottomans at the same time.

What I still don't understand from your whole argument is why would there be more chances of a two front war against the Emperor than IOTL. French expansion into the empires western border would be just as aggravating independently of whether they own territory there or not; the Emperor can simply not sit idly if the French decide to eat Lorraine, as that would gravely violate his contract of vasalage with them. Netherlands or not, Imperial territory had to be defended from foreign invaders independently of if it was part of the Emperor's demesne or that of an imperial prince.
Also, Spain without the Netherlands would also be more likely to focus on the Mediterranean, not less, and that would bring them into a natural collision course with the Ottomans.
 
What I still don't understand from your whole argument is why would there be more chances of a two front war against the Emperor than IOTL. French expansion into the empires western border would be just as aggravating independently of whether they own territory there or not; the Emperor can simply not sit idly if the French decide to eat Lorraine, as that would gravely violate his contract of vasalage with them. Netherlands or not, Imperial territory had to be defended from foreign invaders independently of if it was part of the Emperor's demesne or that of an imperial prince.
Also, Spain without the Netherlands would also be more likely to focus on the Mediterranean, not less, and that would bring them into a natural collision course with the Ottomans.

The Austrian Habsburgs were already heavily in conflict with the Ottomans, since they already occupied parts of their kingdoms (Hungary-Croatia, which they inherited) and the Ottomans even managed to get to the gates of Vienna. Spain OTOH will get in to conflict with the Ottomans over outposts.
In these western possessions Austria will also face the main French forces as well, sure Spain might help, but probably not as much and intensive as IOTL. The Empire will also chip in, IOTL they did way more than a lot here seem to think.
Going from the relief force, to the force, which has to face the bulk of the potentially most powerful country in Europe (France), might more than compensate for TTL gains. As for the Empire, each member usually loyally supplied, what they were required to do, which is much, but where IOTL the brunt was for Spain and Austria, in that order, ITTL the brunt would be for Austria and Spain, in that order.
I guess, I need to nuance two front war into the degree of involvement. IOTL Spain had no excuse to not get involved on the side of Austria, ITTL eventually some Spanish Habsburg might be inclined to only given minimal support, stay neutral or worse. In that sense, there is a rational to the division Charles V made IOTL, contain their enemy France.
 
So what do you think Spain would do if the reasources of the treasure fleets could be more spent on the Mediterranean?
 
So what do you think Spain would do if the resources of the treasure fleets could be more spent on the Mediterranean?
I'd suppose that Phillip II would be able to prevent the Ottomans from reestablishing dominance on Africa's Mediterranean coast and at it's Eastern shores. Venice would be able to keep Cyprus, which would have butterflies for how the British would gain the island, since they had gained it as a protectorate from defeating the Ottomans.
 
If Philip predeceases him, would Charles be so bothered about taking Burgundy away from Don Carlos?

It would depend on his priorities. As I stated before, I think one of the things he cared the most about was preventing the Reformation from taking over Flanders. In this scenario, that objective might be best served by having the Emperor be in a strong position, however, it depends on WHEN he dies. If Charles is left heirless, he would be much more likely to remarry.
 
Top