AHC & WI: No Bourbon Spain

Upon the death of Charles II, you could have the powers agree to adhere to terms of the 2nd Partition Treaty, basically splitting the empire with Austrian Charles getting Spain and Colonies and France's Dauphin Louis getting the Italian portion. Good luck with that, though. Louis XIV and Leopold both wanted all of it, and Britain had stipulations that made any given division unacceptable to one or the other. But technically, the idea isn't ASB
 
If you want a still easier way to keep the Bourbon away from Spain you can have either Ferdinand Wenzel of Austria (Leopold's eldest son) live at least enough to marry and having children or his sister, Maria Antonia of Austria Electress of Bavaria, living longer than Carlos II. Ferdinand and Antonia were the last heirs of the main line of the Habsburg of Spain (they were Leopold I's children by his first wife Margarita Teresa of Spain so grandchildren of Felipe and Mariana)
 
I've seen several "let's partition the empire between Philip and the Austrian candidate" suggestions, and while that seems sensible in theory, in practice both the Spanish and Austrian Habsburgs were insistent that the Empire stay together. The Austrians turned down a proposal that would have split the Empire because they considered the Spanish Empire as a robe, as such it was ridiculous to consider hacking off a sleeve to give to a cousin.
 
Do you happen to know the year and details of said proposal, by chance?

I read it in John Bergamini's Spanish Bourbon's, which I literally returned to the library a few hours ago, and it mentioned 2 such treaties
  1. 1698 Treaty of the Hague which would give France the Italian possessions and Joseph Ferdinand everything else, even before Joseph Ferdinand died Carlos II made sure his will said Joseph Ferdinand would get the undivided empire
  2. 1700 Treaty of London- basically the same as above but switching Archduke Charles for the late Joseph Ferdinand. Even though Charles would get everything but Italy (aka Spain, Spanish Netherlands, and the colonies) Leopold said no because he thought France got too much of Italy and Carlos said no because he refused to divide the Empire.
 
@WillVictoria Couple of thoughts then: (1) Could fighting the War of Spanish Succession for a few years have brought the Hapsburgs around on finding these acceptable terms? (2) If they do accept this kind of deal, how does that affect Suropean geopiltics in the mid-18th Century?
 
@WillVictoria Couple of thoughts then: (1) Could fighting the War of Spanish Succession for a few years have brought the Hapsburgs around on finding these acceptable terms? (2) If they do accept this kind of deal, how does that affect Suropean geopiltics in the mid-18th Century?

  1. Carlos and Spain were the more intractable parties, but Carlos will be dead by this point and as for Spain beggars can't be choosers. The issue for Leopold is that any split of Carlos's lands will fall along "One person gets Spain and the colonies, the other Italy" since Spain isn't going to hand over the New World. On one hand, the Spanish option offered to Austria was the greater catch of lands, but Leopold could never commit because he believed the Italian lands given to France were too close to Austrian territory and threatened its security. You either have to find a way to ease Habsburg beliefs that a French Italy will be causing years of infighting and threaten Austria, or convince Austria to take the Italian share which would defeat the purpose of this thread
  2. The question becomes with a continuing Spanish Habsburgs if the family learns from its mistakes or not. Simply put, I have a feeling the Austrian and Spanish branches will continue with their beloved Uncle-niece pairings which will inevitably cause another meltdown unless they halt before reaching Carlos II 2.0. Another is if this is after years of war, Louis XIV ends up worse off then he started in my opinion. Sure he gained some Italian lands, but now surrounding him are a pissed off Spain angry he caused them to lose their Italian lands by making a fuss and an angry Austria & Victor Amedaeus who are angry about Lorraine and Savoy. Whether this manifests into anything I don't know, but it certainly isn't a great outcome for France vs. IOTL.
 
... but Leopold could never commit because he believed the Italian lands given to France were too close to Austrian territory and threatened its security. You either have to find a way to ease Habsburg beliefs that a French Italy will be causing years of infighting and threaten Austria, or convince Austria to take the Italian share which would defeat the purpose of this thread
What if the French were doing better in the Italian theater, while maybe not doing as well in Spain? If French presence in Italy was already a reality, could the principle of uti possidetis get Austria to assent?
Sure he gained some Italian lands, but now surrounding him are a pissed off Spain angry he caused them to lose their Italian lands by making a fuss and an angry Austria & Victor Amedaeus who are angry about Lorraine and Savoy. Whether this manifests into anything I don't know, but it certainly isn't a great outcome for France vs. IOTL.
Sounds like this could be the basis for another general European war down the line then?
 
I've seen several "let's partition the empire between Philip and the Austrian candidate" suggestions, and while that seems sensible in theory, in practice both the Spanish and Austrian Habsburgs were insistent that the Empire stay together. The Austrians turned down a proposal that would have split the Empire because they considered the Spanish Empire as a robe, as such it was ridiculous to consider hacking off a sleeve to give to a cousin.
the Spanish desire to keep the empire intact is correct and a natural desire. Never mind that trying to keep it intact was mostly likely going to cause worse consequences than accepting a division. It's still an insult to see your house torn asunder while you're still alive.

The Austrian angle had nothing to do with the robe analogy. As you said, they didn't want France in Italy. they wanted Spain for themselves. The sanctity of remaining whole wasn't the issue. Austria simply wanted it all, coupled with they didn't want France to get any of it.
 
We know Leopold wasn't amenable to the partitions, but what about Josef? Leopold has a connection to Spain (Spanish mother and wife, while his sister was queen of Spain). Josef has no such connections (or if he does, they're more distant), plus he's got that whole thing going down in Hungary.

Alternatively, the partition of Italy that was reached at Utrecht/Rastatt/Baden satisfied France and Austria (but not Spain). Could they not do a similar handshake deal - France gets Tuscany-Parma/Naples, while Austria gets Naples/Tuscany-Parma? Milan was imperial territory so I don't think its going anywhere. Spain, plus the Southern Netherlands and the Colonies, gets a Habsburg king in exchange for France getting an Italian secundogeniture in either Florence or Naples. Maybe we can even pull off the series of Franco-Austrian marriages (if only in part) planned at the time: Élisabeth Charlotte d'Orléans won't be marrying Josef I or Adelaide of Savoy to Karl VI, but Anjou can wed Maria Elisabeth or Maria Magdalene of Austria and Karl VI can marry Luisa Maria of Savoy. A sort of early diplomatic revolution, as it were. It won't keep the peace any more than OTL, but if Austria and France are "allied" then random hangers on like the dukes of Lorraine and Savoy will just have to suck it.
 
Thanks, that clears it up.

Would Austria really also offer parts of Northern Italy though, since that threatens their territory even more than Southern Italy, and France was initially only looking for the latter?

Well, they've got Milan. They're not trading that away. If France gets Naples (without Sicily/Sardinia) and Austria gets Milan, Tuscany-Parma, with the pope in between, it should work, right?

The only thing France wants even more than Naples from Austria's gift basket is the Southern Netherlands. Now Austria COULD trade it to the French. Against a Franco-Austrian alliance Britain and the Dutch can threaten but IDK that they would necessarily be able to prevent such a deal from happening.
 
So we've been talking about potential causes here, but not effects; any thoughts on how averting the Bourbon Alliance changes 18th Century Europe, Latin America, or what have you?

I’m particularly interested right now in how this affects the development of the Western Hemisphere; no Bourbon Reforms, obviously, but even before that there were shifts in administration which reverberated across the Atlantic (aiui, the Revolt of the Paraguayan Comuneros is an example of this).

CONSOLIDATE: Potentially way off idea - AIUI, the population of the Spanish New World (or at least Mexico, and possibly South America) underwent a massive demographic collapse that didn’t really bottom out until the mid 17th Century; and that their population started to recover from there, but still largely stagnated in the 18th Century. Am I right about this?

If I am, is it possible that different policies could have allowed for a swifter demographic recovery?
 
Top