Elisabeth of Parma is sterile: who gets the Spanish throne?

WI instead of giving birth to seven children Elisabeth of Parma had being sterile and so avoiding new heirs to Philip V of Spain? Without her sons Charles III and Philip, who gets the Duchy of Parma and later the kingdom of Naples? And after the death of the childless Ferdinand VI, who gets Spain and her Empire?
 

Vitruvius

Donor
If Elisabeth was barren and both she, her husband and his sons by his first wife all die around the same time as IOTL then Spain would I think theoretically devolve to Louis XV upon the death of Ferdinand VI in 1759. Philip V had no daughters nor surviving brothers or nephews other than Louis XV. Of course I doubt that the rest of Europe would be anymore willing to see France and Spain united as they had been 60 years earlier. Conveniently Louis XV while having only one son has at the time 4 grandsons. So Spain could potentially pass to one of them, perhaps the second eldest the Duc de Berry. But the eldest died in 1761 making Louis Auguste Duc de Berry the next in line after his father the Dauphin. Louis Auguste of course becomes Louis XVI. So perhaps his younger brother the Comte de Provence becomes Luis II of Spain (this would be OTL Louis XVIII). Probably a lot of this gets wrapped up in the Seven Years War, although if Austria does ally with France it might work out smoothly.

In fact Austria may come out far ahead. Because if Elisabeth Farnese has no children then there are no heirs to Parma, at least none that I can find searching through all of the male and female lines going back several generations. Basta for the Farnese. So the Austrians may retain Naples and Sicily and perhaps pick up Parma in exchange for allowing Luis into Spain. So in the final analysis France is much the same, except the ultra royalist Comte d'Artois moves up one spot in the line to the French throne, relevant only if we still have the Revolution. Austria is plainly in a much better position in Italy. Spain sadly is much weaker. Charles III was arguably one of the best Spanish Kings of the 18th century and replacing him with OTL Louis XVIII, initially under some kind of regency no less, is not like to improve the situation.
 
If Elisabeth was barren and both she, her husband and his sons by his first wife all die around the same time as IOTL then Spain would I think theoretically devolve to Louis XV upon the death of Ferdinand VI in 1759. Philip V had no daughters nor surviving brothers or nephews other than Louis XV. Of course I doubt that the rest of Europe would be anymore willing to see France and Spain united as they had been 60 years earlier. Conveniently Louis XV while having only one son has at the time 4 grandsons. So Spain could potentially pass to one of them, perhaps the second eldest the Duc de Berry. But the eldest died in 1761 making Louis Auguste Duc de Berry the next in line after his father the Dauphin. Louis Auguste of course becomes Louis XVI. So perhaps his younger brother the Comte de Provence becomes Luis II of Spain (this would be OTL Louis XVIII). Probably a lot of this gets wrapped up in the Seven Years War, although if Austria does ally with France it might work out smoothly.

In fact Austria may come out far ahead. Because if Elisabeth Farnese has no children then there are no heirs to Parma, at least none that I can find searching through all of the male and female lines going back several generations. Basta for the Farnese. So the Austrians may retain Naples and Sicily and perhaps pick up Parma in exchange for allowing Luis into Spain. So in the final analysis France is much the same, except the ultra royalist Comte d'Artois moves up one spot in the line to the French throne, relevant only if we still have the Revolution. Austria is plainly in a much better position in Italy. Spain sadly is much weaker. Charles III was arguably one of the best Spanish Kings of the 18th century and replacing him with OTL Louis XVIII, initially under some kind of regency no less, is not like to improve the situation.

Hmm, reading a bit more about the Dauphin Louis, I found a this piece of information that might be interesting: before his marriage to Marie-Josephe of Saxony he married Maria Teresa of Spain, a daughter of Elisabeth of Parma who wouldn't exist ITTL. If the Dauphin is still married to someone in 1744 in order to ensure the succession as fast as possible, as probably Louis XV wanted, but his wife is other princess than Marie-Josephe, maybe we could get a situation where Louis XV doesn't have four grandsons in 1759, but only one, or even only grandaughters. That might cause more problems of succession in Spain.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
Hmm, reading a bit more about the Dauphin Louis, I found a this piece of information that might be interesting: before his marriage to Marie-Josephe of Saxony he married Maria Teresa of Spain, a daughter of Elisabeth of Parma who wouldn't exist ITTL. If the Dauphin is still married to someone in 1744 in order to ensure the succession as fast as possible, as probably Louis XV wanted, but his wife is other princess than Marie-Josephe, maybe we could get a situation where Louis XV doesn't have four grandsons in 1759, but only one, or even only grandaughters. That might cause more problems of succession in Spain.

I hadn't considered that. Its an excellent point. Of course daughters wouldn't be a problem for Spain since they can inherit but I think that means France passes to the Duc d'Orleans. So France could end up under the Orleans and Spain under which ever House marries the Bourbon heiress, assuming the Dauphin has only Daughters. A single son undoubtedly means war unless Spain passes to Louis XV's eldest daughter Louise-Elisabeth. IOTL she married Philip Duke of Parma another child of Elisabeth Farnese who won't exist.

Speaking of more research I did find a possible Farnese heir. Maria daughter of Ranuccio I the 4th Duke of Parma and Great Great Grandfather of Elisabeth married the Duke of Modena possibly giving them a very weak claim to the Duchy, but considering their line dies out 30 years later and passes by marriage to the Habsburgs I'm considering this to be a moot point.

As an aside I hope I'm not the only one frustrated by the Bourbon penchant for naming all of their sons Louis. From 1610-1824 we have 5 (maybe 6 if you count XVII) Kings, one Grand-Dauphin and two other Dauphins who were the fathers of Kings but not Kings themselves not to mention that 3 of Louis XV's aforementioned grandchildren were named Louis.
 
Top