Ferdinand VII of Spain has a son.

Ferdinand VII was the the King of Spain from 1808-1833, with a small interregnum when Joseph Bonaparte ruled Spain. It is widely agreed that he was quite a poor King, and his lack of a male heir contributed to the Carlist Wars and mass instability for Spain for a long time to come.

What I am wondering is what might've happened had Ferdinand VII had had a son, let's call him Philip born on 21st August, 1817, and that this child survives into adulthood and succeeds his father in 1833. Naturally, this butterflies the Carlist wars, but what other consequences might come from this? If Philip was vastly more capable than his father and had a brain for administration etc, what effect might this have on the politics of Spain as well as the situation regarding their constituional issues?
 
If he tries to keep the ways of his father, there is going to be troubles. So instead of having the Carlist wars you can have another kind of internal strife.

If he goes for a constitutional way, without wars and troubles, Spain is going to avoid a lot of wasted time, of wasted resources and bitterness. You can end up butterflying the First Republic.
 
If he tries to keep the ways of his father, there is going to be troubles. So instead of having the Carlist wars you can have another kind of internal strife.

If he goes for a constitutional way, without wars and troubles, Spain is going to avoid a lot of wasted time, of wasted resources and bitterness. You can end up butterflying the First Republic.

Okay interesting, was the constitutional way more likely to be the desired outcome of the people? And wasn't Carlos also quite a big proponent of Absolutism?

I suppose having him go the way of compromise compared to his father could well see Spain in a much stronger position.
 
After the Cortes of Cadiz, the absolutist ways of Fernando VII were in danger. He had to make use of foreign militar help to keep the liberals under his thumb. That couldn't go on forever.
 
Napoleon needed to cross Spain to get to Portugal, wether he liked or not. Even if there's no Napoleonic invasion, the absolutist rule in Spain is going to fall. It may last a bit longer, but not too much.
 
Napoleon needed to cross Spain to get to Portugal, wether he liked or not. Even if there's no Napoleonic invasion, the absolutist rule in Spain is going to fall. It may last a bit longer, but not too much.

Oh, what makes you say that regarding the fall of asbolutist rule?
 
A parlamentarian monarchy yes, it's going to be more stable than in OTL.

Okay interesting, this might well avoid the rise of the oaf Franco, and Spanish participation in WW2 as well? Potentially avoiding the mass hysteria that came after his fall.
 
Ah very true, though avoiding the mess of Carlism, and perhaps stabilising Spain's ever failing economy would be big enough burdens for the monarch to achieve.

Well, but it wouldn't the monarch who would have to achieve this, but the democratic strcutures to whon his power would be subjected.

The french invasion created the perfect scenario for the spanish liberals to take the upper hand and proclaim a constitution (setin in motion a very natural proccess towards liberalism, but this point would led to a long excursus about the role played by the concept of "vacatio regis" (absence if the king) in the hispanic juridical tradition....)

But the movement was already there, as it was proved again in 1820 and again in 1836. OTL shows that Constitutional Monarchy was the most stable system (ok, the standard was low) for Spain during most of the century. In this TL you have it easier to get the reacionnaries at bay, and a less turbulent succession probably makes easier a compromise between conservatives and liberals(and latter progressives) Though my bet is that liberals would try to cope the court of the new king, causing some trouble in other sectors. However Charles has not the legitimacy to launch a succesful rebelion like the Carlist did in OTL, I guess.

Also, not having a civil war with 200.000 + cassualties followed by "Carlist Wars Espisode II: The old regime couter-attacks" and "Carlist Wars Episode III: The return of the king" (wait, that's another film) will help, reducing also the power of the military and the ascendancy of generals (which owes its share to the carlist wars as well to the War of Independence)
 
Well, but it wouldn't the monarch who would have to achieve this, but the democratic strcutures to whon his power would be subjected.

The french invasion created the perfect scenario for the spanish liberals to take the upper hand and proclaim a constitution (setin in motion a very natural proccess towards liberalism, but this point would led to a long excursus about the role played by the concept of "vacatio regis" (absence if the king) in the hispanic juridical tradition....)

But the movement was already there, as it was proved again in 1820 and again in 1836. OTL shows that Constitutional Monarchy was the most stable system (ok, the standard was low) for Spain during most of the century. In this TL you have it easier to get the reacionnaries at bay, and a less turbulent succession probably makes easier a compromise between conservatives and liberals(and latter progressives) Though my bet is that liberals would try to cope the court of the new king, causing some trouble in other sectors. However Charles has not the legitimacy to launch a succesful rebelion like the Carlist did in OTL, I guess.

Also, not having a civil war with 200.000 + cassualties followed by "Carlist Wars Espisode II: The old regime couter-attacks" and "Carlist Wars Episode III: The return of the king" (wait, that's another film) will help, reducing also the power of the military and the ascendancy of generals (which owes its share to the carlist wars as well to the War of Independence)

Indeed, thus preventing the weakening of the monarchy's image, and preventing the foolishness with the republics.
 
Top