So in a timeline where the Dutch provinces are not under Spanish control but rather under Austrian control how would it develop differently from OTL. Would it still develop professional armies and revolutionary economic models, what would happen to the lands now considered Belgium and what are the outcomes of the dutch colonies.
 
So in a timeline where the Dutch provinces are not under Spanish control but rather under Austrian control how would it develop differently from OTL. Would it still develop professional armies and revolutionary economic models, what would happen to the lands now considered Belgium and what are the outcomes of the dutch colonies.

It depends on how stubborn and unflexible are the Austrian Hapsburgs comparing to the Spanish ones. Open religious conflict in the Austrian territories started much later than in the OTL Netherlands so one may assume a different time frame for the Dutch Revolt as well.

(a) No Spanish-French wars on the Northern border of France and Spain, in general, is better off economically not having to fight 80 (?) years war against the Dutch AND also wars with France. Franco-Spanish conflicts are limited to something like Mantuan War.

(b) The OTL cause for the 30YW becoming an European war is gone (no need for the Spanish Road) and on the initial stage of the conflict Austrian Hapsburgs are in a much worse position: no troops from the Spanish Netherlands and probably no money (ditto for the later stages of the OTL conflict when the Spanish army was directly involved in fighting in Germany). Not sure if without the Spanish troops from the Netherlands the imperial forces would have enough numbers to win even against the opponents as talentless as in OTL. But victory in Bohemia would be probably less politically decisive and perhaps Ferdinand simply would not have enough resources to start pushing around the Protestant princes (Wallenstein still being a wild card but his task is much more difficult with the Netherlands included).

(c) The rebellious Netherlands will have to start developing their military system only in a process of the 30YW (or its AH equivalent). However, with the Austrian Hapsburgs being extremely busy in Germany and Spanish ones not involved, they may not even need anything "revolutionary". As a domino effect, Gustav Adolph does not have a ready practical and theoretical model for modernization of his army. He may or may not come with something like OTL on his own but the Swedish-Polish wars may last longer thus delaying his entry into the German conflict.

(d) Austrian Hapsburgs being in a much worse position than the Spanish ones (Ottomans on the East; German Protestants on the West; no army, no silver and gold from America) would have much greater problems retaining any part of the Netherlands.

(e) Netherlands are better positioned for a faster and more complete victory. The main issue could be sorting out what goes to the new Dutch state and what to France.

(f) Phillip II does not have OTL reason for sending Armadas against England (he lived for years with their piracy and eventually Spaniard figured out reasonably effective methods of defending their colonies) and people of the future are being spared the self-righteous Anglophonic movies and books involving the evil Spaniards, English fighters for the freedom of religion (approximately as plausible as the modern movies in which Spartans are defenders of freedom and democracy), Elizabeth inspiring the troops, etc. :winkytongue: OTOH, if he has no other problems to amuse himself with, he can play a more active part in the French Wars of the Religion (in which case the whole thing may be much more messy).
 
Why are we assuming the Dutch revolt happens as in OTL? Also the "gold and silver" of America was irrelevant for Habsburg economy in the 16th century, in which the Netherlands were the main cash cow, it may even become a personal domain of one of Maximilian II's sons.
 
Would Austria try and integrate nations from the HRE to slowly connect the Netherlands for easier milking? Maybe even trying to take over the Dutch colonies?
 
Why are we assuming the Dutch revolt happens as in OTL? Also the "gold and silver" of America was irrelevant for Habsburg economy in the 16th century, in which the Netherlands were the main cash cow, it may even become a personal domain of one of Maximilian II's sons.

The Dutch revolt would most probably happen but it would be different from OTL by time and specific. Ferdinand II was pushing counter-Reformation in Bohemia and on the rest of his lands so why the Netherlands are exception?

As for the "gold and silver", not too much of those had been coming to Spain from the rebelling Netherlands and, while supplies from America did close to nothing to the Spanish economy, they were helping to finance the Spanish wars (as in "better something than nothing"). The Austrian Hapsburgs would not have that source. If splitting Hapsburg lands by Charles V remains the same as in OTL with the exception of the Netherlands, than further splitting is highly unlikely. The patter was letting the males/females to rule provinces in a viceroyal capacity.
 
If Charles V had one more surviving son, he could inherit Netherlands and start separate Habsburg branch, which would rule neither from Madrid or Vienna but from Brussels.
 
The Dutch revolt would most probably happen but it would be different from OTL by time and specific. Ferdinand II was pushing counter-Reformation in Bohemia and on the rest of his lands so why the Netherlands are exception?

As for the "gold and silver", not too much of those had been coming to Spain from the rebelling Netherlands and, while supplies from America did close to nothing to the Spanish economy, they were helping to finance the Spanish wars (as in "better something than nothing"). The Austrian Hapsburgs would not have that source. If splitting Hapsburg lands by Charles V remains the same as in OTL with the exception of the Netherlands, than further splitting is highly unlikely. The patter was letting the males/females to rule provinces in a viceroyal capacity.
Except Ferdinand I also split Austria among his three sons.
 
Why are we assuming the Dutch revolt happens as in OTL? Also the "gold and silver" of America was irrelevant for Habsburg economy in the 16th century, in which the Netherlands were the main cash cow, it may even become a personal domain of one of Maximilian II's sons.
If you treat the Netherlands as a cashcow, that revolt is going to be there. Not only will the cities defend their tax exemption privileges, but by setting up an adequate bureaucracy for taxation, you will anger the local high nobility. They will feel put aside by parvenus, who only are in government, because they happened to have studied law.



In general: religion was only one of the causes of the revolt, and a minor at that (In my eyes at least)
 
If Charles V had one more surviving son, he could inherit Netherlands and start separate Habsburg branch, which would rule neither from Madrid or Vienna but from Brussels.

That's even better. The independent Netherlands ruled by a realistic Hapsburg. If he is a son of Charles V, then the beginning of his rule is going to be quite exciting because the French immediately invade and occupy a big chunk of the modern Belgium: in case you forgot, the French - Hapsburg wars are still going on and there are no Spanish troops (as in OTL at Battle of St. Quentin and Gravelines) to save his bottom.

After the dust is settled, this Archduke (or whatever his title) is going to try to collect taxes and results are predictable, especially taking into his religion. He does not have an army to crush a a rebellion. Austrian branch is in the same situation as I described: no money and troops from Spain (and Spanish Netherlands). Spain is doing fine but not fighting the Dutch.

There is, of course, an option of him (or his successor) converting to Protestantism in which case scenario looks as the following: the Dutch are placing him (for his own protection) into a gilded cage and using as the star attraction in a zoo (or a traveling circus): "Only here! The rarest creature on Earth!!! The Protestant Hapsburg !!!!!" If properly advertised, it can bring more revenues than the taxes on herring. :openedeyewink:
 
That's even better. The independent Netherlands ruled by a realistic Hapsburg. If he is a son of Charles V, then the beginning of his rule is going to be quite exciting because the French immediately invade and occupy a big chunk of the modern Belgium: in case you forgot, the French - Hapsburg wars are still going on and there are no Spanish troops (as in OTL at Battle of St. Quentin and Gravelines) to save his bottom.

After the dust is settled, this Archduke (or whatever his title) is going to try to collect taxes and results are predictable, especially taking into his religion. He does not have an army to crush a a rebellion. Austrian branch is in the same situation as I described: no money and troops from Spain (and Spanish Netherlands). Spain is doing fine but not fighting the Dutch.
That problem could be solved very easily-that additional son is the one born in 1539, in ATL both child and mother survived. With his beloved Isabel alive Charles suffers less stress and also lives longer, dies when France is already beaten and Henri II lies in grave.
 
That's even better. The independent Netherlands ruled by a realistic Hapsburg. If he is a son of Charles V, then the beginning of his rule is going to be quite exciting because the French immediately invade and occupy a big chunk of the modern Belgium: in case you forgot, the French - Hapsburg wars are still going on and there are no Spanish troops (as in OTL at Battle of St. Quentin and Gravelines) to save his bottom.

After the dust is settled, this Archduke (or whatever his title) is going to try to collect taxes and results are predictable, especially taking into his religion. He does not have an army to crush a a rebellion. Austrian branch is in the same situation as I described: no money and troops from Spain (and Spanish Netherlands). Spain is doing fine but not fighting the Dutch.
That problem could be solved very easily-that additional son is the one born in 1539, in ATL both child and mother survived. With his beloved Isabel alive Charles suffers less stress and also lives longer, dies when France is already beaten and Henri II lies in grave.
 
The Netherlands are still under the same economic pressures right, the invention of the stock market could make Hapsburg markets become more advanced and be able to shoulder more punishment by the HREmpreror
 
(b) The OTL cause for the 30YW becoming an European war is gone (no need for the Spanish Road) and on the initial stage of the conflict Austrian Hapsburgs are in a much worse position: no troops from the Spanish Netherlands and probably no money (ditto for the later stages of the OTL conflict when the Spanish army was directly involved in fighting in Germany). Not sure if without the Spanish troops from the Netherlands the imperial forces would have enough numbers to win even against the opponents as talentless as in OTL. But victory in Bohemia would be probably less politically decisive and perhaps Ferdinand simply would not have enough resources to start pushing around the Protestant princes (Wallenstein still being a wild card but his task is much more difficult with the Netherlands included).
You're vastly over estimating the role of the Spanish in the early phase of the war. The Army of Flanders was only 20,000 strong at the time (and was actually only 18,000 strong at the time of the French intervention), whereas the Imperial Army (funded by taxation and the sale of Bohemian Titles, not Peruvian gold) numbered 110,000 by 1628.
 
That problem could be solved very easily-that additional son is the one born in 1539, in ATL both child and mother survived. With his beloved Isabel alive Charles suffers less stress and also lives longer, dies when France is already beaten and Henri II lies in grave.

Your "solutions" start getting more and more convoluted which means that the goal is less and less realistic. ;)
 
You're vastly over estimating the role of the Spanish in the early phase of the war. The Army of Flanders was only 20,000 strong at the time (and was actually only 18,000 strong at the time of the French intervention), whereas the Imperial Army (funded by taxation and the sale of Bohemian Titles, not Peruvian gold) numbered 110,000 by 1628.

Sorry, but I think that you are confused about the early stage of the 30YW war. in 1618 count of Bucquoy, commander-in-chief of the imperial troops, had a little bit over 10,000 under his command and was able to start acting offensively only after receiving in 1619 reinforcements (and money to pay the troops) from Archduke Albert, ruler of the Hapsburg Netherlands. Even than, in 1620, at the White Mountain the Catholic forces (imperial troops, army of the Catholic League, troops from Spanish Netherlands and Polish Lisowczycy) amounted only to the 27,000 (numbers related to the battles are somewhat confusing because in most cases they involved only a fraction of the total force).

1628 and an army of 100,000 is hardly the "early" stage of war: "Wallenstein's time" started close to the end of the "Danish period" and Wallenstein's army was, indeed, funded by "bellum se ipsum alet" principle (initially, mostly on credit from loans on his own lands and later by the taxes on the German princes, both Catholics and Protestants). After Wallenstein's dismissal in 1630 his army somehow "disappeared" as an organized force and in 1632 he had to raise it again (AFAIK, no indication that the 2nd army was anywhere close to 100,000). Direct Spanish intervention belongs to the later period of war: troops of Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand participated in the Battle of Nordlingen (1634) where they contributed up to 20,000 out of the total of 33,000 on the imperial side.

As for the French intervention, in 1635 it amounted only to 12,000 given to Bernard of Saxe-Weimar.

 
Probably, it's not my area of expertise, and to my knowledge everything prior to the Swedish intervention was usually counted as "early".

Ah, OK. As long as we have a mutual understanding, it is OK.

Spain was spending a LOT on the 30YW/80YW and ended up with a bankruptcies in 1625 and 1647 (big surprise :cool:). The Spanish government was still able to acquire loans as there was always the chance that a major bullion load would arrive in Spain and the money lenders were keen to get their hands on this especially in time of war. But there also were raised taxes and even papal permission to introduce the ecclesiastic taxes (7 millions ducats had been raised allowing to reject the Dutch peace proposals).

In 1628, the royal budget stood at 15 million ducats with 7.5 million being used to pay off the royal debt. The military took up another 4.5 million ducats which left only 3 million ducats to govern the country. By 1647 Spanish armies in the field were costing 13 million ducats a year.
 
How to get it:

For the smoothest transition that doesn't change too much a keeps the ego of men intact (most especially Charles V)

It's been floated before (by myself and others) Charles V weds Amalia of Cleves (younger sister of Anne of Cleves & William the rich) in 1543, with a contract stipulating the child of that marriage will inherit the netherlands. Double wedding to both Habsburg lines for the House of Julich-Kleve-Berg.

To go with the main theme (Austrian Control)
Austrianish, hear me out
A daughter: the French will want her like Marie. She'll be raised in her aunt Mary of Hungary's court most likely (maybe Amalia travels with Charles or she stays but I suspect Mary will be the force behind her upbringing). At a certain point they might consider marrying her to a French prince but I'm willing to be she weds either

OTL Ferdinand II of Tyrol:- problematic, may insist on Philippine Wesler, could/would be perceived as an insult; but the Weslers are bankrolling Charles V so he maybe happy with it if it improves his financial situation and Ferdinand I will probably insist that Charles II weds the heiress to the Netherlands if the older son is unwilling

or

OTL Charles II of Styria:- easier, closer in age. Insisted on counter-reformation but gave political concessions leading to protestant toleration in Styria.

If Charles II's line continues while those of Maximilian II and Ferdinand II of Tyrol fail we have Austro-Netherlandish control. The Netherlands get to feel like their the ones calling the shots/in control, no foreigners telling them what to do, there's probably some amount of toleration (most especially if the Beeldenstorm is avoided). Bohemian revolt also less likely as there is a precedent of toleration already.

True Austrian Control

Give the Netherlands to Maria of Spain or her son, even if it's like later on. Maximilian II inherits the Netherlands from his mother.


How the Netherlands & Belgium develop:

- I hope/see no colonies in the Americas, that is the Spanish arena, so long as their help is needed with the Ottomans, it'll be avoided. Antwerp remains the core centre of trade in the region and continues to be the distribution point of Spanish and Portuguese goods into Europe.

- Any expansion of trade networks would be to India and China; I do not see Ceylon or Malacca being conquered. Trade posts, yes maybe like the examples of manufactories in Goa.

- provided no dutch revolt, stock markets & futures trading I'm not sure. They were tied to speculation on the trade of tulips as far as I'm aware with the Ottomans, political allies because of the revolt. They would be enemies in this situation. Tulips could arrive via Iran/Persia if a true Austro-Persian alliance is formed by the Austrian Habsburgs & Safavids (especially if Portugal remains independent and doesn't continue it's indian ocean piracy or get's a out of that region).

-Professional armies, kind of wonky here. I think if there is a persistent French threat with an invasion scorched earth tactics like France used in the Nine years war, you may see a situation where a skilled individual with a bit of luck maybe able to convince the noblemen that his professional (probably standing army) isn't direct against them but against the French. (I'd imagine the nobility would be keen to avoid another Charles the bold on their hands)
 
- provided no dutch revolt, stock markets & futures trading I'm not sure. They were tied to speculation on the trade of tulips as far as I'm aware with the Ottomans, political allies because of the revolt. They would be enemies in this situation. Tulips could arrive via Iran/Persia if a true Austro-Persian alliance is formed by the Austrian Habsburgs & Safavids (especially if Portugal remains independent and doesn't continue it's indian ocean piracy or get's a out of that region).

You are wrong here. It was even forbiden to speculate on tulips at the official market. The first shares were those of the VOC, the dutch east india company. Those were so succesfull, that soon more enterprises started to issue shares. Soon also bonds followed. The first there were for waterworks.
The VOC was ideal for shares, because it was a company with high risk (that's why they were issued to spread the risk) and high profits (That was why they were bought) To see shares arise, you need a similar enterprise.
 
Top