Infante Charles, ascends the Spanish throne.

Sure. I still need to go through all the details, especially about the politics in Germany and all the treaties and reichstags but undoubtably the Emperor is stronger here. He can achieve some of his OTL plans like forming a united Imperial army that is payed by taxes from the Imperial circles, forbidding alliances between princes of the Empire and foreign powers, appointing his son to govern some important bishoprics etc. but the Edict of Restitution probably won't pass as all the Protestants within the Empire didn't accept it, including Saxony and Brandenburg which were quite powerful within the Empire. Also, I'd still give the Swedes a chance. Today we see them as nearly invincible but Gustav didn't start off too well in 1630 and had some luck. Anyway I think they could make some gains maybe even Gustav could inflict some important defeat on Tilly but the Swedish campaign in Germany has to be much shorter than OTL. Once they are forced back the Emperor can call the Estates and impose the conditions he wants.

Interesting, and how would things be affected if the British get involved?
 
Interesting, and how would things be affected if the British get involved?

Not that much into British history but Charles I made peace with both France and Spain after failures at La Rochelle and Cadiz. Not sure, but I think he had a lot of problems during the 1630, both financial and religious and the fact that the Parliament was prorogued. I fon't think the British could do much as they didn't in OTL also. Maybe they can act as mediators in some conflicts but not much more
 
Not that much into British history but Charles I made peace with both France and Spain after failures at La Rochelle and Cadiz. Not sure, but I think he had a lot of problems during the 1630, both financial and religious and the fact that the Parliament was prorogued. I fon't think the British could do much as they didn't in OTL also. Maybe they can act as mediators in some conflicts but not much more

Alright.

In regards to Elisabeth herself, would she be pushing for better relationship with France
 
Yes, of course. Carlos will probably be willing to listen to her advice as opposed to Philip who listened only to Olivares until the very end when it was clear his policies were failing. Also, their marriage and a deal to prevent the War of Mantuan succession could be useful to prevent further rupture between Madrid and Paris and a sort of detente.
 
Yes, of course. Carlos will probably be willing to listen to her advice as opposed to Philip who listened only to Olivares until the very end when it was clear his policies were failing. Also, their marriage and a deal to prevent the War of Mantuan succession could be useful to prevent further rupture between Madrid and Paris and a sort of detente.

I quite like that. Carlos and Elisabeth falling in love would also be quite something I think
 
They didn't realise that the situation was different than in the time of Charles V and Philip II.

The other problem with the later Spanish Habsburgs were that they were too religious. Both Karl V and Felipe II were pragmatic regarding religion (Felipe staying the pope's hand from excommunicating Elizabeth Tudor; Karl being willing to make peace with the Protestant princes so he could fight the Turks; being two examples) - not always, but if there was nothing for them to gain out of it (for instance, Felipe WASN'T a fan of Queen Bess' protestantism, but he preferred her to the Frenchified Catholic queen of Scots), they didn't bother. Felipe III/IV were religiously dogmatic: For them, the Catholic Church was the ONLY church, and any other religion had to be fought tooth and nail (see Felipe III's expulsion of the Moriscos and Conversos, which did some serious harm to the Spanish economy in the long run). To them, an alliance with a Protestant power (like England) was unthinkable, even if it were aimed at France (the traditional Habsburg enemy).
 
The other problem with the later Spanish Habsburgs were that they were too religious. Both Karl V and Felipe II were pragmatic regarding religion (Felipe staying the pope's hand from excommunicating Elizabeth Tudor; Karl being willing to make peace with the Protestant princes so he could fight the Turks; being two examples) - not always, but if there was nothing for them to gain out of it (for instance, Felipe WASN'T a fan of Queen Bess' protestantism, but he preferred her to the Frenchified Catholic queen of Scots), they didn't bother. Felipe III/IV were religiously dogmatic: For them, the Catholic Church was the ONLY church, and any other religion had to be fought tooth and nail (see Felipe III's expulsion of the Moriscos and Conversos, which did some serious harm to the Spanish economy in the long run). To them, an alliance with a Protestant power (like England) was unthinkable, even if it were aimed at France (the traditional Habsburg enemy).

Yeah, and again, I'm hoping Fernando could remedy some of this. He was apparently more interested in the military and the Church, he had a bastard child and from his actions in the Netherlands he seems to have been somewhat pragmatic and rational. Carlos would probably be religious but in the level of Philip III to force out thousands out of his country when the consequences of their expulsion were clear. Louis XIV could afford to evict the Huguenots and even he suffered losses because of it while having a better organized administration and more resources. Expulsion of Moriscos was just dumb. I don't think they ever even showed the intention to rebel for any reason than being oppressed by the government. Still, even if the future kings of Spain are very religious they can still make changes, especially in economy with some affairs that don't concern the Church too much?
 
Yeah, and again, I'm hoping Fernando could remedy some of this. He was apparently more interested in the military and the Church, he had a bastard child and from his actions in the Netherlands he seems to have been somewhat pragmatic and rational. Carlos would probably be religious but in the level of Philip III to force out thousands out of his country when the consequences of their expulsion were clear. Louis XIV could afford to evict the Huguenots and even he suffered losses because of it while having a better organized administration and more resources. Expulsion of Moriscos was just dumb. I don't think they ever even showed the intention to rebel for any reason than being oppressed by the government. Still, even if the future kings of Spain are very religious they can still make changes, especially in economy with some affairs that don't concern the Church too much?

I'm sure they could, they just need a dash of common sense.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
Going back to the Dutch Republic, my understanding was that through the 1620s at least there was a drive for war with Spain coming from a substantial block within the Republic who were either refugees or the children of refugees from the southern provinces. They still held hoped that Flanders and Brabant, their homelands basically, could be liberated from Spain. Obviously that's not a practical or even truly desirable outcome for the United Provinces as they stood by 1630 so that's a complicating factor.

As for Onate, I understood that the settlement was basically a way of settling the Austrian inheritance. Technically Philip III was the heir to Bohemia and Hungary upon the death of Matthias through the latter's sister, who had married Philip II. Since those two crowns could pass through a female line by rights they would go to Spain over the Inner Austrian branch under Ferdinand. Obviously this was impractical hence the agreement to give Spain compensation elsewhere that was of more strategic value. It just sort fell apart after Ferdinand was elected Emperor and hostilities broke out. What is important though was that Alsace was desirable as the Spanish road had shifted eastwards through the passes controlled by the Swiss (who had come to an agreement with Spain) after France annexed Bresse and Savoy shifted to their camp. This put Alsace and Breisgau at the northern end of the road which no longer went through Franche Comte. Of course the road it self is just a means to the end of moving the Spanish army to the Netherlands so if hostilities there abate its somewhat mooted.
 
A logical point.

So in summary: peace with the Dutch, attempt to avoid mantua war, thus freeing up more troops for the Germany situation?
 
Going back to the Dutch Republic, my understanding was that through the 1620s at least there was a drive for war with Spain coming from a substantial block within the Republic who were either refugees or the children of refugees from the southern provinces. They still held hoped that Flanders and Brabant, their homelands basically, could be liberated from Spain. Obviously that's not a practical or even truly desirable outcome for the United Provinces as they stood by 1630 so that's a complicating factor.

As for Onate, I understood that the settlement was basically a way of settling the Austrian inheritance. Technically Philip III was the heir to Bohemia and Hungary upon the death of Matthias through the latter's sister, who had married Philip II. Since those two crowns could pass through a female line by rights they would go to Spain over the Inner Austrian branch under Ferdinand. Obviously this was impractical hence the agreement to give Spain compensation elsewhere that was of more strategic value. It just sort fell apart after Ferdinand was elected Emperor and hostilities broke out. What is important though was that Alsace was desirable as the Spanish road had shifted eastwards through the passes controlled by the Swiss (who had come to an agreement with Spain) after France annexed Bresse and Savoy shifted to their camp. This put Alsace and Breisgau at the northern end of the road which no longer went through Franche Comte. Of course the road it self is just a means to the end of moving the Spanish army to the Netherlands so if hostilities there abate its somewhat mooted.

Yeah there was a strong faction led by the refugees but also there was another strong faction in Amsterdam and Holland combined with the Indies companies that didn't want the war ruining their business any further. They were really strong in the 1630 led by the Grand Pensionary Adrien Pauw. The companies got a lot of money from the treasure fleet taken in 1628 and the money was used for taking s-Hertogenbosch which I was planning to make a Dutch defeat. The Spanish and Imperialists tried to force the Dutch to raise the siege by attacking Utrecht but couldn't take it. There was much pressure put on Frederick Henry to do it but he refused knowing it was well defended. ITTL the Spanish-Imperial attack is led by Spinola, it's better supplied and the army is stronger turning the campaign into a Dutch defeat. Another campaign financed by the stolen gold was the one to take Brazil. The fleet was already organised in 1629 and attacked in early 1630 where initially their only important gain was Recife. If that can be negotiated with the defeats they suffered at home and especially Frederick disgraced by his defeats in 1629 and fears that the Emperor will join in against them with a stronger army to attack them from the other flank the anti-war party will have enough power to establish the groundwork for a truce with Spain.
As for the Alsace deal I think it's still feasible. Savoy won't cross to the French side without the mantuan war in which they did so and France itself is still a threat as are the Dutch in case some new conflicts arise in the future. Even if a truce is made and the Burgundian inheritance is given to Fernando Alsace is necessary to connect Franche-Comte with Luxembourg and he still needs Spanish troops making the Road very important and useable if Savoy is still on their side. If the Tyrolean Habsburgs complain that their land is given away they can be compensated with a payment and maybe additional territories taken from the Protestants in Germany or perhaps one of the Silesian duchies. Problems will only arise if the French attack and manage to occupy it for a longer period.
 
Yeah there was a strong faction led by the refugees but also there was another strong faction in Amsterdam and Holland combined with the Indies companies that didn't want the war ruining their business any further. They were really strong in the 1630 led by the Grand Pensionary Adrien Pauw. The companies got a lot of money from the treasure fleet taken in 1628 and the money was used for taking s-Hertogenbosch which I was planning to make a Dutch defeat. The Spanish and Imperialists tried to force the Dutch to raise the siege by attacking Utrecht but couldn't take it. There was much pressure put on Frederick Henry to do it but he refused knowing it was well defended. ITTL the Spanish-Imperial attack is led by Spinola, it's better supplied and the army is stronger turning the campaign into a Dutch defeat. Another campaign financed by the stolen gold was the one to take Brazil. The fleet was already organised in 1629 and attacked in early 1630 where initially their only important gain was Recife. If that can be negotiated with the defeats they suffered at home and especially Frederick disgraced by his defeats in 1629 and fears that the Emperor will join in against them with a stronger army to attack them from the other flank the anti-war party will have enough power to establish the groundwork for a truce with Spain.
As for the Alsace deal I think it's still feasible. Savoy won't cross to the French side without the mantuan war in which they did so and France itself is still a threat as are the Dutch in case some new conflicts arise in the future. Even if a truce is made and the Burgundian inheritance is given to Fernando Alsace is necessary to connect Franche-Comte with Luxembourg and he still needs Spanish troops making the Road very important and useable if Savoy is still on their side. If the Tyrolean Habsburgs complain that their land is given away they can be compensated with a payment and maybe additional territories taken from the Protestants in Germany or perhaps one of the Silesian duchies. Problems will only arise if the French attack and manage to occupy it for a longer period.

Intriguing and considering the issues the French are under at this time, I do not think they'd be attacking
 
Intriguing and considering the issues the French are under at this time, I do not think they'd be attacking

Probably not openly. But they might be willing to use Sweden or Poland as a cat's paw against the emperor: They only got openly involved OTL AFTER Gustaf was killed IIRC
 
Probably not openly. But they might be willing to use Sweden or Poland as a cat's paw against the emperor: They only got openly involved OTL AFTER Gustaf was killed IIRC

Sweden definitely, but Poland no. Richelieu can possibly stay in power and the deal with Sweden were mostly his work. But Sigismund III was married to an Austrian archduchess, actually both his wives were daughters of Charles II of Inner Austria and Wladyslaw IV was to marry an archduchess too. The Habsburgs helped him in his war against Gustav in 1628-29. Poland was too closely connected to the Emperor. IOTL Gustav wanted to intervene even without the French help but Gustav accepted it because he knew he couldn't do much in Germany without their money at least. As for him surviving that's not easy to say. He was wounded and nearly killed several times IOTL. IT's easy to imagine a similar outcome ITTL as he took too many risks in battles.
 
Sweden definitely, but Poland no. Richelieu can possibly stay in power and the deal with Sweden were mostly his work. But Sigismund III was married to an Austrian archduchess, actually both his wives were daughters of Charles II of Inner Austria and Wladyslaw IV was to marry an archduchess too. The Habsburgs helped him in his war against Gustav in 1628-29. Poland was too closely connected to the Emperor. IOTL Gustav wanted to intervene even without the French help but Gustav accepted it because he knew he couldn't do much in Germany without their money at least. As for him surviving that's not easy to say. He was wounded and nearly killed several times IOTL. IT's easy to imagine a similar outcome ITTL as he took too many risks in battles.

Intriguing, so likely the Protestant cause possibly dies a death with , which changes the ideological outlook of the educators in the future generations.
 
Intriguing, so likely the Protestant cause possibly dies a death with , which changes the ideological outlook of the educators in the future generations.

They will be defeated, for sure. I've considering a few other ideas. Wallenstein had a plan for an Imperial Baltic fleet that was to be financed and organised by the Spanish with some help from the Poles. Apparently the Spanish have lost a lot by taking part in this endeavour. The reason they wanted in on it was to exert more pressure on the Dutch and possibly to block the Sound straits which were vital to the Dutch. With Olivares gone and Carlos being reasonable they might not take part in it, saving them more money. Also when the Emperor sent general Arnim to help the Poles he sent only 7,000 troops instead of the planned 14,000. I'm wondering if the Emperor can provide more help without the Mantuan war. In 1629 Gustav suffered a big defeat at Honigfeld so he wasn't that invincible. The longer they can distract him the better for Germany. Maybe they can even attack Straldund again and take it but I'm not so sure
 
They will be defeated, for sure. I've considering a few other ideas. Wallenstein had a plan for an Imperial Baltic fleet that was to be financed and organised by the Spanish with some help from the Poles. Apparently the Spanish have lost a lot by taking part in this endeavour. The reason they wanted in on it was to exert more pressure on the Dutch and possibly to block the Sound straits which were vital to the Dutch. With Olivares gone and Carlos being reasonable they might not take part in it, saving them more money. Also when the Emperor sent general Arnim to help the Poles he sent only 7,000 troops instead of the planned 14,000. I'm wondering if the Emperor can provide more help without the Mantuan war. In 1629 Gustav suffered a big defeat at Honigfeld so he wasn't that invincible. The longer they can distract him the better for Germany. Maybe they can even attack Straldund again and take it but I'm not so sure

Alright interesting. The earlier the thirty years war ends, the better, as it means that monarchy is still viewed as good in the educational aspect of things instead of the shambolic people representation.
 
Top