Was the fact that Austria had access to Spanish gold and silver the reason they were able to conquer Hungary in the first place? Could they still conquer it without Spanish support but without as much land as they could have?
Was the fact that Austria had access to Spanish gold and silver the reason they were able to conquer Hungary in the first place? Could they still conquer it without Spanish support but without as much land as they could have?
With no Spanish connection, the Habsburgs may themselves turn Protestant. So Germany becomes effectively a Protestant country with a modest Catholic minority to weak to make any bid for power. In that case the TYW is most certainly butterflied.
Was the fact that Austria had access to Spanish gold and silver the reason they were able to conquer Hungary in the first place? Could they still conquer it without Spanish support but without as much land as they could have?
I beg to differ. Most were devout Catholics, but there's also a connection to the position of (elected) Holy Roman Emperor. They didn't have much to gain from converting, unlike various imperial princes; heck a protestant Emperor might convince a majority of Imperial princes (well those, who were mainly politically motivated) to stay Catholic. Apart from religious considerations, there were also political motives, often a combination of both.
Was the fact that Austria had access to Spanish gold and silver the reason they were able to conquer Hungary in the first place? Could they still conquer it without Spanish support but without as much land as they could have?
I am not sure to understand your question.
The austrian Habsburgs initially inherited the crown of Hungary. Ferdinand of Habsburg was married to Anne Jagellon who became heiress of the kingdoms of Bohemia and Hungary when her only brother Louis II died childless at the battle of Mohacs.
It seems obvious to me that, with or without holding Spain and its colonies, a Habsburg prince, be it Ferdinand or his elder brother Charles V instead, would have married Anne Jagellon.
Now concerning reconquest of Hungary by the Habsburgs, it is not the spanish-american gold and silver that paid for it. It began only in the very late 17th century when Spain was in decline and more or less broke and, as far as I know, Spain did not pay for it (or if it ever gave some help, it was marginal).

The Netherlands' Golden Age was funded by profits from long-distance shipping. During the 16th century, they built large fleets to haul riches from Latin America. During the 17th century, Dutch merchants got into the spice trade around the Indian Ocean. They grew wealthy selling exotic spices to Europeans.
Do you mean that the Baltic trade was a safe market for the Dutch, or that it comprised a plurality of their global trade revenues?Actually the Baltic trade remained the backbone of Dutch trade during the Republic of the 7 United Netherlands.
The V.O.C. was very profitable, the W.I.C. a bit less, but don't underestimate the Baltic trade.
But in Hungary, under the leadership of John Zápolya, the Diet had voted that no foreign prince would ever again be elected King of Hungary after King Vladislaus II, but only a Hungarian. The declaration of the idea of a national kingdom was against the Habsburgs. However, Vladislaus did not enforce the "Rákos resolution", but rather he invalidated it... for the Providence that the Maximilian's grandson, Ferdinand, succeeded to the childless bother-in-law Louis II as King of Hungary and Bohemia in 1526.