Surviving Aragon

Imperialists? Weren't the kings of Castille, France, Aragon, England etc. all imperialists;). I think you mean the HRE?

Sorry for any confusion. There was only one emperor - the Holy Roman Emperor. All the rest were kings, and it follows from that there can be only one bunch of imperialists in this case - those that support the emperor.

It depends on the POD, but a duchy of Milan under the Sforza dukes might be the most acceptable compromise. However things change when the line of Sforza dukes goes extinct.
Is this acceptable to the Holy Father? IIRC, there was a lot of bad blood between Giovanni Sforza, the tyrant of Pesaro and Cesare Borgia, son of Pope Alexander. Does this mean that the Pope will be on the side of the Castilian-Burgundian alliance?

Whether Milan will be French or Habsburg, it might end up in the hands of a cadet branch and with the further arrangement, that the bone who receives the duchy probably marries someone from the other house.
Hmmm - I see. You think it is unlikely that a French domination of Milan is unlikely? Is it impossible for the French to repeat their Italian conquest - I mean - a la what happened under King Charles with his attempted conquest of Italy, except with a permanent French presence in Milan and a French choice ruler in Savoy?

The relations between Castille and Aragon will be interesting too. OTOH even with Aragon separate from Castille, they still equally dislike a too powerful France or Burgundy-Castille in northern Italy. None the less without the union of Castille and Aragon ITTL logistically it has become more complicated. However don't forget that the Austrian hereditary lands are nearby (the north eastern tip of the duchy of Milan borders the south western tip of the county of Tyrol).
No doubt the relations between Aragon and France would be mired in suspicion, even when they are allied. However, there is one factor you should keep in mind, at least in the first few years of the alliance (well, as long as Ferdinand is alive). Ferdinand was truly humiliated by Philip of Habsburg and the Castilian nobles when he tried to intervene on the side of his daughter, Joanna, which was one reason why he went to the French for his alliance. There was a genuine fear in Aragon that they would become the next Leon - essentially a province of the Castilian empire, with Castilian domination in their own land, which is why Ferdinand tried to split the two thrones. Further, if the Aragonese were split from the Castilians, they might press, more forcefully, their claims on the coast of Navarre and also in the south, on Murcia and the adjoining areas.

As for Milan, while Austrians are certainly close by, I am not sure that Austria, at this point, was strong enough to challenge France on her own, without any significant Castilian intervention.

I'm not so convinced of a very hostile Aragon towards Castille as long as they don't interfere too much in their respective spheres of influence.
Less involvement in Italy might free up more troops for any conflict with the Ottomans and the protection of their current possessions. A French focus on Italy might be good thing for the Burgundian possessions of the Habsburgs; and furthermore this will result in tensions between the allies France and Aragon. ITTL the Habsburgs will stay interested in an alliance with England (even IOTL with their religious differences, alliances were made, when politics demanded it).

However just as with Ferdinand having a son with his second wife, Ladislaus II of Hungary-Bohemia only had a son (Louis, 1506) and a duaghter (Anna, 1503)with his third wife at a relatively high age. With this POD they would be already born. The Habsburgs might still inherit those kingdoms, which would increase their involvement. And if they do, they might have more means than IOTL in their conflicts against the Ottomans.
As you say, the Austrians and the Castilians have more resources for their war on the Ottomans, particularly on land. But they also would have a greater fear of the French ITTL. So, it is quite conceivable that they might encourage the Ottoman naval exploits, and urge them to go across the straits of Otranto into the Aragonese possessions in Italy. This means that it is the Venetians who are allied with the French and the Aragonese in opposing the naval expeditions of the Ottomans. And the Aragonese are going to need the French help. However, they would encourage the Ottoman land exploits, urging the Ottomans to go after Hungary and other possessions in central Europe. However, all this is predicated on one thing - the French and the Habsburgs cannot come to some accommodation. If they do (Franco-Aragonese domination in Italy in exchange for Imperial domination in the low countries), it is the Ottomans that would be the losers, since both on land and sea, they would be facing greater opposition, and greater forces arrayed against them.
 
They were allies up until Elizabeth, no?

It is certainly very possible. But at this point, Henry VII was in peace with France and had no wish to see his realm embroiled in any continental wars. He particularly refused to let his daughter Mary marry Massimiliano Sforza, the son of the duke of Milan, because he did not want England involved in the Italian wars. However, with Henry VIII on throne, it is more possible. On a side note, does it mean that if Henry VIII treats Catherine as he did IOTL, will it mean a more forceful retaliation from Aragon and France? After all, Henry was on the side of the emperor in political matters. Will there be a dynastic war in England, with the Aragonese and French acting to secure the interests of Catherine's daughter, Mary?

I wonder if a stronger France leads to a greater push for reform within the empire. Hrm...
Perhaps you could elaborate?

I think this is pretty likely. Where do they really conflict?
With France, Aragon might press its claims to Murcia and the Navarre coast. Also, if Castile and Aragon clashed in the Italian wars, then there would be new flashpoints.
 
Last edited:
Sorry for any confusion. There was only one emperor - the Holy Roman Emperor. All the rest were kings, and it follows from that there can be only one bunch of imperialists in this case - those that support the emperor.
;) referered to imperialist, as in following imperialistic policies. I personally would have used imperial party.

Is this acceptable to the Holy Father? IIRC, there was a lot of bad blood between Giovanni Sforza, the tyrant of Pesaro and Cesare Borgia, son of Pope Alexander. Does this mean that the Pope will be on the side of the Castilian-Burgundian alliance?

A Sforza duchy of Milan would mean, that neither France nor the Habsburgs gain directly control of this region.

Hmmm - I see. You think it is unlikely that a French domination of Milan is unlikely? Is it impossible for the French to repeat their Italian conquest - I mean - a la what happened under King Charles with his attempted conquest of Italy, except with a permanent French presence in Milan and a French choice ruler in Savoy?

It isn't unlikely, it would mean a French foreign policy, which focuses on Italy and that would be 'good news' for other neighbors (and neighboring regions) of France. Furthermore this will (eventually) turn Aragon and France into rivals in Italy.
OTOH this (a dynastic marriage (not between the heirs) and give them Milan) was also suggested IOTL. A more evenly matched France and the Habsburgs or rather a stalemate, could lead to such a compromise.

No doubt the relations between Aragon and France would be mired in suspicion, even when they are allied. However, there is one factor you should keep in mind, at least in the first few years of the alliance (well, as long as Ferdinand is alive). Ferdinand was truly humiliated by Philip of Habsburg and the Castilian nobles when he tried to intervene on the side of his daughter, Joanna, which was one reason why he went to the French for his alliance. There was a genuine fear in Aragon that they would become the next Leon - essentially a province of the Castilian empire, with Castilian domination in their own land, which is why Ferdinand tried to split the two thrones. Further, if the Aragonese were split from the Castilians, they might press, more forcefully, their claims on the coast of Navarre and also in the south, on Murcia and the adjoining areas.

If Aragon decides to do so, then they will need a strong alliance. Furthermore Castille-Burgundy-Austria & the HRE will have their own powerful allies too.
Worst case scenario for Aragon would be Aragon being reduced to their Italian holdings (Naples, Sicily, Sardinia and maybe the Balearic Islands).
As for Milan, while Austrians are certainly close by, I am not sure that Austria, at this point, was strong enough to challenge France on her own, without any significant Castilian intervention.

Given the fact that Castille and Austria-Burgundy have the same ruler, they will join the same intervention. The duchy of Milan was an imperial territory, so the HRE will join too (there was an imperial army, where every HRE member was obliged to contribute (men and/or funds).

As you say, the Austrians and the Castilians have more resources for their war on the Ottomans, particularly on land. But they also would have a greater fear of the French ITTL. So, it is quite conceivable that they might encourage the Ottoman naval exploits, and urge them to go across the straits of Otranto into the Aragonese possessions in Italy. This means that it is the Venetians who are allied with the French and the Aragonese in opposing the naval expeditions of the Ottomans. And the Aragonese are going to need the French help. However, they would encourage the Ottoman land exploits, urging the Ottomans to go after Hungary and other possessions in central Europe. However, all this is predicated on one thing - the French and the Habsburgs cannot come to some accommodation. If they do (Franco-Aragonese domination in Italy in exchange for Imperial domination in the low countries), it is the Ottomans that would be the losers, since both on land and sea, they would be facing greater opposition, and greater forces arrayed against them.

I doubt that the fear of France will be any different ITTL. France will be more tied in Italy, whereas the Habsburgs can focus on central (including the HRE with Austria-Burgundy) and eastern Europe.
BTW how do you define Low Countries, everything North of the Alps (to the north and east of France)?
 
Top