Surviving Habsburg Dynasty

[PhoenicianLegacy]

Greetings once again my dear boardmates,

Here, I would like to explore the short and long term possibilities had the famous and widespread royal Habsburg house of Europe had survived past the 18th century.

It is no mystery that their vain desire to keep their noble blood pure ultimately proved their undoing with their methods being 16 generations of incestious marriages between first cousins and uncles/nieces. There is no better example of this than Charles II of Spain, who died in 1700, infertile due two his corrupted genetics. Because of this Spain fought a disastrous war of succession for the next decade and a half, which arguably marked the beginning of Spain's downward spiral as a world power since it lost both the Netherlands and its Italian holdings in the process.

My point of divergence in this idea for a timeline is that the Habsburgs decide to remain more flexible in their breeding habits, procreating with several fellow nobility across Europe throughout the centuries.

 

[Al B. Short]

Emperor Joseph I had a son that died of hydrocephalus. If he was born healthy and lived, Charles would inherit Spain and maybe also have a son. That way Habsburgs would survive in both Austria and Spain. The war would still happen and the French would want Naples and Sicily etc. for Philip of Anjou. But Charles wold definitely keep all the colonies. And its not just the war that ruined Spain, they were in major problems back since Philip II. He had tons of gold coming from America but it didn't help in bringing Spain to bankruptcy twice during his reign. Philip III and Philip IV weren't bad but still the country was just collapsing slowly with military defeats, debts, inflation, rising taxes and other things. So if Charles and his heirs did their best, Spain could come back.

 

[Delta Force]

Emperor Joseph I had a son that died of hydrocephalus. If he was born healthy and lived, Charles would inherit Spain and maybe also have a son. That way Habsburgs would survive in both Austria and Spain. The war would still happen and the French would want Naples and Sicily etc. for Philip of Anjou. But Charles wold definitely keep all the colonies. And its not just the war that ruined Spain, they were in major problems back since Philip II. He had tons of gold coming from America but it didn't help in bringing Spain to bankruptcy twice during his reign. Philip III and Philip IV weren't bad but still the country was just collapsing slowly with military defeats, debts, inflation, rising taxes and other things. So if Charles and his heirs did their best, Spain could come back.

How did Spain manage to default twice with all the gold and silver coming in from the Americas and elsewhere? That's some serious deficit spending!

 

[JonasResende]

How did Spain manage to default twice with all the gold and silver coming in from the Americas and elsewhere? That's some serious deficit spending!

Actually, much of the gold/silver etc. was pirated by other nations. The convoy system the Spanish used made their treasure fleets easy pickings for the faster and smaller English or Dutch ships that robbed them. I can't remember the source, but sometime in King Philip IV(?)'s reign, a treasure fleet was assembled to bring much needed gold back to Spain, and a quarter of that fleet unloaded in Seville. Also, Spain had the unfortunate habit (doubly unfortunate since the banking houses that allowed it were often bankrupted themselves) of loaning money and pledging future revenues as security. The early Bourbons (to Carlos III) had the right idea with regards to Spain's finances.

 

[Al B. Short]

That is true Jonas. And there were of course, bad harvests and the bubonic plague in the early 1600s that killed 10% of the population. Also, what gold managed to come to Spain caused inflation of the currency. I don't think Spain won any wars in Europe since the beginning of the rule of Philip II until the 18th century. They lost most of the Netherlands, Franche-Comte, Portugal, the Armada, gained nothing in the Thirty Years' War and so on. They won the Battle of Lepanto and gained colonies but it wasn't of much use. But as I said, Charles in Spain probably would have a son and wouldn't have to worry about things like the Pragmatic Sanction. He could turn things around.

 

[PhoenicianLegacy]

My dad just told me that the Spanish empire was already in decline at the time of OTL's Charles II. However, had the Spanish Habsburgs not been so severely inbred to the point of total downfall at the turn of the 18th century, they still could've had a chance.

Since all the minerals were nearly depleted in their new world colonies, they could've still saught other places to mine, notably South Africa and its diamond deposits. Not only would minerals be profitable but spices and silk from the east.

 

[JErosion]

I think you can argue that Spain's decline began near the end of Phillip II reign. The problems the Habsburg's faced with inbreeding was compounded with their multiple marriages to the other royal houses of the Iberian Peninsula were already inbred to a degree. Look at Phillips II's first son, which ancestry while not as facepalm as Charles II's its still pretty bad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Carlos,_Prince_of_Asturias

 

[Emperor Constantine]

Greetings once again my dear boardmates,

Here, I would like to explore the short and long term possibilities had the famous and widespread royal Habsburg house of Europe had survived past the 18th century.

It is no mystery that their vain desire to keep their noble blood pure ultimately proved their undoing with their methods being 16 generations of incestious marriages between first cousins and uncles/nieces. There is no better example of this than Charles II of Spain, who died in 1700, infertile due two his corrupted genetics. Because of this Spain fought a disastrous war of succession for the next decade and a half, which arguably marked the beginning of Spain's downward spiral as a world power since it lost both the Netherlands and its Italian holdings in the process.

My point of divergence in this idea for a timeline is that the Habsburgs decide to remain more flexible in their breeding habits, procreating with several fellow nobility across Europe throughout the centuries.

OK I'm not sure I understand the question. Do you mean a surviving Spanish House of Habsburg, because the Habsburgs did surviving the 18th century, as the Habsburg-Lorraine Dynasty. But, if you mean Spain, there are several easy ways to do that. The Spanish Habsburg Kings tended to marry multiple times, with the problem being that their surviving heirs were the sons of their niece-wives. Have some of the earlier sons (Balthazar Carlos, son of Philip IV for instance) survive and become King and that should probably do it.

However, in many ways the extinction of the Habsburgs was the best thing that could happen to Spain. It gave the country new blood, and a Sovereign who wasn't raised to ignore the myriad of issues plaguing the country. Spain needed major reforms and I'm honestly not sure if any Habsburg would be able to carry them out. Honestly it depends on his personality and advisers. If Spain gets a King similar to Emperors Josef I and II, then maybe. But, if they have someone like Emperor Karl VI the downward spiral will continue.

 

[Delta Force]

OK I'm not sure I understand the question. Do you mean a surviving Spanish House of Habsburg, because the Habsburgs did surviving the 18th century, as the Habsburg-Lorraine Dynasty.

The Austrian Habsburgs still exist and are somewhat prominent in Austria and Europe.

 

[Codae]

OK I'm not sure I understand the question. Do you mean a surviving Spanish House of Habsburg, because the Habsburgs did surviving the 18th century, as the Habsburg-Lorraine Dynasty.

I believe the goal is for the Hapsburgs in general to survive in the male line (which the modern Hapsburg-Lorraine is not), with Carlos II brought up merely as an example of dysfunction, not as the last chance for continuation.

 

[Gonzaga]

How did Spain manage to default twice with all the gold and silver coming in from the Americas and elsewhere? That's some serious deficit spending!

Because only accumulating gold doesn't make a country richer. Such influx of gold in Spain only created inflation, that "eated" the greater amount of precious metal that entered the country.

 

[profxyz]

How did Spain manage to default twice with all the gold and silver coming in from the Americas and elsewhere? That's some serious deficit spending!

Well, if like Philip II you decided to go to war with England, France, the Dutch, the Turks, the corsairs, and various other Italian and German states, you'd probably be spiralling into debt too. By the 1580s the Dutch wars were costing Philip around 2m ducats a year, which was basically the amount he was getting from the Americas in an average year.

So Castile had to provide for most of the Spanish Empire. It's estimated by the end of the 1500s the Americas were still pretty much contributing around 25% of revenues, with Castile (not even Aragon) fronting most of the rest. Lepanto is the archetypical example of this with Castile paying around 800,000 ducats while the Italian States paid another 400,000.

 

[Al B. Short]

Maybe Balthasar Charles, son of Philip IV, could live. He too was an inbred and had the Habsburg lip but seemed healthy enough to rule and have children. He died of the smallpox. If he tries really, really hard, there is your survival of the Habsburgs.

 

[JonasResende]

Maybe Balthasar Charles, son of Philip IV, could live. He too was an inbred and had the Habsburg lip but seemed healthy enough to rule and have children. He died of the smallpox. If he tries really, really hard, there is your survival of the Habsburgs.

Appendicitis, not smallpox. And Baltasar Carlos was decidedly foreign for a Spanish royal of the day, his parents only being 2nd cousins matrilineally. But the same can be said of allowing Felipe II and Élisabeth de Valois' son to survive.

 

[PhoenicianLegacy]

I said that in my idea for a theoretical timeline where the Habsburgs survive is due to them NOT being as severely inbred as they were in our timeline.

Long before Charles II of Spain, they decide to be more flexible in their breeding habits, would lead to more well-functioning leadership in both Spain and Austria.

 

[JonasResende]

I said that in my idea for a theoretical timeline where the Habsburgs survive is due to them NOT being as severely inbred as they were in our timeline.

Long before Charles II of Spain, they decide to be more flexible in their breeding habits, would lead to more well-functioning leadership in both Spain and Austria.

Then Élisabeth de Valois' having a surviving son is your best bet. She wasn't related to Felipe II (their closest common ancestor was Juan II of Aragon or John the Fearless of Burgundy). She had male foetus miscarry in 1561, and sources differ as to whether the pregnancy that killed her in 1566 was a boy or girl. So have one of those boys survive, and D. Carlos die on schedule and the way could be clear for at least a new generation.

Though given that the first non-Catholic queen of Spain only arrived in OTL 19c, the choice may be rather limited as to brides of the right religion, therefore, any bride is likely as not to be a cousin.

 

[Janprimus]

Then Élisabeth de Valois' having a surviving son is your best bet. She wasn't related to Felipe II (their closest common ancestor was Juan II of Aragon or John the Fearless of Burgundy). She had male foetus miscarry in 1561, and sources differ as to whether the pregnancy that killed her in 1566 was a boy or girl. So have one of those boys survive, and D. Carlos die on schedule and the way could be clear for at least a new generation.

Though given that the first non-Catholic queen of Spain only arrived in OTL 19c, the choice may be rather limited as to brides of the right religion, therefore, any bride is likely as not to be a cousin.

I agree. The Reformation greatly reduced the already limited group of potential spouses. More Catholic kingdoms would be very helpful, if only to provide suitable candidates for younger archdukes/infantes.
Still the Habsburgs were not that different from other houses like Bourbon (also other Capetian branches), Wittelsbach etc.
Not only were Filips* II and Élisabeth de Valois unlucky, but it happened a few times especially within the Spanish branch. The Austrian branch was less inbred than their Spanish cousins.
That they virtually only intermarried is a myth, but given the limited possible spouses, they were always on each other's short list.

(*= he was lord of the Netherlands too)

 

[Wallflower]

Well, as stated above, the Habsburgs did survive as the cadet branch of Habsburg-Lorraine, in a much similar way to the Romanovs in Russia (as you may know, the official name of the dynasty was Holstein-Gottorp, but they wanted to emphasize the russian ancestry of the family through the female line).

If you're talking about Austria, the survival of a male Habsburg line could have potentially prevented Europe from entering the War of Austrian Succession.

If you're talking about Spain, the inheritance through the female line was never a problem, and it indeed happened IOTL. The problem was that the heirs to Maria Theresa of Spain were at the same time heirs to France, so it could have led to a disballance of power.

Anyway, an interesting way to prevent the extinction of the male line of Spanish Habsburgs would be marrying the kings to distant princesses. A suggestion:

1 - Charles I of Spain could have married Anne of Bohemia and Hungary instead of his brother Ferdinand. They were only distantly related (Anne's great-grandmother Eleanor of Navarre being half-sister to Charles' grandfather Ferdinand II of Aragon).

2 - Philip II of Spain marrying Margaret Valois, Duchess of Berry (as almost happened IOTL). Again, they were only distantly related, in a the same way as Charles and Anne.

3 - Charles II* (supposing that an alternative Don Carlos survives, born in 1545) could have married an Italian heiress or princess. At the moment I can only think of Lucrezia de Medici, daughter to Grand-Duke Cosimo I. They were close in age and belonged to Catholic dysnaties, it could also be a way to enforce Spain's power over Italian Peninsula, defying the french and making new allies.

4 - Philip III* (a grandson, not a son, to Philip II) could have married one of the daughters of Stadholder William the Silent, in a way to appease the moods between the Spanish and the Dutch during the Dutch Revolt through some sort of peace pact. Probably there would be notes about "how unhappy such a marriage was, due to the boy's ardent Catholicism and the girl's conviction on Protestantism". I suggest Anna, Emilia, Louise Julianna or Catharina Belgica as possible brides, depending on when would this alternative Philip be born.

5 - Philip IV* (an alternative one) could have married an English-Scottish princess in some sort of alternative/gender-bent Spanish Match. IOTL, Elizabeth of Bohemia was the only surviving daughter of king James V and I, however she had other three sisters called Margaret, Mary and Sophia who didn't survive past childhood. If one of them survives and marries Philip IV, there would be fresh Scottish, English, Danish and Northern-German blood into the Habsburg family.

From now on, I don't know how to work on it and the matches would be sort of random. However, this could pretty much prevent the genealogical disaster of Charles II of Spain.

Also, from a realistic point of view, could a possible Spanish king marry a native local noblewoman? The Dukes of Alba, Frias and Medina-Sidonia were very prominent.

Besides, there would no Iberian Union if Charles I does not marry Isabella of Portugal and Philip II would have no clear claim for the crown. However, if somehow the House of Braganza is still the one that raises to power, the daughters of IOTL's John IV of Portugal, Catherine and Joan, were only very very distantly related to the Spanish in this point, with their most recent common ancestors being Isabella I of Castile and Ferdinand II of Aragon. A boost of native minor nobility Portuguese-Spanish blood into the highly german Habsburgs.

 

[Janprimus]

I don't see, why marrying Charles V to Anna of Bohemia & Hungary would work.
A much more plausible alternative, and considered at the time, would be a marriage of Charles V with Mary Tudor (daughter of Henry VII*). In fact this was a match the Habsburgs initially had in mind for Charles V.

(*= to avoid confusion).

 

[Wallflower]

I don't see, why marrying Charles V to Anna of Bohemia & Hungary would work.
A much more plausible alternative, and considered at the time, would be a marriage of Charles V with Mary Tudor (daughter of Henry VII*). In fact this was a match the Habsburgs initially had in mind for Charles V.

(*= to avoid confusion).

I don't see why this is so implausible as you point, since it almost happened IOTL and was seen by Charles himself as a way to assure Habsburg supremacy over Europe and make justice to Habsburg-Jagiellon succession pact. I also may remind you that also IOTL, Charles was so obsessed by power that he wanted his son Philip to become the sole heir to all Habsburg dominions. He really wanted to have things right under his wing.

If he marries Anne and has three sons (as she had with Ferdinand IOTL), the inheritance would be much more fairly distributed amongst the children: the elder one gets Spanish dominions, reaching the apex of their influence, the second one gets HRE, the Austrian Dominions, Bohemia and Hungary and finally the youngest gets Burgundy/Netherlands. Maybe we could have a fourth son to inherit Burgundy separately, if a hypothetical third gets Bohemia and Hungary, in a way not to overburden the second son, already Emperor/Archduke of Austria.