The other Kings of Spain

Now I know that this is not a terribly large WI, and not likely to cause any major change but it is still one that has been nagging at me for some time.

In november of 1870 the revolutionary government in Spain elected the second son of the King of Italy, Amadeo, the Duke of Aosta, as king of of spain. Things did not go well for Amadeo and by early 1873 he was forced to abdicate the throne, not through and major lack of competance, but rather by the chaos that was Spain at the time.

So, what if Amadeo had managed to hold on to the reins of power and forge a new ruling dynasty.
 

Goldstein

Banned
Now I know that this is not a terribly large WI, and not likely to cause any major change but it is still one that has been nagging at me for some time.

In november of 1870 the revolutionary government in Spain elected the second son of the King of Italy, Amadeo, the Duke of Aosta, as king of of spain. Things did not go well for Amadeo and by early 1873 he was forced to abdicate the throne, not through and major lack of competance, but rather by the chaos that was Spain at the time.

So, what if Amadeo had managed to hold on to the reins of power and forge a new ruling dynasty.

That's a really easy one. Amadeo I's legitimacy was based in the figure of Juan Prim, a liberal military, the Spanish prime minister, and the main supporter of Amadeo. He was shot dead in 1870, though, a few days before the new king arrived. Had he survived, amadeo would have had time to settle and to gain legitimacy, at least temporally. What would be a little more dificult is to preserve the Saboya dinasty undefinitely, but who knows.

That would have a great impact in Spain, as the achievements of the 1868 revolution would consolidate instead of fading away. Spain would have more international prestige and more chances for an earlier modernization. Also, an alive Prim would have other important consequences, as he favoured to give greater autonomy, or even independence, to Cuba. It could even imply a belligerent Spain, should the Great War start.
 
That would have a great impact in Spain, as the achievements of the 1868 revolution would consolidate instead of fading away.

This is quite doubtful, actually. In fact, Amadeo's policies during his brief tenure were uncannily similar to the despise of democratic procedure that the Bourbon kings had during the Restoration with the turno de partidos.

IMO, the lack of democratic culture and political decency that the Restoration policies caused, were one of the root causes of the chaos that would ultimately lead to the Civil War.
 

Goldstein

Banned
This is quite doubtful, actually. In fact, Amadeo's policies during his brief tenure were uncannily similar to the despise of democratic procedure that the Bourbon kings had during the Restoration with the turno de partidos.

As long as the 1869 constitution continues, maybe it would not be as bad of a political situation as OTL. (BTW I would like to know more... is there any good article on the Amadeo's tenure?)

The problem, if what you say is true, is that Amadeo could end up getting iosolated even with Prim's survival, so it becomes very hard then.

IMO, the lack of democratic culture and political decency that the Restoration policies caused, were one of the root causes of the chaos that would ultimately lead to the Civil War.

Indeed, indeed, althought I tend to think that "political decency" is an oxymoron. :p
 
Last edited:
Juan Prim was in fact my first thought as well, I find though that when you post a POD with one of these questions everone just debates the legitamacy of it and never actually answers the question.

as for the good doctor's concern about Amadeo's autocratic side there are two things that I can think of right off the top of my head. #1, Amadeo was a monarch of course he's not going to be a shining example of republicanism, but, don't forget he was one of the few royals in europe that were willing to be elected by a revoultionary government. this shows us that he was at least fairly liberal in his personal views.

#2, Amadeo, upon arriving in spain was astonished by the chaotic nature of spanish politics, on the day after he abdicated the throne he appeared before the Cortes and made a speach declairing the spanish people to be ungovernable. I'm certain that he spent most of his tenure as king trying to impose order on the spanish system.
 
as for the good doctor's concern about Amadeo's autocratic side there are two things that I can think of right off the top of my head. #1, Amadeo was a monarch of course he's not going to be a shining example of republicanism, but, don't forget he was one of the few royals in europe that were willing to be elected by a revoultionary government. this shows us that he was at least fairly liberal in his personal views.

There was nothing autocratic about the turno de partidos during the restoration. The king always respected the will of the politicians. Unfortunately, such politicians ignored the will of the people and eschewed the elections to ensure stability. This was already happening under Amadeo's reign: the problem was not that the king had too much power, but that he actually did not do enough to prevent corruption at the political level.
 
All right, I'll accept that. it's good food for thought, so, what would King amadeo have to do to stem the tide of political corruption.
 
Top