Treaty of London (1700) - French Sicily, Naples, Lorraine, and Gipuzkoa

Given how OTL Milan alone was supposed to be enough to exchange for Lorraine, why would the Duke of Lorraine get Lombardy and Piedmont (and potentially Genoa)?


I also don't understand why Genoa is being passed around willy-nilly. It was an independent Republic.

That was not the only option, if the duke of Savoy was not willing to exchange his lands, so including Piedmont, for Naples and Sicily, there were other options. One would be the duke of Lorraine & Bar, not sure if under that Scenario, it would just be Naples. Savoy, like Austria, was much more interested in the duchy of Milan. IOTL Savoy ultimately gained the kingdom of Sicily and bits of the duchy of Milan (most of the duchy of Milan went to Austria), after a few years they were forced to trade Sicily for Sardinia.

A real issue with these treaties, was that they, France and England-Scotland were making proposals to redraw the map, without the other parties, most notably Spain and Austria present. Spain did not like, that foreigners were carving up their empire. Austria is a bit more tricky, yes under this second treaty archduke Charles would inherit Spain and the colonies, but the French presence in Italy was matter of concern for Austria.
The interests of Savoy or Lorraine were far from the main concern either; IMHO in theory, an ATL provision in an ATL proposal, which would have transferred the Riviera di Ponente* from Genoa to Piedmont or Milan-Piedmont, seems entirely in line with the OTL treaties. (*= not the entire Republic of Genoa)
Genoa is a small state with already little true indipendence so will be easily annexed by some powerful neibourgh who want or need sea access. In any case annexing just a part of Genoa to Milan-Piedmont for giving it sea access can work very well.
The Duke of Lorraine would get Piedmont only because Savoy need to swap all his lands for Naples and as Piedmont can not go to France annexing it to Milan is the logical solution...
In alternative the Duke of Lorraine can have Naples while the Duke of Savoy will have Milan (and maybe Corsica for having a royal title). Netherlands, Sicily, Sardinia can either stay with Spain, go to Austria/France or be given as compensation to the loser of the Spanish crown
 
Considering that the King of Spain bequeathed his realm to the grandson of the King of France, the starting point is "France/Bourbons control the Spanish realm, so let's negotiate that down a bit in exchange for not going to war". It's hard to not have a treaty that significantly bolsters the French position.



It seems that Victor Emmanuel wasn't very keen on giving up any territory. Why not just have Spain retain Naples and Sicily but France gain Hainaut, Namur, and Luxembourg? The Netherlands meanwhile gains Brabant and Flanders.

France is kept out of Italy but gains desirable territory.




Otherwise, if Austria was opposed to France having Milan (or being in Italy at all), I suppose Lorraine for Naples with France perhaps keeping Sicily could work.

Fair enough, considering how Belgium in general was a troubled territory for the Spanish and Austrians that might be a better solution for Spain keeping Sicily. The accession of Gipuzkoa would work well enough, if the Spanish think they can just retake it later. Meanwhile Lorraine has proximity to Further Austrian holding so a path supplying it through those territories or through Savoy/Switzerland could work too. Netherlands receiving Brabant and Flanders would be a massive boon to the smaller territory. Maybe they are better able to keep up with the British?
 
The Treaty overall seems largely too generous to the French in regards to the tenability of Hapsburg positions in the future. The Spanish lose Naples and Milan, cutting off the Spanish Road to the Spanish Netherlands making their governance far more prone to instability and increasing the chance that France would be able to capture it in the occurrence of a war.

The Spanish road was gone after France conquered the Franche-Comté in the Dutch war. The Spanish Netherlands can't be easily defended by Spain, which is why the Dutch developed the barrier fortresses.
 
The Treaty overall seems largely too generous to the French in regards to the tenability of Hapsburg positions in the future. The Spanish lose Naples and Milan, cutting off the Spanish Road to the Spanish Netherlands making their governance far more prone to instability and increasing the chance that France would be able to capture it in the occurrence of a war. Exchanging Milan for Lorraine falls under the same problems as Lorraine is vulnerable to French incursion, is distant, and can only be maintained by traveling through French territories or through Savoy. Spain is made more vulnerable by creating a French outpost past the Pyrenees in Gipuzkoa. It seems like the French gain far too much for what they offer in return to the Hapsburgs: a weakened Spanish state that was already crumbling at the edges with the possibility that the French have a stronger position in future wars.

French domination of Two Sicilies and Milan seem likely, at least until the Hapsburgs attempt to kick them out. But, again, they are now in a weakened position in Spain, making their western lands vulnerable while the French remain consolidated. I foresee a French retaking of Lorraine and taking of Belgium, the overrunning of Savoy-Piedmont and Genoa to consolidate lands between Milan and Provence, and the continued presence of French in Gipuzkoa and Naples to dominate part of the Western Mediterranean. Not a good position for the Hapsburgs at all.
I think the deal was that France gains Milan, then promptly exchanges it for Lorraine. In this scenario, Lorraine becomes French upon Charles II death.
 
Considering that the King of Spain bequeathed his realm to the grandson of the King of France, the starting point is "France/Bourbons control the Spanish realm, so let's negotiate that down a bit in exchange for not going to war". It's hard to not have a treaty that significantly bolsters the French position.
the treaty predates Charles II death, and it is unknown who the heir will be. The treaty is an attempt to avoid a war, regardless of who the heir is.
 
Top