Una diferente ‘Plus Ultra’ - the Avís-Trastámara Kings of All Spain and the Indies (Updated 11/7)

Without having to manage the Spanish overseas empire and only having one front to focus on in the war against the Turk, I hope Charles V is remembered more fondly than as simply a failure. Karl V Augustus! :p

And without American Gold flowing to his treasury or the ability to squeeze Castile for revenue, I think he will have a harder time paying his armies.
 
And without American Gold flowing to his treasury or the ability to squeeze Castile for revenue, I think he will have a harder time paying his armies.

American wealth was more a drain that led to the failure of Spain, and another thing that needed the Emperor's attention. The real wealth was from Burgundy and its capital, in the economic sense of the term.

With a consolidated territory, it may well be that the Habsburgs finally make the HRE into a centralized nation.
 
And without American Gold flowing to his treasury or the ability to squeeze Castile for revenue, I think he will have a harder time paying his armies.

Considering that the Burgundian realms equaled if not surpassed the wealth acquired from the Americas he won't have an issue at all.

Without having to manage the Spanish overseas empire and only having one front to focus on in the war against the Turk, I hope Charles V is remembered more fondly than as simply a failure. Karl V Augustus! :p

We can only hope :D
 
Last edited:
American wealth was more a drain that led to the failure of Spain, and another thing that needed the Emperor's attention. The real wealth was from Burgundy and its capital, in the economic sense of the term.

With a consolidated territory, it may well be that the Habsburgs finally make the HRE into a centralized nation.

Considering that the Burgundian realms equaled if not surpassed the wealth acquired from the Americas he won't have an issue at all.



We can only hope :D

Yes, I didn't mean that American gold was the main source of his wealth (it wouldn't be until later habsburgs, and wouldn't be the principal source), and of course the real wealth was in the Netherlands. The first half of his reign, the burden of Charles expenses was financed by his Burgundian and Italian territories, but as time progressed he turned more to Castile, where his power was far greater and parliament could not deny him taxes (and he even had methods to increase taxation without asking the Cortes).

What I was trying to imply is that, in OTL, Charles had problems with finances (he had to ask loans to Genovese and German bankers, his son declared bankruptcy a year after his abdication), even though he had Castile, Aragon and the American empire, so ITTL, if he has to face the same threats (France, Protestants, Ottomans) without them, he will have less resources and thus I suppose he will be less successful, or he will have to squeeze the Netherlands more (which I think will harm economy there, and/or lead to revolts similar to the ones his succesor suffered when he tried).

And, about the effects of the gold, yeah, it created a huge inflation that was extremely harmful to Spanish economy; however, it was horrible to the lower and middle classes, not really for the Crown, who had "free cash": I think that if you asked a XVI century king if he prefered a lot of gold now, or prosperity within a century, he would chose the former, especially when his plans involve expensive armies marching through Europe.
 
I figured a while back that if I butterflied away every single person born after the PoD (1498) I'd have an unrecognizable mess on my hands, so, like many others, Anne of Bohemia and Hungary is still going to be born in the same capacity as she was OTL.

In this case would you consider a Further Austria/Inner Austria/Milan inheritance prudent for Ferdinand's ITTL counterpart? Obviously Charles V isn't going to want to split up the inheritance, but his younger brother could be a good arbiter for Italian affairs and a firm Hapsburg boot on Northern Italy.

IOTL Charles V and Ferdinand of Austria had exactly this argument. In the Burgundian and Iberian possessions the eldest son usually inherited everything or at least most of the inheritance, whereas in the German possessions the inheritance was usually divided under a nominal joint rule. IOTL Ferdinand naturally argued that should be extended to the entire inheritance, whereas Charles was initially inclined to even claim his 'Austrian' share. The OTL agreement was a reasonable compromise, since it left Charles and his house with a stake in the Empire (through the Burgundian possessions), and it also kept the Austrian Hereditary Lands intact.
Another division Charles getting Castille-Aragon and Ferdinand getting Austria-Burgundy would have meant Ferdinand as the Habsburg candidate for the Imperial throne. What definitely would have helped for that to happen, would have been a surviving Philip the Handsome.

Now ITTL Philip the Handsome doesn't go the Castille-Aragon, so he likely won't get ill about the same time. This means Philip will succeed Maximilian, before either Charles or (TTL) Ferdinand, he is likely to based from the Burgundian Lands. This could postpone the inheritance of both of them for a while. If the Habsburg husband of Anna of Bohemia & Hungary inherits those kingdoms in right of his wife (elected due to the marital connection to the previous dynasty), then he will already get a part of his inheritance upon this event (if that happens). Before that, upon reaching adulthood, they will be used as governors by their father to administer a part of Habsburg realms.
 
Yes, I didn't mean that American gold was the main source of his wealth (it wouldn't be until later habsburgs, and wouldn't be the principal source), and of course the real wealth was in the Netherlands. The first half of his reign, the burden of Charles expenses was financed by his Burgundian and Italian territories, but as time progressed he turned more to Castile, where his power was far greater and parliament could not deny him taxes (and he even had methods to increase taxation without asking the Cortes).

Yeah sorry about that didn't mean to jump down your throats over it ha. But in many ways one could see this working out better for Charles since without the endless access to Spains American gold he'll have to restrain his urge to respond with force and seek a more diplomatic approach.

What I was trying to imply is that, in OTL, Charles had problems with finances (he had to ask loans to Genovese and German bankers, his son declared bankruptcy a year after his abdication), even though he had Castile, Aragon and the American empire, so ITTL, if he has to face the same threats (France, Protestants, Ottomans) without them, he will have less resources and thus I suppose he will be less successful, or he will have to squeeze the Netherlands more (which I think will harm economy there, and/or lead to revolts similar to the ones his succesor suffered when he tried).

Most of his financial issues from early on stemmed from just France going to war with him over Flanders and other bits of Burgundy so that's probably going to happen regardless and probably with the same results since Charles won those early conflicts without Spanish help. But many of those future conflicts can easily be butterflied away by the fact that Charles isn't ruling a demense that completely encircles France so less threatening. And hopefully less costly wars as a result.

Turks are going to be an issue regardless so no helping that.

IMHO when it comes to the Protestant reformation with Charles having sole focus on the HRE I think his handling of the situation will be far more successful.

I think overall his reign will be marked by somewhat less conflicts and more ITL empire building forming a coherent state out of the HRE following the legacy of his grandfather and father. Which should in many ways help with his financial situation hopefully.
 
Yeah sorry about that didn't mean to jump down your throats over it ha. But in many ways one could see this working out better for Charles since without the endless access to Spains American gold he'll have to restrain his urge to respond with force and seek a more diplomatic approach.

It's okey, don't need to apologise, I like this debate (I may have sounded a bit pedantic in my first post, it's my fault:oops:). Seen as you put it, yeah, it could mean Charles wouldn't try to smash opposition at first. On the other hand, if it doesn't work, the problem would be more difficult to solve by the force of arms.

Most of his financial issues from early on stemmed from just France going to war with him over Flanders and other bits of Burgundy so that's probably going to happen regardless and probably with the same results since Charles won those early conflicts without Spanish help. But many of those future conflicts can easily be butterflied away by the fact that Charles isn't ruling a demense that completely encircles France so less threatening. And hopefully less costly wars as a result.

Indeed, the initial financial burden originated because of the Italian Wars, but also because of the obscene amounts of money Charles borrowed to bribe the electors and get elected. To repay that debt, or part of it, he rented what today is Venezuela to the family of bankers he owed the money to. And, again (don't want to sound pedantic, sorry:coldsweat:), he wouldn't have Naples, which at the time was quite rich, so it is another lost source of revenue.

I seen your point in that a France not feeling encircled may be less aggresive, but on the other hand that very same France may feel powerful enough to meddle more in the HRE or Italy, so it depends on how one assumes the decisions Francis would take. The Ottoman threat could be a rallying point for the German princes under the Emperor, and so help strenghten the Holy Roman Empire into something more cohesive and less battlefield-of-Europe, or weaken the Emperor and erode more the imperial institutions, it's a metter of perspective again.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, I didn't realized what Janprimus has pointed, that Philip of Habsburg will survive ITTL because he will not go to Spain.
 
5. El Estado del Reino - Part II: Desarrollo del interior
~ El estado del reino ~
Part II: Desarrollo del interior
Iberian Peninsula c. 1500-1515
Union.png


- De flamencos, italianos y lana -
The imminence of Miguel’s coming of age and the reality of an Iberian union must have given Isabel of Castile a second wind, as she spent the last 14 years of her life in a flurry of activity - much of it quite ambitious in scope. Of all Spain’s natural industries, perhaps its most consistently lucrative was its tradition of pasturage. Since the 12th century, Castilians had secured a monopoly on wool in Western Europe, owing to the high quality yield of the native Merino sheep. This monopoly was protected by a powerful association of sheep ranchers known as the Mesta (El Honrado Concejo de la Mesta). In Castile, the Mesta had been formally authorized since 1347, during the reign of Alfonso XI, and it had been steadily growing in wealth and influence ever since, becoming a virtual ‘fourth estate’ by the late 15th century. The laws of Castile had made the major cañadas (traditional north-south right-of-ways for transhumance) virtually untouchable, protecting them from any form of development besides clearage. This withheld significant swaths of arable land from traditional agriculture, putting Castile consistently at risk of a subsistence crisis. Where traditional agriculture did have its space, the harm of the Mesta’s privileges was still felt, with wayward herds of sheep and cattle frequently trampling crops, destroying barriers, and overgrazing already sparse areas of the Meseta Central.

Mesta.jpg

Una cañada

For most of her reign, Isabel of Castile was a strong supporter of the Mesta, but by the beginning of the 16th century it was becoming more and more obvious that the Mesta, as it stood, was doing more harm than benefit. Wool-farming - especially as it was done under the supervision of the Mesta - was only an agricultural pursuit by technicality: while they brought in a steady stream of revenue, sheep were only to be eaten at the end of their productive lives - hardly often enough to qualify as a reliable food source and certainly not often enough to replace the loss in much needed staple crops caused by the irregularities of pastoralism. Isabel did not want to break the Mesta, but rather rein it in. As long as the vast majority of Castile’s space and natural resources were being used for this lone, non-manufacturing, export-based enterprise, the middle classes of Spain could not grow at the same pace as they were in, say, England or France.

The “reyes de lana” were content to grow rich off their trade with the Low Countries while they paid their laborers incredibly meager wages, but for the Crown this was not a satisfactory arrangement. In May of 1502, as part of the Leyes de Oviedo (penned and compiled by the royal jurist Juan López de Palacios Rubios), Isabel decreed that Castilian herdsman were required to be paid a minimum wage of 20 reales a day. In 1503, Isabel later added a corollary to the Leyes de Oviedo that intended to regulate and reduce the overly expansive cañadas. These developments earned the ire of the Mesta’s elite, and many violent skirmishes occurred between the Mesta’s herdsmen and the Santa Hermandad (the royal peacekeeping militia) throughout Andalucía, Extremadura, and Murcia. It was not until October of 1511 that the representatives of the Mesta and of the Crown met in La Hinojosa (near Cuenca), where reparations were paid to the members of the Mesta and the stipulations of the Leyes de Oviedo were fully ratified.

MestaInvernada.png

Lands reserved for the wintering of sheep, c. 1500 and c. 1511

In order to more directly grow Castile’s deficient middle class, Isabel set about importing middle class individuals. Beginning in 1504, thousands of skilled Flemish and English textile workers were hired directly by the Crown to set up shop in Castile with housing prepared and a royal stipend to aid them in their enterprise, provided they 1) remain in Castile 8 months out of the year for the first ten years, 2) hire at least one native-born Castilian apprentice for the duration of those 10 years, 3) raise their children in Castile and educate them in exclusively Castilian institutions, and 4) did not neglect their trade or sink into vagrancy - all of which would be inspected yearly by the local alcalde de barrio, who would receive a bonus in pay for this service, as raised by the locality that volunteered to “adopt” a Fleming artisan and his family. Furthermore, these artisans would receive a monetary boon of 2,000 reales for every legitimate child they conceived in Castile. From 1504 to 1515, nearly 13,000 textile workers - primarily from the Low Countries - were settled in Castile, with most being concentrated in Asturias, Cantabria, and Galicia (more than a thousand each were also present in León and Castilla la Vieja). This policy would succeed in its goal, with anywhere from 16,000 to 24,000 adult males being employed in some capacity in wool-working ventures started by these Flemings by the year 1530. Isabel would eventually realize that cutting out the middleman in such a manner was less beneficial in the North - where the Low Countries already controlled shipping - than it would be in the South. This prompted her to redirect the program further south, and from 1510-1530, around 9,000 non-Castilian textile workers were transplanted or migrated to the cities and towns south of the Sistema Central.

But encouraging artisanship was not sufficient to fully develop a well rounded, native Spanish middle class. The problem was that the merchant class in Southern and Eastern Iberia - the centers of the peninsula’s trade - was almost exclusively Genoese in origin or was in their employ. Genoese merchants had been present in the peninsula for centuries, but only truly began to cement their presence in the 13th century when the Reconquista began to accelerate. The vacuum left by the expulsion of the Moorish and Jewish merchant classes was also filled by these Genoese, who cornered the unexploited markets rather quickly. In Valencia, there was a sizeable Genoese quarter that was sold and thereafter considered a sovereign colony of the city-state. While these newcomers assimilated into Castilian and Aragonese society - settling permanently, adopting the language, and paying the taxes - the exclusivity of their profession made them a class somewhat foreign to all other facets of the society which they entered, thus retaining their bond with Genoa and all the prejudices that came with it.

Genova.jpg

Génova

This arrangement kept “los genoveses” rich and filled the coffers of their ancient mother city, but ultimately benefited the common Spaniard very little. The preference for trade exclusively with Genoa left Spanish markets undiversified, and tied their fortunes directly to those of the city-state, which, truth be told, were facing a long decline. The problem did not entirely lie with the entrenched, Hispanicized Genoese (who considered themselves Castilian or Aragonese), but rather with the constant stream of transient merchants who had no vested interest in Spain beyond speeding up its transfer of wealth. As Genoa was a merchant republic, virtually all of its private enterprise was centered around trade - usually maritime. Consequently, the Genoese could flood the markets of localities with more varied workforces in numbers that said localities simply could not compete with. The Catholic Monarchs were conscious of this dilemma and how it might affect the future of Spain’s economy - as Isabel remarked in 1501, “Even as the immense and fortuitous wealth of the Indies is unveiled by the sons of Castile, the Genoan remains one step behind him while the realm and its inhabitants still remain athwart the entire Ocean Sea.”

Genova2.png

Areas of Genoese market infiltration (Yellow: complete control, Cream: preeminence, Orange: the Republic of Genoa)

While the introduction of Flemish wool-workers into Castile heightened the competition with the Genoese, a more severe readjustment of fortunes was necessary in order to tip the balance in favor of the native Spaniard. Both Isabel and Fernando implemented similar residency requirements for merchants involved in overseas trade in the cities of Sevilla and Valencia, but such was fruitless, as the majority of Genoese merchants within their respective realms were already permanent inhabitants. Isabel also introduced several initiatives to convince Castilian noblemen and retired bureaucrats to buy property in Andalucía (especially in its principal cities, and especially in Sevilla) or to try their hand at playing the southern markets, but there was little room for newcomers. Finally, in March of 1500, Isabel formally proclaimed an embargo against the city-state of Genoa due to France’s enforced protectorate over it, prohibiting any and all trade and declaring all goods involved to be subject to confiscation. When the war with France ended, Isabel refused to lift the embargo, despite vehement protests. The Crown of Aragon followed suit in 1503, declaring that the embargo would hold until French troops departed Liguria. Likewise, all colonies of the city-state within the borders of Aragon and Castile were revested to both crowns.

These were all borderline reckless moves - impoverishing hundreds, racking up royal dept, substantially knocking Spain’s international credit, and causing an explosive growth of the black market - but it would pay dividends in the long run. While the overall influx of wealth into Spain dropped slightly, the distribution of what wealth there was improved significantly. In 1500, the average day’s wages for a common Castilian laborer was about 16 reales [1], yet by 1520, that number had increased to 40 reales [2]. Even more so did the income of the artisan class improve, with the average craftsman receiving roughly 90 reales [3] a day by 1525. However, even better things were to come in the reign of Miguel.

___________________________________
[1] 2 USD
[2] 5 USD
[3] 11.25 USD
 
Last edited:
Sorry for the delay! But long story short - the Catholic Monarchs (primarily Isabel) have passed reforms and begun programs to allow the Spanish economy a greater level of self-sufficiency. The way they went about it has caused some discord and bad blood, but ultimately 1) the living conditions of the average Spaniard are improving, 2) the Mesta is no longer an unbreakable corporate body turning Castile into a giant swath of overgrazed pastureland, 3) the Spanish smallhold farmer has found a powerful advocate in the Crown and food production is increasing, 4) Spanish manufacturing has gotten a jumpstart thanks to a legion of Flemings who prefer warmer weather and don't want to pay for shipping, and 5) the world of Spanish high finance and banking is slowly shifting back into the hands of native Spaniards.

Without having to manage the Spanish overseas empire and only having one front to focus on in the war against the Turk, I hope Charles V is remembered more fondly than as simply a failure. Karl V Augustus! :p

Turk and Frenchman alike will come to fear mighty-chinned Karl and his ruffle-sleeved landsknechts, of that you can be sure ;)

What is your plan with Maria, the OTL wife of the King of Portugal, I think she can marry the King of Scotland instead..

I'm currently working out where all the PoD-affected figures are going to end up, but England will definitely be of interest to Spanish foreign policy in the years to come!
 
Last edited:
Also, for those of you who haven't seen the changes made to the update before this one: the Infanta Isabel died in 1511 (age 42) and Isabel of Castile died in 1513 (age 62). The Infanta also had three other children after Miguel, two of whom lived past childhood: Beatriz (b. 1504) and Enrique (b. 1510).
 
I'm loving this timeline so far! I've always liked the dual potential of the PoD, allowing for interesting alternate paths for Iberia and the Habsburgs alike, so I'll definitely be following this.

I'm not sure I understood what prompted the large-scale economic reforms in Spain in the last update though. Was something similar attempted OTL? I'm not that familiar with Spanish history, I'm afraid.
 
*facepalm* You couldn't have let Isabella of Aragon become Isabella II of Castile instead and do all these things instead of making her mother live so ludicrus long? Also, why Enrique? Manuel or Ferdinand or even Alfonso would have made more sense. He sould have been born earlier than 1510, Isabella would have been 40 or older than.

I do like how you have handled the economic reforms however. Now maybe Spain can have a stronger middleclass.
 
Love the way you are heading, and your writting style, you've found a loyal fan on me.

However, I don't see Isabella enacting those reforms, needed as they were. The Mesta was as powerful as you have pointed (some of the greater nobles were part of it), but the Castilian Crown was content with them as long as they payed their taxes, which were a huge source of revenue (greater than what they would have got from farmers). There was a high tension in the late XV and early XVI centuries in Castile between wool ranchers and exporters, on one side, and local cloth manufacturers and farmers on the other, but it reached an equilibrium during the reign of Isabella: a third of the wool production would be reserved to Castilian producers, and the rest could be exported to Flanders (don't really know if this was finally enforced or exporters found ways to bypass it). So, the Crown didn't really have an incentive to disrupt the balance, at least during Isabellas reign (after her death, it did break, with both lobbies asking the successive regents to increase/lift restrictions, it would be a major theme of the comunero rebelion and the Mesta would finally triumph under Charles I).

The problem of Castile was not the lack of skillful manufacturers, it did, indeed, have a thriving cloth manufacturing industry in the north half at the beginning of the XVI, centered around Segovia. However, this industry had two problems:
  1. The Castilian peasants were poor. It was not just that the Mesta made it more difficult to grow crops with its royal privilegies, it is that the peasants were extremely overtaxed, many had to ask loans just to pay for the taxes before the crops had grown; if then the harvest was bad, they were broke. This meant the inner market could not pull the demand of goods, because there were few who could afford them.
  2. The economical system was directed towards exporting raw materials, especially wool, and neglected local manufacturing (which provided less taxes), so the Crown's policies benefited the exporters (the dynastic ties with Flanders cemented this). Laws requiring Castilian producers a certain degree of quality damaged the locals, who were left with lower quality wool, while this was not enforced on Flemish imports, making Castilians less competitive.
So bringing Flemish wool workers is not the key (in fact, it may alienate Castilian producers from northern Castile, given the structure of guilds of the time), but lowering taxes, lifting regulations and maybe tax wool exports and clothes imports to incentivize local production (this is my suggestion for the next monarch).
 
I'm loving this timeline so far! I've always liked the dual potential of the PoD, allowing for interesting alternate paths for Iberia and the Habsburgs alike, so I'll definitely be following this.

I'm not sure I understood what prompted the large-scale economic reforms in Spain in the last update though. Was something similar attempted OTL? I'm not that familiar with Spanish history, I'm afraid.

Glad to have you join me :)

I didn't really intend for these reforms to come across as sweeping as they might have (I'll explain this more in depth in my response to Onerom's post), but as for why Isabel chose her latter years, I'd say it's two things: 1) It's not unusual for someone to get more anxious about getting their affairs in order once they realize they're on the way out, especially when it concerns providing for one's grandson and heir, and 2) the conquest of Granada, the first Italian War, and the rebellious Mudéjares have kept Isabel quite busy for the last decade and a half, and only now (beginning in 1500/1501) is she comfortable enough to be able to take stock of her kingdom and butt a few heads.

*facepalm* You couldn't have let Isabella of Aragon become Isabella II of Castile instead and do all these things instead of making her mother live so ludicrus long? Also, why Enrique? Manuel or Ferdinand or even Alfonso would have made more sense. He sould have been born earlier than 1510, Isabella would have been 40 or older than.

I do like how you have handled the economic reforms however. Now maybe Spain can have a stronger middleclass.

Sorry partner, I didn't think I could cheat her out of a somewhat premature death, even with the PoD. Call it "Final Destination" syndrome. I have adjusted the year her second son was born, however. Also, I don't quite see what's so "ludicrously long" about Isabel's life span of 62, especially given her stoutness of figure and tough constitution - neither of which the Infanta inherited.

As for the name of the second son, Enrique, I had thought to give him a name more in the Portuguese tradition (plus I just thought the name would serve to differentiate TTL from OTL, to be honest), but it totally slipped my mind that Enrique IV was responsible for the Castilian Civil War... so Enrique's out. Naming him Manuel would be a little problematic, as Portuguese separatists (who are bound to emerge eventually) would find a Portuguese heir named Manuel to be both an easy choice for a pretender and a nice source of propaganda. As for Alfonso, I don't think the Infanta's husband would be too keen on naming one of his sons after the man that his wife was formerly infatuated with and who he possibly had murdered (unlikely, but still). So Fernando it is!

Love the way you are heading, and your writting style, you've found a loyal fan on me.

However, I don't see Isabella enacting those reforms, needed as they were. The Mesta was as powerful as you have pointed (some of the greater nobles were part of it), but the Castilian Crown was content with them as long as they payed their taxes, which were a huge source of revenue (greater than what they would have got from farmers). There was a high tension in the late XV and early XVI centuries in Castile between wool ranchers and exporters, on one side, and local cloth manufacturers and farmers on the other, but it reached an equilibrium during the reign of Isabella: a third of the wool production would be reserved to Castilian producers, and the rest could be exported to Flanders (don't really know if this was finally enforced or exporters found ways to bypass it). So, the Crown didn't really have an incentive to disrupt the balance, at least during Isabellas reign (after her death, it did break, with both lobbies asking the successive regents to increase/lift restrictions, it would be a major theme of the comunero rebelion and the Mesta would finally triumph under Charles I).

The problem of Castile was not the lack of skillful manufacturers, it did, indeed, have a thriving cloth manufacturing industry in the north half at the beginning of the XVI, centered around Segovia. However, this industry had two problems:
  1. The Castilian peasants were poor. It was not just that the Mesta made it more difficult to grow crops with its royal privilegies, it is that the peasants were extremely overtaxed, many had to ask loans just to pay for the taxes before the crops had grown; if then the harvest was bad, they were broke. This meant the inner market could not pull the demand of goods, because there were few who could afford them.
  2. The economical system was directed towards exporting raw materials, especially wool, and neglected local manufacturing (which provided less taxes), so the Crown's policies benefited the exporters (the dynastic ties with Flanders cemented this). Laws requiring Castilian producers a certain degree of quality damaged the locals, who were left with lower quality wool, while this was not enforced on Flemish imports, making Castilians less competitive.
So bringing Flemish wool workers is not the key (in fact, it may alienate Castilian producers from northern Castile, given the structure of guilds of the time), but lowering taxes, lifting regulations and maybe tax wool exports and clothes imports to incentivize local production (this is my suggestion for the next monarch).

Thank you for your interest :) I'll be honest, I'm no economist, and it's been a couple years since I read John Elliott's book (which gives an exhaustive outline of the Castilian and Aragonese economic climates at this time), and I also feel a lot of elaboration has been lost in trying to get this update out as soon as possible and to keep it at a digestible size. Here's what I probably should have elaborated in the last update (hah):

1) The reforms Isabel or Fernando passed were not quite as severe as they might have come across. For instance, the Catholic Monarchs attempts to dislodge the Genoese was only a series of two mild, ineffectual laws and an embargo, which was more or less justified given the war with France at the time it was passed. The reforms passed to regulate the Mesta were a little more intensive, but can't really be considered intrusive. The minimum wage that was declared for the Mesta's herdsmen (20 reales) is a little more than 2 dollars a day, so it was primarily meant to ensure that the Mesta paid their workers the baseline. Also, the reduction of wintering land and right of ways for the Mesta was not necessarily restrictive either: most of the land that was reserved for them was unused for most of the year, so the reductions only forced them to remain more consistently within the paths they've chosen (so as to prevent their flocks from running amok). The violence that broke out between the Mesta and the Santa Hermandad was precipitated by the Mesta's annoyance with being boxed in, not necessarily a reaction to their old rights being infringed upon, and it was by no means a civil war - more of a general tendency for the two groups to brawl. What has been established by the Mesta's consent to the Leyes de Oviedo is exactly what you mentioned - equilibrium - albeit a one that will eventually tip in favor of more mercantilist policies.

2) As for the Castilian artisan class, I realize that importing foreigners is a poor tactic - and also a little ironic considering Isabel's attempts to shrink the Genoese merchant class - but the point of this program was not to fill in a population gap in the workforce. Rather, the real boon of introducing Flemish textile-workers was the technical expertise, market savviness, and resources that they would bring with them, all of which were very quickly diffused through Castilian society thanks to the strict residency requirements (having to spend most of their time in Castile, having to give their children exclusively Castilian educations, having to hire at least one native Castilian apprentice, etc.) The total number of immigrants from the Low Countries (and elsewhere) was only about 20,000 in total (I should've elaborated that the 13,000 in the North and the later 9,000 in the South were numbers that overlapped given internal migration) is about 0.44% of the population of Castile (which stood at about 4.5 million c. 1500), so it's a drop in the ocean and not likely to put too many Castilians out of work.

3) All in all, I had to make the reforms attempted by the Catholic Monarchs in the last update a little ham-fisted for the sake of realism. Luckily for Castile, more of the real rubber-hitting-the-road reforms that you mentioned in the latter part of your response will come to fruition during the reign of Miguel and of his successor - especially without Charles V and the Comunero revolt. What Isabel and Fernando have started with their reforms was a struggle - that is, a struggle for the rights and welfare of the Spanish peasant, for the advancement of the Spanish merchant, and against the preference given to foreign corporate bodies. When the riches of the Indies, both East and West, begin to flow in, Miguel will make sure that everyone else's access to those riches will be on Spain's terms and Spain's terms only.
 
Last edited:
I can't believe this is the third damn time I have to say this!

Kill of Isabella I in 1503 damn it! Woman was ailing since 1497 when Juan died. She has a capable heirress to Castile in her oldest daughter now and grandchildren to settle the sucession. There is nothing more for her to do now!

Make sure Miguel is sworn in as prince of Girona to Aragon is paramount to importance, Ferdinand can die in 1514 and his bastard, the archbishop of Zaragoza can serve as regent until Miguel reachest his majority. Isabella will be content with that, her son will inherit a empire. Give her some cities in Aragon as her own as compensation.

Also, don't give me that bullshit about Isabella of Aragon needing some kind of premature death, with help and love she would not have a worse health than her siblings and given she had a kingdom to rule she would have good pyshicians to help her. She would have recovered her health as it was nessesary. Manuel seems like he was a good husband so she has him as emotional support (don't make her Isabella the mad however). Also 1510 is very late for a second son, a infante Manuel or/and infante Alfonso or/and infante Fernando in 1502-05 that would give Isabella I some peace of mind before she died.

Kill of Isabella to early and you risk Manuel getting remarried and having more children with would upset the iberian union even more if he and Isabella had more than one son. Philip the handsome won't pull some bullshit because he can't get past Manuel or Isabella and two adult rulers from 1500-1520 will aid iberia in defence against france. In fact not killing of Isabella II until 1518-1520 would make THE WHOLE THING MORE STABLE FOR MIGUEL SINCE HE WILL INHERIT A LARGE EMPIRE AND NEEDS TO GET USED TO DEALING WITH IT!!!!
 
Last edited:
I can't believe this is the third damn time I have to say this!

Kill of Isabella I in 1503 damn it! Woman was ailing since 1497 when Juan died. She has a capable heirress to Castile in her oldest daughter now and grandchildren to settle the sucession. There is nothing more for her to do now!

Make sure Miguel is sworn in as prince of Girona to Aragon is paramount to importance, Ferdinand can die in 1514 and his bastard, the archbishop of Zaragoza can serve as regent until Miguel reachest his majority. Isabella will be content with that, her son will inherit a empire. Give her some cities in Aragon as her own as compensation.

Also, don't give me that bullshit about Isabella of Aragon needing some kind of premature death, with help and love she would not have a worse health than her siblings and given she had a kingdom to rule she would have good pyshicians to help her. She would have recovered her health as it was nessesary. Manuel seems like he was a good husband so she has him as emotional support (don't make her Isabella the mad however). Also 1510 is very late for a second son, a infante Manuel or/and infante Alfonso or/and infante Fernando in 1502-05 that would give Isabella I some peace of mind before she died.

Kill of Isabella to early and you risk Manuel getting remarried and having more children with would upset the iberian union even more if he and Isabella had more than one son. Philip the handsome won't pull some bullshit because he can't get past Manuel or Isabella and two adult rulers from 1500-1520 will aid iberia in defence against france. In fact not killing of Isabella II until 1518-1520 would make THE WHOLE THING MORE STABLE FOR MIGUEL SINCE HE WILL INHERIT A LARGE EMPIRE AND NEEDS TO GET USED TO DEALING WITH IT!!!!

Alright, easy there.
Firstly, I've changed things around in the second update on page 2: the Infanta's second son is named Fernando, and he was born 1504. He will survive to adulthood.
Secondly, while I'm glad you're so invested in this and I appreciate all the insight you've given me, this TL isn't a challenge to make things go as swimmingly as possible for the Iberian Union. Yes, what you've recommended would certainly make Miguel's succession more secure and give him the necessary training to form him into a much more capable ruler, but history rarely goes swimmingly and Miguel's very birth and survival is an enormously fortunate event for the three kingdoms, especially in the long run. Miguel is still receiving an intensive education from all three kingdoms and all their resources, and he is going to have an uncanny resolve about him, so I wouldn't worry that he's going to be incompetent - no, quite the opposite, really.
As for the Infanta, she was physically weak - even compared to the Infante Juan - there's no getting around that (her tendency to fast constantly made things even worse). She is exceedingly lucky to have been able to live so long. Manuel I was legitimately in love with her ITTL (it's hard to tell how strongly he felt IOTL), and he will be consequently be slow in remarrying, producing no more sons until his death.
Don't worry, an Iberian Union is still going to occur, and it will last into the present day without any significant interruption - nevermind the patriotism or the commercial interests of the Portuguese or anyone else.
I've moved and adjusted things on multiple occasions based on the very astute observations you've made, but this is simply the course I've chosen to take.
 
You are aware that her being physically weak can be helped with proper eating and help? Juan seems to have been weak his enire life, Isabellas health is more easily remedied than Juans. It's also more realistic she gets better than her mother somehow living for 12 more years.

Fine do it your way. I thought you might be one of the few writers who would be able to not screw over Isabella in favor of her son, but no.

Also Manuel married his sons behrothed after Maria died, so good luck with that. His love for Maria of Aragon did not prevent him for humilating Joao III, him staying widowed for the rest of his life is slim. But hey you said you wanted to be realistic.
 
Last edited:
Top