War of the French Succession?

Hm. Most Succession Wars didnt play out as civil wars, though. The Spanish one was an exception in that, not the rule. I see little reason to believe that France would NOT crown the Duke of Orleans, so what it comes down to would be a straight Franco-Spanish war - which of course Spain has no chance of winning until the rest of Europe decides to hammer on France for past grievances sake.

I agree, but only if Philip do not give up the Spanish throne. If he decides that Paris is more important than Madrid and gives up Spain in exchange of having his claims to the French throne recognized than I think Orleans would have no chance.
 

Susano

Banned
I agree, but only if Philip do not give up the Spanish throne. If he decides that Paris is more important than Madrid and gives up Spain in exchange of having his claims to the French throne recognized than I think Orleans would have no chance.

Yes, thats the most likely way for Philip to win. Of course, even without such a promise, some states might think that after all they can still switch sides later on (alliance fidelity wasnt a great value back then...), but such longterm planning in several states at once is unrealistic, of course. So, it comes down to - would Philip to so? He will think himself in the right for the Spanish throne as well, after all, and when he thought himself to be in the right he didnt care much for teh realities on the ground... (see War of the Quadruple Alliance).
 
Yes, thats the most likely way for Philip to win. Of course, even without such a promise, some states might think that after all they can still switch sides later on (alliance fidelity wasnt a great value back then...), but such longterm planning in several states at once is unrealistic, of course. So, it comes down to - would Philip to so? He will think himself in the right for the Spanish throne as well, after all, and when he thought himself to be in the right he didnt care much for teh realities on the ground... (see War of the Quadruple Alliance).

Sure, but all those territories in Italy didn't have the same value as France. He migth try to have them both, but when the possibility of Orleans be the king of France becomes more and more real I doubt he would prefer to be the Spanish king than to rule the senior Bourbon kindgom. It's a matter of importance. IOTL when he tried to conquer the Italian territory he was already firmly the king of Spain. Here his position is more fragile, and he would be forced to make a decision.
 
but if Philip V leaves the Spanish Crown for the French one, who gets the Spanish Crown? his son Louis? that leaves the King of Spain the Dauphin of France, maybe to his son Ferdinand, but that leaves the crown of Spain on the head of a 2 year old who is second in line to the French crown, after a 8 year old, so maybe make Philippe II, Duke of Orléans King of Spain, but the question really must be, how is Spain going to take all this King switching, having just gotten a new king, to have said king up and leave and dump them on to some one else because he doesn't really like their country, and would all this look like a good time for Archduke Charles to push his claim, because under the will of Charles II of Spain if Philip V became king of France his brother the duc de Berri became king of Spain and if the duc de Berri became king of France (or as in OTL and TTL dies without issue) it's Archduke Charles that becames King of Spain
 
but if Philip V leaves the Spanish Crown for the French one, who gets the Spanish Crown? his son Louis? that leaves the King of Spain the Dauphin of France, maybe to his son Ferdinand, but that leaves the crown of Spain on the head of a 2 year old who is second in line to the French crown, after a 8 year old, so maybe make Philippe II, Duke of Orléans King of Spain, but the question really must be, how is Spain going to take all this King switching, having just gotten a new king, to have said king up and leave and dump them on to some one else because he doesn't really like their country, and would all this look like a good time for Archduke Charles to push his claim, because under the will of Charles II of Spain if Philip V became king of France his brother the duc de Berri became king and if the duc de Berri became king of France (or as in OTL and TTL dies without issue) it's Archduke Charles that becames King of France

If Berry doesn't die then Charles' will could be applied, and he becomes king (as it stablished that if Anjou should inherit France then Berry would become king of Spain). But if he is dead as IOTL than Spain is in a turmoil.

The problem of Charles becoming king of Spain is that he was already the Emperor, and if a union between France and Spain wasn't accept the same is valid for Austria-Spain. And there were no more male Habsburgs to claim the Spanish throne. In the end it would be needed some kind of compromise as IOTL
 

Susano

Banned
What Archduke Charles? Do you mean per chance Emperor Charles as he already was by 1713? GB and the NL were adamant in not allowing an Austrian-Spanish union in the War of the Spanish Succession already, they still wouldnt allow it.

The other questions would be decided during the war. If France/Orelans remains strong through the wa,r but still loses, Orleans might as compensation gain Spain. If not, then not, and Ferdinand most likely becomes King. And why shouldnt Spain like it? The nobles get a weak (because in the minority) king with a regency, a vcuum for them to gain influence. And the commoners dont matter ;)
 
What Archduke Charles? Do you mean per chance Emperor Charles as he already was by 1713? GB and the NL were adamant in not allowing an Austrian-Spanish union in the War of the Spanish Succession already, they still wouldnt allow it.

Charles was an Emperor, a King, and an Archduke, as Holy Roman Emperor, King of Hungary and Archduke of Austria, i prefer to call post-30-years-war Holy Roman Emperors Archdukes of Austria because it more clearly shows were their power lay.
 

Susano

Banned
Charles was an Emperor, a King, and an Archduke, as Holy Roman Emperor, King of Hungary and Archduke of Austria, i prefer to call post-30-years-war Holy Roman Emperors Archdukes of Austria because it more clearly shows were their power lay.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Thats plain silly. They were Emperors. It doesnt mean what power the title had - thats what they officially were, and what everybody else and they themselves called them. More importantly, "Archduke of Austria" is a title EVERY male Habsburg holds, so when you just say "Archduke Charles" you do make it appear as if you didnt know Joseph already had died.
 
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Thats plain silly. They were Emperors. It doesnt mean what power the title had - thats what they officially were, and what everybody else and they themselves called them. More importantly, "Archduke of Austria" is a title EVERY male Habsburg holds, so when you just say "Archduke Charles" you do make it appear as if you didnt know Joseph already had died.

ya i guess your right, but when i think of HREs i'm thinking Charlemagne to Charles V, Ferdinand I to Ferdinand III are in a kind of Gray zone for me not quite what i think of as HREs but not quite Austrian, but in my head Leopold I to Charles I of Austria are Austrian Archduke/Emperors more then anything else
 
Top