WI/AHC: The Habsburgs Are Like The Hohenstaufens and Luxemburgs

So, the Hohenstaufens were first elected as emperors in 1138 (Conrad III), and the dynasty died out roughly 130 years later (in 1268) when Conradin (three greats-grandson of Conrad III's younger brother) was executed (although they'd lost the imperial title in 1254 already). In that time, they had climbed from dukes of Swabia to being Holy Roman Emperor, king of Italy & Sicily, king of Jerusalem, and arguably, the most powerful men in Europe. They likewise held the titles of count of Burgundy and one was married to the heiress presumptive of Spain, while another was betrothed to a Hungarian princess and still another to a Dane.

The Luxemburgs are a similar story. Count Henri of Luxemburg, a ruler of a reasonably small state in the empire was elected as emperor in 1308. Emperor Sigmund of Luxemburg (his great-grandson) died in 1437, holding the titles of Holy Roman Emperor, king of Bohemia, king of Hungary and Croatia, and other members of his family had been margrave of Brandenburg (which he himself had also held) and of Moravia as well duke of Luxemburg.

The Habsburgs, on the other hand, had their first member elected in 1273 (Rudolf I), lost the imperial crown in 1308 (Albert I; although Friedrich the Fair held onto the German crown a bit longer (1330), got their next shot at the imperial dignity in 1437. This time proved more lasting, since with the exception of one reign in the 18th century, the Habsburgs (or Habsburg-Lorraines) ruled as emperors until the dissolution of the empire, amassing titles like king of Spain, Naples, Sicily, Sardinia, Hungary and Bohemia, duke of Burgundy, Milan, etc etc.

The Hohenstaufens and Luxemburgs burned bright for about a century before going extinct in the male line. The Habsburgs, however, managed to stick it out for the long haul. The challenge, should you accept, is simply this: pick a date - 1273 or 1437, and let the Habsburgs only last a few generations (both Hohenstaufens and Luxemburgs were on the throne for 130 years - interruptions aside in the latter case - so that would be 1403 for a 1273 date or 1567 for a 1437 date) on the imperial throne before going extinct. But there's a catch. Since both other dynasties (Hohenstaufen and Luxemburgs) held kingdoms outside the empire (Sicily-Jerusalem for the Staufers and Hungary-Croatia for the Luxemburgs), the Habsburgs need to do the same in their 130 year span. Which kingdom(s) it is, is entirely up to you - though it should preferably be plausible (not like Habsburgs invade Russia and become tsars, sort of thing).

Have fun
 
Have Charles of Habsburg have an unfortunate accident in the summer of 1519. The electors decide to elect the Pope's candidate, Frederick of Saxony, over the sixteen year old Ferdinand of Habsburg. Ferdinand is now King of Castile and Aragon.
 
That's pretty easy, Philip of Burgundy only has girls with Joan of Castille.

Even with Philipp living longer (and he'd be pretty close to ASB were he to make 1567) that doesn't really fit. Karl V and/or Ferdinand I only having girls make sense (Ferdinand died in the 1560s) though.

Have Charles of Habsburg have an unfortunate accident in the summer of 1519. The electors decide to elect the Pope's candidate, Frederick of Saxony, over the sixteen year old Ferdinand of Habsburg. Ferdinand is now King of Castile and Aragon.

And come Friedrich's death in the 1520s, would Ferdinand throw his hat into the ring? Because as I stated, they should hang onto the imperial title until around 1403/1567.
 
The other question I've got is WHY the Habsburgs managed to be as successful (certainly flourished) as opposed to their predecessors. The Hohenstaufens tended to marry older women (Constance of sicily, then Constance of Aragon-Hungary, Margarethe (?) of Babenberg) so that might've played a role. The Luxemburgs also didn't have the most sterling luck in begetting heirs
 
Bad Genes or Bad Luck?
Out of curiosity: would it be considered a Hohenstaufen/Luxemburg wank if OTL people had better luck begetting boys?

I mean, Barbarossa had several sons - two who were betrothed to Hungarian and Danish princesses respectively before dying young - but only one male line grandson, Friedrich II. Philipp of Swabia had two sons, but both were either stillborn/miscarried/died at birth.

Same could be said for Emperor Karl IV. He likewise only had one male-line grandchild (Eliska of Luxemburg, who married Albrecht of Habsburg), although his eldest son was married twice. His younger son was married to a widow who was quite a bit older than him, so I think that'd still be childless (maybe if said son were to marry his original betrothed - a Lorrainer princess IIRC). Johann Heinrich of Moravia (Karl's brother) had no male line grandkids.
 
Top