WI - Different 30YW

Suppose the Habsburgs don't inherit the Spanish throne - without Spanish involvement in the conflict, how would things have turned out in the greater scheme of things?
 
France might not care about Hapsburg hegemony. It makes for more internal fighting in the HRE and less external players, since two large Kingdoms on opposition factions are removed. If neither side gets a quick victory in the first 3 ish years, the end result is probably the same: total devastation of the lands inside the HRE and complete breakdown of order (in OTL unpaid troops usually became bandits)
 
Suppose the Habsburgs don't inherit the Spanish throne - without Spanish involvement in the conflict, how would things have turned out in the greater scheme of things?

Well before the 30YW would be a major change in the Italian Wars: Aragonian claim for the Naples would have nothing to do with Burgundian inheritance and Hapsburg interest in Northern Italy. The same goes for the military effort: France would be able to deal with the Spaniards and Germans separately. Financial situation for the Hapsburgs would be worse without American gold and silver and Spain would be probably better off in that regard because it has to finance a much smaller military and political activities. Without Spanish ‘global’ policies French Wars of Religion may end faster making France stronger by the time of the 30YW.

Taking into an account that the Netherlands were Hapsburg possessions, Spain does not have any interest in the 30YW and there is no help with troops and money to the Hapsburgs on the initial stage of war which means that even with the leadership they had, the Czechs may force Hapsburgs to make a peace. If this is not happening, there are no Spanish troops on the Swedish stage of war. France is much better positioned to take all the areas on their northern border they got in OTL. BTW, are the Netherlands rebellious? Strictly German Hapsburgs would have a hard time to fight them for 80 years even if just because they did not have money.
 
Well before the 30YW would be a major change in the Italian Wars: Aragonian claim for the Naples would have nothing to do with Burgundian inheritance and Hapsburg interest in Northern Italy. The same goes for the military effort: France would be able to deal with the Spaniards and Germans separately. Financial situation for the Hapsburgs would be worse without American gold and silver and Spain would be probably better off in that regard because it has to finance a much smaller military and political activities. Without Spanish ‘global’ policies French Wars of Religion may end faster making France stronger by the time of the 30YW.

Taking into an account that the Netherlands were Hapsburg possessions, Spain does not have any interest in the 30YW and there is no help with troops and money to the Hapsburgs on the initial stage of war which means that even with the leadership they had, the Czechs may force Hapsburgs to make a peace. If this is not happening, there are no Spanish troops on the Swedish stage of war. France is much better positioned to take all the areas on their northern border they got in OTL. BTW, are the Netherlands rebellious? Strictly German Hapsburgs would have a hard time to fight them for 80 years even if just because they did not have money.
Netherlands would be the richest land under imperial control and likely the seat (or one of the seats) of either the Emperor or his heir...
But Habsburg would still be allied and kinsmen of the Spanish rulers (and the union of the two kingdoms was only during Karl V’s kingdom and can very well be butterflied with either the survival of Juan, Prince of Asturias or Miguel da Paz or with Ferdinand of Austria as King of Castile and Aragon after his grandfather (aka Karl V never received the Spanish Crowns)
 

Derek Pullem

Kicked
Donor
I think it will be difficult to exclude Spain from the Italian Wars and any religious wars given that before Ferdinand died they were already established in Naples. Spain my play a reduced role in the later Italian wars which may mean that France is more successful but any threat to the Papal States will likely bring in Spain on the Papal side.

No 80 years war in the Netherlands for Spain will also mean it is less stretched financially and better placed to intervene decisively in the French Wars of Religion. In fact France may become the battleground for religion rather than Germany (or more correctly before Germany). Also Spain will be in a better position to prolong its annexation of Portugal.

Assuming a Catholic win in France of some description I would still expect a Spanish army to be involved in the alt-30 years war. But this army would be closer to the Swedes in its raison d'etre - late to the war and primarily there as "mercenaries" for the cause of their religion. A more Catholic leaning France may also decide to intervene on the Catholic side but all this will do is probably extend the war to the Netherlands (and possibly postpone the English Civil War??).

If anything the war becomes bloodier if that is possible. Probable end is a defeat but not extinction of Protestantism, with the peripheral nations of Europe (Sweden, England, The Netherlands) forming the core.

English Civil War may end up being regarded as an extension of 30 years war.
 
Netherlands would be the richest land under imperial control and likely the seat (or one of the seats) of either the Emperor or his heir...
But Habsburg would still be allied and kinsmen of the Spanish rulers (and the union of the two kingdoms was only during Karl V’s kingdom and can very well be butterflied with either the survival of Juan, Prince of Asturias or Miguel da Paz or with Ferdinand of Austria as King of Castile and Aragon after his grandfather (aka Karl V never received the Spanish Crowns)

The Netherlands had been the richest land in Europe but this did not prevent Maximillian, Charles V and Phillips II from being permanently out of money: there were traditional rules related to the taxation.

Not sure how exactly the Hapsburgs in that AH end up as close kinsmen of the Spanish rulers and which “two kingdoms” you are talking about (HRE was not a “kingdom”) but in OTL Spain had a vested interest in the 30 YW, security of the ‘Spanish Road’, which in this AH is absent. Being a relative does not automatically obliges a ruler to throw all resources of his kingdom into a major war in which he does not have interests. Not to mention that if Spain does not have the Netherlands (Belgium) there are no reinforcements on the Bohemian stage of war (they came from the Netherlands).

As far as the late (post Charles) split is involved, it is unrealistic and Ferdinand ending up as a king of Spain is a contradiction to the premise: the Hapsburgs are not ruling Spain. And it is absolutely unclear why would Charles (Hapsburg) would leave Spain to somebody who is not a Hapsburg.
 
As far as I remembered reading the Polish Population of Silesia especially the Protestant Population wanted to reattach to Poland during the 30 years war but the Poles chose their alliance with Austria...perhaps we can have the Polish parts of Silesia annexed to Poland in exchange of allying with the Protestant Czechs.

If the Habsburgs did not inherit the Spanish throne they will most likely go protestant.
 
I think it will be difficult to exclude Spain from the Italian Wars and any religious wars given that before Ferdinand died they were already established in Naples. Spain my play a reduced role in the later Italian wars which may mean that France is more successful but any threat to the Papal States will likely bring in Spain on the Papal side.

That's true. The big difference comparing to OTL is that eventually instead of 2 major players (Francis I and Charles V as an Emperor and King of Spain ) you have 3: Francis, Charles (as an Emperor) and King of Spain. Spanish (formally, Aragonian) interest is in Naples and they are in a firm possession of it by 1504. Spain may or may not be participating in a quarrel over control of the Northern Italy but there is no obvious reason for it to be committed up to the OTL degree because there is no clear gain and because excessive strengthening of the imperial position in Northern/Central Italy is just as dangerous as French. Position of the Papacy and specific Italian states had been changing more than once in OTL and the same would probably happen in AH but they are not the critical factor.

In OTL Charles V eventually got an upper hand in Italy because he had a combination of the Spanish and German contingents. In this AH he has only the Germans, which is not enough for a strategic victory. In OTL import of gold and silver from the Americas started in 1505 and kept growing. Of course, it was not covering the war-related expenses but it was a noticeable factor: between 1511 and 1550 263,916 kg of silver and 4,965 kg of gold had been brought to Spain (https://d2ct263enury6r.cloudfront.net/OHS3vkJGFHE1jt4B0Xz2PCPxY8AgxfC2CGFMrvcFdIyDnBFo.pdf).

In AH this bullion is not available to Charles, which means that he has even much greater difficulties with paying his troops than in OTL. Which means that he is probably unable to keep fighting long enough for the French to give up an idea of abandoning Milan.

No 80 years war in the Netherlands for Spain will also mean it is less stretched financially and better placed to intervene decisively in the French Wars of Religion.

In OTL Spanish participation in the Wars of Religion had quite reasonable explanation: with an ongoing rebellion in the Netherlands a victory of the Huguenots or even a stable government in France meant that France, one way or another, would be helping the rebels with an intention to get back at least a part of the Burgundian Inheritance. Then, the most important Spanish direct interference was on the North of France: the Duke of Parma marched from the Netherlands to relieve Paris besieged by Henry IV and later during the war of 1595 - 98 they again advanced from the Netherlands taking Doullens, Cambrai and Le Catelet and in the spring of 1596 capturing Calais by April.

In this AH Spain may invade only the Southern France which is heavily Huguenot and not as strategically important as North however it is not clear what would be a motivation for a full scale war. They can keep subsidizing the Catholic League just to keep France "busy" but without the Netherlands as a strategic factor the motivation is not quite clear either.


In fact France may become the battleground for religion rather than Germany (or more correctly before Germany). Also Spain will be in a better position to prolong its annexation of Portugal.

France was such a background in OTL because the Huguenots started inviting the German Protestants on the early stages of these wars. The main difference with the 30YW was that France, even torn apart by a religious issue, remained a single national entity and even the rebelling Huguenots did not really questioned a royal authority as a matter of principle.

Assuming a Catholic win in France of some description I would still expect a Spanish army to be involved in the alt-30 years war.

In France Catholicism was more or less doomed to win. It was just a matter of a final power balance between the parties. Now, how and why the Spanish army would get involved in the 30YW is a little bit of a mystery to me. Unlike OTL where Spanish interest was absolutely clear (maintain security of the Spanish Road to be able to send troops to the Spanish Netherlands) there is no clear reason for such an expensive involvement. Neither is there an easy way to get troops to the HRE. In OTL Spaniards had been landing in Genoa, marched through the Spanish-held Duchy of Milan recruiting soldiers on a way and kept marching through the Spanish-held Franche-Comté and Luxembourg. In AH Milan and Genoa are not in their (or imperial) possession and they have to march all the way from Naples bypassing territories held by French and their allies. And all this for which gain exactly?

But this army would be closer to the Swedes in its raison d'etre - late to the war and primarily there as "mercenaries" for the cause of their religion.

Sweden had a clear reason for entering the war: conversion of the Baltic Sea into the Swedish Lake. Even if later the Swedish armies had been mostly concerned with the looting, this was a way for the opponent to agree to their occupation of the coastal territories of the HRE. For Spain territorial motivation is absolutely absent. Then, Sweden was not too far from the main theater while for the Spanish troops it would be a prolonged sea travel from Spain to the Naples and then a march across all Italy before they even reach HRE border.

While there can be some Spanish contingents present, they are not numerous and there is no reason for Spain to get into a major commitment lasting for few decades.

What's probable, is a prolonged Spanish union with Portugal and more intensive colonial activities: without a permanent involvement in the European wars Spain has more cadres for settlements in the Americas and on the Pacific. Or it can put more stress on conquest of the Northern Africa. In theory, without a need for maintaining a permanently fighting army Spain may concentrate more on the navy even if to deal with the English piracy (but they'd need to develop a metallurgy to produce more of the long range guns).

A more Catholic leaning France may also decide to intervene on the Catholic side but all this will do is probably extend the war to the Netherlands (and possibly postpone the English Civil War??).

As far as France is concerned, almost nothing changed comparing to OTL (except that Spain is more or less out of the picture): the Hapsburgs are still in a possession of the Burgundian Inheritance and France still wants the same pieces of the Hapsburg Netherlnads it wanted in OTL. Plus, as a matter of its traditional policy, it is going to try to weaken the imperial power as much as possible. France is obviously a Catholic state (with Edict of Nantes still in place even if already abridged) but its geopolitical interests are not dictated by a religion.

OTOH, it is an open question if the Austrian Hapsburgs would (a) let situation in the Netherlands to deteriorate to a full-scale rebellion and (b) if this happens, to maintain a military effort for many decades. Unlike Spain, they have the Ottomans on their back, a need to deal with the Protestant princes of the HRE and a routine shortage of money (IIRC, by the time he got his 1st assignment as imperial commander in chief Wallenstein had more disposable money than an emperor).
 
Netherlands would be the richest land under imperial control and likely the seat (or one of the seats) of either the Emperor or his heir...
But Habsburg would still be allied and kinsmen of the Spanish rulers (and the union of the two kingdoms was only during Karl V’s kingdom and can very well be butterflied with either the survival of Juan, Prince of Asturias or Miguel da Paz or with Ferdinand of Austria as King of Castile and Aragon after his grandfather (aka Karl V never received the Spanish Crowns)

Indeed it would not butterfly away the Habsburg-Trastamare matches and their joint concerns about French power. There were valid reasons these marriages came about. Italy is a concern, they both had. Aragon had traditional claims and holdings in the south of Italy; the Habsburg as Emperor of the HRE had claims (it were (albeit mostly nominal) Imperial fiefs on northern Italy, however with France already neighbouring their Burgundian Lands, France also threatening their Austrian Hereditary Lands from northern Italy is a very dangerous threat indeed. Like OTL the Habsburgs probably would want to end up with the duchy of Milan (if the are really victorious ITTL it would be a fitting compensation for the Burgundian Lands seized by France), more likely the would have to accept, that the best chance to get a strong enough alliance to remove France from Italy is that they back a Sforza restoration in Milan.

As for the Habsburg financial capacities, well there are the Low Countries with Antwerp (Antwerpen), Ghent (Gent), Bruges (Brugge), Amsterdam etc., but let's not forget the Fuggers and their Austrian Lands did have some profitable banks. Besides given their aligned interests, Spain might be willing to bankroll, well give loans to, their Habsburg kinsmen for Italian campaigns. The Low Countries, though notorious hard to tax, well when facing a French threat the Estates General will give funds for the protection of these lands.

It also gives some benefits for Habsburg politics in the Empire, their main focus is actually there and ITTL Charles V, or maybe his father Philip the Handsome will be Emperor first ITTL, will be seen as a much more native Emperor. In fact he might be able to handle to Reformation sooner and more effective, maybe or likely not stopping it entirely, but at least the Catholic church ITTL will be more supportive earlier on, if ironically the Emperor is weaker (OTL they felt Charles V was too strong and at first thought those protestant rebels could be useful to weaken him or at least distract him for a while).

@alexmilman: I don't think, that the Habsburgs would let the situation in the Netherlands deteriorate in such a way, if only because it is one of the 'jewels in their crown'. Many think that the Dutch Rebellion was purely religious, well they are wrong, Catholics and Protestants alike were unhappy about the political situation, and while OTL Charles V was born in Ghent and raised in Brussels/Mechelen (or is it Malines in English), his son Philip II was born in Spain and never understood the region. ITTL the Habsburgs can't afford to ignore these lands. Especially if the Habsburgs still end up with Bohemia and Hungary ITTL, then I can see the Emperor mostly residing in Vienna or Prague, but his heir, most often the King of the Romans, could end up residing at the Koudenberg Palace in Brussels.
A more native Emperor might get more support from Imperial vassals to protect Imperial lands, well at least those north of the Alps against foreign invaders.
Sure Charles V or Philip OTL and ITTL was mostly Francophone and better in Dutch than German, but the Luxembourg dynasty was also more Francophone than German, but it were native dynasties.

OTOH at the Imperial level, the Austrian Hereditary Lands combined with the Burgundian Inheritance and possibly the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, would give the Emperor a powerbase not seen since the days of the Hohenstaufen dynasty. Some bigger houses might want to weaken that, smaller houses might actually like a more effective Emperor against said bigger houses.
 
The Netherlands had been the richest land in Europe but this did not prevent Maximillian, Charles V and Phillips II from being permanently out of money: there were traditional rules related to the taxation.

Not sure how exactly the Hapsburgs in that AH end up as close kinsmen of the Spanish rulers and which “two kingdoms” you are talking about (HRE was not a “kingdom”) but in OTL Spain had a vested interest in the 30 YW, security of the ‘Spanish Road’, which in this AH is absent. Being a relative does not automatically obliges a ruler to throw all resources of his kingdom into a major war in which he does not have interests. Not to mention that if Spain does not have the Netherlands (Belgium) there are no reinforcements on the Bohemian stage of war (they came from the Netherlands).

I was saying exactly who the Trastamaras-Habsburg alliance will still happen as France is a shared enemy, so Philip of Burgundy will still marry one of daughters of Ferdinand and Isabella and likely we will see other matches between Austria and Spain in the next generations (if Juan survive his children will have Margaret of Austria-Burgundy as mother, if he still die then the crown of Spain will include also the Portugal and without any other local ruler Austria-Burgundy will be likely seen as the most logical partner for wedding alliances)....
Spain will still be involved in the Italian Wars as the Crown of Aragon has Naples, Sicily and Sardinia in his possession and will want to keep them while France is claiming Naples.

Maximilian had never full control of Burgundy, specially after Mary’s death, Charles V was a too absent ruler for keep the estates of Burgundy in check and Philip was an hated foreign unable to understand the land so that explain their troubles with the estates of Netherlands.

I used Kingdom in a figurate sense (I know who the HRE empire is not properly one) as was talking about the union of Spanish inheritance with the Austrian one...

[QUOTE="alexmilman, post: 18585074, member: 112942]As far as the late (post Charles) split is involved, it is unrealistic and Ferdinand ending up as a king of Spain is a contradiction to the premise: the Hapsburgs are not ruling Spain. And it is absolutely unclear why would Charles (Hapsburg) would leave Spain to somebody who is not a Hapsburg.[/QUOTE]
I was just saying how preventing Charles’ inheritance of Spain (and so the union of the realms) in first place as none of the situation I suggested would see Charles on the Spanish throne so I can not understand why Charles “would leave Spain to somebody who is not a Habsburg” as you are saying.
Charles innhereited the Spanish crown from his mother Juana, second daughter and third child of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile:
1) Juan, prince of Asturias is the only son of Ferdinand and Isabella and so Juana’s brother: if he survive and had children (by his wife Margaret of Austria-Burgundy, paternal aunt of Charles by the way) then Charles will never inhereit Spain;
2) Miguel da Paz, prince of Portugal, Asturias and Girona was the only son of Manuel I of Portugal and his first wife Isabella of Aragon and Castile, princess of the Asturias and firstborn child of Ferdinand and Isabella. If Miguel survive, marry someone and had children then Charles will never inhereit Spain as Miguel being son of the eldest sister came before him in the line of succession;
3) Ferdinand of Austria is the younger brother of Charles and an Habsburg but him as King of Spain (and is possible only instead and not after Charles) still satisfy the requisite of preventing the union between Spain and Austria because Ferdinand was born and raised in Spain and his namesake maternal grandfather (aka Ferdinand of Aragon) wanted him an not the foreign Charles as successor (so Ferdinand of Austria in Spain was a native candidate). If Ferdinand of Aragon is able to execute his plan and have Ferdinand named as heir (something who will include an engagement/wedding to Isabella of Portugal aka Karl V’s future OTL wife) then King Ferdinand of Spain for HRE Charles will be only the brother who he has never met and had stolen half of his inheritance so I can not see OTL level of cooperation between Spain and Austria-Burgundy.
[When Charles abdicated in OTL the division of the lands between Ferdinand and Philip was only formal as Ferdinand had already received everything who formed his share years and years earlier]
 
Indeed it would not butterfly away the Habsburg-Trastamare matches and their joint concerns about French power. There were valid reasons these marriages came about. Italy is a concern, they both had. Aragon had traditional claims and holdings in the south of Italy; the Habsburg as Emperor of the HRE had claims (it were (albeit mostly nominal) Imperial fiefs on northern Italy, however with France already neighbouring their Burgundian Lands, France also threatening their Austrian Hereditary Lands from northern Italy is a very dangerous threat indeed. Like OTL the Habsburgs probably would want to end up with the duchy of Milan (if the are really victorious ITTL it would be a fitting compensation for the Burgundian Lands seized by France), more likely the would have to accept, that the best chance to get a strong enough alliance to remove France from Italy is that they back a Sforza restoration in Milan.

As for the Habsburg financial capacities, well there are the Low Countries with Antwerp (Antwerpen), Ghent (Gent), Bruges (Brugge), Amsterdam etc., but let's not forget the Fuggers and their Austrian Lands did have some profitable banks. Besides given their aligned interests, Spain might be willing to bankroll, well give loans to, their Habsburg kinsmen for Italian campaigns. The Low Countries, though notorious hard to tax, well when facing a French threat the Estates General will give funds for the protection of these lands.

It also gives some benefits for Habsburg politics in the Empire, their main focus is actually there and ITTL Charles V, or maybe his father Philip the Handsome will be Emperor first ITTL, will be seen as a much more native Emperor. In fact he might be able to handle to Reformation sooner and more effective, maybe or likely not stopping it entirely, but at least the Catholic church ITTL will be more supportive earlier on, if ironically the Emperor is weaker (OTL they felt Charles V was too strong and at first thought those protestant rebels could be useful to weaken him or at least distract him for a while).

@alexmilman: I don't think, that the Habsburgs would let the situation in the Netherlands deteriorate in such a way, if only because it is one of the 'jewels in their crown'. Many think that the Dutch Rebellion was purely religious, well they are wrong, Catholics and Protestants alike were unhappy about the political situation, and while OTL Charles V was born in Ghent and raised in Brussels/Mechelen (or is it Malines in English), his son Philip II was born in Spain and never understood the region. ITTL the Habsburgs can't afford to ignore these lands. Especially if the Habsburgs still end up with Bohemia and Hungary ITTL, then I can see the Emperor mostly residing in Vienna or Prague, but his heir, most often the King of the Romans, could end up residing at the Koudenberg Palace in Brussels.
A more native Emperor might get more support from Imperial vassals to protect Imperial lands, well at least those north of the Alps against foreign invaders.
Sure Charles V or Philip OTL and ITTL was mostly Francophone and better in Dutch than German, but the Luxembourg dynasty was also more Francophone than German, but it were native dynasties.

OTOH at the Imperial level, the Austrian Hereditary Lands combined with the Burgundian Inheritance and possibly the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, would give the Emperor a powerbase not seen since the days of the Hohenstaufen dynasty. Some bigger houses might want to weaken that, smaller houses might actually like a more effective Emperor against said bigger houses.
The Imperial interest in Milan will be always first give back the Duchy to the Storzas but if that line will be extinct like OTL you can be almost sure who the Emperor will name one of his sons as new Duke.
And yes, no way who the situation in Netherlands will go down like OTL as that rebellion was against the foreign Philip II and in a world where Burgundy is united only to Austria (plus maybe Bohemia and Hungary) they will be either one of the main seats of the Holy Roman Emperor or the seat of his heir (and will be ruled directly by them)
 
I was just saying how preventing Charles’ inheritance of Spain (and so the union of the realms) in first place as none of the situation I suggested would see Charles on the Spanish throne so I can not understand why Charles “would leave Spain to somebody who is not a Habsburg” as you are saying.

Actually, I was saying that this is unrealistic.

3) Ferdinand of Austria is the younger brother of Charles and an Habsburg but him as King of Spain (and is possible only instead and not after Charles) still satisfy the requisite of preventing the union between Spain and Austria because Ferdinand was born and raised in Spain ...

You are, intentionally or not, misinterpreting the pre-requisite. To quote the initial post, "Suppose the Habsburgs don't inherit the Spanish throne". Which part of it is not clear? Ferdinand of Austria does not inherit the Spanish throne because he is a Hapsburg and the rest is irrelevant to the subject.

... so I can not see OTL level of cooperation between Spain and Austria-Burgundy.

So it seems that you are saying approximately the same thing that I did: in AH serious Spanish involvement in the 30YW is unlikely.
 
Last edited:
@alexmilman: I don't think, that the Habsburgs would let the situation in the Netherlands deteriorate in such a way, if only because it is one of the 'jewels in their crown'. Many think that the Dutch Rebellion was purely religious, well they are wrong, Catholics and Protestants alike were unhappy about the political situation,

And financial situation as well. The Netherlands had been forced to financed the endless wars with France, the Ottomans and German Protestants. Not to mention that at least in the cases of France and Germany the wars were against the traditional trade partners. Plus, there was a matter of shifting power: while traditionally a lot of it was broken by the regions and in the hands of a local nobility and rich merchants, Charles V and especially Phillip II tried to concentrate power in the hands of a central government (which, strictly speaking, was historically "progressive" ;)) through their own appointees. "Under the governorship of Mary of Hungary (1531–1555), traditional power had for a large part been taken away both from the stadtholders of the provinces and from the high noblemen, who had been replaced by professional jurists in the Council of State." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Revolt#Taxation) Of course, the locals were opposite to happy.

OTOH at the Imperial level, the Austrian Hereditary Lands combined with the Burgundian Inheritance and possibly the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, would give the Emperor a powerbase not seen since the days of the Hohenstaufen dynasty. Some bigger houses might want to weaken that, smaller houses might actually like a more effective Emperor against said bigger houses.

Well, adding the Netherlands to the OTL list would be a bonus but as far as a power base is involved, the Hapsburgs ruled each of these territories as a separate entity with a lot restrictions (at least in the cases of Bohemia and in this AH the Netherlands) on what they could do legally and what they could get away with. A big difference between OTL and this AH is that, unlike OTL Phillip II, his AH equivalent does not have a ready enforcement tool (Spanish troops), which was deployed in OTL (to turn problem into a full scale disaster). Not to mention that a balance between Catholics and Protestants would be quite different from one in OTL Spanish "empire". So, short of a complete insanity, alt-Phillip (;)) would have to look for a compromise solution or risk a major revolt across a big part of his territories. And if he is exercising a flexible religious policy then one of the causes for the 30YW is gone (and another, maintenance of the Spanish Road and resulting Spanish involvement is not there by definition).
 
And financial situation as well. The Netherlands had been forced to financed the endless wars with France, the Ottomans and German Protestants. Not to mention that at least in the cases of France and Germany the wars were against the traditional trade partners. Plus, there was a matter of shifting power: while traditionally a lot of it was broken by the regions and in the hands of a local nobility and rich merchants, Charles V and especially Phillip II tried to concentrate power in the hands of a central government (which, strictly speaking, was historically "progressive" ;)) through their own appointees. "Under the governorship of Mary of Hungary (1531–1555), traditional power had for a large part been taken away both from the stadtholders of the provinces and from the high noblemen, who had been replaced by professional jurists in the Council of State." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Revolt#Taxation) Of course, the locals were opposite to happy.
Don't forget England, which traditionally has been a large trading partner of the Low Countries. France too, though it also had a history of wanting to expand into this region. Financing a war to fight France in Italy is different from having to finance a war against France directly threatens the Low Countries. In case of the latter, support won't be an issue, in case of the former, well getting more than legally obligated will be a lot harder (but not impossible). ITTL the Habsburgs are probably facing a more sympathetic Papacy and thus Catholic side in the HRE will be able to respond sooner and formulate an answer. The Habsburgs had long advocated for a Council of Trent, before it happened IOTL. Conflicts will probably still arise, OTOH Dutch protestants generally are Calvinists, and not Lutherans like in Germany. If ITTL France still ends up backing the Protestants in Germany, then IMHO it's not a stretch to see Spain supporting the Catholic side, though not like IOTL.
The pattern of jurists getting a bigger role in the administration, actually was already started by the Valois dukes of Burgundy, but they reserved certain roles for the local upper nobility in the government, like the office of Stadtholder (litterally stadhouder is a placeholder, so a representative of the monarch, so basically a governor), the whole nobility could still serve in army as an officer. Of course the locals were unhappy, and while IOTL Charles V was one of them; his son Philip II always remained a foreign Spaniard, by being distant, including literally, he only visited the Low Countries once, as heir, so he was not as loved as his father, nor did he invest time in the region like, which had been a tradition from Philip the Bold (in Flanders and Artois) to Charles V, so he lacked the political goodwill to smooth things over. ITTL I can't imagine an archduke/emperor and maybe king (Bohemia-Hungary) neglecting this, they will visit, and though given the Ottoman threat I can see the Emperor being in Vienna or Prague, but the heir could very well be sent to Brussels and reside there.

Well, adding the Netherlands to the OTL list would be a bonus but as far as a power base is involved, the Hapsburgs ruled each of these territories as a separate entity with a lot restrictions (at least in the cases of Bohemia and in this AH the Netherlands) on what they could do legally and what they could get away with. A big difference between OTL and this AH is that, unlike OTL Phillip II, his AH equivalent does not have a ready enforcement tool (Spanish troops), which was deployed in OTL (to turn problem into a full scale disaster). Not to mention that a balance between Catholics and Protestants would be quite different from one in OTL Spanish "empire". So, short of a complete insanity, alt-Phillip (;)) would have to look for a compromise solution or risk a major revolt across a big part of his territories. And if he is exercising a flexible religious policy then one of the causes for the 30YW is gone (and another, maintenance of the Spanish Road and resulting Spanish involvement is not there by definition).

ITTL the situation in the Habsburg Netherlands would more resemble the situation in the Austrian Hereditary Lands, there too at one point were a lot of Protestants, but the Habsburgs initially bided their time and became huge supporters of the Counter-Reformation (IMHO it sounds a bit negative, for Catholics it also included long overdue reforms of the Roman Catholic Church). Remember even IOTL at the early stages of the Dutch revolt, Protestants certainly were a majority in most regions. So de-escalation and giving concessions, which are reasonable for the local Catholics (that's the group they should never alienate, given that they are a Catholic dynasty themselves), seems more like the direction the Habsburgs are forced into ITTL.
 
The Imperial interest in Milan will be always first give back the Duchy to the Storzas but if that line will be extinct like OTL you can be almost sure who the Emperor will name one of his sons as new Duke.
And yes, no way who the situation in Netherlands will go down like OTL as that rebellion was against the foreign Philip II and in a world where Burgundy is united only to Austria (plus maybe Bohemia and Hungary) they will be either one of the main seats of the Holy Roman Emperor or the seat of his heir (and will be ruled directly by them)

Imperial yes, Habsburg only as a second best, still I can't see many others fight to replace a Valois for a Habsburg in Milan, kicking an invader out OTOH to replace a native dynasty.... Once the Sforza line goes extinct an appointed Habsburg duke seems likely, though he will also need to have French princess as bride or already as wife.
As for the Habsburgs, the fact that Philip II was foreign meant that he mishandled the whole issue and lacked the loyalty of the upper class, which was still somewhat commanded by Charles V. However, as mentioned here, there were more reasons for the revolt, though given a weaker position the Habsburgs will be forced to the negotiating table sooner.
 
If Spain doesn’t go to the Habsburgs, there wouldn’t be a 30 years war. That’s a change in the first two decades of the 1500s, and a massive one that impacts Karl V, his relationship with France, France’s relations with others, might butterfly Luther and Calvin’s actions as we know them, etc.
 
Top