WI France gains Spanish Netherlands in 1714.

WI during the partition of the Spanish empire after the Spanish war of succession, France gained the Spanish Netherlands instead of Austria.

Edit. If France can't get the Netherlands in 1714, WI it gets it after the Austrian succession war, how would that effect Europe.
 
Last edited:
WI during the partition of the Spanish empire after the Spanish war of succession, France gained the Spanish Netherlands instead of Austria.
Depends rather a lot on the how, so do you have any specific reason in mind? To me it seems like this'd require a shockingly massive French victory coupled with a terrible show from Spain, which seems... tricky.
 
Depends rather a lot on the how, so do you have any specific reason in mind? To me it seems like this'd require a shockingly massive French victory coupled with a terrible show from Spain, which seems... tricky.

Or alternatively, Spain remains a Habsburg power and France is compensated with the Spanish Netherlands?
 
ASB. Always remember this rule with the Habsburg Netherlands: no one but France wanted it and no one wanted France to have it. Also, at that point the Netherlands was controlled by Spain, ruled by Louis XIV's grandson Felipe V, so no way is the Sun King going to take his grandson's territory.

Now if you want France to control the Habsburg Netherlands, the best time is the Austrian Succession war. At the end of that war France occupied the entire Austrian Netherlands but Louis XV, rather idiotically, returned it in its entirety to Maria Theresa, arguing that he was "king of France, not a shopkeeper." Have Louis not be an idiot and keep the Austrian Netherlands instead.
 
Even if we do have Habsburg Spain, France isn't getting compensated with the Spanish Netherlands. The British and Dutch would veto that immediately, and any war where the Spanish end up Habsburg is one that the Anglo-Dutch are on the winning side. France might get compensated elsewhere (e.g. some of the Spanish Italian possessions), but not the Netherlands

As others have suggested, the War of Austrian Succession is much more likely to give you a French Belgium.
 
ASB. Always remember this rule with the Habsburg Netherlands: no one but France wanted it and no one wanted France to have it. Also, at that point the Netherlands was controlled by Spain, ruled by Louis XIV's grandson Felipe V, so no way is the Sun King going to take his grandson's territory.

This isn't quite true. The Austrians didn't care about it; that's why they spent the second half of the 18th century trying to find a way to swap it for something useful. Now, the British didn't want France to have it, but they also didn't want America to get independence.
 
This isn't quite true. The Austrians didn't care about it; that's why they spent the second half of the 18th century trying to find a way to swap it for something useful.

That doesn't contradict Constantine's statement - he didn't say the Austrians wanted it, he said they didn't want the French to have it.

Now, the British didn't want France to have it, but they also didn't want America to get independence.

Losing the American colonies was an annoyance and an irritation. French control of the Spanish/Austrian Netherlands, and Antwerp in particular, was considered an existential threat.
 
That doesn't contradict Constantine's statement - he didn't say the Austrians wanted it, he said they didn't want the French to have it.

Except they were willing to agree to various swaps that would have put a Bourbon ally/puppet in charge of the Spanish Netherlands.
 
No. Even without the Low Countries, France by itself was considered a deadly threat by Britain.

That was the way of thinking of the british political and economic ruling class. They could not bear a too close competitor. Thta's why even after France had stupidly renounced annexing the Low Countries in 1748, Britain however decided to start a new war against France barely 6 years later.

What is oft n ignored is that France's economic growth was at least as fast as Britain's in the 18th century. France was modernizing fast and was seen as a really threatening economic and trade competitor by Britain.
 
Last edited:
Except they were willing to agree to various swaps that would have put a Bourbon ally/puppet in charge of the Spanish Netherlands.

No. They offered that a single time and then rescinded the offer because the French failed to complete their part of the bargain. And they swapping Silesia which is:
  • A fourth of imperial income in 1740s (when Austria last held it)
  • Major population center in the empire
  • Right next to Austrian core regions not far away like the Southern Netherlands
  • Not guarded by the Dutch via treaty
  • Wasn't completely overrun by a French army in the War of the Austrian Succession (Silesia actually took effort from the Prussians to be taken)
  • A black mark on Austrian pride as long as its in Prussian hands
  • The life goal of Maria Theresa to regain
So yeah you can see why Austria would swap the South Netherlands for Silesia.
 
A single time? It happened at least in the Seven Years War, and the War of Bavarian Succession, no?

No. During the Bavarian Succession Crisis, Joseph tried to trade some parts of the Southern Netherlands for Southern Bavaria with the Wittelbachs of Bavaria. And at the time the Wittelbachs were neither allies nor puppets of the French. And also Joseph only offered a few select parts not the entirety or even majority of the Southern Netherlands. Thus leaving the single Second Treaty of Versailles during the Seven Years' War.
 
Top