Hello, the scenario is as follows, the Holy Alliance is more lasting, and Later add The Empire of Brazil and Spain, which would be the butterflies? Personally, I can see a joint expedition of the alliance in Spanish America (especially the tension that will be created between the Latin American revolutionaries and the empire of Brazil because join in the Holy alliance, And the fact that OTL Spain still had other conflicts even after the independence of Spanish America (chincha war And tampico expedition), Some might talk about how the holy alliance would transport the troops? I don't see much problem, Spain during the late 19th century consistently took over 100,000 men to the Caribbean, Furthermore, the Brazilian Navy in the period was not insignificant.
WI: Holy alliance lasting longer and Posteriorly including Spain and the Brazilian empire
- Thread starter Math
- Start date
There is only one Holy Alliance, which was founded following the Napoleonic War between Russia, Prussia and Austria. The alliance in the 1600s is called the Holy League (note the difference here).
The problem is, the Holy Alliance is not suited for all of this. It was a very fleeting accord to avoid falling right back into Napoleonic warfare, and only offered diplomatic support. In the incredibly unlikely case Spain or Brazil get in, they're still on their own, at best enjoying benevolent support from HA participants.
Not to mention Brazil's whole founding as an independent country / empire ran as an antithesis to the very thing that the Holy Alliance stood for. I cannot see any situation where Brazil is invited into an alliance that primarily makes up the landed conservative powers of Europe.
Not really, Brazil become Independent (And have previously It had been elevated to kingdom status while the royal family fled there ) because the liberal elites who took over Portugal after the Napoleonic war and because the absence of the royal family wanted to demote Brazil to the level of a colony again And Also "In light of the wave of conservatism led by the Holy Alliance, the Emperor used his influence over the Brazilian Army to dissolve the Constitutional Assembly, in what became known as the Night of Agony. On his own authority, he then issued a constitution that concentrated the executive power on the Emperor himself (eventually crowned "Constitutional Emperor and Perpetual Defender of Brazil")." (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Constitution_of_Brazil)
I don't think you can simply sum up the Brazilian independence as simply a conservative reaction against Portugal's liberal movement. Pedro was pretty well known for his liberal views, and certainly there were liberal undercurrents among the Brazilian independence movement as well. The fight against the constituent assembly was more of the assembly's desire to clamp down on the possible powers of the Brazilian monarch, it was not a situation of Pedro turning into dyed in the wool conservative or reactionary by desiring more power for his position. Even in the end, the Brazilian monarch obtained a unique position as a moderator between the executive / legislative / judicial... he didn't exactly make himself an absolute monarch.
This is a man who sought to place his daughter on the throne of Portugal as a liberal figure head, even if admittedly his idea of marrying her to her uncle Miguel the archconservative was not a great idea. Same in regards to the break down of the dual monarchy established previously: there were Brazilian deputies present in Portugal, thought their numbers were small and they were mistreated. In some instances, they did work together with liberal deputies to frustrate some ideas during Portugal's attempt to draw up a new constitution that would reduce Brazil's position.
Even if Pedro sought to create a new constitution to increase his own authority, he was still leading a rebellion against Portugal: by virtue of the settlement of the Congress of Vienna and the standards set by the Holy Alliance as a bastion against revolution, democracy, and secularism, Brazil would not exactly be an ideal candidate for such an alliance. Plus, you've still got to address why a South American monarchy (with close ties to Britain) would have any interest in joining an alliance of Prussia, Austria, and Russia. They aren't in any position to be of any aid or assistance. Even Spain joining this Holy Alliance doesn't exactly justify Brazil's participation: why would Spain ally with Portugal's newly independent colony in an attempt to retain their own?
Even if the Holy Alliance wanted to send troops to South America, Prussia and Austria don't exactly have the naval capacity to be much assistance there. Prussia's navy was practically nonexistent, and Austria's mainly consisted of former Venetian vessels: many which were sold off due to Austria's financial issues. The first Austrian ship to cross the Atlantic wasn't even until 1817, when the Archduchess Maria Leopoldina was brought to Brazil. Russia definitely has more naval capacity, but mostly concentrated in the Baltic and Black Sea (and c. 1815, it was essentially bottled up there, as no warships are allowed through the Bosporus straits). Spain can be of more assistance, but they can't transport their own troops plus others.
At the end of the 19th century, Spain transported more than 100,000 troops to the Caribbean in both the 10 Year War and the war against the United States, Maybe they don't have the conditions right after the Napoleonic war but they have the potential to do so
100,000 of their own troops though—not others. Neither Prussia nor Austria have any capacity to transport large amounts of troops overseas c. 1815, and Russia would likely be constrained too. Spain’s situation c. 1815 was pretty dismal, it would take time to restore their naval power, and by time they do so, they will likely have already lost their mainland American colonies.
The whole liberalism vs absolutism struggle had little to do with the independence - the real issue is that the Portuguese deputies at the Cortes were set on taking away the autonomy that Brazil had enjoyed since João VI had relocated there and the Brazilian elites were having none of that.
And moreover, the constitution that Dom Pedro issued was quite a liberal document for its time. remember that at the time, having a written constitution was not something a absolutist monarch would go for - One of the first things Dom Miguel (Dom Pedro's younger, absolutist brother) did when taking power in Portugal was to scrap the Portuguese Constitution, Fernando VII did the same in Spain when first taking power, and did it again after the French helped taking down the liberal government that had forced him to reinstate the constitution. Austria and Prussia only made theirs after the 1848 Revolutions, and Russia didn't have any until 1906.
Last edited: