Wittelsbach Spain: Bavarian-Spanish union

Could it have been possible that a prince of the Bavarian House of Wittelsbach had become the crowned King of Spain ? Further more, what if the Bavarian monarch is King of Spain in a personal-union.
 
Yes.Both Spain and a good number of powers favored Joseph Ferdinand as a compromise candidate to avoid the Spanish War of Succession from breaking out.He will most likely be crowned King of Spain if he lived long enough,but France and Austria will still get some lands off as compensation.
 
There will not be a personal union, the Wittelsbach line would split.

They were already split in two main branches, the elder Palatinate branch and the younger Bavarian branch. Each of these two main branches had a number of cadet branches.

AFAIK Joseph Ferdinand was the eldest son of prince-elector Maximilian of Bavaria, and since the electoral dignity and the duchy of Bavaria were inherited by primogeniture, this meant that Joseph Ferdinand would normally be first in line.
Obviously any future peace treaty may alter the ordinary succession though.

As for compensations, France and Austria were the major contenders, but Savoy could also ask for some compensation.
In spite of the proposals, which basically were Franco-British compromises without consulting other parties with a major stake; IMHO Spain will probably lose the same territories they lost IOTL when Philip V of Bourbon (duke of Anjou) became king. For instance the only reward they had in mind for Austria was the duchy of Milan, admittedly a price Austria had desired for a long time, but compared to the French compensation (the kingdoms of Naples & Sicily, the state of Presidi and the marquisate of Finale) a bit 'meagre'. IMHO in that case Austria is likely to also get the Southern Netherlands (the only other option for extra compensation would be Sardinia, which seems unlikely).
 
I know, but the thing is the continent is against any personal between Spain and another power. Bavaria though not a leading power was power at the time. Hence Bavaria would pass to the younger brother of Joseph whilst he would become King of Spain.

Spain's domain's were already divided by treaty, so that upon the ascendance of Joseph the lands of the Hapsburg would be split up. Archduke Charles was to get Milan; the Dauphin was to get Gipuzkoa, Naples, Sicily, Finale and Presidi; Joseph was to get Spain, Sardinia, Southern Netherlands, and Overseas.

The reason the Austrian gains are "meagre" is because they hold a weaker claim.

No they weren't already divided, France and England had reached an agreement without consulting Spain, Austria, Savoy, Bavaria and other third parties.
An Austrian army in control of Bavaria would certainly be able to get a better deal, though admittedly they would rather have more territories in Italy, but any compensation would be at the expense of Bavaria. Overseas isn't a real option, so this leaves Sardinia and the Southern Netherlands, given the fact, that Austria lacked any real naval power in that part of the Mediterranean, so this only leaves the Southern Netherlands to placate Austria.

As for the weaker claim, Joseph and Charles had a stronger claim than Joseph Ferdinand, only the Dauphin had a better claim.
 
No they weren't already divided, France and England had reached an agreement without consulting Spain, Austria, Savoy, Bavaria and other third parties.
An Austrian army in control of Bavaria would certainly be able to get a better deal, though admittedly they would rather have more territories in Italy, but any compensation would be at the expense of Bavaria. Overseas isn't a real option, so this leaves Sardinia and the Southern Netherlands, given the fact, that Austria lacked any real naval power in that part of the Mediterranean, so this only leaves the Southern Netherlands to placate Austria.

As for the weaker claim, Joseph and Charles had a stronger claim than Joseph Ferdinand, only the Dauphin had a better claim.

From what I remember in 1696 Carlos II named his great nephew heir to the entire monarchy, like Philippe Duc d'Anjou was later. Realistically any partition treaty, since they neglected to consult Spain itself and Austria, was doomed to failure from the beginning.

As for Bavaria, a personal union could be possible, but it would be very difficult to pull off. Legally, its easy yes, but trying to govern Bavaria would lead to difficulties, both in communications and in dynastic intrigue. The Spanish King's half brothers would no doubt want to gain Bavaria, or parts of Bavaria, for themselves. The Electorate doesn't border any of the lands of the Spanish monarchy, making communication with Madrid difficult, since I'd bet that the Habsburgs would want to cut communications between King and Viceroy/Regent. Third, the Wittelsbach would be in a stronger position than they were in the early 1740s, controlling three electorates and being backed up by Spanish money and power.

On the other hand, the union between Hanover and Britain went off relatively well, with little objections from Vienna or the great powers. I guess the whole thing depends on how successful such a union is. If it fails José could always pull a Charles V and divide his territories.
 
The key from all the issue of the succession of the Spanish Kingdom was the last will of Phillip IV. There, he clearly excluded his eldest daughter Maria Theresia, Queen of France and her descendants, and bypassed them with the descendants of his younger daughter Margaret, the full-sister of Charles II, mostly because since childhood she was betrothed to Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I, her maternal uncle and member of the Austrian branch of the Habsburgs, so is logical to think that the King preferred to favored his Austrian cousins than the Bourbons.

Thus, following the line of succession estipulated by Phillip IV, the only possible heir of Charles II was Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria, the only surviving descendant of Margaret by 1696. If he will survive, indeed inherited the Spanish Kingdom COMPLETE, at least in theory, because Charles II in his own will refused any partition of his domains and given all to his grand-nephew.

Now, will be interesting to see what could be the reaction of Louis XIV if Joseph Ferdinand became King: because one of the clauses of his marriage contract estipulated that Maria Theresia recovered her rights if her dowry wasn't fully pay (and this exactly happen), so by right of primogeniture, the Grand Dauphin, as the only surviving son of the French Queen, was the legal heir of Charles II, because in the Kingdoms of Castile and Leon the female inheritance was allowed (in the case of Aragon, this could be debatable). In default of the Dauphin (heir of France), his sons had the primarly right to inherited, in this case the second son, Phillip, Duke of Anjou. So, Louis XIV could probably began a war for the rights of his grandson.
 
The key from all the issue of the succession of the Spanish Kingdom was the last will of Phillip IV. There, he clearly excluded his eldest daughter Maria Theresia, Queen of France and her descendants, and bypassed them with the descendants of his younger daughter Margaret, the full-sister of Charles II, mostly because since childhood she was betrothed to Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I, her maternal uncle and member of the Austrian branch of the Habsburgs, so is logical to think that the King preferred to favored his Austrian cousins than the Bourbons.

Thus, following the line of succession estipulated by Phillip IV, the only possible heir of Charles II was Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria, the only surviving descendant of Margaret by 1696. If he will survive, indeed inherited the Spanish Kingdom COMPLETE, at least in theory, because Charles II in his own will refused any partition of his domains and given all to his grand-nephew.

Now, will be interesting to see what could be the reaction of Louis XIV if Joseph Ferdinand became King: because one of the clauses of his marriage contract estipulated that Maria Theresia recovered her rights if her dowry wasn't fully pay (and this exactly happen), so by right of primogeniture, the Grand Dauphin, as the only surviving son of the French Queen, was the legal heir of Charles II, because in the Kingdoms of Castile and Leon the female inheritance was allowed (in the case of Aragon, this could be debatable). In default of the Dauphin (heir of France), his sons had the primarly right to inherited, in this case the second son, Phillip, Duke of Anjou. So, Louis XIV could probably began a war for the rights of his grandson.

Good point. Legally, le Grand Dauphin was the heir presumptive to the Spanish monarchy, considering Mara Theresa's dowry was never payed (kind of a ridiculous clause to put in considering Felipe IV knew how bad his finances were). However, as the first partition treaty showed, Louis XIV wasn't adverse to a deal that would give him some of the Spanish empire. The real question becomes whether or not he, and Austria to be honest, would accept the Electoral Prince as the successor to the entire Monarchy.

We could end up seeing a truly bizarre sight: an alliance between France and Austria to divide the Spanish empire (France gaining the Netherlands and Austria the Italian possessions?) against an alliance of Spain, England and the Netherlands. Its out there, to be sure, but history itself has seen stranger bedfellows.
 
Good point. Legally, le Grand Dauphin was the heir presumptive to the Spanish monarchy, considering Mara Theresa's dowry was never payed (kind of a ridiculous clause to put in considering Felipe IV knew how bad his finances were). However, as the first partition treaty showed, Louis XIV wasn't adverse to a deal that would give him some of the Spanish empire. The real question becomes whether or not he, and Austria to be honest, would accept the Electoral Prince as the successor to the entire Monarchy.

We could end up seeing a truly bizarre sight: an alliance between France and Austria to divide the Spanish empire (France gaining the Netherlands and Austria the Italian possessions?) against an alliance of Spain, England and the Netherlands. Its out there, to be sure, but history itself has seen stranger bedfellows.

A Franco-Austrian alliance would certainly be a possibility. IMHO a French Southern Netherlands isn't going to happen. Austria getting Sicily, Naples, Presidi and Finale in addition to Milan seems equally unlikely. IMHO altering the Franco-British agreement seems more likely. France does indeed have a more recent closer connection and thus a better claim, but what they offered Austria seems a bit insulting, especially if they have to accept the ascendency of a rival Catholic dynasty in the Empire. So, again, the wealthy Southern Netherlands, may not be Austria's first choice, but it could help to sugar coat the final result and make it easier to sell the outcome.

Don't forget that Austria by regaining much of Hungary from the Ottomans was in the ascendency. Another reason, why IMHO Austria might be able to expand their compensation at the expense of Bavaria.

Then there also is Savoy, unless France and Austria want give a bit from their share (bits of Milan and Finale), there's only Sardinia left.
 
A Franco-Austrian alliance would certainly be a possibility. IMHO a French Southern Netherlands isn't going to happen. Austria getting Sicily, Naples, Presidi and Finale in addition to Milan seems equally unlikely. IMHO altering the Franco-British agreement seems more likely. France does indeed have a more recent closer connection and thus a better claim, but what they offered Austria seems a bit insulting, especially if they have to accept the ascendency of a rival Catholic dynasty in the Empire. So, again, the wealthy Southern Netherlands, may not be Austria's first choice, but it could help to sugar coat the final result and make it easier to sell the outcome.

Don't forget that Austria by regaining much of Hungary from the Ottomans was in the ascendency. Another reason, why IMHO Austria might be able to expand their compensation at the expense of Bavaria.

Then there also is Savoy, unless France and Austria want give a bit from their share (bits of Milan and Finale), there's only Sardinia left.

The Southern Netherlands weren't wealthy at this point. With the closing of the Scheldt today's Belgium had gone into a perpetual decline, with nearly half the population in deep poverty. As for being unlikely, look at the Treaty of Utrecht. Austria got Naples, part of Milan, Sardinia and the Southern Netherlands. That in itself would be ASB it it hadn't actually happened.

Also, if France takes the Netherlands like they did in the Austrian Succession war, who's going to tell Louis XIV "no you can't have it"? Possession is 9/10ths of the law, as they say, and if no one is in a position to expel the French then they keep the Southern Netherlands by default.

Finally, to Savoy, I'd say give them Sardinia. No one else wanted it and it would make the Duke into a King. He'd no doubt try for more, but if he acted like he did OTL no ones gonna trust him.
 
Perpetual is a bit melo-dramatic, the Southern Netherlands weren't in a position, which remembered of the golden Burgundian days. (OTOH my part of the Netherlands was a Generality Land (occupied without own representation; and my ancestors, like the majority stayed loyal to the Catholic Faith (hardly any one converted to the faith of the Protestant occupiers; so the glorious Dutch Republic, wasn't that glorious for my oppressed and discriminated ancestors. Luckily by now that all lies in the past, and started with the foundation of the Batavian Republic.
 
Top