Charles V gave the Low Countries to Austria Philip II continue reconquista?

[Parma]

Just a thought Charles V devided his realm different. The Burgundian kreist, the Low Countires would be part of the Austrian Habsburg realm while Castille, Arragon and Naples went to his son Philips II.

Now the quarrels of the Low Countries is not Phillips II concenrn.
Would Phillips a devout Catholic spent his energy, time and money in a new reconquista in this case the reconquista of Northern Africa up to Egypt perhaps?

 

[Mildtryth]

I doubt it'll go that far, but in the years before the Dutch revolt, Spain actually was fighting the Ottomans in the Mediterranean all through the 1560s, so you'd probably see more resources being spent that way, but even if they were more successful, you probably wouldn't see direct Spanish control of these areas beyond some coast towns, but they'd exert influence indirectly instead, like they tried to do with some of the Hafsid and Zayyanid sultans around that time.

 

[isabella]

Just a thought Charles V devided his realm different. The Burgundian kreist, the Low Countires would be part of the Austrian Habsburg realm while Castille, Arragon and Naples went to his son Philips II.

Now the quarrels of the Low Countries is not Phillips II concenrn.
Would Phillips a devout Catholic spent his energy, time and money in a new reconquista in this case the reconquista of Northern Africa up to Egypt perhaps?

You will do better in giving a second surviving son to Charles V… or a son to Philip II and Mary Tudor with don Carlos leaving heirs… but Maria could get the Low Countries if Mary Tudor never became Queen of England and Philip remarried to Maria of Viseu

 

[Kurt_Steiner]

You would see a Phillip II more inclined to keep an eye on North Africa and, perhaps, expand there, but also to be ready to help his Austrian kindreds against any heretic threat. Perhaps Flanders wouldn't be his problem, but Phillp would still be Phillip.

 

[Fabius Maximus]

Would an Austrian-ruled Netherlands still rebel like IOTL? And if it did, would the Austrians be more or less likely to defeat the rebellion than their Spanish bretheren?

 

[Mildtryth]

Would an Austrian-ruled Netherlands still rebel like IOTL? And if it did, would the Austrians be more or less likely to defeat the rebellion than their Spanish bretheren?

Well, for obvious reasons, the Austrians won't be sending in the Duke of Alba after the first disturbances, so unless they go and send somebody as overzealous and heavy-handed as him, they have a good chance of keeping things under control.

 

[Jürgen]

I think the easiest way for a different split of the Spanish possessions are to kill off Philip II around 1540. If Charles V ends up not marrying again, this means a split between Ferdinand’s sons instead. I would suggest that Maximilian get what he got in OTL plus the Burgundian Inheritance and Inner Austria minus Tyrol. Ferdinand II gets Spain. While Charles II gets Further Austria instead of Inner Austria, but keeps Tyrol and likely also get Milan.

 

[Jan Olbracht]

I think the easiest way for a different split of the Spanish possessions are to kill off Philip II around 1540. If Charles V ends up not marrying again, this means a split between Ferdinand’s sons instead. I would suggest that Maximilian get what he got in OTL plus the Burgundian Inheritance and Inner Austria minus Tyrol. Ferdinand II gets Spain. While Charles II gets Further Austria instead of Inner Austria, but keeps Tyrol and likely also get Milan.

Then Maria, Charles V's daughter, inherits Spain and Burgundian inheritance. Max II was her husband, so Low Countries are still ruled by Spanish monarch.

 

[Nuraghe]

Just a thought Charles V devided his realm different. The Burgundian kreist, the Low Countires would be part of the Austrian Habsburg realm while Castille, Arragon and Naples went to his son Philips II.

Now the quarrels of the Low Countries is not Phillips II concenrn.
Would Phillips a devout Catholic spent his energy, time and money in a new reconquista in this case the reconquista of Northern Africa up to Egypt perhaps?

In reality we know that Philip II had the intention after Lepanto to bring the war home to the Ottomans ( to repay them for their support for the Morisco revolt of 1567) by assisting a popular uprising in the Morea ( with Papal and Venetian support for this ) which had already been an ambition of Charles V in 1538 ( to prevent Suleiman from coordinating with Francis I in an attack on the kingdom of Naples ) so I can see Spain focusing on keeping up the pressure on Constantinople by staging an amphibious invasion of Greece ( probably trying to coordinate with Vienna's military campaigns in Hungary ) now honestly speaking I don't think that the situation in Burgundy worsened in Otl solely due to Philip's religious orthodoxy, but rather I believe that the main causes were others ( to which then later added the religious component ), i.e. his centralizing policies ( which were going to undermine local privileges and autonomies and also hit the pockets of the interested parties ) combined with a current that was very popular at the Madrid court ( personally I call it the "nationalist" faction " ), who wanted to transform the duchy into a sort of purely "Spanish" viceroyalty like Naples, Sicily and Sardinia, in opposition to the treatment reserved for Milan, with Philip who was forced to have to balance the various political currents in opposition between them, and any of his choices would inevitably have caused discontent, certainly Alba's hard fist did not help to calm the delicate situation created ( but it must be remembered that according to Parker, Philip in 1566 was preparing to travel immediately to Burgundy to try to personally find mediation with the rebels, but two things hindered him, the start of the revolt of the Moriscos and the opposition of the "nationalist" faction, which did not see a possible return to the government practices typical of Charles V, who would have prevented any of their political ambitions in the region, so they did everything to procrastinate the preparations for the royal trip or even distort the information arriving from Burgundy, especially if it was written from the point of view of the "rebels" )


@Kellan Sullivan @Janprimus

 

[Parma]

In reality we know that Philip II had the intention after Lepanto to bring the war home to the Ottomans ( to repay them for their support for the Morisco revolt of 1567) by assisting a popular uprising in the Morea ( with Papal and Venetian support for this ) which had already been an ambition of Charles V in 1538 ( to prevent Suleiman from coordinating with Francis I in an attack on the kingdom of Naples ) so I can see Spain focusing on keeping up the pressure on Constantinople by staging an amphibious invasion of Greece ( probably trying to coordinate with Vienna's military campaigns in Hungary ) now honestly speaking I don't think that the situation in Burgundy worsened in Otl solely due to Philip's religious orthodoxy, but rather I believe that the main causes were others ( to which then later added the religious component ), i.e. his centralizing policies ( which were going to undermine local privileges and autonomies and also hit the pockets of the interested parties ) combined with a current that was very popular at the Madrid court ( personally I call it the "nationalist" faction " ), who wanted to transform the duchy into a sort of purely "Spanish" viceroyalty like Naples, Sicily and Sardinia, in opposition to the treatment reserved for Milan, with Philip who was forced to have to balance the various political currents in opposition between them, and any of his choices would inevitably have caused discontent, certainly Alba's hard fist did not help to calm the delicate situation created ( but it must be remembered that according to Parker, Philip in 1566 was preparing to travel immediately to Burgundy to try to personally find mediation with the rebels, but two things hindered him, the start of the revolt of the Moriscos and the opposition of the "nationalist" faction, which did not see a possible return to the government practices typical of Charles V, who would have prevented any of their political ambitions in the region, so they did everything to procrastinate the preparations for the royal trip or even distort the information arriving from Burgundy, especially if it was written from the point of view of the "rebels" )


@Kellan Sullivan @Janprimus

Interesting input. But remember, the Burgundy lands are Not His realm, here now part of the Austrian branch, his uncle. Ande he was not realy a hard line devoot man.
So what you sugest Philip II could have more time, money and energy to fight the Ottomans and take some easy picks on the South shore of the Mediteranee.

 

[Nuraghe]

Interesting input. But remember, the Burgundy lands are Not His realm, here now part of the Austrian branch, his uncle. Ande he was not realy a hard line devoot man.
So what you sugest Philip II could have more time, money and energy to fight the Ottomans and take some easy picks on the South shore of the Mediteranee.

Certainly the Spanish branch will have more resources to dedicate to the defense of Italy and the fight against the Ottomans, but the fact remains that I do not see Ferdinand I or Max II treating the Protestants in Burgundy with glove makers, especially if Calvinists ( who are excluded from the Peace of Augsburg, and considered to be state criminals, given their actions that jeopardized the delicate balance between Vienna and the Protestant princes, I can see even the Lutheran princes offering their help to the Emperor to quell possible Calvinist riots ( one must remember that at this time Lutherans saw Calvinists as equal or in some cases worse than Papists, so I can see many being happy to bash them ( to be polite ), provided that new privileges are obtained in exchange ) certainly the imposition of the Counter-Reformation will be more gradual than in Otl ( but I am sure that it will be introduced anyway, the dynastic security of the Habsburgs is at stake, just see what happens in Otl when in Vienna the emperors were forced under extortion, to give enormous privileges to their Protestant nobility ( it was the trigger of the 30YW ) we probably will not see such a strong push towards the creation of a centralized administration as in Otl ( so this should reduce most of the problems at basis of the revolt ) finally I don't think that England will be too worried about Austria holding Burgundy compared to Spain, so I don't see Elizabeth putting too much effort into supporting any local political maneuvers to the detriment of the Habsburgs, rather she will focus on fighting by proxy in France against Spain ( if his relationship with Philip were to continue to evolve as in Otl, a rather difficult scenario, but I don't rule it out a priori )

 

[HunterX]

Maximilian II would handle the religious element of the Netherlands far better than Philip, and having the wealth of the Netherlands to draw on would enhance the position of Austrian branch (are they still Austrian here or do they prefer to rule from Brussels?) quite a bit. Relations between the two Habsburg branches would also be better assuming this scenario also involves Charles V not trying to make his son Emperor.