WI Joan of Castille officially supported the Comuneros?

I want to know the general opinion about the possibility if in 1520 Joan of Castille accepted to recognize and even lead the revolt of the Comuneros (in OTL she decided to remain passive even if she was freed) against his same son Charles V, probably under the spring to revenge the years of imprisonement husband, father and son forced on her, not counting the infamous accusations of lunacy.

If we also add the POD the rebels won, probably Aragon will pass on Joan's side as well, considering that many preferred the Spanish daughter of Ferdinand to the Flemish nephew, a Spain united under the rule of Joan how will affect the political and religious future of Europe, considering she died in 1555?

Knowing Joan as more anti-conformist respect to her mother Isabel, her rule could have leading Spain towards Protestantism? Also, assuming as almost certain she wasn't crazy, if she won the news she was mentally stable could affect negatively the prestige of a Charles V just Emperor of the HRE, giving more opportunity to Francois I but also to the Protestant movements...

Uh, well you called her Juan at the first part there

I'm not sure about leading Spain towards Protestantism, but maybe just create a space where it's allowed to grow as long as its loyal to the monarch? It would be interesting to see Rome's stance toward Spain in a TL where she's beaten Charles V to rule, but I thought the Spanish monarchs already had a lot of control of their own church.

MNP said:

Uh, well you called her Juan at the first part there

I'm not sure about leading Spain towards Protestantism, but maybe just create a space where it's allowed to grow as long as its loyal to the monarch? It would be interesting to see Rome's stance toward Spain in a TL where she's beaten Charles V to rule, but I thought the Spanish monarchs already had a lot of control of their own church.

Click to expand...

Uh I made a spelling mistake as usual

Well, honestly I think it could be a real challenge to create a POD which will make Spain a Protestant country or at least a more religious open one. Surely, much will depend if a Joan Queen of Spain could be determined to reduce or even kick out the Inquisition and the Dominican order, IMO the two main obstacles for any attempt of religious reform. Probably, there could exist enough space of manouver to create a sort of Spanish Church like the English model.

Another issue could be the succession. Joan could be able to marry and bear another child in time (in case of victory in 1520-1521 she will have 41-42 years, probably it's too late for another pregnacy but who knows? )? Or maybe she could try to impose a cadet branch of the Trastamara?

RyuDrago said:

Uh I made a spelling mistake as usual

Well, honestly I think it could be a real challenge to create a POD which will make Spain a Protestant country or at least a more religious open one. Surely, much will depend if a Joan Queen of Spain could be determined to reduce or even kick out the Inquisition and the Dominican order, IMO the two main obstacles for any attempt of religious reform. Probably, there could exist enough space of manouver to create a sort of Spanish Church like the English model.

Another issue could be the succession. Joan could be able to marry and bear another child in time (in case of victory in 1520-1521 she will have 41-42 years, probably it's too late for another pregnacy but who knows? )? Or maybe she could try to impose a cadet branch of the Trastamara?

Click to expand...

First, Spain would NEVER be protestant. Even without the inquisition I don't think protestantism even really caught on in the Iberian Peninsula. And I doubt she would do either, kicking out the Inquisition or Dominican order I mean. By all accounts she was a devoted Catholic.

And for heirs, she would either support Charles eventually inheriting the throne or she would recall her son Ferdinand to serve as heir. He was raised in Spain for his entire early life and Ferdinand II tried to make him King of Aragon before he died.

Emperor Constantine said:

First, Spain would NEVER be protestant. Even without the inquisition I don't think protestantism even really caught on in the Iberian Peninsula. And I doubt she would do either, kicking out the Inquisition or Dominican order I mean. By all accounts she was a devoted Catholic.

Click to expand...

I guess you are right.

Emperor Constantine said:

And for heirs, she would either support Charles eventually inheriting the throne or she would recall her son Ferdinand to serve as heir. He was raised in Spain for his entire early life and Ferdinand II tried to make him King of Aragon before he died.

Click to expand...

Here I want to debate. The Comuneros revolted because essentially Charles imposed a regency composed by Flemish advisors, and the Castillians refused to be ruled by a bunch of foreigners. If the war will be won by the rebels, I doubt the Spanish which brought Joan to the throne of Spain wanted the imposition, return or what else of a king of Flemish culture, considering the rebellion was in anti-Flemish way.

The loss of Spain will force Charles to a different division of his Empire, so maybe Low countries and Austria both will go to Philip, who however will never be raised in Spain but probably in Belgium so he will grow in an ambient of Flemish culture too, and surely he will take the Imperial crown.

So, I think the Spanish could try to proclaim successor of Joan a collateral heir of the Trastamara instead to give to the Habsburg the throne...

Emperor Constantine said:

First, Spain would NEVER be protestant. Even without the inquisition I don't think protestantism even really caught on in the Iberian Peninsula. And I doubt she would do either, kicking out the Inquisition or Dominican order I mean. By all accounts she was a devoted Catholic.

And for heirs, she would either support Charles eventually inheriting the throne or she would recall her son Ferdinand to serve as heir. He was raised in Spain for his entire early life and Ferdinand II tried to make him King of Aragon before he died.

Click to expand...

Agreed. The big reason Spain had no Protestant movement was because Spain had ALREADY reformed the Catholic Church in their own domains. Ferdinand and Isabella were very moved to suppress some of the abuses of the church and clergy. It wasn't a reformation, perse, but it did make significant changes that were important for the country so that the people would continue to see the church in favorable light.

Agreed on the heirs. She'll either support Charles, or recall Ferdinand. The Communeros were pretty anti-foreign, so they'd probably support Ferdinand's candidacy given he was raised in Spain and Charles seemed foreign (and had already alienated them by filling posts with his Flemish advisors). She could remarry and have maybe one more child (41-42 really isn't that old; Elizabeth I continued to flirt with marriage into her late fourties for political reasons, and one of the conditions for her courting Alençon was that she undergo an exam to basically prove she could still have child. It had satisfactory results, and this was when she was 47.) Besides, she was so obsessed with Philip, I doubt she'd consider remarriage.

It's debatable if Joanna was insane: by the standards of the Renaissance, yes, given modern medical diagnoses, especially regarding mental health didn't exist in the era. If anything her personal story reads with lots of ups and downs, manic and depressive behavior, similar to bipolar disorder. The condition is tolerable in the modern age on the right combination of drugs, but sometimes takes years to find the right dosages, not to mention the right medicine. Even then, you can still have manic/depressive episodes. So that would be would big hitch to her ruling -- the revolters are going to have to deal with that. Even if she has clarity of mind (she did, to a point, so it seemed), her government is going to have to deal with her being incapacitated on many an occasion, so she'd probably still have to accept a co-ruler (she continued to "reign" until 1555, although Charles was total ruler in all but name), even with the Communeros. It's just, in this situation we'd be more likely to see Ferdinand, not Charles.

RyuDrago said:

I guess you are right.



Here I want to debate. The Comuneros revolted because essentially Charles imposed a regency composed by Flemish advisors, and the Castillians refused to be ruled by a bunch of foreigners. If the war will be won by the rebels, I doubt the Spanish which brought Joan to the throne of Spain wanted the imposition, return or what else of a king of Flemish culture, considering the rebellion was in anti-Flemish way.

The loss of Spain will force Charles to a different division of his Empire, so maybe Low countries and Austria both will go to Philip, who however will never be raised in Spain but probably in Belgium so he will grow in an ambient of Flemish culture too, and surely he will take the Imperial crown.

So, I think the Spanish could try to proclaim successor of Joan a collateral heir of the Trastamara instead to give to the Habsburg the throne...

Click to expand...

I don't see the correlation between being anti-foreigner and anti-inquisition. The inquisition was made of Spaniards, not the Flemish, and had been created by,I believe, Ferdinand and Isabella, not brought in by Charles V. So no I doubt you'll see the abolishment of the Inquisition or if you do it would be a temporary thing, like when a monarch abolished his or her predecessors secret police, only to create a new version a little while later.

The revolt of the Comuneros was in 1520, and Philip was born in 1527. You won't see the same Philip if that even ends up being his name. Hell you probably won't see Charles marry Isabella of Portugal either. Best bet Charles steals his brothers bride and marries Anne of Hungary and Bohemia. An unintended consequence might be the strengthening of the HRE, what with the Emperor being on hand to deal with the problems plaguing the Empire and not a viceroy-brother.

But Juana is going to want one of her sons to succeed her. Crazy or not (I'm inclined to believe not) no monarch is going to want to leave her throne to a distant relative over her own children. Again I can see Ferdinand being sent to become her heir as a compromise between Charles and his mother.

DrakeRlugia said:

Agreed. The big reason Spain had no Protestant movement was because Spain had ALREADY reformed the Catholic Church in their own domains. Ferdinand and Isabella were very moved to suppress some of the abuses of the church and clergy. It wasn't a reformation, perse, but it did make significant changes that were important for the country so that the people would continue to see the church in favorable light.

Agreed on the heirs. She'll either support Charles, or recall Ferdinand. The Communeros were pretty anti-foreign, so they'd probably support Ferdinand's candidacy given he was raised in Spain and Charles seemed foreign (and had already alienated them by filling posts with his Flemish advisors). She could remarry and have maybe one more child (41-42 really isn't that old; Elizabeth I continued to flirt with marriage into her late fourties for political reasons, and one of the conditions for her courting Alençon was that she undergo an exam to basically prove she could still have child. It had satisfactory results, and this was when she was 47.) Besides, she was so obsessed with Philip, I doubt she'd consider remarriage.

It's debatable if Joanna was insane: by the standards of the Renaissance, yes, given modern medical diagnoses, especially regarding mental health didn't exist in the era. If anything her personal story reads with lots of ups and downs, manic and depressive behavior, similar to bipolar disorder. The condition is tolerable in the modern age on the right combination of drugs, but sometimes takes years to find the right dosages, not to mention the right medicine. Even then, you can still have manic/depressive episodes. So that would be would big hitch to her ruling -- the revolters are going to have to deal with that. Even if she has clarity of mind (she did, to a point, so it seemed), her government is going to have to deal with her being incapacitated on many an occasion, so she'd probably still have to accept a co-ruler (she continued to "reign" until 1555, although Charles was total ruler in all but name), even with the Communeros. It's just, in this situation we'd be more likely to see Ferdinand, not Charles.

Click to expand...

It's indeed an interesting analysis.

Emperor Constantine said:

I don't see the correlation between being anti-foreigner and anti-inquisition. The inquisition was made of Spaniards, not the Flemish, and had been created by,I believe, Ferdinand and Isabella, not brought in by Charles V. So no I doubt you'll see the abolishment of the Inquisition or if you do it would be a temporary thing, like when a monarch abolished his or her predecessors secret police, only to create a new version a little while later.

The revolt of the Comuneros was in 1520, and Philip was born in 1527. You won't see the same Philip if that even ends up being his name. Hell you probably won't see Charles marry Isabella of Portugal either. Best bet Charles steals his brothers bride and marries Anne of Hungary and Bohemia. An unintended consequence might be the strengthening of the HRE, what with the Emperor being on hand to deal with the problems plaguing the Empire and not a viceroy-brother.

But Juana is going to want one of her sons to succeed her. Crazy or not (I'm inclined to believe not) no monarch is going to want to leave her throne to a distant relative over her own children. Again I can see Ferdinand being sent to become her heir as a compromise between Charles and his mother.

Click to expand...

In fact in the previous post I didn't make a correlation between anti-foreigner and anti-inquisition about the events of 1520. I was talking about the civilian and not of the religious administration of Spain in those years. Anyway I don't think Ferdinand will be interested to rule Spain but to keep Austria and Bohemia on his grip. Neither I don't see why Joan should still support Charles's claim only because she was his mother. The need to leave a strong country behind after the ruler's death is more important of the blood ties if necessary: Elizabeth's decision to recognize James Stuart as successor is a clear example. And Charles could still marry Isabel of Portugal in order to have a base to launch a future invasion of Spain if things will continue to go wrong with her mother...

RyuDrago said:

It's indeed an interesting analysis.



In fact in the previous post I didn't make a correlation between anti-foreigner and anti-inquisition about the events of 1520. I was talking about the civilian and not of the religious administration of Spain in those years. Anyway I don't think Ferdinand will be interested to rule Spain but to keep Austria and Bohemia on his grip. Neither I don't see why Joan should still support Charles's claim only because she was his mother. The need to leave a strong country behind after the ruler's death is more important of the blood ties if necessary: Elizabeth's decision to recognize James Stuart as successor is a clear example. And Charles could still marry Isabel of Portugal in order to have a base to launch a future invasion of Spain if things will continue to go wrong with her mother...

Click to expand...

What correlation is there between the civil and religious administration here? Spain is NOT GOING TO GET RID OF THE INQUISITION! Hell OTL it was only officially abolished in 1834. So if it took that long for it to be abolished OTL then I can't see them abolishing it in 1520 TTL.

Why WOULDN'T Ferdinand want to rule Spain? He had no territory anywhere else. Ferdinand only got the Archduchy of Austria in 1521. If Charles loses Spain and possibly Naples and Sicily (remember they were technically under the Crown of Aragon) then I doubt he's going to want to give up more territory. Also Bohemia and Hungary were ruled by Louis II Jagiellonian until his death on the battle field in 1527 so no crown there either. So yes Ferdinand would definitely want to become the Spanish heir. And the James VI & I/Elizabeth analogue doesn't work here. Elizabeth refused to marry. James was her closest relative. Juana had ,what ,six children. They would be the heirs. Elevating cadet Branch over her own children doesn't make sense and would invite rebellion after Juana's death. Better a compromise candidate with Ferdinand. And finally Charles might still want to marry Isabella of Portugal but would that still be in Portugal's best interests? Would it not be better to marry her to the heir of Spain? Like Ferdinand? In a scenario with the Comneros succeeding, it would make the most sense to switch brides, with Ferdinand marrying Isabella and Charles marrying Anne.

Emperor Constantine said:

What correlation is there between the civil and religious administration here? Spain is NOT GOING TO GET RID OF THE INQUISITION! Hell OTL it was only officially abolished in 1834. So if it took that long for it to be abolished OTL then I can't see them abolishing it in 1520 TTL.

Why WOULDN'T Ferdinand want to rule Spain? He had no territory anywhere else. Ferdinand only got the Archduchy of Austria in 1521. If Charles loses Spain and possibly Naples and Sicily (remember they were technically under the Crown of Aragon) then I doubt he's going to want to give up more territory. Also Bohemia and Hungary were ruled by Louis II Jagiellonian until his death on the battle field in 1527 so no crown there either. So yes Ferdinand would definitely want to become the Spanish heir. And the James VI & I/Elizabeth analogue doesn't work here. Elizabeth refused to marry. James was her closest relative. Juana had ,what ,six children. They would be the heirs. Elevating cadet Branch over her own children doesn't make sense and would invite rebellion after Juana's death. Better a compromise candidate with Ferdinand. And finally Charles might still want to marry Isabella of Portugal but would that still be in Portugal's best interests? Would it not be better to marry her to the heir of Spain? Like Ferdinand? In a scenario with the Comneros succeeding, it would make the most sense to switch brides, with Ferdinand marrying Isabella and Charles marrying Anne.

Click to expand...

I know the Spanish Inquisition lasted till that long and I don't understand why do you continue to think I still think about his early removal in 1520. It seems clear from my previous posts I recognized your point of view, and so I focused to other possible scenaries. And with this I don't want to indulge further on the matter unless others wants to intervene.

About the issue of the succession still, I think we should consider the fact in case of victory Joan could be aided by a sort of council formed by rebels who could easily convince her to choice another candidate instead to promote one of her spawn. Also, I remember that James Stuart wasn't the only candidate to the English crown and still existed other cadet members of the Tudor in England, and Elizabeth remained hesitant till the end. In truth Anne Stanley was more legitimed of James to ascend into the throne but it was the English government in the end who moved for the union of the crowns.

I could agreed instead about the bride switch of Charles and Ferdinand.

RyuDrago said:

I know the Spanish Inquisition lasted till that long and I don't understand why do you continue to think I still think about his early removal in 1520. It seems clear from my previous posts I recognized your point of view, and so I focused to other possible scenaries. And with this I don't want to indulge further on the matter unless others wants to intervene.

About the issue of the succession still, I think we should consider the fact in case of victory Joan could be aided by a sort of council formed by rebels who could easily convince her to choice another candidate instead to promote one of her spawn. Also, I remember that James Stuart wasn't the only candidate to the English crown and still existed other cadet members of the Tudor in England, and Elizabeth remained hesitant till the end. In truth Anne Stanley was more legitimed of James to ascend into the throne but it was the English government in the end who moved for the union of the crowns.

I could agreed instead about the bride switch of Charles and Ferdinand.

Click to expand...

OK with the Inquisitive lets just agree to disagree.

As for the Succession, I can agree with an advisory council (perhaps the Council of Castile's power is expanded, especially with Juana likely to have bouts of "insanity") but even then I can't see her betraying her children. Remember OTL she stood by her son even when she was offered the chance to be free and be a Ruling Queen, not just a reigning one. So I can't see her giving her throne to a distant relative. Or if she agrees it would only be in public with her and her supporters working behind the scenes for a Habsburg succession. Also, consider the fact that Juana's support would transform the Comuneros revolt into a Civil war. It would not give them an instant victory. Charles won because he gave huge concessions to Castilian grandees and they in turn raised an army to beat the rebels. Here the Grandees would be divided with some siding with Juana but not all. And there's the possibility of Charles sending an army to assist his supporters. With all this, wouldn't it make the most sense to negotiate with Charles rather than fight and risk losing? With that being the case, I can see several possibilities.

1. they both reign but with Juana ruling and Charles having to stay out of Spanish and Italian affairs. In a sense reverse of the OTL situation between the two. 2. A negotiated peace, with Juana as Queen and either Charles or Ferdinand as the heir. 3. Negotiations are broken off and who wins is up in the air. If Juana wins, she'll still favor one of her sons but might be forced to concede for a more distant relative. If Charles wins, I can see a much more vicious reprisal than in OTL, with the possibility of Juana being removed from the country all together, being sent to either Flanders, an island controlled by Aragon or even Naples.

As for the Elizabeth bit, yes Anne Stanley was the LEGAL heir but by laws of Primogeniture, James was the rightful heir. And the one who made the most sense. With the Scottish King also ruling England it ended the possibility of an invasion from Scotland, either by the Scots or another power using Scotland as a springboard. Plus much of the English government favored the Scottish succession. Anne was a nonentity. And Elizabeth was only hesitant because she feared if she named an heir that heir would become a railing point for those who apposed her reign or could him/herself try to overthrow her. It seems that privately Elizabeth considered James her heir, partially out of guilt for his mother Mary Queen of Scots' execution.

And finally thanks for seeing my point on flipping brides.