Two and a Half Kingdoms: A Stuart TL

[Finbarr the Fair]

Fascinating

Subscribed, please carry on the good work.

Finding this very interesting, albeit a bit sad that while the detail is different Ireland gets screwed again in the 17th Century

Historical inevitability??

 

[Youngmarshall]

Subscribed, please carry on the good work.

Finding this very interesting, albeit a bit sad that while the detail is different Ireland gets screwed again in the 17th Century

Historical inevitability??

First, thank you very much.

As for historical inevitably, I wouldn't go that far but I do think a 1565 POD is probably too late to avoid most of their troubles.

The problem the Irish had about then is that the English really care holding onto about Ireland. You read quotes from English statesmen around this time and they honestly seemed to view the loss of Ireland as inevitably leading to invasion of England and so something to be avoided at all costs. When the crown is willing to invest as much money and men into defeating rebellions in Ireland as the English crown was, that makes things hard.

I mean Elizabeth downsized the English navy on the very eve of armada so she didn't have to pay them full wages but she was willing to fund a 30,000 man army in Ireland and take the country to the brink of bankruptcy rather than abandon it. So it's clear that in this timeframe the English aren't leaving Ireland unless they have no choice.

And the problem with that is the Irish are much less numerous and organised than the English and nobody else cares enough about the Irish to intervene on a large scale. I mean 6,000 men from Spain, 4,000 men from the Pope, 7,000 mercenaries from Scotland, sure. But a large scale army? No, it just wasn't on the cards. And the result of that is you have one side which can throw endless men and money at the problem and the other side which can't. And that can only lead to one result.

Having said all that Ireland in OTL suffered through three devastating wars in the 17th century, if it can just avoid the second two in TTL it'll be doing better. Already it's benefited from the fact the destruction of crops in Ulster happened in 1606 rather than 1603 when the weather was better and so there was less natural crop failure to magnify the problem.

 

[My Username is Inigo Montoya]

Brilliant work!

 

[Youngmarshall]

Brilliant work!

Thank you.

Excerpt from "The Counter-Factual Discussion board" (Translated from Spanish).

Ok guys so let's talk Spanish Dominance. Short of divine intervention (so anything like comets hitting paris or Philip II suddenly deciding he cares about economics are right out) what change after 1474 and the union of Aragon and Castile can keep Spain the dominant power in Europe?

Henry of Navarre refuses to convert to Catholicism maybe? A more prolonged French war of religion and you might prevent France's rise.

No expulsion of jews might help the financial problems a little by keeping the banking system in Spain. You might also get more innovation with a more tolerant society. In terms of teaching the scientific method, at least. The demographic problem is harder, mind.

You need less wars. Mary of England has a son and survives until he reaches adulthood thus replacing one of our enemies with a friendly nation and so cutting out the anglo-islamic war and meaning a less successful dutch revolt. That might give you the manufacturing base and demograhics needed to compete with France. Or likewise if the plot to assassinate Elizabeth actually worked.

Yeah, Spain's main problem is it didn't manufacture anything. It bought everything it needed with precious metals that it dug out of the new world in places like my hometown instead, which only works if the manufacturing bases are at least still in your own empire. The moment Antwerp rebelled I think is when you're in trouble.

Doesn't solve the number of men. There are just more French men, the innovations and riches come directly from that. Possibly a weaker caste system in the new world could see the indians being used as man power, but that requires a manufacturing base in the new world which is going to mean a richer mexica rather than a richer spain.

How about an Irish style agricultural revoloution then? Sicily and Spain are good conditions for a great number of new world crops which never really made the jump.

I'm English so can't speak as much as about this as those who grew up learning about Spain's long decline but if we agree that Philip II's intolerance helped strangle innovation and that France's rise was due to it having more people then how about the Knights of Malta not falling to the Ottomans. If I remember right that is what led to the panic about secret muslims that resulted in the banning of Arabic which led to the Morisco rebellion and so their expulsion, so there's some more Spanish right there.

And didn't Philip tell Egmont that he was perfectly happy with Dutch tolerance right up until Malta fell and he suddenly backtracked[1]? So no Dutch revolt.

And with the Dutch navy on side, then succesful Armada.

I'll ignore that last comment because I know that you know, we've beaten the idea of the armada ever being succesful into the ground on here. But interesting idea. I can't really see a Hospitaller victory at Malta, mind. I mean they put up a hell of a fight in OTL and numbers (and the genius of a certain corsair, heh) told in the end. But okay lets say they do win, which means Spain doesn't have to retake and garrison Malta, the Ottomans are less eager to attack Cyprus so no victory at Lepanto, Tunis doesn't swap hands 100 times but remains Spanish. That gives Spain some advantages in the med but not so much that you're not still going to see an anglo-islamic war over the Portuguese throne. And that devestated the Spanish economy. Honestly I think your best bet may be Sebastian surviving the Plague. Portugal simply wasn't worth what it took to take it

[1]In OTl the backtrack came after Malta was saved. The general feeling in OTL was he was fobbing off the dutch until the turks were dealt with, in TTL it's assumed that the massacres of the maltese made him less tolerant of non catholics.

 

[Youngmarshall]

Excerpt from the Website 'Ask an Historian.'

"Q: Why did the Spanish lose the Dutch Revolt?

A: Money. Philip II's financial woes are worth dwelling on. He kept building up huge amounts of debt trying to fund a larger military than he could afford, going bankrupt, not paying his debts and then doing the same thing again.

In his defence with Malta lost and the Turks raiding the Spanish coast, he certainly needed to be active in the Mediterranean, and with the Dutch up in arms and smashing statues, he probably needed a large army in that area too. But when just that one army in the low countries sometimes cost more to support than his entire empire was earning[1], he simply couldn't afford a third front. And when he provoked the Moriscos into rebelling he had one. And then after that he invaded Portugal which gave him another one. And then he invaded Morocco, France, Ireland and tried to invade England.

When you are trying to fight a war on five fronts and you can't afford to fight on even one, something had to give and what gave was Holland.

The revolt probably could have been stopped early on if Philip had been more reasonable and not put Alva in charge but when he tried to withdraw Alva his bankruptcy caused Alva's troops to mutiny due to not being paid and rampage through Antwerp. At that point all of the Netherlands were anti Spanish and the Dutch Rebels had essentially won."

Excerpt from "Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma"
By Javier Stabile @ Lammergeier Publishing, 1983

"The Union of Brussels had united all of the low countries under William of Orange, Farnese would spend the next twenty years using a mixture of diplomacy and force to try and undo it and reconquer the Low Countries for Spain.

Farnese realised that Alva had failed by turning any potential allies against him and he was determined not to repeat the same mistakes. His war strategy was simple, he marched upon a town, laid siege to it, took it and then was generous in the terms given to the defenders. As such the south was reasonably loyal to him, with most of their grievances with Spain addressed and no hint of the barbarity with which Alba had conducted himself. And with the rebels deeply divided, Farnese seemed in a good position to win the war. But in 1580 Spain invaded Portugal and part of his army was called back to Iberia.[2]"

Excerpt from "Elizabeth and Religion"
By Sarah Lister @ Carolinian Press, 2001.

"How serious Elizabeth was in her attempt to marry the Catholic Duke of Anjou is a subject for debate. Certainly they were ongoing talks, and the fact that a Catholic French Prince was willing to both discuss being wed to an Anglican and also declare himself protector of the Calvinist Dutch, shows how much the fear of Spanish power crossed religious lines. Something Elizabeth would exploit a great deal in the coming decade.

Anjou's death of Malaria in 1581[3] prevented any deal being made and so no French troops were to fight in Portugal or Holland at that point. But as much as Elizabeth had no desire to take Anjou's role as official protector, his death meant she would fulfill that roll unofficially. The following year, Robert Dudley arrived in Holland.[4]

The States General had revolted with the goal of replacing a King they didn't like with a King they did, not with changing the structure of the country at all. To them therefore Elizabeth taking the place of Philip seemed a perfectly reasonable result. To Elizabeth it was a burden she had no desire for."

Excerpt from "Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma"
By Javier Stabile @ Lammergeier Publishing, 1983

"Alva earned Spain 22 million florins in his five year campaign, Parma in his first five years only earned 12 million from tax and trade in the low countries[5]. If he was to be able to fund a long campaign he needed to hold Antwerp, likewise if the Rebels were to their fund their army they needed it. Antwerp was set to be the decisive battleground, for not only the dutch revolt, but also the wider war against the English and Turks. Without Antwerp the money to finance any military campaign simply didn't exist.

The problem was, the long Spanish road around France that took troops from Spain to the low countries meant the English could bring their troops across the Channel before Parma had his whole army back."

[1] That's something too unbelievable not to have happened in OTL.
[2] Everything up to here is OTL but this isn't.
[3] As mentioned earlier Anjou died three years earlier in TTL,
[4] Again three years earlier due to the fact England and Spain were already at war in 1582 in TTL.
[5] Alva's figure is OTl. Parma's is slightly lower.

 

[Youngmarshall]

Excerpt from the 'Dutch Wars of Independence'.
By Marjolien Smit, @Oxford University, 1983.

"English sources tend to credit the reformation of the County of Holland to the diplomatic efforts of Elizabeth and Dudley. Certainly they wanted a single leader to negotiate with and Elizabeth wanted it to be clear it wasn't her. But what Dudley really wanted was an end to the independence of the various provinces, a direct taxation system, an embargo on dutch trade with the spanish and authority over the local governors[1], none of which the dutch were willing to give. William the Silent finally took the step to be crowned Count of Holland as much so that he had the authority to refuse Dudley as for any other reason. William was against centralising of any kind, it was the only way he could think of to keep both the radical anti papal northern provinces of Zeeland and Holland and the more religiously mixed southern provinces together."

Excerpt from the Nupedia Website (Translated from French).

"The Battle of Steenbergen was an English/Dutch victory over Spanish forces under the Duke of Parma in 1583 and prevented the fall of the city to the Spanish.[2]"

Excerpt from "A Realm to a State: How Elizabeth created the English."
By Gregory Hillton, @Sidehouse publishing, 1943

"Dudley's orders were simple. He was to stop the Dutch rebels from collapsing and make sure the Spanish were unable to ever muster the resources to attack England. The problem he had was the Army of Flanders was far better and mobile than his own. After retreating from Steenbergen, Parma campaigned again the next year, this time further south among the Dender and Schelt rivers and captured Ypres, Ghent, Mechelen, Bruges and Aalst mostly without even having to fire a shot, due to starvation tactics and badly paid english troops surrendering at the first sign of Parma's approach.

Antwerp and Brussels were therefore cities that Dudley could not let fall. not if his own reputation was to survive. The details of Dudley's last stand do not need to be repeated here. But that his death saved Antwerp and meant that for the second time in three years Parma had to retreat, was a huge boon for relations between the Dutch and the English[3]."

Excerpt from "Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma"
By Javier Stabile @ Lammergeier Publishing, 1983

"After the defeat of 1585, Philip lost faith in a decisive victory in Holland and started planning for a knock out blow to the English instead. Drake's two attacks on Spain in 1585 and 1587 and the entry of Morocco into the war in the latter year saw Spain's eye drift further away from the Dutch army. Parma's new role was to make no more offensives and instead gather his army on the coast to be ready to invade London and just hope that in his absence neither the Dutch nor the French were to try any offensive into the low countries. The problem's with this plan were glaring, Parma had improved his money situation slightly with his 1584 campaign but his men still mutinied on a regular basis due to a lack of pay and he had no access to a deep water port which meant he needed to build barges in order to board the Armada and with no money to offer boat builders he was unable to.

However the threat of his invasion did mean that the English withdrew all their troops to England and that meant that, once the Armada was defeated, he could launch a second attack on Brussels and Antwerp, capturing them by 1589. And that meant he was soon making 9 million florins a year again, as opposed to 12 million in his first five years combined[4].

The problem was by that time Spain was at war with England, Morocco and the Ottomans and before long would also go to war with France. Holland was no longer the most important front and so Parma, and his money and his men, were taken out of the low countries and put on other fronts. The momentum was lost. Parma himself was to die campaigning in France and with him died any hope of Spanish victory in the low countries."

Excerpt from the 'Dutch Wars of Independence'.
By Marjolien Smit, @Oxford University, 1983.

"Philip II went bankrupt four times[5] and by 1598 he was paying almost all his revenue just on interest[6]. It was not a matter of if Spain would come to terms with the Dutch, but how much territory the rebels would hold when it did. The Dutch were willing to let Spain hold onto most of the Union of Arras but they were not willing to make peace until Flanders, and in particular Antwerp were recaptured.

In 1604 they finally got their wish and so a ceasefire was agreed.[7]"

[1] All things he got in OTL because the rebellion was in a much worse position when Dudley arrived after the assasination of William and the fall of Antwerp.
[2] A Spanish victory in OTL.
[3] In OTL Antwerp fell in 1585. In TTL things are slightly worse for the Spanish and so it doesn't.
[4] As far as I can tell this is an accurate reflection of the effect of capturing Antwerp and surrounding area on the Spanish purse.
[5] One more than OTL.
[6] Same as OTl.
[7] This campaign failed in OTL. So TTL's County of Holland is much bigger than OTL's United Provinces.

 

[Youngmarshall]

So yes Pompejus, that's why Dudley has a good reputation in TTL.

You're the expert on Dutch history (I'm really not), do you think it's plausible?

 

[Youngmarshall]

OK so this thread started when I was looking at the state of the english economy in 1603 and thinking about what would happen if we strained that a bit more.

All this continental stuff has been written because if you're going to strain the english economy by a longer war with spain then that's going to have knock on effects. The story of the Dutch Revolt is they win when Spain are distracted elsewhere, essentially.

So inevitably by distracting the spanish, I had to write about the dutch. But I'm british, we grew up learning about the history of the british isles and ignored the continent mostly. So I'm uneasy about writing about events in the continent as I don't have the knowledge there.

Now I've written Parma losing twice in battles he won in OTL. Now OTOH the army of flanders was the best army in europe, bar none, in terms of ability. It could wipe the floor with anything england or holland can offer. But, on the other hand, the spanish economy is a basket case, Parma's troops mutinied a barely believable 40 different times due to lack of pay and when Philip II died he genuinely was spending most of his empire's revenue just on paying interest on his loans.

So I tend to think in economic terms rather than military ones but I think if you put further strain on the Spanish economy as I have in TTL even Parma is going to lose battles. Simply because he can't afford to keep his men in the field long enough to win them. If he doesn't have the money and equipment to carry out a long siege and the opposition is unexpectedly tough, I think retreats are understandable.

 

[pompejus]

So yes Pompejus, that's why Dudley has a good reputation in TTL.

You're the expert on Dutch history (I'm really not), do you think it's plausible?

Well, expert. Not realy. But I am Dutch, which probably means I know more of Dutch history than most people here. Anyway. What comments do I have?

First of all, you are talking about the protestant north and the catholic south. One thing to remember is that you should not look at 16th century "Belgium" in the same way as you look at 21st century Belgium. There were a lot of protestants in Belgium. Actualy Flanders is where the Dutch reformation started. I would say that a lot of places had a majority of protestants, crypto-protestants, protestant sympathisers or people who did not care enough. That is why so many cities joined the Union of Utrecht and the rebellion and in so many places the catholic leaders were replaced by protestants. It realy was a bottom up reformation/revolution. When Parma recaptured those towns often 1/3 or more fled the cities north*. Especialy Antwerp and Ostend had a protestant majority and lost a lot of people. If an independent Netherlands keeps (or regains) these places, expect a protestant majority in almost all of the Dutch speaking Netherlands (certainly if it is before the counterreformation), although with a large catholic minority and several areas with a catholic majority (like for example Volendam is a catholic town in North-Holland).

Next you make a difference between Walloon and Dutch/Flemish Netherlands. That division did exist, but was not terribly important. For example Flanders, Limburg, Overmaas and Brabant had both Walloon and Dutch speaking parts. People would not care about the linguistic division. If for example the Dutch during the war captured the areas near the river Meusse they would not limit themselves to the Dutch speaking parts of Limburg. (BTW there were also several Walloon protestants, who fled to the north and founded the Walloon churches*.)

Furthermore, I guess it is possible, or at least not impossible. Making Parma lose because of a worse financial situation of Spain? I guess it is possible. It was a main reason why the Dutch situation turned from almost lost to effectively won in a couple of years. Certainly when Parma was forced to open a new front in France OTL. It is certainly not the most unrealistic I have seen around here. So far so good.

*Interestingly the people who fled north were often the most strict and conservatives among the Dutch protestants, which also suggests that the less strict ones stayed around and reconverted/turned into crypto-protestants.

 

[Youngmarshall]

Well, expert. Not realy. But I am Dutch, which probably means I know more of Dutch history than most people here. Anyway. What comments do I have?

First of all, you are talking about the protestant north and the catholic south. One thing to remember is that you should not look at 16th century "Belgium" in the same way as you look at 21st century Belgium. There were a lot of protestants in Belgium. Actualy Flanders is where the Dutch reformation started. I would say that a lot of places had a majority of protestants, crypto-protestants, protestant sympathisers or people who did not care enough. That is why so many cities joined the Union of Utrecht and the rebellion and in so many places the catholic leaders were replaced by protestants. It realy was a bottom up reformation/revolution. When Parma recaptured those towns often 1/3 or more fled the cities north*. Especialy Antwerp and Ostend had a protestant majority and lost a lot of people. If an independent Netherlands keeps (or regains) these places, expect a protestant majority in almost all of the Dutch speaking Netherlands (certainly if it is before the counterreformation), although with a large catholic minority and several areas with a catholic majority (like for example Volendam is a catholic town in North-Holland).

Next you make a difference between Walloon and Dutch/Flemish Netherlands. That division did exist, but was not terribly important. For example Flanders, Limburg, Overmaas and Brabant had both Walloon and Dutch speaking parts. People would not care about the linguistic division. If for example the Dutch during the war captured the areas near the river Meusse they would not limit themselves to the Dutch speaking parts of Limburg. (BTW there were also several Walloon protestants, who fled to the north and founded the Walloon churches*.)

Furthermore, I guess it is possible, or at least not impossible. Making Parma lose because of a worse financial situation of Spain? I guess it is possible. It was a main reason why the Dutch situation turned from almost lost to effectively won in a couple of years. Certainly when Parma was forced to open a new front in France OTL. It is certainly not the most unrealistic I have seen around here. So far so good.

*Interestingly the people who fled north were often the most strict and conservatives among the Dutch protestants, which also suggests that the less strict ones stayed around and reconverted/turned into crypto-protestants.

I appreciate your comments.

My use of walloon as a distinction was probably wrong. What I was trying to get across was that there was no attempt to attack the union of Arras (so lille, mons etc.), merely regain as much of the union of Utrecht as possible.

I'll bow your expertise on the religion thing. I'd just read that they were conflcits between the radical calvanists in zeeland and holland and the more catholic southern states so used that division as a reason why Willian would be against Dudley's centralising methods. That bit can be rewritten to focus on the provinces traditional privilages instead.

 

[pompejus]

My use of walloon as a distinction was probably wrong. What I was trying to get across was that there was no attempt to attack the union of Arras (so lille, mons etc.), merely regain as much of the union of Utrecht as possible.

I don't know. They would certainly go for strategic targets everywhere, including parts of the union of Arras. The Meusse is an important river and control of it gives a major strategic advantage. The Dutch did capture Maastrich and a large part of Overmaas (Dutch south Limburg), even though it never was part of the Union of Utrecht. To be fair, Luxemburg and Mons are pretty safe, since it is too far from the main battleground, so I guess i know what you mean. It will be mostly a battle to regain the Union of Utrecht area.

I'll bow your expertise on the religion thing. I'd just read that they were conflcits between the radical calvanists in zeeland and holland and the more catholic southern states so used that division as a reason why Willian would be against Dudley's centralising methods. That bit can be rewritten to focus on the provinces traditional privilages instead.

To be fair, there were more catholics in the southern Netherlands (even excluding the Walloon areas) and some places, like Mechelen and Leuven (I think) manage to avoid a protestant take over. But most towns in the south were in the hands of the protestants, usualy by homegrown protestant who took over control, while catholics barely resisted or did not care enough to intervene.

Focusing on decentralisation is a good thing though. That was realy a major grievance of the Dutch, everywhere, including the south and including the Walloon areas.

 

[Youngmarshall]

Focusing on decentralisation is a good thing though. That was realy a major grievance of the Dutch, everywhere, including the south and including the Walloon areas.

Certainly Leicester's attempts to treat it as a centralised kingdom with direct feudal control by the governor gentral were so unpopular that you have to assume that in a tl when the dutch had a stronger negotiating position with the English (which they do in this one due to england already being at war with spain and so not being able to walk away and also the dutch controlling more land and still having a respected figurehead) than stuff like direct taxation, the government telling merchants who they could and could not trade with and the ability of the governor general to execute military oficers from the provinces would not ever happen.

William still wanted some kind of national council to make nation wide decisions but he'd never go that far.

There are problems with a decentralised state that will quickly become apparant though. I mean for one it means the rebuilding effort will be done on a provincial basis and some provinces have seen a lot more fighting than others and will need to do a lot more rebuilding. So there's going to be a time period where some provinces are economically doing a lot better than others because the decentralised status means that zeeland doesn't have to pay to rebuild mechelen. Which is going to be a source of tension.

 

[Xenophonte]

Economics and political consequences.

This is a great Story with an original style and narrative format.

The ìntegrcion of Antwerp and its port in the Netherlands since its formation ... are definitely not good news for London and the future commercial development of England and the reverse is true for the Netherlands.

Especially when its independence war was shorter than OTL and have come out of it, apparently more stronger and with an extensive and more centralized territory than in OTL.

Since the longest and bloodiest conflicts with economics and political consequences with the new European balance of power would be reasonable to speculate that the colonial-trade initiatives of English and Dutch would be postponed ,at least they would take more tradititional forms of territorial expansion and obtaining wealth for their nations, at least in the short and medium term.


What is certain that dramatically affect the conquest, colonization of America and the subsequent political organization, through submission to the Spanish Crown.

First by the Human and material losses that these conflicts, then because this Timeline and in this situation, many future Conquistadores, many of them veterans of the Spanish thirds that would embark for America, seeking to escape poverty their hometowns in search of a chance to flourish, to become Hidalgos or be recognized as such and therefore as belonging to the lower nobility.


This would happen here not as many would have a better chance, from their perspective, of booty by joining the armies and navies Royals.

While this does not stop all adventurers, it would not be as 'simple and fast' and OTL arm or join a group of conquest or that these obtain permission for the Royal initiative but after achieving their objectives and for the few lucky to survive and decide to establish residence in America, given its remoteness and attention to the Crown was in Europe and the crusade against the Moro, the Turk and against heretics.

Presumably, the religious intolerance and xenophobia of the Europeans in general and particularly of the Spaniards would see much greater extent than in our Reality.

Another consequence could be very likely that by the time the Crown and its directors turn their attention to American affairs ... are that it is impossible to subject the former conquerors to the Royal authority in full and should recognize and legalize retroactively their autonomy and especially the treatment applied to the Indians by small oligarchies Hispanic-Indigenous. Remember that the Crown, under pressure from the Church, was his great defender against the Spanish settlers ,in OTL!!.

In exchange for much needed resources is the Spanish Empire wich should to recognize and to accept the existence, at least short-term, of a relation similar to the supported one with other Kingdoms that were members of the Hispanic Monarchy.

 

[Youngmarshall]

Thank you for your praise.

Yes, inevitably european colonisation of both the new world and asia is going to be different because spain, france, portugal, netherlands and britain are all different ittl. I'll get into that in due course. It's worth remembering that in 1603 England didn't have an overseas empire nor did france or holland. It was an iberian game only. So how that begins to change is an upcoming post as well as how the spanish colonies fared in the war, with the spanish crown demanding men and money for their war not for the empire.

And you're also right that a large scale alliance between protestant powers on one hand and islamic powers on the other is very scary for catholic europe. Turko-calvinism which conflates the two religions is a much bigger idea ITTL which leads to harder hearts. We'll see how that affects the holy roman empire in the lead up to what in otl was the thirty years war, shortly.

But yes battle lines are much more sharply drawn. Philip II's line about rather ruling nobody than ruling heretics is going to be more mainstream thought.