bytor
Chief petty officer
I'm baaaack.
Posts: 132 
Likes: 68
|
Post by bytor on Sept 1, 2016 18:23:25 GMT
In my timeline, one of the butterflies is that France is not allowed to intervene in Spain in 1822, so-call "Hundred Thousand Sons of St. Louis".
As a result, the Cadíz Progresista government's attempt at a Bonaparte-list centralization and redistricting of Spain gets further along. It was very unpopular, OTL, but the French invasion stopped it. In my timeline it continues and it pisses off the varying regions which had had centuries of relative autonomy under both the Habsburg and later Bourbon monarchs. The regions revolt and we end up with new Kingdom of Aragon (a stronghold of conservatives and monarchists), Republic of Navarre (stronghold of Basques and democrats) and Léon-Asturias-Galicia (a mixed bunch who just doesn't like the Castilian Cadíz Progresista controls). Andalucía rebels but is subdued because of an alliance between moderate liberals and absolutists, leaving Ferdinand VII with greatly reduced powers and only in Castile.
Would these newly independent states claim any of the remaining Spanish colonies like Cuba or the Philippines that had not rebelled like the others? Or would they be content with letting Castile keep them?
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 64,958
Likes: 46,115
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 1, 2016 18:50:28 GMT
In my timeline, one of the butterflies is that France is not allowed to intervene in Spain in 1822, so-call "Hundred Thousand Sons of St. Louis". As a result, the Cadíz Progresista government's attempt at a Bonaparte-list centralization and redistricting of Spain gets further along. It was very unpopular, OTL, but the French invasion stopped it. In my timeline it continues and it pisses off the varying regions which had had centuries of relative autonomy under both the Habsburg and later Bourbon monarchs. The regions revolt and we end up with new Kingdom of Aragon (a stronghold of conservatives and monarchists), Republic of Navarre (stronghold of Basques and democrats) and Léon-Asturias-Galicia (a mixed bunch who just doesn't like the Castilian Cadíz Progresista controls). Andalucía rebels but is subdued because of an alliance between moderate liberals and absolutists, leaving Ferdinand VII with greatly reduced powers and only in Castile. Would these newly independent states claim any of the remaining Spanish colonies like Cuba or the Philippines that had not rebelled like the others? Or would they be content with letting Castile keep them? Could the British not take over the Spanish colonies like Cuba or the Philippines with the reason to safe guard the stability of the former Spanish colonies. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,488
Likes: 12,086
|
Post by stevep on Sept 1, 2016 20:14:17 GMT
In my timeline, one of the butterflies is that France is not allowed to intervene in Spain in 1822, so-call "Hundred Thousand Sons of St. Louis". As a result, the Cadíz Progresista government's attempt at a Bonaparte-list centralization and redistricting of Spain gets further along. It was very unpopular, OTL, but the French invasion stopped it. In my timeline it continues and it pisses off the varying regions which had had centuries of relative autonomy under both the Habsburg and later Bourbon monarchs. The regions revolt and we end up with new Kingdom of Aragon (a stronghold of conservatives and monarchists), Republic of Navarre (stronghold of Basques and democrats) and Léon-Asturias-Galicia (a mixed bunch who just doesn't like the Castilian Cadíz Progresista controls). Andalucía rebels but is subdued because of an alliance between moderate liberals and absolutists, leaving Ferdinand VII with greatly reduced powers and only in Castile. Would these newly independent states claim any of the remaining Spanish colonies like Cuba or the Philippines that had not rebelled like the others? Or would they be content with letting Castile keep them? Could the British not take over the Spanish colonies like Cuba or the Philippines with the reason to safe guard the stability of the former Spanish colonies. I think by this time most of Europe was pretty tired of war so there would be little incentive for Britain to go for Cuba or other Spanish colonies in the Caribbean. You might get some of the southern US states agitating for some move although their still developing their own territory at the moment so could lack the interest at the moment. Also at this point Britain has a relatively liberal leadership, at least compared to most of Europe and would probably welcome reform in Spain. Especially since it would speed up the break-up of the Spanish American empire and hence opens it up to British trade. [Presuming reforms in the rump Castile doesn't make continued membership of the empire attractive to some of the colonies, but other than the Carribean colonies that stayed OTL I suspect this would be unlikely. If there is unrest in them then Cuba could also possibly become independent earlier.] In terms of the initial question I doubt any of the break-away states from Castile are likely to have the will and capacity to hold any of the American colonies. |
|
bytor
Chief petty officer
I'm baaaack.
Posts: 132
Likes: 68
|
Post by bytor on Sept 2, 2016 1:16:11 GMT
Could the British not take over the Spanish colonies like Cuba or the Philippines with the reason to safe guard the stability of the former Spanish colonies. It feels to me that France would have been more likely to want to do that, rather than Britain, since at this time they only had St. Pierre & Miquelon and St. Martin that I can think of off-hand and were chomping at the bit to reestablish themselves as a colonial power since their rehabilitation to Great Power status after Aix-la-Chapelle. Now that I think of it, it would not be out of line for a Concert of Europe congress in 1826 that requires Leon to elect a King, presaging their requirements in Belgium in 1830 and Greece in 1832, to also reassign Cuba, the Philippines, and other Spanish colonies to other European states. |
|
