AGCEEP: War of Spanish Succession

[Twoflower]

Like the Thirty Years War, the War of Spanish Succession is quite a letdown right now in EU2, and as a complex international conflict, it makes sense to discuss suggestions on improving its representation in a separate thread. The goal of this is obviously to work out an entirely new sophisticated sequence, but for now, I'll just throw in some random ideas of mine:

• It might be interesting to have an option that has Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria survive and rise to the Spanish throne, vassalizing a small Bavaria to Spain (a big Bavaria with more than say 5 provinces might get Spain as vassal) and putting the First Partition Treaty of 1698 into effect, i.e. France gets Naples, Sicily and Sardinia and Austria Lombardia. This would basically avoid the war.
• Also, I think that Austria should have a choice to accept the Second Partition Treaty - that France, England and the Netherlands had already agreed on in 1700 and was rejected by Leopold because he wanted the whole inheritance for his son. By virtue of this, Charles would have become King of Spain in exchange for France getting Spain's Italian possessions.
• Only if none of the two above ahistorical choices has been made, Spain gets the historical Death of Carlos event in 1700, choosing between a Bourbon, Hapsburg and possibly a Wittelsbach (would there have been any chance of Max Emanuel himself becoming King of Spain?)heir - otherwise the respective partition is put into effect
• After Philipp of Bourbon has ascended the Spanish throne, France can decide whether it pushes for unification of France and Spain by appointing Philipp Dauphin or accepts the division of the succession to the French and Spanish throne. Only pushing for unification would cause the huge war of succession.
• Within the event sequence, there needs to be a distinction between the rival claimants to the Spanish throne, i.e. France and Austria, who will fight for the inheritance almost no matter what (except if both agree to some partition) and the rest of Europe, especially England and the Netherlands, that will only intervene if BoP is threatened.
• The conflict within Spain itself, between the supporters of Charles in Catalonia, Aragon and Valencia and those of Philipp in Castile, should be represented, either by massive revolts or by Catalonia (against Philipp) or Castile (against Charles) becoming independent. The revolting state would be reannexed as soon as there is a peace settlement.
• England, Austria and Savoy need to be encouraged in some way to go after their historical conquests
• Both Austria and France should, if their claim to the Spanish throne has prevailed, have an, albeit small, possibility to achieve a union with Spain, i.e. inherit it

 

[unmerged(6159)]

IF you allow for Charles VI to become King of Spain you really have to rethink subsequent events. Could he have inherited the Austrian possesions if he were King of Spain? (Leopold's death was after Almanza wasn't it?) Would anyone have accepted the Pragmatic Sanction if he were King of Spain (after all, Leopold's daughter (Electress of Bavaria) ought to have precedence over Maria Theresa in any sort of primogeniture. I would think that Charles VII would get much more international support if there were the Spanish Empire to fleece in addition to the Austrian lands.

The fact that Spain can get the Hapsburgs with no serious consequence has always bothered me.

On the other hand if you want more fantasy (a la Joseph Ferdinand), it's worth keeping in mind that Victor Amadeus III of Savoy had almost as good a claim to the Spanish throne as did Joseph Ferdinand.

Another thing to consider is how the Spanish Sucession crisis would have played out with James II on the English throne. I really don't think he would have been a French lakey, but his policy would surely have been different from William's.

 

[Twoflower]

There are so many possibilities that it might be necessary to think through the events and each of their choices one after another. So let us start with the First Partition Treaty of 1698. Obviously, we could start here by questioning whether the choice should really be with Spain - in fact this was probably much more an English decision -, but giving the event to Spain is definitely the most practical and fairest - after all this is about Spain picking its future monarchs - solution. That said, the choices should IMO be:

A: Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria
stability +1, relation with Bavaria +100, relation with England and the Netherlands +50, sets a flag that will be the trigger for the historical event sequence
B: Charles of Hapsburg
stability -2, relation with Austria +100, relation with France, England and the Netherlands -100, sets a "Hapsburg" flag
C: Philipp of Bourbon
stability -2, relation with France +100, relation with Austria, England and the Netherlands -100, sets a "Bourbon" flag
D: Victor Amadeus of Savoy
stability -3, relation with Savoy +100, relation with England and the Netherlands +50, sets a "Savoy" flag

This would already leave us with four possible paths that all need to be covered.

EDIT: In fact, there is a pretty strong justification for having the whole thing dependent on who is ruling England, but this would make things even more complicated...

 

[unmerged(7597)]

Originally posted by Twoflower
Like the Thirty Years War, the War of Spanish Succession is quite a letdown...as a complex international conflict

Agreed - EU2 is just not very good at simulating complex general wars.

I still haven't tried out the French 30YW events, so for all I know that particular problem is now solved. Even so, there remain a few to crack: Sp Succession, Aus Succession, 7YW, etc.

I want to offer an untested hypothesis: general wars cannot adequately be represented in EU2 without using a combination of the AI trigger and the war command.

EEP was generally very reluctant to use the war command, either because it was too "deterministic" (realistic) or because it constrained the player.

To the first objection there is no answer - if you are satisfied never seeing the 30YW, War of Sp Suc, War of Aus Suc, etc, then it makes no difference. But if you will even contemplate scripting these major wars, then you are willing to accept a degree of "determinism" (realism) already.

To the second objection, the AI trigger is a sufficient answer.

Unfortunately, without a command to give military access, even using the war command may result only in a white peace after a few years - Europe's great rulers largely ignored the rights of small neutrals in order to get at their foes, but EU's AI doesn't. All the same, I think forcing the AI into war may be the only way to generate these complex general wars.

 

[unmerged(17856)]

I think the most logical point to center the series on is around Carlos' will. That way, Spain becomes the most important player as Twoflower desires and also has the befefit of making alot of sense.

NOTE: Ahistorical/fantasy options aside for a minute here...

The broader point being that regardless of whom Carlos II went with after Prince Joseph's death (Austrias Arch Duke Charles, or France's Duke of Anjou Philip) there would have been a massive war. This is because Carlos bequeathed the whole lot, which upped the stakes, and introduced a wild element of greed into the equation. Basically, he didn't section it off like everyone was scheming to do, he wanted unity.
In other words, once Carlos dished out that bomb shell, all bets were off.

I don't think that we should even bother to consider the First Partition Treaty as being a scriptable event in itself, as Prince Joseph dies before Carlos II does, rendering not only Carlos' decision useless but the treaty aswell. I should add that I don't think it's a good idea to make it viable for Prince Joseph to live longer than he did, because then you have to allow for the possibility for all other monarchs to live longer and then we all go massively insane from thinking about all the 'what if's' for these situations.

The logical relevant antecedant event series for Carlos II's deathbed 'succession choice' event would be the already mentioned Second Partition Treaty, which should really only follow its natural historical course, because it made the most sense.

* Following Carlos' death, which should occur as it did, France would have the option to abide by the treaty:
The Duke of anjou ascends the Spanish throne as Philip V (France does not vassal or annex Spain as the Treaty prevented this from occuring)
France takes Naples, Sicily, and Milan - as vassals or annexes. I would suggest simply ceding the relavent provinces via province triggered events.
The other choice for France would be to abide by the late Carlos' II wishes, which effectively throws the treaty out the window:
triggers the war sequences, where French cores should be placed in the Spanish Netherlands, parts of Italian peninsula etc.

On the Ahistorical/fantasy note...

Scripting the War of Spanish Succession to favour a diversification of the conclusions will have a big impact on the european scene.

It is likely that without a war, negotiations between England and Scotland for Union in 1707 would have either not started, been delayed or even worse, simply just failed. Much of the success of the negotiations for Union was due to Marlborough's ass-kicking ways in the Netherlands.

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
Another thing to consider is how the Spanish Sucession crisis would have played out with James II on the English throne. I really don't think he would have been a French lakey, but his policy would surely have been different from William's.

Yeah, it's tough for sure, but regardless of who James II would favour, the net desire and goal for everyone (except France and Spain) was a so-called balanced Europe, i.e. no super power. So on the level of involvement, I'd say they would have equalled each other, but on whose side they would have fallen onto, well, probably Austrias still. I could be wrong, but the more I think about it, the more I feel that James II would have defniately supported Austria, or at least been 'convinced' to. The merchant ranks in England were entirely against French hegemony. Both England and Holland stood to lose Spanish trade to France in the event of a spanish-French union.

If the chips fell such that Spain and France and England were allied v.s Austria that would run entirely counter to England's underlying goal.

On the Philosophical Issues...

Originally posted by Count Six
I want to offer an untested hypothesis: general wars cannot adequately be represented in EU2 without using a combination of the AI trigger and the war command.

EEP was generally very reluctant to use the war command, either because it was too "deterministic" (realistic) or because it constrained the player.

To the first objection there is no answer - if you are satisfied never seeing the 30YW, War of Sp Suc, War of Aus Suc, etc, then it makes no difference. But if you will even contemplate scripting these major wars, then you are willing to accept a degree of "determinism" (realism) already.

To the second objection, the AI trigger is a sufficient answer.

Unfortunately, without a command to give military access, even using the war command may result only in a white peace after a few years - Europe's great rulers largely ignored the rights of small neutrals in order to get at their foes, but EU's AI doesn't. All the same, I think forcing the AI into war may be the only way to generate these complex general wars.

IMO, it is the degree of determinism that is a problem here. I think most people accept determinism, to a certain degree, such as myself. The thinking runs along the lines of, 'well, if the right conditions are in place, and we're merely giving the desired situation a push, then why not?'. The problem with forcing a war via event is that it is not exactly a push, or even a shove, it is really blatantly forcing the desired result, which is the degree of determinism which IMO might encounter resistance.

I think that 'pushing' the war by allocating cores, manipulating relations and alliances, is fair enough. If you are a player, and you don't want to have anything to do with a major historical war, then you have to option to 'opt' out, while the AI will 95% of the time, follow our desired choices and be 'garden pathed' towards a war.

IMO, the AI will perform well with proper motivation such as the core allocation, relation manipulations, alliances and AI file settings.

EDIT: * re-worded for clarity

 

[Arilou]

Unfortunately, without a command to give military access

Although there is no such command (Whine to the developers? ) there is still the vassal command, which gives military access of a sort.

 

[unmerged(6159)]

Savoy's claim

Victor Amadeus' claim to the Spanish throne was based on the fact that his great grandmother was Caterina, daughter of Phillip II. This sounds like a weak claim, but the argument on his behalf was that Caterina was the daughter of the first marriage of Phillip II, whereas Phillip III was the son of the fourth marriage. The argument was that once you accept inheritance through a female branch the priority of the first marriage needs to be respected. This argument is pretty similar to the devolution claims made by Louis XIV upon the death of Phillip IV in 1665.

Victor Amadeus used this claim to establish his right to a share in the division of the Spanish Empire. And he did get Valenza and Sardinia which isn't too bad. How realistic it would be for him to inherit the whole thing is open to debate. Carlos II insisted that the Empire be kept intact. There was no way that Spain alone could fend off all claimants, and even with English and Dutch help (which was not forthcoming) he knew that it was very unlikely that the Empire would avoid eign split up. As such he had to leave the whole thing to Austria or France to ensure that Spain would have an ally to help her keep all of her possesions.

 

[berhaven]

Savoy claim

I think that the Savoy claim could give at least a core on something (Sardinia, Sicily, Lombardy?) to Savoy or a Savoy-lead Italy.

 

[Twoflower]

Re: Savoy claim

Originally posted by berhaven
I think that the Savoy claim could give at least a core on something (Sardinia, Sicily, Lombardy?) to Savoy or a Savoy-lead Italy.

Good idea to wonder about cores. Let's sum up which conquests (that can be represented by EU2) happened in the war of Spanish succession:

Austria:

Flandern, Brabant, Luxembourg, Lombardia, Mantua, Napoli, Apulia, Sardinia

Savoy:

Sicily, Apulia

England / Great Britain:

in Europe:
Gibraltar, Baleares (arguably, only Menorca)

in the colonies:
Hudson Bay (Winisk, Eskimalt, Attawapiskat?), Nova Scotia, Acadie, Newfoundland

Which of these should be represented by cores?

 

[unmerged(6159)]

Possibly Artois could be added for Austria. Much of French Belgium was lost to France in 1713.

Newfoundland and Hudson Bay were English before the war. France merely renounced her claims there. Acadie was conquered, and the disputes in Nova Scotia were finally resolved in favour of the British.

 

[Archaalen]

Sadly, most of this means almost nothing for the Grand Campaign. With a human involved, France might already be ruling over most of Germany and Italy, already. If you want the general wars done right, you have to have scenarios themed for them to come off properly. Unless you structure things very carefully, a Grand Campaign makes it hard for historicity to be maintained across all 400 years of game time. AGC seemed to be working from this angle, making sure that states stayed more or less within the constrains of what happened without a human involved, and focused on cool historical events second.

 

[unmerged(17856)]

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
Victor Amadeus' claim to the Spanish throne was based on the fact that his great grandmother was Caterina, daughter of Phillip II. This sounds like a weak claim, but the argument on his behalf was that Caterina was the daughter of the first marriage of Phillip II, whereas Phillip III was the son of the fourth marriage. The argument was that once you accept inheritance through a female branch the priority of the first marriage needs to be respected. This argument is pretty similar to the devolution claims made by Louis XIV upon the death of Phillip IV in 1665.

Victor Amadeus used this claim to establish his right to a share in the division of the Spanish Empire. And he did get Valenza and Sardinia which isn't too bad. How realistic it would be for him to inherit the whole thing is open to debate. Carlos II insisted that the Empire be kept intact. There was no way that Spain alone could fend off all claimants, and even with English and Dutch help (which was not forthcoming) he knew that it was very unlikely that the Empire would avoid eign split up. As such he had to leave the whole thing to Austria or France to ensure that Spain would have an ally to help her keep all of her possesions.

I would say it would be very unrealistic, as claims such as Victors would probably need a truly awesome amount of support. IMO, nothing more than perhaps core asignment should be made.

Louis XIV devolution claims were based on the fact that Spain renegged on a costly dowery. Marie Therese's renunciation of her Spanish claims (and thus of her French offspring) was conditional upon a compensatory dowry for her marriage to Louis XIV.

Thus, we have the choice of scripting the pre-cursors to this war.

Perhaps each country should choose who they want to place their claim with. Louis XIV could have claimed the spanish throne for the Dauphin, for example.

A suggestion...for pre-Carlos' II decision.

Austria:

Claims for either...

1.Jospeh Ferdinand (Electoral Prince)
-gains traditional allies and the right to place Joseph Ferdinand on the Spanish throne with a decisive victory

2.Charles VI
- gains traditional allies AND the right to place Charles VI on the Spanish throne with a moderate or decisive victory

3.Jospeh I (next HRE)
- loses traditional allies
-the right to inherit Spain with a decisive victory

4.Renounce all Claims

France:

claim Spanish throne for either...

1.Philip, Duke of Anjou
- gains traditional allies and the right to place Philip on
the Spanish throne with a moderate OR decisive victory.

2. Dauphin Louis
-loses traditional allies (minus Spain), gains the right to inherit Spain with a decisive victory

3.Renounce all Claims

With the death of Jospeh Ferdinand, the Austrians would get the chance to choose between the remaining two. I suppose we could just take Autria's default position to be that of Jospeh Ferdinand, and then upon his death, just simply have Austria choose between the remaining two.

Either side choosing to take the strongest position might change the Carlos' II decision event, at any rate, Carlos' II decision would remain at the heart of the series, as whomever he chooses should naturally give the other claiment the advantage in the ally department.

 

[unmerged(6159)]

Originally posted by ribbon22
I would say it would be very unrealistic, as claims such as Victors would probably need a truly awesome amount of support. IMO, nothing more than perhaps core asignment should be made.

No different that Joseph Ferdinand though. And by the way, I agree with you that we shouldn't really allow him to live.

Louis XIV devolution claims were based on the fact that Spain renegged on a costly dowery. Marie Therese's renunciation of her Spanish claims (and thus of her French offspring) was conditional upon a compensatory dowry for her marriage to Louis XIV.

Not really. The peace of the Pyrennes forced her to renounce her claims on the throne of Spain, but this clause was put in place because at the time it didn't look like Phillip IV would have a male heir. Also, although both the dowry and the renunciation were enumerated in the peace treaty and also in the marriage treaty, the renunciation was not explicitly conditional on payment of the dowry, the French just interpreted the treaty that way,

Anyway, when Carlos II arrived the whole question of her renunciation should have been moot until 1700, as no-one had imagined that she had any claims against Carlos' inheritance to renounce in the first place. However, Louis claimed that in the Netherlands the inheritance went to all daughters of the first marriage BEFORE sons of any second marriage, and thereby claimed the Netherlands, as husband of the daughter of Phillip IV's first marriage over Carlos II, son of his second marriage. This is exactly the same as the situation between Carlo Emmanuel of Savoy (husband of the daughter of Phillip II's first marriage) and Phillip III (son of Phillip II's fourth marriage) in 1598 for the dispoisiton of the Netherlands. Obviously no-one made an issue of it then and the the French claims had no real historical basis.

And clearly the claims of Savoy in 1700 were on a different basis, as there was no no heir in the male line going all the way back to Charles V.

 

[unmerged(17856)]

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
No different that Joseph Ferdinand though. And by the way, I agree with you that we shouldn't really allow him to live.

IMO, Joseph Ferdinand's claims were more substantiated than Victor's (of course, until he died in 1699 ). Archduke Charles' claims were more en par with Victors, than Joseph Ferdinand's.

HRE Ferdinand III fathered Philip's IV second wife, Mariana, he also fathered HRE Leopald I. Leopald married Philip and Mariana's daughter, Margaret Teresa.

Basically, Leopald married his niece :wacko: and had a daughter, Maria, who ended up having Joseph.

Though I may be completely wrong, Joseph (the Electoral Prince recall) could have been the next HRE, but he died at a young age. So I guess you can argue that, before Joseph Ferdinand's untimely death, and without external political pressures, Austria was effectively bidding for Spanish-Austrian unification.

This changed, after Jospeh Ferdinands death and before the war, where Leopald now claimed the Spanish throne for his second son by his second marriage, Archduke Charles. He makes the choice based on the assumption that Leopald's first son, the future HRE Joseph I, would be taking the Austrian throne. We see that Leopald therefore abides with the wishes of the rest of Europe, avoiding Austrian-Spanish unification. When Jospeh I dies, and Archduke Charles is to become HRE, we see how the rest of Europe reacts. Basically along the lines of 'ummm, so Leopald, let us get this straight, you want us to fight for Charles to obtain the Austrian throne and the Spanish throne? umm, no' and treaties are hurredly signed disfavouring the Autstrian cause.

Personally, I see Archduke Charles' claim to the Austrian throne as incredibly sketchy, as it lacks that double inscestuousness that Joseph Ferdinand's claim had. As far as what I understand, I can see a liking between Archduke Charles' claim and Victor's perhaps.

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
Not really. The peace of the Pyrennes forced her to renounce her claims on the throne of Spain, but this clause was put in place because at the time it didn't look like Phillip IV would have a male heir. Also, although both the dowry and the renunciation were enumerated in the peace treaty and also in the marriage treaty, the renunciation was not explicitly conditional on payment of the dowry, the French just interpreted the treaty that way,

IMO, a Louis' claim of the Spanish throne for the Dauphin would have been the strongest. I am obviously siding with France on the 'legality' of the renunciation of Marie Therese' claiment clauses of the Pyrenees Peace Treaty and marriage treaties, which I still maintain, was the basis of the War of Devolution. Spain failed to pay the dowery, as she was obligated to do under the treaties, and at that point, France is completely within her rights to claim the treaties null and void, and to claim and invade away.

I guess you can argue that Louis wasn't too interesting in uniting the Spanish and France throne's, initially, as he probably really only wanted the Spanish Netherlands. However, this attitude was completely reversed when Carlos II, upon his death, bequeathed the whole lot to Louis' second grandson, Philip, Duke of Anjou.

I am unfamiliar with the Spanish rules of succession, if someone would be so kind as to explain them, it might help serve as some kind of a basis for which we can take Spain's position and a framework for measuring France and Austria's claims (and Savoy's).

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
Anyway, when Carlos II arrived the whole question of her renunciation should have been moot until 1700, as no-one had imagined that she had any claims against Carlos' inheritance to renounce in the first place. However, Louis claimed that in the Netherlands the inheritance went to all daughters of the first marriage BEFORE sons of any second marriage, and thereby claimed the Netherlands, as husband of the daughter of Phillip IV's first marriage over Carlos II, son of his second marriage. This is exactly the same as the situation between Carlo Emmanuel of Savoy (husband of the daughter of Phillip II's first marriage) and Phillip III (son of Phillip II's fourth marriage) in 1598 for the dispoisiton of the Netherlands. Obviously no-one made an issue of it then and the the French claims had no real historical basis.

And clearly the claims of Savoy in 1700 were on a different basis, as there was no no heir in the male line going all the way back to Charles V.

It sounds to me like Savoy (or France should Savoy not exist)should get that opportunity to make a stink about that 1598 situation.

At present, I just don't think Savoy would have solid ground to claim Spain. I don't have a problem with Savoy making the historical claims she made. Unless you can convince me otherwise, with some detailed geneological explanations or whatever.

 

[Twoflower]

Ribbon, you *might* want to know that Joseph Ferdinand, the presumptive heir to the Spanish throne until his premature death, was a Wittelsbach and Electoral Prince of Bavaria. Do not confuse him with Joseph of Hapsburg, who was to succeed to Austria and the HRE while his brother Charles should inherit Spain. Only upon the death of Joseph the Hapsburgs were really bidding for unification of Spain and Austria.

 

[unmerged(17856)]

Originally posted by Twoflower
Ribbon, you *might* want to know that Joseph Ferdinand, the presumptive heir to the Spanish throne until his premature death, was a Wittelsbach and Electoral Prince of Bavaria. Do not confuse him with Joseph of Hapsburg, who was to succeed to Austria and the HRE while his brother Charles should inherit Spain. Only upon the death of Joseph the Hapsburgs were really bidding for unification of Spain and Austria.

I wasn't sure if it would be possible for Joseph Ferdinand to become the next HRE and King of Austria, and was mainly the reason why I said 'though I may be completely wrong' in that paragraph...

Originally posted by ribbon22
Though I may be completely wrong, Joseph (the Electoral Prince recall) could have been the next HRE, but he died at a young age. So I guess you can argue that, before Joseph Ferdinand's untimely death, and without external political pressures, Austria was effectively bidding for Spanish-Austrian unification.

But other than that uncertainty, I bear no confusion between Joseph Ferdinand the Electoral Prince and HRE Joseph I. I use 'HRE' before 'Joseph' in order to refer to Leopald's 1st son.

I use 'Jospeh Ferdinand' or 'Electoral Prince...' to refer to Leopald's 1st grandson.

confusing I know...

My statement was based on if Joseph Ferdinand could be named the next HRE, or heir to the Austrian throne. See if that was possible, then Austria could be claiming inheritance of Spain (at least until Joseph Ferdinands death)

It is in the spirit of the general model that I proposed where we simply prompt the bidding countries to establish claiments amongst possible candidates. Candidates would determine the extent of the claims. Then we make Spain decide on exactly who is getting the throne and we cook up a war accordingly. Finally an assessment of the degree of victory/defeat and script some conclusions.
Perhaps a tough course, but if successful, we'll probably be setting the standard for many of those decade-or-so long wars of the 18th century that Count Six made mention of.

 

[unmerged(6159)]

Originally posted by ribbon22

I am obviously siding with France on the 'legality' of the renunciation of Marie Therese' claiment clauses of the Pyrenees Peace Treaty and marriage treaties, which I still maintain, was the basis of the War of Devolution. Spain failed to pay the dowery, as she was obligated to do under the treaties, and at that point, France is completely within her rights to claim the treaties null and void, and to claim and invade away.

For the situation in 1700 the French have a decent case, they claim the treaty of the Pyrennes is null and void as the dowry was not paid. But the situation in 1665 is entirely different. Even if you accept that Marie Terese hadn't renounced her claims (plausible) you have to accept, in addition, the made up claim that the daughter of the first marriage takes precendence over the son of later marriages. This claim was made because Louis had gobs of lawyers going over the historical traditions of Gallic tribes and other such nonsense to support that the daughter of the first wife gets precendence. No one in Savoy would have made a stink, in the exact same circumstances, because the whole thing is bunk. And even if it were true in 1665, then it would have been true in 1598, and the French claim, by their own logic, is weaker than Savoy's claim.

When I compared Victor Amadeus' claim to Jospeh Ferdinand's, I simply meant that in reality Bavaria was no stronger than Savoy. Either would require a lot of help, or the acquiescence of all parties in order to suceed. Legally the Savoyard claim is weak, although somewhat stronger than Louis XIV's claim in 1665. However, if a 'neutral' candidate were required, Savoy might just fit the bill.

 

[Archaalen]

Did Spain even have any clear laws on succession, like the Salic Law in France? Spain was a country cobbled together from various smaller Iberian states early in game-time, so other than direct relation, I'm not sure there was any clear "rule" on who should have taken the throne.

 

[unmerged(17856)]

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
For the situation in 1700 the French have a decent case, they claim the treaty of the Pyrennes is null and void as the dowry was not paid. But the situation in 1665 is entirely different. Even if you accept that Marie Terese hadn't renounced her claims (plausible) you have to accept, in addition, the made up claim that the daughter of the first marriage takes precendence over the son of later marriages. This claim was made because Louis had gobs of lawyers going over the historical traditions of Gallic tribes and other such nonsense to support that the daughter of the first wife gets precendence.

All i know is that the war of devolution, 1667-1668, Louis claimed parts of the Spanish Netherlands on grounds, like you mention, of a law of Brabant providing that property might devolve upon the children of a first marriage. Marie Terese had renounced her claims, in accordance with France part of the treaty, however, Spain failed to uphold their treaty stipulations. A viable excuse for Louis' claims for France IMO. Why should Marie Terese's renunciation be considered valid when the treaty is invalid?

I may be wrong, but I don't see any other legal differences between the onset of the War of Devolution, and Louis' claims for his grandson 30 years later (before Carlos II actually bequeathed it all to the Duke). I only see a set of different circumstances which favoured his increased aggression. My position is that Louis deliberately chose Philip Duke of Anjou, as his candidate because Philip was not expected to become King of France. Louis could have claimed Spain for the Dauphin, however, for the exact same legal reasons. He chose not to because that would make it blatently obvious to the ROTW that Louis wanted utter unification. It is often said that despite this 'political mindfulness', Louis planned for unification even with Philip on the Spanish throne.

It seems we both agree that France's claim kicks everyone's ass once Carlos actually declares Philip the heir.

Originally posted by Isaac Brock

When I compared Victor Amadeus' claim to Jospeh Ferdinand's, I simply meant that in reality Bavaria was no stronger than Savoy. Either would require a lot of help, or the acquiescence of all parties in order to suceed. Legally the Savoyard claim is weak, although somewhat stronger than Louis XIV's claim in 1665. However, if a 'neutral' candidate were required, Savoy might just fit the bill.

Joseph Ferdinand's claim was supported by the behemouth that was Austria, while a similar claim made by Savoy would have utterly isolated her from the majority of her historical allies.

I assume you mean a neutral candidate for some kind of Partitional agreement? I suppose that option's still there, but I still don't see how a Partitional agreement can even be made in light of a decision by Carlos II to select an heir. Do you agree with that? I mean, if we give Spain the choice event, which I support, then perhaps if Spain chooses the option of 'choosing no heir', then partitional treaty stipulations could be put into effect.
This complicates things but now that i think of it, perhaps it would be kinda cool. So basically, we'd go through Partitional treaties, and then use them as the basis in light of a 'no heir' decision by Spain? This is what i think you had in mind for the Partitional Treaty events, does it sound good as a basic direction?

Originally posted by Archaalen
Did Spain even have any clear laws on succession, like the Salic Law in France? Spain was a country cobbled together from various smaller Iberian states early in game-time, so other than direct relation, I'm not sure there was any clear "rule" on who should have taken the throne.

someone should answer this if they can, this makes two of us who recogize the potential importance for establishing some kind of 'rule of thumb' for Spain.

 

[unmerged(17856)]

Proposed Working Model for Spanish War of Succession

This is a proposal for a Working Model of the Spanish War of Succession. I cannot stress the obvious schematic nature of this proposal enough. It was designed with the hopes that those who are unfamiliar with scripting may quickly assess country, triggers, choices and consequences. I liken it to guitar tablature and I hope this format facilitates further discussion.

This is designed to be the 'bare bones' of the events, a flexible structure that needs to be fleshed out. There are rather obvious limitations and exclusions within the model at present, however, this is a working model and these kinds of models are built to evolve. In no way do I presume this model to be perfect, not even in the slightest.


####################
#PRE-CARLOS IIs death. PRE-JOSPEH FERDINANDS DEATH. PRE-PARTITION-TREATY.
#CLAIM SPANISH THRONE EVENTS
####################

Austria:

1.Jospeh Ferdinand (Electoral Prince)

• flag 'Ferdinand'
• +ve relations SPA HOL(?) ENG(?) BAV
• -ve relations FRA SAV

2.Joseph I (next HRE)

• flag 'Joseph_I'
• -ve relations ENG FRA HOL SAV BAV POR
• alienates traditional allies but gains the right to place the future HRE on the throne of Spain, with a decisive victory thus potentially uniting the thrones!
• +ve badboy

3. Elector Maximilian Emmanual of Bavaria

• flag 'max_bav'
• +ve relations ENG HOL SPA BAV POR
• -ve relations FRA SAV

4.Renounce all Claims

• flag 'no_claim'
• +ve relations FRA SAV BAV(?)
• -ve badboy

France:

1.Philip, Duke of Anjou

• flag 'Philip'
• +ve relations SPA SAV
• -ve realtions HAB ENG HOL BAV(?)
• gains the right to place Philip on the Spanish throne with a moderate OR decisive victory (?).

2. Dauphin Louis

• flag 'Dauphin_Louis'
• -ve relations HAB ENG HOL SAV
• alienates traditional allies but gains the right to place the Dauphin on the throne of Spain, with a decisive victory thus potentially uniting the thrones!
• +ve badboy

3. Victor Amadeus of Savoy

• flag 'victor_sav'
• +ve relations SPA SAV

4.Renounce all Claims

• flag 'no_claim'
• +ve relations HAB SAV BAV ENG HOL POR (?)
• -ve badboy

#########################
# PRINCIPALS' NEGOTIATION CHOICES & RESPONSES
#########################

England:

1. Support Autria's Claims

• flag 'hab_support'
• +ve relations HAB
• -ve relations FRA
  2. Support Victor, a compromise
  • flag 'victor'
  • +ve relations SAV
  • -ve relations FRA HAB
  3. Support France's Claims
  • flag 'fra_support'
  • +ve relations FRA
  • -ve relations HAB
  4. Remain Neutral
  
  Netherlands:
  
  1. Support Austria
  • flag 'hab_support'
  • +ve relations HAB
  2. Support Victor
  • flag 'victor'
  3. Support Philip Duke of Anjou
  • flag 'fra_support'
  • +ve relations FRA
  4. Remain Neutral
  
  #########
  # THE SECOND PARTITION TREATY
  #########
  Louis XIV of France was determined to see that Spain with all her possessions did not go to the Emperor of Austria. It was partly due to this anxiety on his part that he hurriedly ended the War of the League of Augsburg in 1697. Negotiations started between Louis XIV and William III. In 1698 the First Partition Treaty was made by which most of the Spanish possessions were to be given to the son of the Elector Maximilian of Bavaria. Unfortunately, the son of the Elector died soon after the treaty and consequently, the whole matter had to be reopened.
  The Second Partition Treaty was concluded in 1700 by which it was agreed that the Archduke Charles of Austria was to be the King of Spain with the Netherlands and Spanish America as his possessions. Philip of Anjou, the second son of the Dauphin, and the grandson of Louis XIV, was to get Naples, Sicily and Milan.
  
  England:
  flag 'hab_support' or flag 'fra_support'
  
  1. Sign the Treaty
  • trigger FRA_ENGsigns
  • trigger HAB_ENGsigns
  • trigger HOL_ENGsigns
  • trigger SPA_ENGsigns
  2. Refuse to Sign
  • trigger FRA_ENGrefuse
  • trigger HAB_ENGrefuse
  • trigger HOL_ENGrefuse
  • trigger SPA_ENGrefuse
  
  Holland:
  flag 'hab_support' or flag 'fra_support'
  
  1. Sign the Treaty
  • trigger FRA_HOLsigns
  • trigger HAB_HOLsigns
  • trigger HOL_HOLsigns
  • trigger SPA_HOLsigns
  2. Refuse to Sign
  • trigger FRA_HOLrefuse
  • trigger HAB_HOLrefuse
  • trigger HOL_HOLrefuse
  • trigger SPA_HOLrefuse
  Austria:
  HAB_HOLsigns or HAB_ENGsigns
  
  1. Sign the Treaty
  • clear flag 'partition_I'
  • flag 'partition_II'
  • +ve relations ENG, HOL, FRA, SAV, HUN, BAV,
  • -ve relations SPA
  2. Refuse to sign
  • -ve relations ENG, HOL, FRA, SAV, HUN, BAV,
  • +ve relations SPA
  • flag 'dismiss_partition_II'
  France:
  flag 'partition_I'
  1. Sign the treaty
  • clear flag 'partition_I'
  • flag 'partition_II'
  • +ve relations ENG, HOL, SAV, HUN, BAV, HAB
  • -ve relations SPA
  2. Dismiss the treaty
  • flag 'dismiss_partition'
  • -ve relations ENG, FRA, HOL, SAV, HUN, BAV, HAB
  • +ve relations SPA
  ########################
  #CARLOS II IS ALMOST DEAD, SIGNING HIS WILL...WHO's GONNA #SUCCEED?!?!
  #######################
  
  Spain, Give it all to...:
  1. Philip, Duke of Anjou
  • flag 'Philip_A'
  • stability -1
  • +ve PRR
  • +ve relations FRA
  • -ve relations ENG, HAB, BAV
  • wake Philip V (?)
  • - trigger FRA_1
  2. Charles VI, ArchDuke
  • flag 'Charles_VI'
  • stability -2
  • - +ve PRR
  • alliance HAB
  • +ve relations HAB,
  • wake Charles III (?)
  • trigger HAB_1
  3. Abide by the Partition Treaty II
  • flag 'partition_II'
  • stability -3
  • +ve PRR
  • wake Charles III
  • cede provinces accordingly, lose cores on any appropriate provinces.
  • trigger FRA_0
  • trigger HAB_0
  ################
  #HISTORICAL REPERCUSSIONS - WAR MOTIONS - IF FRA OR HAB SUCCEEDS BY BEQUEATHAL
  ##################
  
  France: FRA_1
  1. Accept Carlos' II bequest:
  • clear flag 'partition_II'
  • flag 'spa_succession_war'
  • alliance SPA (?)
  • +ve relations SPA BAV
  • -ve relations HAB ENG SAV HOL BAV
  • trigger HAB_2
  • +ve badboy
  2. Refuse the crown:
  • clear flag 'partition_II'
  • flag 'refuse_crown'
  • +ve relations HAB ENG SAV HOL
  • -ve relations SPA BAV
  • -ve badboy
  Austria: HAB_1
  1. Accept Carlos' II bequest:
  • clear flag 'partition_II'
  • flag 'spa_succession_war'
  • alliance SPA (?)
  • +ve relations SPA ENG HOL
  • -ve relations FRA BAV SAV
  • trigger FRA_2
  2. Refuse the crown:
  • clear flag 'partition_II'
  • flag 'refuse_crown'
  • +ve relations FRA ENG HOL BAV SAV
  • -ve relations SPA
  • -ve badboy
  France: FRA_2
  1. Destroy the Imposters!
  • clear flag 'partition_II'
  • flag 'spa_succession_war'
  • alliance SPA BAV POR SAV
  • +ve relations BAV
  • -ve relations SPA HAB ENG SAV
  • cassus belli SPA HAB ENG
  • cores (?)
  2. Withdraw Claims
  • clear flag 'partition_II'
  • flag 'no_claims'
  • +ve relations SPA HAB ENG HOL BAV SAV POR
  • -ve badboy
  Austria: HAB_2
  1. Destroy the Imposters!
  • clear flag 'partition_II'
  • flag 'spa_succession_war'
  • alliance ENG HOL
  • +ve relations ENG HOL SAV POR
  • -ve relations FRA SPA
  • cassus belli SPA FRA SAV POR
  • cores (?)
  2. Withdraw Claims
  • clear flag 'partition_II'
  • flag 'no_claims'
  • +ve relations SPA FRA ENG HOL BAV SAV POR
  • -ve badboy
  ##########
  #Crowning Events (?)
  ##########