That is the same thing as I did with my Burgundian TL a year ago. I realised that I tied myself in knots and lost direction, while I could make bigger changes.
We are all looking forward to a new story from you and we will patiently wait for you to get your ducks in a row. The Italian Wars are a pain thou.
Perhaps a Navarre match for him this time? In your story he married Claude of France I belive? If he's gonna become king of three kingdoms, why not have him wed a lady that brings a fourth realm as well? Might as well go full Emperador Hispania on Europe's asses.
That sounds really good.
I can't speak for the other writers, but I'm really honoured that you included me in the list.
Take your time! I support
@BlueFlowwer in Miguel getting navarre!
And i hope Charles still marries Anne to get all her familie's domains!
I know a Navarrese match would be most expedient for Spain ITTL, and Juan Pelayo was only 11 years older than Jeanne d'Albret while his son Gabriel was only 8 years younger than her (not impossible matches, but a little bit unlikely - also, could you imagine someone like Jeanne d'Albret, with her Protestant inclination, being queen of Spain? lol), but I feel like I should keep TTL's match between Charles IX of France and Jeanne d'Albret for two reasons:
- To keep this TL realistic, I've got to upset the fortunes of Spain every now and then. A Navarrese match would certainly be too good to be true, with the entire Iberian Peninsula sealed off and without any bloodshed, unlike OTL. Also, as I've mentioned above, there aren't any stellar matches agewise for a king/heir of Spain to marry a queen/heir of Navarre.
- A less realism-oriented reason - France moving in on Navarre against Spanish wishes makes for good storytelling. French Navarre lays the groundwork for decades of conflict between the Valois and the Avis-Trastamaras, sowing bad blood that will eventually ignite further conflicts in the future. I know it might sound cheap or maybe even slightly bloodthirsty on my part, but Spain and France permanently resolving their border early on and then parting ways for the rest of history is just boring IMHO. It also seems to go against the grain of what usually happens in OTL history, where conflict resolution between nations fails time and time again - far, far more often than it succeeds.
All this being said, however, Navarre
will end up a permanent part of TTL's Spain, and in the first half of the 17th century as well.
A couple of things that perhaps, would be worth to be taken into account for the Redux may be reconsidering bothy the role and TTL greater importance for the Avís-Trastámara Spain of the Canary Islands... Not only in their Historical role for Spanish America, but TTL, also, as key resupply/stopover point for the Portuguese travels to the Cape and beyond, to the East Africa/Red Sea and India/Ceylon (Sri Lanka) and, supposing that it would still happen or develop, most importantly for the Moroccan wars/campaigns.
Funny that you mention that, because I learned a little while ago that the voyage of Pedro Álvares Cabral in 1500 probably only caught the trade wind that lead it to Brazil because it bypassed resupplying at the Canaries, due to the Spanish possession of those islands. This voyage was, after all, intended for India...
If Portugal and Spain were on much friendlier, or rather much less competitive terms due to, say, sharing the same monarch at the time, then this voyage might have stopped at the Canaries and the discovery of Brazil might be postponed for a while or - more likely - Brazil might first be discovered by navigators in Castilian employ.
I have a question, if the Low countries are not spanish but austrian, the french could succeed annexing them in the future? That would make them even more powerful than in our timeline... so I'm not sure if the french would end up dominating north-western europe... Is there a possibility for the spaniards to make some southern lands of France (occitan) secede so they don't get too powerful?
I've also been thinking about this. Spain is inevitably going to be less interested in constantly fighting France without a Habsburg monarch, so the Austrians are likely going to have to bear the brunt of French aggression by themselves (but with intermittent Spanish/English/Papal-Italian support). France is no paper tiger, especially in the early 16th century, so it might also be likely that the Austrians are going to fare worse in the Habsburg-Valois wars than they did IOTL.
However, The Habsburgs not taking possession of Spain ITTL means the fear of Habsburg domination among the Habsburgs' OTL rivals (England, France, the Protestants, etc) is greatly diminished. Smaller Habsburg domain means less fear of a universal monarchy for every non-Habsburg state, and less fear for the French of being encircled. This removes a huge motivation for the unrelenting anti-Habsburg policy that engrossed the French monarchy for two centuries, so the Italian Wars might fizzle out early ITTL.
Although it should also be taken into consideration that a large European competitor right next door - and one that also serves as a unifying element for Germans as a national bloc - is naturally going to be seen as a threat in France. Add to this the fact that Austria has ownership of several (very wealthy) regions long considered to be part of the kingdom of France (Artois, Flanders, Charolais), and you've got the recipe for unavoidable conflict. The Austrian Low Countries is probably going to be fighting for its life against France.
I doubt the Spanish will try to establish some independent power in Southern France (although they'd probably like to) because Cerdanya, Rousillon, and Navarre are all contested with France by the PoD, and they're all the Spanish really want from France in the long term (in order to secure their side of the Pyrenees). Also, linguistic differences notwithstanding, Southern France proved to be pretty loyal to the idea of a French state during this period and through to modern times.