Fernando VII Has a Son?
JonasResende
As it says on the tin, Ferdinand VII has a son with one of his four wives. Obviously, the older the boy is on his accession the more things are likely to be...
alternatehistory.com
Come on, I know this isn't a common POD, but I thought it could be interesting.

This could be a highly interesting POD, not just in the way your thinking. If Fernando VII had a son with his first wife, id before Napoleon's invasion, perhaps the Emperor would place the baby on the throne with a Bonaparte or Marshal as Regent.

If not, then at the very least we'd see a unified Spain without three separate civil wars. Of course it depends on which of Fernando's wives is the mother and how old the boy is when he becomes King. If he's a male Isabel II (ie Isabel is a boy) then I think we'd see low-level chaos, with fighting between Infante Carlos and the Queen Mother over the regency.

In my opinion the best bet would be Maria Josefa Amelia. She's the most remote blood wise of Fernando's four wives so that would mean the least inbreeding. Assuming the Prince of Asturias is born in around 1820-21 he'd be old enough to rule on his own at his father's death. However I think we'd see a conservative backlash among the Spanish government, similar to what the Carlists wanted. With a son there's no need to court the liberals for backing the repeal of Salic law.

This could be a highly interesting POD, not just in the way your thinking. If Fernando VII had a son with his first wife, id before Napoleon's invasion, perhaps the Emperor would place the baby on the throne with a Bonaparte or Marshal as Regent.

I quiet like your idea, so the POD is 1804, Princess Maria Antonia, wife of Prince Ferdinand of Asturias, has given birth to a healthy baby boy, called Charles Ferdinand de Borbón.

He is beloved by his grandfather, Charles IV and gives him the royal title of Prince of Girona. The new child was seen as a blessing for the royal family as talks of revolts from the citizens of Spain.

However the baby could not calm all the citizens as they were still feeling the economic troubles and were not happy with King Charles IV's ineptitude, riots, and a popular revolt at the winter palace Aranjuez, in 1808 forced the king to abdicate on 19 March, in favor of his son.

Ferdinand took the throne as Ferdinand VII, but was mistrusted by Napoleon, who had 100,000 soldiers stationed in Spain by that time. The ousted King, having appealed to Napoleon for help in regaining his throne, was summoned before Napoleon in Bayonne, along with his son, in April 1808. Napoleon forced both Charles and his son to abdicate, declaring the four year old, Prince Charles as the new king of Spain, as Charles V with Napoleon's brother, Joseph Bonaparte, who had been crowned King of Naples on 30 March 1806, as Regent of Spain.

[/SIZE]

I quiet like your idea, so the POD is 1804, Princess Maria Antonia, wife of Prince Ferdinand of Asturias, has given birth to a healthy baby boy, called Charles Ferdinand de Borbón.

He is beloved by his grandfather, Charles IV and gives him the royal title of Prince of Girona. The new child was seen as a blessing for the royal family as talks of revolts from the citizens of Spain.

However the baby could not calm all the citizens as they were still feeling the economic troubles and were not happy with King Charles IV's ineptitude, riots, and a popular revolt at the winter palace Aranjuez, in 1808 forced the king to abdicate on 19 March, in favor of his son.

Ferdinand took the throne as Ferdinand VII, but was mistrusted by Napoleon, who had 100,000 soldiers stationed in Spain by that time. The ousted King, having appealed to Napoleon for help in regaining his throne, was summoned before Napoleon in Bayonne, along with his son, in April 1808. Napoleon forced both Charles and his son to abdicate, declaring the four year old, Prince Charles as the new king of Spain, as Charles V with Napoleon's brother, Joseph Bonaparte, who had been crowned King of Naples on 30 March 1806, as Regent of Spain.

While this would stabilize Napoleon's control of Spain for a time, it wouldn't save him from ultimately losing. So what happens to Charles V?

[/SIZE]

I quiet like your idea, so the POD is 1804, Princess Maria Antonia, wife of Prince Ferdinand of Asturias, has given birth to a healthy baby boy, called Charles Ferdinand de Borbón.

He is beloved by his grandfather, Charles IV and gives him the royal title of Prince of Girona. The new child was seen as a blessing for the royal family as talks of revolts from the citizens of Spain.

However the baby could not calm all the citizens as they were still feeling the economic troubles and were not happy with King Charles IV's ineptitude, riots, and a popular revolt at the winter palace Aranjuez, in 1808 forced the king to abdicate on 19 March, in favor of his son.

Ferdinand took the throne as Ferdinand VII, but was mistrusted by Napoleon, who had 100,000 soldiers stationed in Spain by that time. The ousted King, having appealed to Napoleon for help in regaining his throne, was summoned before Napoleon in Bayonne, along with his son, in April 1808. Napoleon forced both Charles and his son to abdicate, declaring the four year old, Prince Charles as the new king of Spain, as Charles V with Napoleon's brother, Joseph Bonaparte, who had been crowned King of Naples on 30 March 1806, as Regent of Spain.

Spain didn't give Princely/Ducal titles to its Royal family (Seville and Cádiz being notable acceptation) so he'd just be Infante Carlos.

While this would stabilize Napoleon's control of Spain for a time, it wouldn't save him from ultimately losing. So what happens to Charles V?

Why wouldn't that work? The entire reason for the Spanish national uprising against the French was the enthronement of Joseph Bonaparte. Keep the Bourbons on the throne and Napoleon should be good, at least in Spain. Although a different Regent would be best (a French Marshal perhaps, something that's not an obvious Bonaparte takeover).

While this would stabilize Napoleon's control of Spain for a time, it wouldn't save him from ultimately losing. So what happens to Charles V?

This would stabilize Spain, as they would see this as a better deal then just a French man on the throne.

And really it could. Without Spain getting upset, there would be no Peninsula War, meaning Napoleon does not have to worry about sending his army back to Spain, instead he can concerntrate on Britain and Eastern Europe.

As for Charles V, if Napoleon does lose, he is kept as co-monarch along side his re-instated father, Fernando VII, which he does until Charles V is 29, when his father dies and he becomes the sole King of Spain.

Spain didn't give Princely/Ducal titles to its Royal family (Seville and Cádiz being notable acceptation) so he'd just be Infante Carlos.

My bad, I do hate, how each royal family does things differently, but hey hoe, who am I to argue with royalty lol.

Why wouldn't that work? The entire reason for the Spanish national uprising against the French was the enthronement of Joseph Bonaparte. Keep the Bourbons on the throne and Napoleon should be good, at least in Spain. Although a different Regent would be best (a French Marshal perhaps, something that's not an obvious Bonaparte takeover).[/QUOTE]

Or what about Joseph Bonaparte being joint Regent, with a loyalist Spaniard?

Such as - Mariano Luis de Urquijo, François Cabarrus, Juan O'Donojú or Francesc Antoni de la Dueña y Cisneros?

The problem with a French Marshal, eg. Joachim Murat, is that they would still be seen as a Bonaparte.

Napoleon's defeat is not written in stone. Under the guise that there's no Iberian war, Napoleon has greater military resources to throw at his adventures elsewhere.

Austria was enthused to attack in 1809 partially because they saw it an opportune time while Napoleon was having troubles in Spain. No Iberian conflict could mean a delay in Austria's attack. Delay it to dovetail with Russia's belligerence and now you have a situation where the war is not taken to Moscow, but instead fought in Europe and/or along the Russian border (doesn't make sense for Russia to withdraw if France is occupied fighting Austria). remember the 2 keys for Napoleon's defeat were the Spanish Ulcer and the Russian Winter. eliminate both of those, and Nap's fortunes could change dramatically.

At the same time, the Portugal takeover is a rousing success (I still maintain that the Portugal takeover was part of the military takeover of Spain, so if I still to my guns, Portugal is butterflied, but it's immaterial for my point) and Britain has no place to build up the British/Portuguese/Spanish army which was one of the keys to defeating Nap. Alternately, if Portugal is butterflied, and there's no invasion, Britain is still denied the OTL place to build up a military. Instead, they go ahead with the OTL planned (but never carried out) invasion of Venezuela, where they likely get bogged down, or at least occupied.