In 1931 the King Alfonso XIII of Spain was forced to leave Spain and the Republic was proclaimed. During the past decades, the fate of the Monarchy had been at first tied to an oligarchic party system based on falsification of the electoral process, and after his demise, to a Military Directorate. Most Spaniards blamed the King for the situation of the country, and when the Directorate tried to restore the parliamentary system, the people overwhelmingly called for his abdication. But it’s interesting to see how fast the support of the Monarchy among the political class vanished in few years. Before the establishment of the Dictatorship of Primo de Rivera in 1923, those who advocated for the Republic were actually outsiders, while most of the political (oligarchic, it’s true) class supported some form of Monarchy. Even the Socialists under Largo Caballero had somehow collaborated with the Dictator‘s labor legislation, but when the system begun to crumble they distanced themselves from it and approached the Republicans. But the most astonishing transformation took part among a broad group of former monarchist politicians who, disappointed with the King’s support of the Directorate, turned their backs to the Crown and enthusiastically embraced republicanism. It was the case of Niceto Alcalá-Zamora, former leader of a monarchist Liberal faction , or Miguel Maura, son of the prominent Conservative statesman Antonio Maura. They leaded a very large portion of monarchists who actually switched sides during the last 1920s. All them would play a decisive role prior to, during and after the proclamation of the II Spanish Republic.
According to some historians, this latter group of “new republicans” was decisive in the downfall of the Monarchy. Unlike most of the lifelong Republican politicians, they were well-known figures who enjoyed significant support among moderate circles and, specially, still exerted some influence on the old patronage system and even on some portions of the armed forces. Alcalá-Zamora and Maura joined and played a leading role in the Republican Pact, which gathered several factions opposed to the Government and had begun to pave the way for the regime change. They were awarded with the post of Head of Provisional Government and Home Secretary respectively during the first stages of the II Republic, gaining for the Republic the respectability and the moderate semblance it needed.
That’s why it can be assumed that these “last-minute Republicans” decisively tipped the balance in favor of the new regime. Their role was crucial for the establishment of the Republic, but soon they would be outflanked by the left during the elections for the Constituent Assembly, and later marginalized in the drafting of the republican Constitution, which they had reluctantly to accept. In the 5 years of history of the II Spanish Republic before the outbreak of the Civil War, the political spectrum from the right to the center remained split over the degree of support for the regime, ranging from the enthusiastic endorsement (last-minute Republicans and the historical Radical Party), resigned/conditional acceptance (the Catholic Right), and acrimonious hostility (far-right monarchists and Traditionalists)
So, WI the course of events hadn’t led so clearly to the downfall of the Monarchy? WI the old system had a last chance to reform and become more inclusive? WI that influential group of newcomers to the republican camp had instead stood loyal to the Crown? IMHO it could have led to a smoother transition and probably would have prevented the horrors of the Civil War. For this to have been accomplished, this guy should have enjoyed a very different life.
Don Alfonso de Borbón y Battemberg, first son of king Alfonso XIII and heir apparent was born in 1907 (he was 23 to 24 years old when his father was ousted). He suffered from haemophilia , so he grew as a weak and overprotected child, a fact that virtually ruled him out for inheriting the throne. But to crown it all, his brother, the Infant Jaime, second in the line of succession, was partially deaf and dumb, so it was considered unfit for the Crown too. Only the fourth son of King Alfonso, the Infant Juan (the father of current King Juan Carlos), could have been chosen for the post, but he was still a teenager during the last 1920s.
But WI prince Alfonso didn’t carry the gene responsible for haemophilia? WI instead of an unsuitable candidate, he had grew healthy and been raised to become King someday? WI he had been I, if not a gifted and bright Prince, at least a well- advised one, someone distant enough of the political turmoil which engulfed his father, but at the same time committed enough to the task of governance to be regarded as a potential replacement to The King? In short: could he have saved the monarchy in Spain?
In outline, for such a decisive change of the course of Spanish history at this crucial moment we need:
a. A good candidate (or at least, one with a competent camarilla)
b. Different political developments enough to discredit the republican option and make the abdication of the father in favor of his son the least viable solution.
About b., it must be remembered that OTL proclamation of the Republic in 1931 was preceded by a failed pronunciamiento in Jaca, a distant mountain town, in December 1930. The attempted coup ended in failure, but the discredit of the Monarchy (which was at that moment struggling to go back to constitutional order) was such that the Republicans recovered surprisingly fast from this fiasco, and the execution of the putsch authors even provided them with martyrs. But maybe if the politicians who sponsored the coup had been less organized, or the republican complot had been weaker, the blow could have doomed the cause. OTL Republican Pact comprised most factions of opposition to the government, from moderates to maximalists, and even the Socialists joined at the very last moment…….. but ITTL, had the Succession scheme worked, only the hardliners would be behind the plot, and such a fringe group would probably fall in disgrace after the coup.
Anyways the improved parliamentary Monarchy which would be established ITTL would be far from perfect: remember, we’re still talking about Spain in the 1930s, and the socioeconomic conditions were generally backwards… but I think that TTL Bourbon Succession could at least soften the tensions that sunk the Republic and led to SCW (but I don’t dismiss the possibility of some form of authoritarian government at the end, less unwilling to democratize itself after WWII than Francoism); in outline, some issues have to be avoided, or at least delayed:
1. The introduction of an electoral system which favored polarization and overrepresented majorities: instead of the majority bonus for the winning coalitions (harshly criticized by OTL moderates), which led to the formation of antagonistic blocks, the new Cortes should be elected under proportional system. This would strengthen centrist coalitions: a fair representation would also avoid OTL intransigence and belligerent attitude from the governmental blocks, who often regarded themselves as the sole depositaries of the true will of the whole nation. This would broaden consensus around many OTL positive reforms (regional autonomy, expansion of education, military reform). In addition to this, the only chance for this regime to last is co-opting part of the opposition, for instance the moderate Republican Radical Party headed by Lerroux, who OTL was able to reach agreements first with the Left and then with the Right in exchange of posts in the Government.
2. Some of the anticlerical legislation shouldn’t be implemented: Most factions agreed on the necessity of some form of Church-State separation, but the prohibition of all forms of religious education, the forced closing of Catholic institutions, the subjection of any form of public religious celebration to restrictive conditions, etc, turned a big portion of the catholic public hostile at some degree to the Republic, despite of having been neutral at first.
3. OTL socioeconomic reforms (labor arbitration, land reform…) were in general very positive, although in the case of land distribution it had to face too many technical obstacles that hindered its implementation. Perhaps the main problem was that too much was attempted to be made too fast, and this provoked frustration in the less favored classes, that were enduring at the time the worst effects of world economic crisis. The main victim of this frustration were the Socialists: they had entered in the government aiming to fulfill their agenda of much needed social progress, but soon they were attacked both from the left, because the expectations they had raised were difficult to meet, and from the right, who unfairly blamed PSOE of marching towards a bolshevik revolution. Their subsequent exit from government would in turn radicalize PSOE, depriving the Republic of an essential stabilizing factor. Perhaps, ITTL the entry of PSOE in government would have been delayed, so it won’t be blamed so early for so many setbacks, and the reforms slowed down enough to avoid unnecessary tensions, but I admit that this is a problem very hard to prevent..
Well, that’s enough just for outlining the basic idea, in the next post I will describe the ATL political landscape after the Succession Crisis. I want to know your opinion, especially about the plausibility of the project: I know that such schemes (dramatic political changes from King to King) were frequent in nineteenth century; in fact, Spain experimented similar developments several times during the 1800s, even a change of dynasty, but Europe in the 1930s was quite different.
According to some historians, this latter group of “new republicans” was decisive in the downfall of the Monarchy. Unlike most of the lifelong Republican politicians, they were well-known figures who enjoyed significant support among moderate circles and, specially, still exerted some influence on the old patronage system and even on some portions of the armed forces. Alcalá-Zamora and Maura joined and played a leading role in the Republican Pact, which gathered several factions opposed to the Government and had begun to pave the way for the regime change. They were awarded with the post of Head of Provisional Government and Home Secretary respectively during the first stages of the II Republic, gaining for the Republic the respectability and the moderate semblance it needed.
That’s why it can be assumed that these “last-minute Republicans” decisively tipped the balance in favor of the new regime. Their role was crucial for the establishment of the Republic, but soon they would be outflanked by the left during the elections for the Constituent Assembly, and later marginalized in the drafting of the republican Constitution, which they had reluctantly to accept. In the 5 years of history of the II Spanish Republic before the outbreak of the Civil War, the political spectrum from the right to the center remained split over the degree of support for the regime, ranging from the enthusiastic endorsement (last-minute Republicans and the historical Radical Party), resigned/conditional acceptance (the Catholic Right), and acrimonious hostility (far-right monarchists and Traditionalists)
So, WI the course of events hadn’t led so clearly to the downfall of the Monarchy? WI the old system had a last chance to reform and become more inclusive? WI that influential group of newcomers to the republican camp had instead stood loyal to the Crown? IMHO it could have led to a smoother transition and probably would have prevented the horrors of the Civil War. For this to have been accomplished, this guy should have enjoyed a very different life.
Don Alfonso de Borbón y Battemberg, first son of king Alfonso XIII and heir apparent was born in 1907 (he was 23 to 24 years old when his father was ousted). He suffered from haemophilia , so he grew as a weak and overprotected child, a fact that virtually ruled him out for inheriting the throne. But to crown it all, his brother, the Infant Jaime, second in the line of succession, was partially deaf and dumb, so it was considered unfit for the Crown too. Only the fourth son of King Alfonso, the Infant Juan (the father of current King Juan Carlos), could have been chosen for the post, but he was still a teenager during the last 1920s.
But WI prince Alfonso didn’t carry the gene responsible for haemophilia? WI instead of an unsuitable candidate, he had grew healthy and been raised to become King someday? WI he had been I, if not a gifted and bright Prince, at least a well- advised one, someone distant enough of the political turmoil which engulfed his father, but at the same time committed enough to the task of governance to be regarded as a potential replacement to The King? In short: could he have saved the monarchy in Spain?
In outline, for such a decisive change of the course of Spanish history at this crucial moment we need:
a. A good candidate (or at least, one with a competent camarilla)
b. Different political developments enough to discredit the republican option and make the abdication of the father in favor of his son the least viable solution.
About b., it must be remembered that OTL proclamation of the Republic in 1931 was preceded by a failed pronunciamiento in Jaca, a distant mountain town, in December 1930. The attempted coup ended in failure, but the discredit of the Monarchy (which was at that moment struggling to go back to constitutional order) was such that the Republicans recovered surprisingly fast from this fiasco, and the execution of the putsch authors even provided them with martyrs. But maybe if the politicians who sponsored the coup had been less organized, or the republican complot had been weaker, the blow could have doomed the cause. OTL Republican Pact comprised most factions of opposition to the government, from moderates to maximalists, and even the Socialists joined at the very last moment…….. but ITTL, had the Succession scheme worked, only the hardliners would be behind the plot, and such a fringe group would probably fall in disgrace after the coup.
Anyways the improved parliamentary Monarchy which would be established ITTL would be far from perfect: remember, we’re still talking about Spain in the 1930s, and the socioeconomic conditions were generally backwards… but I think that TTL Bourbon Succession could at least soften the tensions that sunk the Republic and led to SCW (but I don’t dismiss the possibility of some form of authoritarian government at the end, less unwilling to democratize itself after WWII than Francoism); in outline, some issues have to be avoided, or at least delayed:
1. The introduction of an electoral system which favored polarization and overrepresented majorities: instead of the majority bonus for the winning coalitions (harshly criticized by OTL moderates), which led to the formation of antagonistic blocks, the new Cortes should be elected under proportional system. This would strengthen centrist coalitions: a fair representation would also avoid OTL intransigence and belligerent attitude from the governmental blocks, who often regarded themselves as the sole depositaries of the true will of the whole nation. This would broaden consensus around many OTL positive reforms (regional autonomy, expansion of education, military reform). In addition to this, the only chance for this regime to last is co-opting part of the opposition, for instance the moderate Republican Radical Party headed by Lerroux, who OTL was able to reach agreements first with the Left and then with the Right in exchange of posts in the Government.
2. Some of the anticlerical legislation shouldn’t be implemented: Most factions agreed on the necessity of some form of Church-State separation, but the prohibition of all forms of religious education, the forced closing of Catholic institutions, the subjection of any form of public religious celebration to restrictive conditions, etc, turned a big portion of the catholic public hostile at some degree to the Republic, despite of having been neutral at first.
3. OTL socioeconomic reforms (labor arbitration, land reform…) were in general very positive, although in the case of land distribution it had to face too many technical obstacles that hindered its implementation. Perhaps the main problem was that too much was attempted to be made too fast, and this provoked frustration in the less favored classes, that were enduring at the time the worst effects of world economic crisis. The main victim of this frustration were the Socialists: they had entered in the government aiming to fulfill their agenda of much needed social progress, but soon they were attacked both from the left, because the expectations they had raised were difficult to meet, and from the right, who unfairly blamed PSOE of marching towards a bolshevik revolution. Their subsequent exit from government would in turn radicalize PSOE, depriving the Republic of an essential stabilizing factor. Perhaps, ITTL the entry of PSOE in government would have been delayed, so it won’t be blamed so early for so many setbacks, and the reforms slowed down enough to avoid unnecessary tensions, but I admit that this is a problem very hard to prevent..
Well, that’s enough just for outlining the basic idea, in the next post I will describe the ATL political landscape after the Succession Crisis. I want to know your opinion, especially about the plausibility of the project: I know that such schemes (dramatic political changes from King to King) were frequent in nineteenth century; in fact, Spain experimented similar developments several times during the 1800s, even a change of dynasty, but Europe in the 1930s was quite different.