What were the causes and results of the war of spanish succession?
The cause: Carlos II, last king of the Spanish Hapsburg line, died childless (1700).His will left the throne to Phillip of Anjou, grandson of Louis XIV (related to Carlos II through marriage). Neither England nor the Netherlands was prepared to see France united with Spain, so supported an alternative claimant to the Spanish throne, Archduke Charles, second son of emperor Leopold I. As Charles was a Hapsburg, it was felt he had a stronger claim by blood. Phillip assumed the Spanish throne as Phillip V. In March 1701,French forces occupied fortresses in the Spanish Netherlands and parts of northern Italy in support of Phillip's claim to the entire Spanish empire,thus precipitating the war.Austria, Netherlands Prussia and England formed the Grand Alliance against France and Savoy (which soon changed sides).Bavaria joined the war on the French side September 1702. Results: Under the Treaty of Utrecht (11 April 1713) Phillip was confirmed as king of Spain;he renounced all claims to the French throne for himself and his descendants. Similarly, the descendants of Louis XIV renounced all claims to the Spanish throne. The Spanish empire was divided,Charles receiving most of the Italian territory (the rest went to Savoy) and the Spanish Netherlands. Phillip got the Spanish colonial territories. So, the main result was that French ambitions of a wider European hegemony were thwarted, and a balance of power retained in Europe 2 other results with long term consequences were that Britain received Gibraltar from Spain, and the war virtually bankrupted France, leading to ongoing financial problems which culminated in total bankruptcy of the state by 1789.
What was the Spanish war of succession?
The War of the Spanish Succession was fought among several European powers, principally the Spanish loyal to Archduke Charles, the Holy Roman Empire, Great Britain, the Dutch Republic, Portugal and the Duchy of Savoy against the Spanish loyal to Philip V, France and the Electorate of Bavaria over a possible unification of the Kingdoms of Spain and France under one Bourbon monarch. Such a unification would have drastically changed the European balance of power. The war was fought mostly in Europe but included Queen Anne's War in North America. It resulted in the recognition of Philip as King of Spain while requiring him to renounce any claim to the French throne and to cede much of the Spanish Crown's possessions to the Holy Roman Empire, the Dutch Republic, Savoy and Great Britain, partitioning the Spanish Empire in Europe.
Why did the Spanish empire disintegrate so much earlier than the other European empires?
Of the major seafaring European powers (England, Portugal, Spain, France, Netherlands), Spain and Portugal were the first to launch seafaring explorations explicitly to discover new trade routes. The Spaniards were the first to “discover” the New World, the Americas, in 1492. Within 1550, they had established the first worldwide empire, taking over all of South America (except for Brazil, which went to the Portuguese. But the Iberian Union later, which conjoined Spain and Portugal, meant that Spanish Empire effectively controlled all of SA).The Spanish Empire, mining massive amounts of gold and silver, then sending them over the Atlantic Ocean in massive treasure fleets, became enormously wealthy. So why did the Spanish Empire disintegrate so soon?Firstly, the Spanish Empire made many enemies and became overextended. In the 1500s, the Spanish Emperor also became the Holy Roman Emperor, in effect meaning that Spain controlled Austria as well. Around this time, however, Holland, England, and various breakaway Protestant German states raised trouble. Most of Spain’s finances and efforts were dedicated to fighting off these menaces, draining the treasury. Charles V himself abdicated due to fatigue.Secondly, Spanish society was stagnant. Crucially, a viable middle-class never arose. In England, a new merchant class was made rich through trade in the New World, in Holland a similar manifestation, and in France, the famous bourgeoisie originated from this time. In Spain however, most of the wealth was funneled into the Court and the nobility and Church. Yes, a few aspiring entrepreneurs went and became famous. But on the whole, colonial administrators, plantation owners, soldiers, were all nobles. As such, they were already secure in their wealth and had no ambition, no drive, no motivation to drive them to more riches. Eventually, the Spanish economy stagnated as a result.Finally, a combination of civil wars, piracy by the English, and court corruption led to the decline of the Spanish Empire. The invasion by Napoleon sealed the fate of Spain, with colonies seeing Spanish weakness and declaring independence a few short years later. At the same time, the British and French empires were on an upward trend, gradually acquiring more colonies in Asia and Africa.The rest, they say, is history.
Why did France and Spain become increasingly intrested in the American Revolution?
France wanted revenge for dereat in the Seven Years War (1756-1763) - France had been forced to give up all claims in Canada and in America east of the Mississippi. Spain wanted to regain Gibraltar, lost to Britain under the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) at the end of the War of Spanish Succession. If the colonists in America could put up a good enough fight for long enough, the drain on British resources would be sufficient for France and Spain to declare war and achieve these aims. Although the French gained revenge by aiding the American colonists to achieve independence from Britain, the Spanish failed to capture Gibraltar despite besieging it for over 3 and a half years.
King William's War and Queen Anne's War?
In my textbook it seems to combine the two wars into one: "Indian allies of the French ravaged with torch and tomahawk the British colonial frontiers...Spain, eventually allied with France, probed from its Florida base at outlying South Carolina settlements. For their part the British colonists failed miserably in sallies against Quebec and Montreal but scored a signal victory when they temporarily seized the stronghold of Port Royal in Acadia." The next paragraph it says "Peace terms, signed at Utrecht in 1713, revealed how badly France and its Spanish ally had been beaten. Britain was rewarded with French-populated Acadia and the wintry wastes of Newfoundland and Hudson Bay". I am a bit confused here, because in the first paragraph it looked like the French and Spanish were winning. Was it because the British's "signal victory" (what is a signal victory, or is it a typo for single?) in Port Royal was so important that French troops were immediately forced to surrender? Please explain why it appears that the French and Spanish have won, and yet through the peace treaty the British have won. Thank you all in advance.
King Philip’s War could be best described as?
The only correct answer. E. A conflict between Native Americans and New England settlers King Philip's War was a general Indian uprising in 1675-1676 to resist continued expansion of the English colonies in New England. It was the bloodiest of the Indian wars in terms of relative casualties, and several tribes were virtually or totally eliminated. Six hundred colonists were killed, which included about one-fifth of all the men fit for military service. Philip was the Christian name assigned to Metacomet, the sachem of the Wampanoag Indians.