Mind you, I can understand why Isabella didn't want to be a retired King's wife again, either.
Oh, definitely! And as I recounted last time, there were good political reasons for his ministers not wanting him to do that again:
1. He already did that, and it ended badly. (His son died after just 7 months, putting him back on the throne.) Incidentally, that's one reason Philip the Frog so badly wants off the throne: he formally renounced it, and he thinks he's violating his oath and offending God by remaining king. And it's why he refuses to speak to his ministers except through his wife: if he doesn't act like a king, at least he's not violating his oath nearly as badly!
2. When he was retired, he was backseat driving from his country palace like crazy, telling his son what to do. Nobody wants two masters again.
3. Since his oldest son died, his next oldest son is a minor, so there would have to be a regency. Isabella, the normal candidate, would have to follow her husband into retirement. Philip doesn't have any brothers. His closest male-line relative is the king of France. And we know how it goes when there's discussion of uniting France and Spain: war!
Even if we manage to avoid a Europe-wide war, nobody wants the plotting and counterplotting within Spain over who gets to be regent.
4. Since (unlike in the reign of Philip's equally mentally ill so later in the century), there is a queen to act as point of contact, and she's willing and able to do the job, there's some continuity in leadership if we keep Philip locked in his room and Isabella acting as spokesperson for his opinions about politics.
And it's why he refuses to speak to his ministers except through his wife: if he doesn't act like a king, at least he's not violating his oath nearly as badly!
Ohhhh. That... makes a certain amount of twisted sense.
It's also sometimes because he's dead, and dead people can't talk. (They can sometimes mutter a bit when alone with their wives, but definitely no talking to ministers.)
...This guy needed lots of help, and lots less power.
Btw, I notice a typo in what you replied to: in "unlike in the reign of Philip's equally mentally ill so later in the century," that should read "mentally ill son."
Re: Philippe le Grenouille
Date: 2024-03-07 07:52 pm (UTC)Oh, definitely! And as I recounted last time, there were good political reasons for his ministers not wanting him to do that again:
1. He already did that, and it ended badly. (His son died after just 7 months, putting him back on the throne.) Incidentally, that's one reason Philip the Frog so badly wants off the throne: he formally renounced it, and he thinks he's violating his oath and offending God by remaining king. And it's why he refuses to speak to his ministers except through his wife: if he doesn't act like a king, at least he's not violating his oath nearly as badly!
2. When he was retired, he was backseat driving from his country palace like crazy, telling his son what to do. Nobody wants two masters again.
3. Since his oldest son died, his next oldest son is a minor, so there would have to be a regency. Isabella, the normal candidate, would have to follow her husband into retirement. Philip doesn't have any brothers. His closest male-line relative is the king of France. And we know how it goes when there's discussion of uniting France and Spain: war!
Even if we manage to avoid a Europe-wide war, nobody wants the plotting and counterplotting within Spain over who gets to be regent.
4. Since (unlike in the reign of Philip's equally mentally ill so later in the century), there is a queen to act as point of contact, and she's willing and able to do the job, there's some continuity in leadership if we keep Philip locked in his room and Isabella acting as spokesperson for his opinions about politics.
And that's how it ended up awful for everyone. :/
Re: Philippe le Grenouille
Date: 2024-03-14 04:47 am (UTC)Ohhhh. That... makes a certain amount of twisted sense.
Re: Philippe le Grenouille
Date: 2024-03-14 11:06 pm (UTC)...This guy needed lots of help, and lots less power.
Btw, I notice a typo in what you replied to: in "unlike in the reign of Philip's equally mentally ill so later in the century," that should read "mentally ill son."