We're talking about the Italian Wars in class and I always wondered what would have happened if two of the most powerful nations in the world at the time happened to merge when one of the conquered the other. Would the cultural and political differences have not allowed it? Or would it really have been possible?
And by merging I don't mean a personal union, I mean the nations of Spain and France combining into one Kingdom.
A reply to /u/TheUnbiasedRedditor
Great question, although the answer is complicated. Poner una pica a flandes as they say in Spain. ;-)
In that era, dynastic claim trumps nearly all. After all, that was how the Trastamara line lost the crowns of Spain to the Habsburgs. So in order for one nation to be absorbed by another, they have to first be under personal union. Why did I not say "merge"? Because I don't believe it feasible between Spain and France, what with their natural border the Pyrenees, and the lack of precedent that two major European nations at that time could merge.
So, first sub-question: what would it take for Spain's crowns and France's crowns to be under personal union? We can consider French kings from Charles VIII who launched the Italian wars to claim Naples (notably he bypassed Milan on the way, as he had strong claims to Naples but not to Milan), up to Francis II whose death launched the French Wars of Religion. Notably, Elisabeth Valois daughter of Henry II of France and Catherine de' Medici, married Philip II. Unfortunately, by this point French succession had decreed that it has to go through the male line.
On the Spanish side, we can consider Isabella I to Ferdinand to Joana, to Habsburg Philip to Charles V to Philip II. On the Spanish side, succession could go through the female line, after all this is how Philip Habsburg became King jure uxoris on behalf of his wife Joana the Mad. Unfortunately their children all married not into the French royalty, so there's little hope there.
The next sub-question is, let's say a personal union did miraculously happen, let's say the wine at a royal tournament was poisoned and dozens of claimants died at once, clearing the way to a personal union. How would such a thing be accepted? We can look at an important precedent, when Philip Habsburg and then his son Charles I of Spain (Charles V HRE) claimed the crowns of Spain. The Castilians felt insulted by his Burgundian / Low Countries entourage taking up and buying positions in Castile, and that he demanded money for pursuing the title of Holy Roman Emperor, that they revolted as soon as he left the country, in what was known as the Revolt of the Comuneros.
Finally, evidently even in Spain, the crowns remained separate all throughout the rule of the Habsburgs.
So based on all that, the chance of those two countries merging in the 16th century, is less than \epsilon, where \epsilon is an arbitrarily small number greater than zero.
TLDR: "fuhgettabouttit"