france gets burgundian possessions instead of habsburgs

Gallic85 · Apr 16, 2014

Was it possible that instead of making war on burgundy the franch king married his son with mary the rich and got all the burgundian possesions united with france? What would happen? Does the holy roman emperor allow france to annex all the low countries and franche compte? What would then happen with such a large and powerful france ? How it affects the italian wars and what else do they annex? couuld we see france and italy united as a new carolingian and even holy roman empire? Do the french and germans fight for the sole right of being empire of the west and the tiltle? Any possibility french and holy roman empires get merged under the french king emperor too? How much territory and titles can the french monarchy aquire? What about dynastic union with spain under valois instead of habsburgs? Do the valois not get replaced by bourbon? What about huguenots and is there still a dutch or flemish revolt? Anymore ottoman french political and military collaboration? What about anglo-french relations and the colonies and high seas? Does this universal french monarchy come to be or does it last for long? Anymore french or other revolutions? Do england and germany get severely trolled by it? Or the protestants? I'd like to see some ideas and maps maybe.

Matteo · Apr 26, 2014

The HRE would have no word to say about it. The HRE and its emperor then had no weight and no power. And the Burgundian principality had then been under a french dynasty for a century.

The point is : how would Mary of Burgundy and the general States of the provinces accept ?

Space Oddity · Apr 26, 2014

Matteo said:
The HRE would have no word to say about it. The HRE and its emperor then had no weight and no power. And the Burgundian principality had then been under a french dynasty for a century.

The point is : how would Mary of Burgundy and the general States of the provinces accept ?

No weight and no power.

Which is how he wound up with the damn provinces IOTL.

iddt3 · Apr 26, 2014

Matteo said:
The HRE would have no word to say about it. The HRE and its emperor then had no weight and no power. And the Burgundian principality had then been under a french dynasty for a century.

The point is : how would Mary of Burgundy and the general States of the provinces accept ?

The HRE had plenty of weight and power at that point in time, but it isn't the HRE as a whole France needs to worry about, it's Austria.

Janprimus · Apr 26, 2014

Matteo said:
The HRE would have no word to say about it. The HRE and its emperor then had no weight and no power. And the Burgundian principality had then been under a french dynasty for a century.

The point is : how would Mary of Burgundy and the general States of the provinces accept ?

The HRE could only act, when Mary had died without heirs. Otherwise as IOTL the dynasty of the Emperor would have to marry with her. IOTL Mary and Maximilian were a good match and quite happy. Also the son and heir of the king of France was much younger (Mary and Maximilian were about the same age) and the son of a mortal rival of her late father.

Yes, the house of Valois-Burgundy was from French origin, but they had grown estranged from the main Royal Valois line and their Valois-Orléans cousins (which were quite close).

IOTL Maximilian and the Habsburgs provided enough protection to let her keep most of her inheritance. IMHO I can't see Frederick III make a better match for Maximilian, than he did IOTL.

Of course this POD could happen, if Mary would be more or less forced, so I don't expect a happy marriage; also there probably will be a 'Battle of the Golden Spurs' 2.0 in the future. The Estates General won't accept, just being incorporated into France; maybe if France is patient, it could eventually happen, but rushing things will cause a rebellion (which the rest of Europe will gladly facilitate). In fact the dukes of Burgundy also faced resistance, when they wanted to rush the centralization of their Lands.

Wendell · Apr 27, 2014

Maybe we could have a sort of counterintuitive situation?

Nicholas I of Lorraine lives a long life, and marries Mary the Rich. One of their heirs, being a Valois Capetian in the male line ends up ruling France...

HunterX · Apr 27, 2014

Wendell said:
Maybe we could have a sort of counterintuitive situation?

Nicholas I of Lorraine lives a long life, and marries Mary the Rich. One of their heirs, being a Valois Capetian in the male line ends up ruling France...

I don't believe the Burgunian Valois have a close enough claim for that to fly.

Johannes Parisiensis · Apr 27, 2014

There is another POD:

OTL, in 1491, Charles VIII of France repudiated Margaret of Austria to marry with Anne of Britanny to keep the duchy of Britanny into the French Realm.

Janprimus · Apr 27, 2014

HunterX said:
I don't believe the Burgunian Valois have a close enough claim for that to fly.

Valois-Burgundy had a better claim, then the Capetian house of Bourbon. However after this marriage, they would actually base their claim on the house of Valois-Anjou (which also had a stronger claim than the Capetian house of Bourbon and the house of Valois-Burgundy), which at that point ruled in Lorraine, also because Mary the Rich was the last of the house of Valois-Burgundy and the claim to France went through the male line.

Wendell · Apr 27, 2014

HunterX said:
I don't believe the Burgunian Valois have a close enough claim for that to fly.

Weren't they closer than the Bourbons?

Janprimus · Apr 27, 2014

Wendell said:
Weren't they closer than the Bourbons?

Yes, the Capetian house of Bourbon (founded in 1268), descends from the count Robert of Clermont, the sixth son of king Louis IX of France.

The house of Valois (and their cadet branches) descends from count Charles of Valois, the fourth son of king Philip III of France.

BTW Philip III and Robert of Clermont were brothers.

Wendell · Apr 27, 2014

Janprimus said:
Yes, the Capetian house of Bourbon (founded in 1268), descends from the count Robert of Clermont, the sixth son of king Louis IX of France.

The house of Valois (and their cadet branches) descends from count Charles of Valois, the fourth son of king Philip III of France.

BTW Philip III and Robert of Clermont were brothers.

And Philip was the older of the two brothers, so his descendants are more senior to Robert's?

Janprimus · Apr 27, 2014

Wendell said:
And Philip was the older of the two brothers, so his descendants are more senior to Robert's?

Obviously since he's the one, who became king.

Yes and no, the claim of Robert's descendants is based on Robert being the 6th son of Louis IX. Whereas the claim of the Valois is based on Charles being the fourth son of Philip III.
The house of Valois was closer to the Royal line, since they had split from the Royal line at a later point (one generation).

Wendell · Apr 27, 2014

Janprimus said:
Obviously since he's the one, who became king. Yes and no, the claim of Robert's descendants is based on Robert being the 6th son of Louis IX. Whereas the claim of the Valois is based on Charles being the fourth son of Philip III.
The house of Valois was closer to the Royal line, since they had split from the Royal line at a later point (one generation).

That makes sense. The Valois-Anjou diverged more recently from the royal line, and therefore were closer in blood proximity to it.

Gallic85 · May 2, 2014

Janprimus said:
The HRE could only act, when Mary had died without heirs. Otherwise as IOTL the dynasty of the Emperor would have to marry with her. IOTL Mary and Maximilian were a good match and quite happy. Also the son and heir of the king of France was much younger (Mary and Maximilian were about the same age) and the son of a mortal rival of her late father.

Yes, the house of Valois-Burgundy was from French origin, but they had grown estranged from the main Royal Valois line and their Valois-Orléans cousins (which were quite close).

IOTL Maximilian and the Habsburgs provided enough protection to let her keep most of her inheritance. IMHO I can't see Frederick III make a better match for Maximilian, than he did IOTL.

Of course this POD could happen, if Mary would be more or less forced, so I don't expect a happy marriage; also there probably will be a 'Battle of the Golden Spurs' 2.0 in the future. The Estates General won't accept, just being incorporated into France; maybe if France is patient, it could eventually happen, but rushing things will cause a rebellion (which the rest of Europe will gladly facilitate). In fact the dukes of Burgundy also faced resistance, when they wanted to rush the centralization of their Lands.

What if France ''finesses'' the Low Countries into the French realm,with considerable autonomy, at least at first? Would there not still be a Dutch revolt or what about the other powers? And I'm surprised everyone thinks the HRE and Austrians would just allow for a peaceful transfer. I think later a Dutch revolt might bring more active English support at least.

Matteo · May 3, 2014

The Habsburgs are ni match if their possessions are limited to Austria.

And besides, uniting the kingdom of France with the Low Countries definitly maker France the super power of Europe. England is no match either, from mi 15th century to mi 17th century.

Only Spain could be a rather strong counterweight. But without owning the Low Countries itself, Spain (=Castile + Arago) has less reason confrontions France. It even has an economic interest in sel king its merino wool to the Low Countries.

However, what would be foreseeable would be a harsher conflict in the Americas between Spain and an extented France which, thanks to the Low countries, would be a first class sea power.

Remember that there were french settlements in Brazil, New York and Florida in the first half of the 16th century.

Wendell · May 3, 2014

Gallic85 said:
What if France ''finesses'' the Low Countries into the French realm,with considerable autonomy, at least at first? Would there not still be a Dutch revolt or what about the other powers? And I'm surprised everyone thinks the HRE and Austrians would just allow for a peaceful transfer. I think later a Dutch revolt might bring more active English support at least.

That's way too ambitious to work.

Matteo said:
The Habsburgs are ni match if their possessions are limited to Austria.

And besides, uniting the kingdom of France with the Low Countries definitly maker France the super power of Europe. England is no match either, from mi 15th century to mi 17th century.

Only Spain could be a rather strong counterweight. But without owning the Low Countries itself, Spain (=Castile + Arago) has less reason confrontions France. It even has an economic interest in sel king its merino wool to the Low Countries.

However, what would be foreseeable would be a harsher conflict in the Americas between Spain and an extented France which, thanks to the Low countries, would be a first class sea power.

Remember that there were french settlements in Brazil, New York and Florida in the first half of the 16th century.

Depending on the POD, there are still border issues for Spain and France to fight over. Roussillon comes to mind, but don't forget also their rivalry in Italy.

Xgentis · May 3, 2014

It would be an interesting timeline.