Charles V Is a Girl
- Thread starter Pericles
- Start date
So what if he was born a she? Then Ferdinand would become OTL's Charles V.
Basically. Philip and Joanna had their 'spare.' What would be interesting is who this new Princess would marry and what her name would be. Margaret, after her aunt, perhaps? What would be especially funny is if Henry VIII still divorces Catherine of Aragon and only has a daughter (which depends on butterflies...) Henry VIII was interested in the widowed Duchess of Milan, Christina of Denmark (who was Charles' niece iOTL) but she quipped "If I had two heads, one should be at the King of England's disposal."
It'd be quite funny if this female Charles ended up a widow and Henry VIII set his sites on her. Of course by the late 1520s/1530s she'd be older as Charles was born in 1500, but still marriage material.
No she wouldn't. Philip and Joanna had a second son, Ferdinand. If Charles was born a female, he'd simply be another Archduchess, not an heiress. The German States practiced Salic Law whereby men could only inherit; men could only inherit through the female line if the male line was extinct. The Lowlands didn't really follow this as it was often contested between the empire and France (in France feudal fiefs could pass to women, although appanges given to French Princes, such as Burgundy, could not, and returned to the crown upon the extinction: hence Louis XI seizing Picardy and Burgundy and angling to take the rest through marriage).
The big change is not going to *Carlotta V. It is going to be that there is now only one male heir, Ferdinand.
With only one male heir there is going to be much more pressure to keep the Habsburg Empire together in one family instead of splitting it up.
Whether they can actually achieve that is another thing.
Massive butterflies ...
With only one male heir there is going to be much more pressure to keep the Habsburg Empire together in one family instead of splitting it up.
Whether they can actually achieve that is another thing.
Massive butterflies ...
@ DrakeRlugia: well whether Burgundy was an appanage was contested between France and the house of Valois-Burgundy and the successor the house of Habsburg. Certainly the duchy of Burgundy held by the Capetian house of Burgundy wasn't an appanage, in fact they even had the right of succession from/through the female line in absence of a male heir.
Maybe Anjou, Berry and Orléans are less contested examples of appanages.
Maybe Anjou, Berry and Orléans are less contested examples of appanages.
Appanges are a little more fluid in the early modern era; it wasn't until the the Estates at Blois codified things more clearly in 1566 regarding royal lands: that they couldn't be alienated, sold off, and ecetera, and appanges could still be granted, but were to be reunited with the royal domain in the absense of a male heir.
The Duchy of Burgundy was an appanage in the sense that it was part of the crown of France, annexed in 1004. Typically as the French kings expanded their base of power, so grew the royal domain. Burgundy was granted firstly to Robert, son of Robert II of France to settle the succession dispute, and was a Capetian as you said. The Duchy of Burgundy ruled by the Capetian Burgundians wasn't an appange in the traditional sense in that it was not granted by the king to a son or grandson, but was granted to settle a dispute with no stipulations attached to it often were with typical French appanages. The Capetian Burgundians were French vassals of course, but acted quite independently, and at least until the 13th century were more powerful and more wealthy. This line ended with Philip of Rouvres, who died at fifteen. From 1032 to 1361, they had ruled the Duchy in an unbroken line of male succession.
After his death, the reigning King of France Jean II successfully claimed the Duchy as the closest heir by proximity of blood, most obviously through the female line, but I'd argue his position of King of France was much more important. The House of Valois-Burgundy were granted Burgundy as a traditional appange. Their expanded their territories through various marriages, yes, gaining places such as Franche-Comté, Artois, Hainault, Holland, and Flanders, some territories which were fiefs within the kingdom and others were not. Charles the Bold's death gave Louis XI the opportunity he needed to reclaim the original territories that Jean II had granted to son Philip as an appanage. As they had been granted as such, legally they would return into the hands of the crown; the other territories acquired by the Dukes, be it through marriage, purchase, ect., would not, because they had not been granted by the king.
The big issue whether Burgundy is or was not an appange primarily comes from Philip of Rouvres will, where he stated that his "county, and to our possessions whatever they may be, those, male and female, who by law or local custom ought or may inherit." Because Burgundy by this time practiced simple primogeniture there was no way all of the territories would pass to one man or woman. All of Philip's territories had passed to him in different ways, which meant they would be inherited in different ways accorded to the customs of each of those fiefs: Auvergne and Boulogne passed to Jean de Boulogue, Philip's great-uncle; The County of Burgundy (that is, Franche-Comté) and Artois passed to his great-aunt, Margaret of France.
Burgundy was more complicated. Two succession laws were held as valid. Primogeniture, which is based on a line of succession, such as a grandson succeeding his grandfather as king because his father and the original heir had passed, rather than the king's second son, the grandson's uncle. The other was proximity of blood, such as in Artois where Robert II's death saw Mahaut, his eldest daughter succeed, rather than his grandson by his eldest son who was deceased.
Essentially, the actual Duchy had a super complicated succession issue because of overlapping laws and wills, and the two claimants more of less had equal right to claim Burgundy: the King of Navarre or the King of France. In the case of the end of Capetian Burgundy, it seems a case of 'might makes right' more than anything. Capetian Burgundy was definitely not an appange, but once it was taken by the King of France and given to his son as one, it was. But only the Duchy proper. The Free County was part of the empire, as were the acquisitions in the Lowlands. While Louis XI had a right to annex Burgundy (even if it was a low blow and dirty move: but hey, he's not the spider king for anything) he knew he had no right to the entirity of Mary's inheritance, hence his poor attempts to have her marry the Dauphin, his nine year old son.
A lot of butterflies from this one. Ferdinand might not marry Anne of Bohemia - that alliance is already secured through one of his sisters, and he'd be better off marrying in the West - Claudia of Valois per the Treaty of Blois 1504 and then when that fell through Mary Tudor of England. Which means that when King Louis fell at Mohacs his crowns would pass to whoever had wed Anne.
As for Carlotta - more likely named Isabella - she'd probably replace OTL Isabella as the wife of King Christian of Denmark, possibly bumping all of the other sisters' marriages up and leaving the very youngest to marry someone else new entirely.
As for Carlotta - more likely named Isabella - she'd probably replace OTL Isabella as the wife of King Christian of Denmark, possibly bumping all of the other sisters' marriages up and leaving the very youngest to marry someone else new entirely.
Any Idea what would happen to the Empire itself? Would Ferdinand divide the Habsburg dominions along the same lines as Charles?
I still believe that the house of Habsburg-Burgundy had a decent claim on the duchy of Burgundy , but I agree that it came down interpretations (it was given to the youngest son of the French king, but if it was considered an appanage) and 'might makes right'.
Still once Mary the Rich is an adult and has succeeded her father and suggestions that she should marry a minor even if he is a French prince are insulting; she in that situation needs a mature powerful husband, hence Maximilian was also a rational choice (and all OTL write that they were (or fell) passionately in love).
Still once Mary the Rich is an adult and has succeeded her father and suggestions that she should marry a minor even if he is a French prince are insulting; she in that situation needs a mature powerful husband, hence Maximilian was also a rational choice (and all OTL write that they were (or fell) passionately in love).
Last edited:
I agree, the Habsburg dynasty still had a decent claim on it based on the traditional will of Philip of Rouvres (which I assume would still be considered valid, as it concerned all his territories at the time -- hence the Duchy proper would go to Mary, not the King of France; whilst in Louis' view it was a traditional appanage and thus his as the Burgundian line was 'extinct' in the sense it had no legitimate males).
Louis' offer was indeed quite insulting and she also had to deal with the restless cities of Lowlands which had tired of the heavy handed rule of her father and grandfather, hence her need for a powerful husband not only to aid her against France, but in a way against her own subjects, too.
The Habsburgs definitely considered Burgundy theirs, given they still claimed the title and Charles V technically took it when he captured François Ier at Pavia. The fact he wanted the Duchy proper back shows that it was still considered important to the Habsburg family at least in the beginning of the 15th century. Had they been remained based in the Lowlands and never gained Spain, I have no doubt they would've continued to have an interest in it. (In my TL, the Prince of Peace, the Habsburgs are definitely interested in regaining it as a member of the tripartite alliance
).That's interesting regarding Mary. I knew she was fond of him but fortunately there's not much written on her... do you know any books on her in English? I have Mary of Burgundy; or the Revolt of Ghent in two volumes, by George Payne Rainsford James, Memoirs of Mary, the Young Duchess of Burgundy, and Her Contemporaries by Louisa Stuart Costello, both which are older books in the open domain and free to read on google books, but fortunately I haven't been able to find much else on her. A pity too, as I find her awfully interesting.