Plausability Check: A Valois Emperor

First, let us say that Mary of Burgundy had been born a boy, for whom we'll refer to henceforth as *Philip IV. Let's also assume for one moment that Charles the Bold's career unfolds more or less as in OTL, and he is killed at Nancy in 1477 and succeeded by *Philip IV, who manages to make peace with all the people his father pissed off and focus on increasing his own wealth and power.

Taking all this into account, what are the chances that *Philip IV or one of his sons could displace the Habsburgs and gain the Imperial Crown in the next few decades? It seems that the Duke of Burgundy, with his wealth and power, would be very well placed to make a bid for Holy Roman Emperor, especially considering that at that time the Habsburgs would only have been elected to the imperial throne for one or maybe two generations...
 
I think *Philip IV will have a hard time to make peace with all the people his father pissed off... Especially with Louis XI, the Spider King of France, who would have done everything to keep Burgundy in check.

As for the Imperial Crown, I don't think the Duke of Burgundy is that well placed. Sure he is rich, but he isn't German, something the Electors won't like. Plus, I believe the Hapsburg were already pretty strong politically and that isn't going to change with Maximilian around.
 
I think *Philip IV will have a hard time to make peace with all the people his father pissed off... Especially with Louis XI, the Spider King of France, who would have done everything to keep Burgundy in check.

As for the Imperial Crown, I don't think the Duke of Burgundy is that well placed. Sure he is rich, but he isn't German, something the Electors won't like. Plus, I believe the Hapsburg were already pretty strong politically and that isn't going to change with Maximilian around.

But *Philip IV will probably be more Flemish than French. The Burgundian lands had begun revolving around Flanders since Charles the Bold, maybe further. Charles own granson was more Flemish then French or Austrian, and the Bolds ATL descemdents will be too barring them inheirting France.
 
But *Philip IV will probably be more Flemish than French. The Burgundian lands had begun revolving around Flanders since Charles the Bold, maybe further. Charles own granson was more Flemish then French or Austrian, and the Bolds ATL descemdents will be too barring them inheirting France.

Yes and no, though the Valois dukes of Burgundy did know Dutch, their court was (mainly) Francophone.
OTOH culture is more than language and in that regard you could argue that the influence of the Burgundian Netherlands was larger.

Furthermore given the Salic Law the house of Valois Burgundy has a higher claim than the house of Bourbon, so if they're still around then they will inherit France and not (yet) the house of Bourbon.
 
Why not just have François Ier outbid Charles V? Viola, Valois Emperor. Sure, Charles V has a lot on his side over the French King, but at that point there was not significant gold coming out of the Americas as many believed. American gold didn't win Charles his crown, it was Castilian Rents. He morgaged them successfully to the Fuggers for the funds needed. It probably helped that Charles V also neutered the pro-French party by driving the Duke of Wüttermburg into exile. Charles V was also not without his competition: The Pope was urging the Elector of Wittenburg to run and Henry VIII briefly tipped in his hat for prestige reasons.

Give Francis some better luck, thrawting Charles V's attempts in Wüttermburg and possibly having him sway the Fuggers instead by offering economic encentives, like perhaps a percentage of the Taille or Gabelle (both very lucarative taxes at the time), and he might beat Charles V. If say the Elector of Saxony does decide to play and Henry sticks it out for longer, perhaps the King of France can slim out a victory.

Having the Burgundian Valois is interesting, but Charles and his ancestors always seemed more interested in gaining a crown of their own, not the Imperial mantle. Charles the Bold nearly gained the crown of Burgundy but the Emperor tired of his arrogance and left Worms IIRC under the cover of night. I don't see why this male son wouldn't continue to pursue that claim.

Also agree with Jan; claims that Philip IV would be more "Flemish" is bogus. The Burgundian court was in the Lowlands, yes, but it was heavily francophone. Indeed, Charles V was too, and that was a big reason for the Revolt of the Comunneros because he brought all his foreign advisors to Spain. There were Flemings in his administration, yes, but the culture of the Burgundian court was first and foremost French. Flemish was still regarded as a vulgar tongue at the point. So be it François I or Philip IV* as Emperor, they'd be French speaking and at the head of a French speaking court. Very little seperated the Valois of the main branch of the Burgundian branch despite their dislike towards each other. They both spoke French and the Burgundian court model was widely copied abroad.

And also agreed; the language they speak means diggly squat. Even if they became Flemish, who would it disbar them from France? France followed Salic Law, not "you have to speak French" law. The surviving Burgundians are still superior to the Bourbons. Besides, Henri IV succeeded with no issues and even he was somewhat foreign, being King of Navarre and having been raised in the south of France. He was a real Gascon; he spoke with a lingering accent for the whole of his life.
 
Last edited:
Even today the old flemish nobolity speak a flawless french I would even go as far as saying they speak a better french then me who is francophone lol.
 
Even today the old flemish nobolity speak a flawless french I would even go as far as saying they speak a better french then me who is francophone lol.

It's really be interesting to get hands on a linguistic map of the Low Countries in the Renaissance period. France really was pretty widespread, esp. in urban cneters. Ofc, the Low Countries of yesteryear also include "core" French territories today, like Artois... :(
 
It's really be interesting to get hands on a linguistic map of the Low Countries in the Renaissance period. France really was pretty widespread, esp. in urban cneters. Ofc, the Low Countries of yesteryear also include "core" French territories today, like Artois... :(

The language border before 19th century was pretty stable, in fact until the 19th century Brussels was a Dutch speaking town with a bilingual elite.

The burghers of towns like Gent, Brugge, Antwerpen, Dordrecht etc. did speak Dutch and the estates demanded that their lord also spoke the local language. The nobility of the area certainly spoke the language too, but they (increasingly) spoke French too. Given the prestige (as court language) burgher elite became bilingual too; OTOH in the OTL baroque era the entire European elite at least knew French as a second language.
And French was not as uniform as today, dialects like Picard were influential too. Besides the local populace spoke their own French (Romance) dialects, just like the local populace in the Dutch speaking parts spoke Dutch (Germanic) dialects.

Artois and Flanders originally two French fiefs had long periods of being held by the same person.

Darkest Green: area where Dutch is spoken today.
Green: areas were Dutch was spoken in Germany (standard language from between the 17th and 19th century).
Lightest Green: formerly Dutch speaking areas (not that in parts in Germany it more was a governance language)

Verbreitungsgebiet_des_Niederländischen.PNG
 
Last edited:
Another image more focused on the South West. The Romance-Germanic Language in the 7th and 8th century used to be the blue line, but the current language border is the red line. (However the position of these Flemish dialects in France for a long time was problematic, but these are at least protected now.)

Kaartfransvlaanderen.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top