The Low Countries without the Valois-Burgundy?

What would have been the fate of the Low Countries if they had not been unified by the house of Burgundy? Would they have stayed divided as they had been for most of the Middle Ages or would another power come along and pull the various principalities together into a major state?

I've been reading about the Low Countries in the first stage of the Hundred Years War, and the lack of political cohesion in Edward III's anti-French coalition is remarkable, with various princes switching sides and playing the French and the English off each other.

It occurs to me that any successful unification of the Low Counties would have to be based around Flanders, as Flanders was by far the wealthiest and most populous state in the region (although manifestly unstable). Since Flanders was on the path to being absorbed into France after the reign of Phillip the Fair, it would seem to me that any unified Low Countries post 1300 would be heavily under French influence. Is there a state in Germany with the strength and proximity to unify the Low Countries? Perhaps a more successful House of Luxembourg reasserting itself west of the Rhine?

Anyway, let the discussion begin!
Scipio
 
Brabant is just as good as Flanders, and will only grow richer in the 15th century.

IMO, the House of Dampierre or the House of Brabant and maybe the House of Avesnes (Holland & Hainaut) could have pulled it of with no more difficulties than the Valois-Burgundy if they hadn't become extinct in the male line. You could peacefully unite 2/3 of the Low Countries with just two inheritances if you get lucky. Pick one of those three dynasties, have a surviving son, let the others die out as in OTL, arrange 2-3 good marriages, and you have a personal union between Brabant, Limburg, Flanders, Holland, Zeeland & Hainaut as a minimum. Depending on the POD, you could add Nevers, Rethel, Artois as well.

In any case, French influence would be an issue, but there's still the HYW to keep France busy/leave it in a weakened state.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Wouldn't the Low Countries still be considered "German" in that case. It would also create interesting butterflies with the Habsburgs never getting their richest provinces, and thus probably weaken the Holy Roman Empire as a whole (and the power of the emperors would be alot weakened).
 
Historically, the Burgundians controlled many, but not all of the Netherlands. It was Charles V that completed the union of the Netherlands after defeating the Duke of Guelders. I think that a powerful/competent ruler gaining control over two or more of the most powerful states (Flanders, Holland, Brabant and Guelders) would stand a chance at uniting the rest of the counties.
 
Indeed, perhaps Flanders or Brabant would be able to unify the region by themselves. However, there was a lot of resistance against the Burgundians, and I wonder if princes with less resources could have been successful.
Also, yes, it is true that Charles V was the person to complete the unification, the Low Countries coalesced into a cohesive political unit under Phillip the Good of Burgundy.
Perhaps in another scenario, only Flanders, Brabant, Holland and Hainaut (with their dependancies) would be joined together, but this principality would exclude Luxembourg and the territories in the Rhine delta. This was the extent of Phillip the Good before he annexed Luxembourg.
Scipio
 
Wouldn't they fell pray to the french?

I think the 100 years war would prevent the French from truly gaining influence.

In the long run it all depends on who will gain control over the Netherlands. I can see two interesting ways the Netherlands could develop.

First, Jacqueline of Bavaria, member of the House of Wittelsbach, became Countess of Holland, Zeeland and Hainault, but was forced to give her titles to Charles the Bold. If the House of Burgundy would be out of the picture, the titles could have remained into the Wittelsbach family.

The other possibility, around the time Charles V inherited his title, the Arnold, Duke of Guelders had started a campaign that conquered much of the Northeastern Netherlands (up to Friesland and Groningen). If he could have consolidated his gains, he would have been one of the most powerful rulers in the region.
 
Wouldn't they fell pray to the french?

I think the 100 years war would prevent the French from truly gaining influence.

In the long run it all depends on who will gain control over the Netherlands. I can see two interesting ways the Netherlands could develop.

First, Jacqueline of Bavaria, member of the House of Wittelsbach, became Countess of Holland, Zeeland and Hainault, but was forced to give her titles to Charles the Bold. If the House of Burgundy would be out of the picture, the titles could have remained into the Wittelsbach family.

The other possibility, around the time Charles V inherited his title, the Arnold, Duke of Guelders had started a campaign that conquered much of the Northeastern Netherlands (up to Friesland and Groningen). If he could have consolidated his gains, he would have been one of the most powerful rulers in the region.
 
Top