The Story of Nations - Holland/Chapter 4
Philip, misnamed the Good, that crafty, splendid, thrifty duke, died in 1467, and was succeeded by his son, well named Charles the Headstrong (le Téméraire). The father began to destroy the liberties of the Netherlands; the son completed the work—the one with caution, the other with ferocious brutality. Philip had practically held the balance between England and France. His alliance had almost secured the conquest of France by the English, his defection had secured France to the French. But he had done too much harm to France to be really trusted by the French king, and too much service to be ever adequately compensated. In the later years of his life he had given an asylum to the Dauphin, afterwards Louis XI., between whom and his father the deepest and most natural distrust existed. Louis XI., who became king of France in 1461, played with matchless cunning against the violence of his quondam friend, Charles, as soon as he succeeded to his dukedom, baffled all his projects, enticed him to his ruin, and appropriated the French provinces of his only daughter and heir.
The principal object which Charles had before him was to make himself a king, the monarch of a long tract of country which stretched from the German Ocean to the Mediterranean. To this object he clung with a tenacity of purpose which characterized no other of his projects. But he held his dominions under two overlords. The Emperor of Germany had nominal rights over the Netherlands, and according to the law of Europe of that time, and for a long time after, was the sole manufacturer of new kings. Perhaps he might have succeeded in negotiating the matter with Frederic the Third, called the Lazy, who ruled over the German Empire for fifty-three years, only he thought the emperor’s son not good enough for his daughter, to whom indeed she was married after the death of Charles.
But he had another sort of person to deal with in Louis the Crafty. For three centuries the French kings had been engaged persistently in securing their dominion over the whole of France, and in putting down the arrogance of their nobles. Philip Augustus had deprived John of half his continental possessions, and would have expelled him from the whole, only John’s mother being still alive, he could not deprive her of her inheritance. Charles V., called the Wise, had completed the conquest. Two generations afterwards, and the English kings had not only regained their ancient possessions, but had even been called to the French throne. Again had they been expelled, just before Louis the Crafty had come to the throne. He was not likely to allow the fundamental principle of the French monarchy, viz., to assimilate and unite to France all that was or had been French territory, to be set at naught.
There was nothing which Louis would not promise or swear. His promises cost him nothing to break as soon as he could break them with safety. His oath was as good as his word, and both were worth nothing. Curious inquirers speculated on what oath would bind his conscience, and professed to have discovered it in a particular title of the Virgin Mary. But there is grave doubt on this subject. Now what could a wild headstrong duke, who took counsel with nothing but his own passions, and turned everything to the objects of his personal ambition, do against this cool, crafty, perfidious monarch, on whom no law, human or divine, had any binding force, who saw so clearly through his rival’s designs and could turn even his successes against him? The French nobles stirred up the war of the Public good, and Charles took their part. He vanquished Louis at the battle of Montlhéry (1465) and Louis gained all the advantages of victory. In 1468, Louis took the unaccountable step of throwing himself into the power of his enemy. As he was at Peronne news came of the rising of Liége and he was imprisoned. He had to make terms with his foe; he seemed to be vanquished, but he came out in the end victorious.
The ambition, the wars, the prodigality of Charles left him no resource but to pillage the Netherlands. His pride, his insolence, his ferocity, displayed in childhood before Bruges, led him to oppress them. He could not endure the appearance of resistance to his will, or even the possibility of it. He centralized a despotism in Holland, governed the country by his deputies, and taxed it at his pleasure. He removed its supreme court from the Hague to Mechlin, where the Court would be under his control, and he maintained a standing army against the liberties of the states.
The unfortunate constitution of the Netherlanders destined through the war of independence, and for centuries afterwards to induce weakness in their counsels, and disunion among themselves, aided theprojects of Charles, as it did that of Margaret, of Alva, of Requesens, of Parma.
The Flemish towns were practically little republics, though not so in form. They were busy, energetic, populous. But except in the fact that they were eager to vindicate their privileges, they had no other common purpose. Flanders had no national unity; on the contrary, the several cities were isolated, suspicious, and jealous of each other. It even seems that their commercial rivalry was so keen from time to time, as to make one city such as Ghent or Bruges contented or even pleased at the depression or even ruin of the other. A shrewd and active despot could therefore destroy the liberties of the Netherlands, by attacking the cities in detail, being pretty sure that the imperilled liberties, say of Bruges, would not seriously awaken the sympathies or secure the active assistance of Ghent.
Again, though this mischief was not developed till a later day, the Netherlanders suffered from the misfortune of a titled and powerful aristocracy, which though often turbulent, was extravagant, violent, and treacherous. We shall see when we part company with the ten obedient provinces, and confine ourselves entirely to the history of Holland, that the folly, the extravagance, and the treachery of the Flemish nobles was a principal factor in the imperfect success of William of Orange and his energetic son. In the struggle which the Italian republics made for liberty it was soon discovered that the nobles could not be trusted. They were therefore excluded from all share in the government. In course of time the Florentines went further, and got rid of a turbulent, treacherous, or dangerous citizen, by putting him into the ranks of the nobility and thereby effacing him. It would have been well for the Netherlands had such a policy been adopted in their estates.
At first, Charles the Headstrong treated his Flemish subjects with greater kindness than any of their previous overlords. His father, as has been stated above, declared himself free from the obligations of his predecessors, and from the conditions under which he had entered into their inheritance. There is little doubt that the emissaries of Louis the Crafty stirred up the Netherlanders to demand the restoration of their privileges. He wished to find his most dangerous enemy employment, and to prevent him from meddling again in the affairs of France. But at first Charles disappointed him. He was, to be sure, secretly indignant with the people of Ghent, on account of the danger they had put him in, and the promises they constrained him to make. However, he confirmed the privileges of the towns to Ghent, to Brussels, to Brabant, to Antwerp, to Malines, and to a host of others.
This moderation did not last long. The people of Liége rebelled and were subdued. Charles deprived them of their municipal rights, and forced the other Flemish cities to surrender theirs. He superseded their magistrates, and exacted taxes from them without waiting for their consent, or respecting their refusal. The burghers of Liége broke out with a new rebellion, and that at the moment when Louis the Crafty, who was charged, perhaps justly, with having roused this revolt, was in the power of Charles at Peronne, a place where Charles the Simple, a former king of France, had been imprisoned and murdered 560 years before. For a time it was feared that Charles would follow the ancient precedent. But he took counsel, compelled Louis to accept humiliating conditions, and, among other particulars, to renounce all sovereignty over the French provinces of the duchy of Burgundy, and all interference in the affairs of the Netherlands. Louis was forced to comply, and even to take part in the punishment of Liége. From henceforth the Duke of Burgundy found no obstacle to his projects against the liberties of the Netherlanders, and in particular he established a complete military despotism in Holland.
At last Charles the Headstrong quarrelled with the Swiss. He had appointed one Hagembach as his deputy in a district of Alsace which was frequented by Swiss merchants. The deputy plundered them, and Charles paid no attention to the complaints of the Swiss envoys. In 1474, the inhabitants of Brisach captured Hagembach, tried him, and executed him. On November 13th, they first came into collision with the Burgundians, near Hericourt, and routed them decisively.
Charles did not attack them in person till the beginning of the year 1476. On March 3rd, he met them at Granson, near the Lake of Neufchâtel. When the battle had raged near six hours, when no impression had been made on the mountaineers, and some of the best of the Burgundian captains had fallen, the mist which hung over the battle rose, and the astonished army of Charles saw the second division of the Swiss peasants descending upon them, fresh and eager for the fight. A panic seized the Burgundian army; Charles himself was hurried away in the rout, and all his treasure fell into the hands of the Swiss. His diamonds, we are told, were sold by the captors for trifling sums. They imagined that his vessels of gold and silver were copper and tin. Of these diamonds the three largest came ultimately into the possession of the Pope, the Emperor of Germany, and the King of France, and are still in the tiara and crowns of these potentates.
The soldiers of Charles, whom he summoned to his standard by the threat of punishing them as deserters, reassembled at Lausanne, and marched to Morat, near Berne. Thither the Swiss confederates also marched. On June 22nd, the battle was joined, and the Swiss again defeated Charles, with immense slaughter. Charles again had to fly, and did not draw bridle till he reached the Lake of Geneva.
He was beside himself with rage, and henceforth his actions were those of a madman. He had been twice beaten by peasants whom he despised, and had lost his treasures and artillery. The rich cities of the Netherlands could make good his losses, and he resolved on a third attempt. On October 22nd, he undertook the siege of Nancy. On Christmas Day the Swiss marched to relieve it. On January 5th, he met his enemies and perished. Two days afterwards his body was discovered, or was thought to be discovered, amid a heap of slain, and frozen into a muddy stream. The end of no person in that age was more tragic. He seemed at one time to be the foremost man in Europe.
Louis the Crafty at once despoiled his daughter of her French possessions, and wished to get the guardianship of her and her patrimony in the Netherlands. But the Netherlanders knew the old fox too well by this time. They thought that they might recover their liberties from her; they knew that his rule would be even worse than that of Charles.