In general, as always, a very nice update, and it's impressive to see how the game is progressing.
As a little complaint, it's somewhat disappointing that - apparently; if Austria has indeed managed to gain Burgundy by an alternate turn of events during the game and this is not how the scenarios between 1477 and 1556 are set up, I apologise for the rant - Paradox has kept the incorrect setup for the Hapsburg Netherlands in the 16th century, although this has constantly been brought up in EU2 discussions. It is moddable, and sure as anything will be modded by the successor of the AGCEEP in one of its first versions, but still, it is just wrong for Austria to own the Netherlands anytime before the 18th century, and even more so in 1503 than in the 1480s, and I'd like to ask Paradox most humbly to reconsider this, because in my opinion it is a bad decision.
Just a few, very basic facts:
Basically, I'd like to know how having Austria own the Netherlands in 1503 (as a starting setup, and - if there are events- as the default outcome of events to simulate the fate of Burgundy) is supposed to be justified.
As a little complaint, it's somewhat disappointing that - apparently; if Austria has indeed managed to gain Burgundy by an alternate turn of events during the game and this is not how the scenarios between 1477 and 1556 are set up, I apologise for the rant - Paradox has kept the incorrect setup for the Hapsburg Netherlands in the 16th century, although this has constantly been brought up in EU2 discussions. It is moddable, and sure as anything will be modded by the successor of the AGCEEP in one of its first versions, but still, it is just wrong for Austria to own the Netherlands anytime before the 18th century, and even more so in 1503 than in the 1480s, and I'd like to ask Paradox most humbly to reconsider this, because in my opinion it is a bad decision.
Just a few, very basic facts:
- in 1477, after Charles the Bold's death, the Duchy passed to his daughter, Mary the Rich.
- When she married Maximilian of Hapsburg, he became her co-ruler, however it is worth noting that the Burgundian estates always insisted that the legal ruler was Mary, not Maximilian, and also that at that time Austria and the empire were still held by Maximilian's father, Friedrich III
- When Mary died by an accident in 1482, the duchy was inherited by the couple's son, Philipp the Handsome. Maximilian from 1482 to 1494 acted as regent for his son. It was always very clear that the Duchy that the legal monarch was Philipp and that the Duchy would be passed to him when he comes of age.
- It should be noted that after taking over Burgundy in 1494, Philipp pursued a very independent policy, for example concluding a treaty of neutrality with the King of France during the latter's war with his father Maximilian in Italy. As a matter of fact, after 1494, Burgundy in no way was in a political union with Austria.
- Of course, the longterm plan was to achieve such a union between Burgundy and Austria after Maximilian's death, when Philipp would be the heir to Austria and the Empire. This was however prevented by Philipp's untimely death in 1506.
- It is at least worth mentioning that in 1504, Philipp became king-consort of Castile, as husband of Queen Juana the Mad, in an almost identical arrangement to that in Burgundy between 1477 and 1482.
- When Philipp died, the Duchy passed to his minor son, the future Charles V, with his aunt Margaret - not Maximilian, nor Ferdinand of Aragon -, acting as regent until his coming of age in 1515. Margaret, during her regency, concluded a treaty of commerce with England and participated in the League of Cambrai - which, again, shows that Burgundy had complete international subjectivity.
Charles went on to inherit Aragon and replac Fernando as regent of Castile (for the insane Juana) in 1516 and suceeded Maximilian in Austria and the Empire in 1519 - In the treaties of Worms and Brussels in 1521, Charles' brother Ferdinand was ceded the Austrian lands and Wirtemberg, under the nominal suzerainty of his brother but for all effects acting as the ruler of Austria.
- so, what's the bottom line?
from 1477 to 1519, Austria and Burgundy had different legal rulers
they were effectively ruled jointly by Maximilian for one year, 1493, when he became emperor, to 1494, when he gave up the regency of Burgundy
Burgundy entered into personal union with Spain earlier - in 1516 - than it did with Austria
Burgundy and Austria were in effective personal union only from 1519 to 1521, although they both remained part of Charles' realm until 1556.
Basically, I'd like to know how having Austria own the Netherlands in 1503 (as a starting setup, and - if there are events- as the default outcome of events to simulate the fate of Burgundy) is supposed to be justified.
