CHARLES THE BOLD
For France had recovered from her trials; and when he succeeded his father, Charles, surnamed the Bold, was confronted by an adversary all the more formidable that, through his impulsive temperament, he literally played into the hands of the cunning French king. Faced, as Philip had been, by the opposition of the Communes and by the separatist tendencies of certain towns, the new duke, scorning diplomacy, tried to impose his will through sheer force and terrorism. The sack of Dinant in 1466 was destined to serve as an example to Liége, where the agents of King Louis maintained a constant agitation. Two years later, the duke obliged his rival to witness the burning and pillage of the latter city, which had revolted for a second time, following the instigations of the French.
Charles might have resisted his enemy's intrigues, if he had limited his ambitions to the Low Countries. Like his father, he entered into negotiations with the Emperor with the hope of acquiring the title of king. His Burgundian domains were separated from the Low Countries by Alsace and Lorraine. Had he been able to join Low and High Burgundy through these lands, he would have very nearly reconstituted the old kingdom of Lotharingia, by unifying all the borderlands lying between France and Germany, from the North Sea to the Mediterranean. The success of such an enterprise might have had incalculable consequences. But Charles was the last man to succeed in an endeavour requiring at least as much skill and diplomacy as material resources. He obtained rights upon Alsace and conquered Lorraine, but fell an easy prey to Louis XI's artifices by launching an expedition against the Swiss. Defeated at Granson and Morat, he was killed before Nancy, leaving the whole responsibility of his heavy succession to his young daughter Mary.
According to Philip de Commines: "He tried so many things that he could not live long enough to carry them through, and they were indeed almost impossible enterprises." But his external policy remained all through perfectly consistent. He was a faithful friend to the House of York and gave his support to Edward IV, with whom he intended to divide France, had he succeeded in conquering Louis.
POSITION OF BELGIUM
Philip the Good, by his work of territorial consolidation, had succeeded in obliterating from the map of Europe the frontier of the Scheldt, which, since the Treaty of Verdun, had divided the country between France and Germany. Charles the Bold failed in reconstituting the short-lived kingdom of Lotharius, which had stood, for a few years, as a barrier between the two rival Powers. Such a dream was indeed outside the scope of practical politics, though, considered from the point of view of language and race, it was not entirely unjustifiable, the population of the Rhine sharing with that of the Low Countries both their Romanic and Germanic characteristics, and asserting from time to time their desire to lead a free and independent life. This desire was never fulfilled, owing partly to the main direction of the line of race-demarcation running from north to south, parallel to the political frontier, and partly to the narrowness of the strip of territory involved. Had such a boundary extended through Belgium along the Scheldt, for instance, instead of being deflected from Cologne to Boulogne, the same result would have occurred. Belgium owes her independent state to the presence of the Coal Wood which, in the fourth century, broke the invaders' efforts along a line running from east to west across political frontiers, not parallel to them. Thanks to the exceptional richness of her widespread plain, easily accessible from the sea, she remains, in modern times, as the last fragment of the great Empire of Lotharius, which, for a few years, gathered under one rule all the borderlands of Western Europe.