Talk:Charles the Bold

Sources and stuff

More sources

• Biographie universelle ancienne et moderne: Histoire par ordre alphabétique de la vie publique et privée de tous les hommes, vol V 56-562.
• Boehm, L., 'Burgundy and the Empire in the Reign of Charles the Bold', The International History Review (1979)
• Brown, A.,'Bruges and the Burgundian ‘Theatre-state’: Charles the Bold and Our Lady of the Snow', History (1999)
• Evans, J., 'The Garter of Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy', The Antiquaries Journal (1952)
• Mantel, G., The Encyclopedia of Diplomacy: Charles the Bold (1433-77)
• Smith, J., 'Portable Propaganda—Tapestries as Princely Metaphors at the Courts of Philip the Good and Charles the Bold', Art Journal (1989).
• Walsh, R., Charles the Bold and Italy 1467-1477: Politics and Personnel
• Weightmann, Margaret of York, Duchess of Burgundy, 1446-1503

Mine Puttnam and Vaughan to a far greater degreee than they are used already. Lose the old PD sources, and while biographies of Charles' contemporary rulers might be useful for gleaning material—particularly international relations—Charles Ross's or Michael Hicks's Edward IV would be more useful than JA-H. By that token, also look at James Cleugh's 1970 Chant Royal: The Life of King Louis XI, and find something about Fred III. Ceoil, have you done something on either his tomb or book of hours? And Johnbod, was it Max Ernst who did a curious thing with Jean Hatchett and Charles the Bold? If so, we can add that to 'Cultural depictions' section and get rid of some of those books. SN54129 15:10, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

I have Vaughan at hand but it's probably available at archives.org. Victoria (tk) 15:38, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

I have Bart van Loo, The Bugundians: A Vanished Empire, 2021, Head of Zeus, ISBN 9781789543438 (a lucky charity shop buy) with 65 pages on Charles' reign. He's not an academic historian though. Sorry "Max Ernst who did a curious thing with Jean Hatchett and Charles the Bold" rings no bell with me (or Google) - ok this. It is Jeanne Hachette, not "Jean". Johnbod (talk) 22:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

That produced the moronicwiki gem "She is currently known for an act of heroism on 27 June 1472, when she prevented the capture of Beauvais by the troops of Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy." Johnbod (talk) 01:55, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks both! Johnbod, I've never heard of 'moronicwiki' before (but then, IIRC, you were also the one who introduced me to 'cite banditry' too!), but thanks for listing that source here. I'm going to dig out a few in French too, there must be plenty. Yes, that collage was the Ernst piece I was thinking of, although on a re-read, I see that my original comment (Max Ernst... did a curious thing with Jean Hatchett and Charles the Bold) has a certain innuendo to it, fnarr fnarr! Thanks again, SN54129 14:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Copy edit questions

> Charles was around this age when he began partaking in public affairs of his father's duchy.

Is this the age of 8 when Philip appointed d'Auxy as Charles's guardian? Or is this in 1445 (age 12) when Charles accompanied Philip to Holland and Zealand?

He was born in 1433, so the latter.

> During the actual journey, Charles managed to break sixteen or eighteen lances and received prizes from two princesses.

What is the "actual journey"? Is this an actual tourney and not the practice tourney?

Yes, in that 'journey' is a mistransliteration for 'tourney'

> He returned to his lines before getting captured.

In the Battle of Montlhéry, Charles was not captured, correct? 🌊PacificDepths^talk|contrib 18:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

No he wasn't; does the article say so? I couldn't see it. Thanks for addressing the copy edit PacificDepths, much appreciated! ——Serial Number 54129 20:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

The prior wording was unclear. I tried to make it more clear.

About about the other questions about "actual journey" and Charles's age when he began to engage in public affairs? 🌊PacificDepths^talk|contrib 05:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

@PacificDepths: Indeed, I answered inline. ——Serial Number 54129 10:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello @PacificDepths, thanks for all the work! Regarding your questions, 1. the actual tourney is the correct wording. 2. The source itself does not actually specify his age. It says 'tender age' between 1440 and 1453. Amir Ghandi (talk) 09:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello User:Amir Ghandi and User:Serial Number 54129: I believe I have finished my copy edits. Please review for correctness. Some general thoughts:

• The article states that Charles struggled for power before he became Duke. There could be more examples.
• I'm confused about the enmity between Charles and de Croÿ.
• Background is still too long and can be shortened.

🌊PacificDepths^talk|contrib 05:46, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, @PacificDepths, can you please elaborate on your second point? What is confusing about the Charles-de Croy rivalry? Regarding your first point, I don't think there's anything else we can add. And unfortunately, I must disagree with you on the Background section. See Henry IV, whose background was twice as long as this article. Amir Ghandi (talk) 20:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

What was the cause of the feud between Charles and Philip de Croÿ? Was it a struggle for power in Philip the Good's court? Was it a suspicion of motives?

> Charles resented de Croÿ, whom he considered at fault for his father's humiliation by the king of France, as Charles VIII had reportedly bribed de Croÿ numerous times.

When was Philip the Good humiliated? And is Charles VIII correct? If it's the French monarch contemporaneous with Philip the Good, would it be Charles VII? I might rewrite this as:

> Charles suspected that Philip de Croÿ accepted money from Charles VII to undermine Philip the Good.

For other points, that's fine. 🌊PacificDepths^talk|contrib 00:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

That's a good amendment. Done. Amir Ghandi (talk) 11:00, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Bart van Loo

Hello, @User talk:Serial Number 54129, with the copyediting done, I was thinking to nominate the article for FAC, though I have one concern. It seems Bart van Loo's book, The Burgundians: A Vanished Empire is not considered a reliable source. Will I have to delete this source all together? Amir Ghandi (talk) 11:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

"Seems" how? I'd think it is reliable for facts, but rather opinionated. Johnbod (talk) 12:56, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

It might be my misunderstanding but it seems this discussion deems the source as unacademic. Amir Ghandi (talk) 13:21, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Well it isn't an academic work for sure - nor are others you use. Quoting from that discussion "...a topic with more than its fair share of Serious Academic Commentary. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!)". The trouble is, Van Loo's 8 page introductory note to his 20 page bibliography lists 4 biographies in French and 2 in German from recent(ish) years. None of these are used here (though some articles etc by the same authors are). I don't think the copyediting is done btw - not to FAC standards. The English needs attention. Johnbod (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Of the books, I can only find two others (Potter and Querengässer) that I might be slightly leery of—but not badly so, and among everything else, that's pretty insignificant. There is no major problem with Van Loo as long as he's not given weight over, say, Vaughan. And the articles and 'paedias used are all high quality. I agree with JB wrt the copyedit. It's a great improvement, but not so great it cannot be further improved. SerialNumber54129 14:38, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Dubious

Hey, @User:Cplakidas, here is a direct quote from the source regarding the Trebizond claim: "Charles the Bold’s meeting with the despot of the Morea in October I475 was not without significance. As we shall see in a moment, it was quickly followed by talk of transferring to the duke of Burgundv the titles to Constantinople and Trebizond: and, for the present discussion, it suffices to say that, with the demise of other claimants from the lines of Palaiologos and Comnenos, the rights to the empires of both Constantinople and Trebizond now reposed with the descendants of Thomas Palaiologos (died 1465). the last effective despot of the Morea and brother of the last emperor of Constantinople, Constantine IX. Clearly the despot who visited Charles the Bold was a son of Thomas Palaiologos, but which of the two it was, Andrew or Manuel, is difficult to say" Amir Ghandi (talk) 11:25, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Amir Ghandi, that sounds more plausible, as Trebizond alone is odd for a Palaiologos. I had a look at the article on Andreas Palaiologos, and there the question as to who offered what is actually answered: "By 1475, at the age of 22, Andreas had begun offering to sell his claims to the imperial thrones of both Constantinople and Trebizond (the Empire of Trebizond being a Byzantine successor state which lasted until 1461), writing letters to several rulers, including the King of Naples (Ferdinand I) and possibly the Duke of Milan (Galeazzo Maria Sforza) and the Duke of Burgundy (Charles)." I would suggest taking up the reference used there into the article on Charles. Constantine ✍ 15:17, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Done, thanks for the suggestion. I went ahead and removed the tag Amir Ghandi (talk) 17:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Charles the Bold/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Amir Ghandi (talk · contribs) 07:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Borsoka (talk · contribs) 09:25, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comments

• ...in the city of Dijon Specify that it was the capital of the Duchy.
• Link Philipp the Bold and Isabella of Portugal when they are first mentioned. Perhaps you can also mention that she was his third wife.
• Perhaps you could introduce his father as the ruler of several duchies and counties, mentioning that some of them were located in France, others in the Holy Roman Empire.
• ...within days from his birth Delete (no actual information).
• ...and made his son a knight of the Golden Fleece, a knightly order created by him in 1430. The infant also became the count of Charolais, a title given to the heirs of the dukes of Burgundy. 1. I think the last part of the first sentence and the first part of the second sentence could be consolidated, and info about the Order of the Golden Fleece and the county could presented in a separate sentence. Please also clarify that Charolais was located in France.
• Introduce Count Charles I of Nevers and Antoine I de Croÿ (perhaps as two aristocrats/noblemen..).
• ...who was Philip the Good's stepson from his second wife, Bonne of Artois Why not past perfect? From? Link Bonne.
• ...the young Charles... Young? He was about one year old.
• The Duchess and her son descended the mountains in April 1435, after the plague had receded. Afterwards, they travelled to Paris to join Philip the Good. Consolidate the two sentences only leaving the most relevant pieces information (She brought him to Paris after the plague).
  • Done with those above

    The Duchess and her son travelled to Paris to join Philip the Good. When? I think this happened after the plague.

    • Added
• En route, they passed through Bruges.... In 1436, when Isabella and her entourage were to leave the city... The second sentence suggests me that they stayed in Bruges for several days/weeks/months.
  • Changed the word 'passed' for 'stayed'. I'm half-minded about chaging it to 'sojourned', because I think that conveys the meaning better
• ...forcefully stopped and arrested... One verb is enough.
  • Done

  I still do not understand the above sentences. Were they passing for days/weeks/years through Bruges before they were to leave the city in 1436? Why are the two verbs necessary? I would summarize the whole story in one sentence: "When they reached Bruges in 1436, they were arrested by rebels who had taken control of the city.", or something similar

Now, I stop the review and suggest you to seek a thorough and comprehensive copyedit at the guild of copy editors because the prose could be improved. Please ping me when the copyedit was completed. Borsoka (talk) 09:55, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@Borsoka But the article has already been through copyeditting by someone from the guild. Amir Ghandi (talk) Amir Ghandi (talk) 10:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

• Sorry, but I think a new copyedit is needed because it is hard to understand. I guess that some prose could be deleted and some sentences could be consolidated. Borsoka (talk) 10:02, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

  Okay then. I'll enlist this in GOCE Amir Ghandi (talk) 10:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comments: @Borsoka and Amir Ghandi: Where are we regarding the status of this article? It's been a while since this review was updated and with the GANR backlog drive coming up I want to make sure all potential articles are able to be included. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 23:04, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
  • I comprehensive copyedit is needed before the review. Borsoka (talk) 04:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

    Hey @Borsoka, just wanted to let you know that the copy edit has been completed. I will go on to address your above points. Amir Ghandi (talk) 08:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

    • Thank you for pinging me. I will continue the review on Saturday at the latest. Borsoka (talk) 04:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• ...her dowry... Dowry? Margaret was her father's heir.
  • The source uses this wording: "Margaret brought more in her dowry than the prospect of the territories ruled by her father"

    So, not the lands formed her dowry.

    • Changed the sentence
• The division of his father's lands amongst his sons... Rephrase to avoid misunderstanding (who is who?)
  • Done
• ...began his territorial expansion... I would clarify that these are in France to introduce the Burgundian-French treaty (in a previous sentence we are informed that he abstained himself from French politics).
  • Done
• ... in exchange of 132,000 écus Delete.
  • Done
• The term Lotharingia and the link is misleading: this is Lower Lotharingia. Borsoka (talk) 05:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Done
• ...was described as... By whom?
• He showed an interest in martial matters and military operations early in his life; by the age of two... Sorry, but for me this is very funny: did the two-year-old infant show interest in martial matters and operations? I would delete the first part of the sentence.
  • Deleted
• ...the daughter of John the Fearless I think her relationship to Philip the Good is more prominent, taking into account that we do not know who John the Fearless is.
  • With John introduced in Background, does this need any changes?
• ...Agnes was more prominent in Charles's early education Some explanation?
• Agnes and Charles were constantly in his mother's company. Delete (uninformative and obviously wrong, as I could list situations when his mother was probably alone).
• ...the Valois royal family... Link Valois and refer to France.
  • I delted the sentence, since it was reduntant now with the Background section existing.
  • Done
• ...in his new ally... Ally? We are informed about a reconciliation in the previous sentence.
• ...wedded children... Could you rephrase?
  • Done
• Could you name the governess?
• ...according to the wedding accounts,... Delete.
  • Done
• ...his father's duchy. Only the Duchy of Burgundy?
  • Changed to 'realm'
• Link Holland and Zeeland. Why are these two territories important (I mentioned above that you should introduce Philip the Good as the ruler of dozens of provinces.)
  • Done in the Background section
• Introduce Olivier de la Marche.
  • This part was deleted, see below for the reason
• ...their count... Was Charles their count?
  • The source meant Philip the Good, therefore I deleted the sentence
• Reduce the first paragraph of section "Youth" by 50-60%: they loved each other, she died of an illness.
  • Deleted
• The spectacle excited Philip the Good but caused Isabella of Portugal to worry for her son's safety. Delete.
  • Deleted
• ...and received prizes from two princesses Delete or explain their relevance in Charles's life.
  • Deleted
• In his honour, heralds cried the well-known French battle cry, Montjoie Saint Denis! (which was also the motto of the Kingdom of France). Is this highly relevant? I would delete it.
  • Deleted
• Why is "burghers" italicised. Link the term.
  • Isn't it a foreign term?

• • I have never seen it italicised in English sources.
    • Changed

• ...to renew the Treaty of Arras (which had been broken by the death of Catherine of France) by marrying his niece to his son. I do not understand: how could the marriage of his niece and his son renew a treaty between France and Burgundy? Borsoka (talk) 09:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  This is the wording of the source: "Philip was pleased with his strategy, assuming that with this Bourbon marriage he had now repaired the French alliance of Arras, made tn 1435, which had since become so tattered by military, economic, and judicial threats from Charles VII." Amir Ghandi (talk) 12:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

• The source does not say that the marriage between his niece and son served for the renewal of the treaty, but the marriage between a Bourbon and his son. (That the Bourbon was also his niece is not important in context.) Borsoka (talk) 02:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Changed to Bourbon

• From 1454 to 1464, Charles was excluded from power—the ducal council and the Burgundian court—by his father, Philip the Good. I am not sure I understand the relevance of the sentence. Why this timeframe is set? Previous heirs to the throne were members of the ducal council? What is the ducal council? I would delete the sentence.
  • This is the wording of the source: "During the whole decade 1454-1464, when Charles was excluded from power, from the ducal council and even from court" I can add a note explaining the ducal council.

    Rephrase to avoid close paraphrasing. Borsoka (talk) 08:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

• Even as regent, Charles held little to no power compared to his mother, the duchess, and his father. Some context? ("His mother could..., but he could only..."). I do not understand the reference to his father: his father was the reigning duke. Do you want to say that Charles did not have full ducal power?
• Nevertheless, Charles still was able to issue documents in his own name. Some context? People usually issue documents in their own name.
• Philip de Croÿ, who was high bailiff of Hainault and a member of the influential House of Croÿ. Rephrase to avoid repetition of his family name.
  • Done
• Where is Dendermonde?
  • Amended

    Sorry, I was not clear. Where was Dendermonde? Why did he flee there?

• He attempted to formalise his status as the heir to ... What does this mean?
• Introduce Chastellain.
  • Done
• So, in 1463, according to Georges Chastellain, he turned to his employees and asked those who could pay for themselves to stay with him, and those who could not to leave him until he could afford to pay them. His staff replied that they would live and die with him. They offered him a share of their money so that the estate could function normally. Charles had tears in his eyes and expressed his gratitude to his staff. I would dramatically shorten this story.
  • Done

    According to Burgundian court chronicler...According to German historian... Rephrase to avoid repetition.

• ...to their surprise,... Delete. Borsoka (talk) 11:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Deleted
• Link Dauphin of France. Capitalise all references to him in the text.
• Philip saw his guest as an opportunity... Rephrase.
• Philip saw his guest as an opportunity to mend his relations with the crown and took the dauphin in, indulging him with kindness, showing humility, and refusing all the king's requests to send the dauphin back. Shorten.
• ...to mend his relations with the crown ... refusing all the king's requests to send the dauphin back... Contradiction.
• Charles VII attempts to regain his son failed. He reportedly said: "My cousin Burgundy is feeding a fox who will eat up all his chickens". Delete.
• In contrast to Louis's friendship with Philip the Good,... Delete.
• ...Louis and Charles disliked each other. However, Charles asked the dauphin to be godfather to his daughter, Mary. Consolidate.
• ...with the crown... Which crown? Capitalise crown.

@Amir Ghandi: after reading more and more sections, I think the article still needs significant improvements. My above comments show that the text often contain details that are totally irrelevant from the perspective of Charles's life, on the other hand in some cases the article does not provide the reader with context. I highly appreciate your hard work, but I have become convinced that the article is to be failed. I suggest you request a peer review to get some inspiration for improving the article. I would say that the text should radically be condensed. Thereafter put yourself in our readers' shoes: they have almost no information of Charles, Burgundy and 15th-century European history, so they need some context to understand the article. Borsoka (talk) 08:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Image review

• File:La Duchesse de Bourgogne arrêtée aux portes de Bruges - Sophie Rude - MBA Lyon 2014.JPG: US PD tag is needed at Commons.
  • Done
• File:Jacques de Guise, Chroniques de Hainaut, frontispiece, KBR 9242 (c).jpg: US PD tag is needed; the source link at Commons is not specific enough (I would name the manuscript and add a page).
  • Done
• File:Recueil d'Arras fol 061.jpg: US PD tag is needed.
  • Deleted
• File:Bataille de Montlhéry.jpg: the source link is not safe.
  • Changed the image
• File:Charles le Téméraire en tenue de deuil noire.jpg: US PD tag is needed.
  • Done
• File:Londra, corona di margherita di york e cofanetto, ante 1461, 01.jpg: I would delete this picture (it is relevant for Margaret, but not for Charles).
  • Done
• File:Burgundian lands.jpg: the source should specified at Commons; the Duchy of Burgundy and some other territories were part of France (in contrast with the caption).
  • Changed the image
• File:Karte Haus Burgund 4 EN.png: a reliable source is needed at Commons.
  • Done
• File:166Friedrich III und Karl von Burgund.jpg: US PD tag is needed.
  • Done
• File:SOAOTO - Folio 074R.jpg: the source at Commons is a dead link; US PD tag is needed.
• File:Heeresordnung1473 fol 5r.jpg: the Commons contains a dead link; US PD tag is needed.
• File:Armure de Charles le Téméraire.jpg: I would delete it. If not, source and US PD tag are needed.
• File:Deutsche Geschichte5-310.jpg: US PD tag is needed.
• File:The Siege of Neuss by Charles the Bold in 1475. Museum Hof van Busleyden, Mechelen, Belgium.jpg: the source is a dead link at Commons; US PD tag is needed.
• File:Berner Schilling, B. 3, S. 170 (Ausschnitt).jpg: I would delete this picture (a meeting between the two is already illustrated in the article)
• File:Luzerner Schilling Battle of Grandson.jpg: US PD tag is needed. Borsoka (talk) 09:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

@Borsoka, I deleted the first two paragraphs of the Youth section in order to introduce a Background section into the article. Any thoughts? Amir Ghandi (talk) 16:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

• I like the new section. Borsoka (talk) 05:33, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Source review

• Academic sources of high standard are cited, including important monographies about Charles's life. Tertiary sources are also cited but the article is predominantly verified by secondary sources.
• Section "Books": add oclc to each title (or delete them).
• Section "Articles": add issn to each title. Decide whether mention or ignore the publisher at each title.
• Section "Encyclopedias": Hemelryck - place of publication is missing. Borsoka (talk)
  • Done with all

Partially reverted dashes script edit on Charles the Bold

Hi, I've partially reverted your edit on Charles the Bold, as it affected the ISSN numbering of 4 references. Per Template:Cite web#Identifiers, the issn/eissn parameters only accept hyphens, not en-dashes, otherwise it breaks the auto-generated WorldCat links. Can you look at updating your dashes script to not change instances of hyphens if they are within an eissn, isbn, ismn and issn parameter? Thanks Harryboyles 15:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)