AHC: Crown an 'Emperor of the Netherlands'

[yeetboy]

The Netherlands historically had a history of a power struggle between the monarch-like stadtholder faction and the republic faction. The challenge is to create a Netherlands where not only do the Netherlands become a monarchy, but control enough territory/prestige and crown themselves an emperor. The only rule is the empire has to be named such that the Netherlands is the primary nation in the title.

 

[Atterdag]

Easiest way is probably have the Dutch monarch also be Emperor of Indonesia, like how the British were Emperors of India.

 

[Arcavia]

Easiest way is probably have the Dutch monarch also be Emperor of Indonesia, like how the British were Emperors of India.

If it has to be Continental Europe, I feel like a Burgundy wank is the best possible approach

 

[Nagisaki]

Easiest way is probably have the Dutch monarch also be Emperor of Indonesia, like how the British were Emperors of India.

Considering that the British only got the title after dethroning the Mughals, is there anyone the Dutch can dethrone to claim the Emperorship of Indonesia?

 

[EnvarKadri]

The title of Emperor doesn't just land on the head of monarchs with a lot of land. The Hohenzollern and Habsburg took it by claiming to be the successors of the Holy Roman Empire. The russians claimed it by proclaiming themselves third Rome and successors of the Eastern Roman Empire. And Napoleon proclaimed himself Emperor by making an analogy of the french republic with the roman one. So the idea of emperorship in Europe steams from the romans and by proclaiming yourself that you claim a symbolic heritage. Proclaiming yourself emperor outside of europe is easier as europeans associated the term empire with large realms outside europe. Thats why you could go proclaiming yourself emperor of Brazil/Mexico/India without any relations with roman heritage.

 

[Analytical Engine]

If the Netherlands keeps the Cape, maybe they proclaim an Empire of South Africa?

 

[EnvarKadri]

If the Netherlands keeps the Cape, maybe they proclaim an Empire of South Africa?

I think OP wants the Netherlands as an european empire, not overseas one.

 

[Atterdag]

The Hohenzollern and Habsburg took it by claiming to be the successors of the Holy Roman Empire.

This it not true for the Hohenzollerns, they did not claim heritage from the HRE.

 

[pompejus]

The problem is that OTL Netherlands was too republican. It only became a kingdom because republics were disliked in 1815. I think the Netherlands at least needs more of a monarchical tradition. It needs to be a monarchy from the start.

Maybe Elisabeth I actualy accepts the crown of the Netherlands during the Dutch revolt. The Anglo-Dutch consolodates the Netherlands and expands into Germany including capturing Aachen. The HRE gets into trouble and is more or less disbanded (probably during this timeline's the variant of the thirty year war, because of the involvement of England. This is probably the moment they manage to capture som German lands bordering the Netherlands). The Austrians still claim the imperial crown, but in the 18th century they fall to a republican revolution. Because the Netherlands (still united with England) is the only main power left iin the area, the king of the Netherlands (and England) decides to proclaim himself (or herself, I don't care) emperor in Aachen.

 

[alexmilman]

If it has to be Continental Europe, I feel like a Burgundy wank is the best possible approach

This would be best approach territory-wise but not as far as the title is involved. At the top of the Burgundian power Charles the Bold could not even negotiate a king’s title for himself and, as far as the imperial title is involved, to have European Empire of the Netherlands would require a massive POD going back to God knows how far. The HRE was the only officially recognized empire in Europe until 1720s (and the the official recognition of the Russian empire was a multi-step process that took few decades).

So, on which legal basis ruler of the Netherlands could proclaim them an European empire? Even if they are united with some big European state, the recognized imperial title is still unrealistic, especially with the Netherlands being 1st on the list.

How about the following (admittedly shaky) scenario: ruler of the Netherlands is an “emperor of Kingdom of the Netherlands and <long list of the colonial possessions>”. This still does not make him an European emperor but the imperial title can be recognized.

 

[alexmilman]

The problem is that OTL Netherlands was too republican. It only became a kingdom because republics were disliked in 1815. I think the Netherlands at least needs more of a monarchical tradition. It needs to be a monarchy from the start.

Maybe Elisabeth I actualy accepts the crown of the Netherlands during the Dutch revolt. The Anglo-Dutch consolodates the Netherlands and expands into Germany including capturing Aachen. The HRE gets into trouble and is more or less disbanded (probably during this timeline's the variant of the thirty year war, because of the involvement of England. This is probably the moment they manage to capture som German lands bordering the Netherlands). The Austrians still claim the imperial crown, but in the 18th century they fall to a republican revolution. Because the Netherlands (still united with England) is the only main power left iin the area, the king of the Netherlands (and England) decides to proclaim himself (or herself, I don't care) emperor in Aachen.

I may be wrong but my impression was that the followers of the Orangist party during the Dutch-<French/British> wars had been de facto monarchists even if the title involved was “stadholder” and not a king. As for the rest, England at the time of the Dutch revolt was not a major military power and hardly could add a considerable force allowing not only to win fast against Spain but also expand into HRE (Aachen). A chance of the early disbandment of the HRE because of the involvement of England seems to be completely unrealistic unless there are some very significant changes in the numerous areas during the reigns of Elizabeth and Jacob I including creation of a militaristic state similar to GA’s Sweden but on a much greater scale. Not sure that even this is enough because there would be numerous players not interested in this happening. Spain would be the 1st one. France - as soon as it is done with Spain. Various German states/coalitions during alt-30YW. Austrian Hapsburgs.

AFAIK, in the XVIII century Aachen was pretty much irrelevant as far as the imperial title was involved: from 936 till 1531 Aachen Cathedral was a site where the Kings of Germany had been crowned. The emperors had been until XVI century (IIRC) crowned in Italy. So proclaiming himself an emperor just by the virtue of holding Aachen most probably would not work other than for a domestic consumption. Not sure how this would go together with the Protestant tradition either.

 

[Workable Goblin]

This would be best approach territory-wise but not as far as the title is involved. At the top of the Burgundian power Charles the Bold could not even negotiate a king’s title for himself and, as far as the imperial title is involved, to have European Empire of the Netherlands would require a massive POD going back to God knows how far. The HRE was the only officially recognized empire in Europe until 1720s (and the the official recognition of the Russian empire was a multi-step process that took few decades).

Well, the obvious possibility is to have Burgundy be more stable and successful, so that while Charles the Bold might not become a king, much less an Emperor, some descendent or relative later becomes Holy Roman Emperor. At some later point the HRE is dissolved, but the monarchy of Burgundy (*Netherlands) survives, and styles itself Emperor of The Netherlands afterwards. In other words, a direct analogy to the Austrians, where they were able to create an imperial title de novo because they had always been Emperors and obviously they weren't going to get knocked down to being merely kings, regardless of the dissolution of the entity that they derived their imperial title from.

 

[alexmilman]

Well, the obvious possibility is to have Burgundy be more stable and successful, so that while Charles the Bold might not become a king, much less an Emperor, some descendent or relative later becomes Holy Roman Emperor. At some later point the HRE is dissolved, but the monarchy of Burgundy (*Netherlands) survives, and styles itself Emperor of The Netherlands afterwards. In other words, a direct analogy to the Austrians, where they were able to create an imperial title de novo because they had always been Emperors and obviously they weren't going to get knocked down to being merely kings, regardless of the dissolution of the entity that they derived their imperial title from.

If a descendant of Charles the Bold becomes an emperor (Charles V) he is an emperor of the HRE and so are his descendants who end up as the Austrian Hapsburgs. Analogy is not working because they did have a huge hereditary empire which included at least 2 kingdoms (Bohemia and Hungary). Plus, they had a legacy of a different imperial title. Describe a scenario (with the specifics) in which ruler of the Netherlands possesses something of the kind and your case may work.

 

[Workable Goblin]

If a descendant of Charles the Bold becomes an emperor (Charles V) he is an emperor of the HRE and so are his descendants who end up as the Austrian Hapsburgs. Analogy is not working because they did have a huge hereditary empire which included at least 2 kingdoms (Bohemia and Hungary). Plus, they had a legacy of a different imperial title. Describe a scenario (with the specifics) in which ruler of the Netherlands possesses something of the kind and your case may work.

I don't "have" to do anything. The whole point of my post was just to provide a possibility for other people to work out, not to "describe a scenario (with the specifics)".

If you want a real suggestion, have language evolve a tad bit differently after the fall of the Roman Empire so that "Imperator" or derivatives becomes the common royal title, the way that "Princeps" became a common title instead of a highly exclusive one. Then everyone is an "Emperor" and we have a completely different silly debate over the "prestige" of titles. Even better would be to make it so that anyone and everyone can call themselves whatever they wish, so you could have the "Emperor" of Paris, the "Count" of England, or whatever, and no one would bat an eye, but that seems harder than merely changing things up a bit.

 

[Mike Stearns]

I think OP wants the Netherlands as an european empire, not overseas one.

Then have the Dutch king lay claim to some rock in the North Sea as a “colony” so that he can call himself Emperor of the Netherlands, basically as the ruler of an empire in being.

 

[EnvarKadri]

Then have the Dutch king lay claim to some rock in the North Sea as a “colony” so that he can call himself Emperor of the Netherlands, basically as the ruler of an empire in being.

Not colonial empire but continental empire ala France, Austria and Russia. The French model of :Emperor of the X people" seems to make the most sense. Since they cant get imperial titles from the HRE or its successor.

 

[Analytical Engine]

Not colonial empire but continental empire ala France, Austria and Russia. The French model of :Emperor of the X people" seems to make the most sense. Since they cant get imperial titles from the HRE or its successor.

Maybe "Emperor of the United Netherlands, King of the Dutch, Flemish and Walloons", or something like that?

 

[Mike Stearns]

Not colonial empire but continental empire ala France, Austria and Russia. The French model of :Emperor of the X people" seems to make the most sense. Since they cant get imperial titles from the HRE or its successor.

Well, the Rhine flows out into the North Sea through the Netherlands, so maybe some Dutch King declares himself to be the Emperor of the People of the Rhine? I bet the Germans would love that.

 

[Deleted member 109224]

The title Emperor of the British Isles was offered to George III during the unification with Ireland, but he opted against it. By the 19th century, proclaiming yourself an Emperor couldn't have been that taboo.


I think at the very least the Dutch realm has to be a bit larger. The Dutch pushed for the Northern Rhineland at Vienna but didn't succeed. Perhaps they're successful there, resulting in North Rhineland and the Principality of Orangeassau becoming part of the Netherlands.

Down the line the Dutch get into a kerfuffle with Prussia and the Netherlands seizes Westphalia from Prussia. The Dutch King, aware of his increasingly diverse nation (Walloons and Flemings and Hollanders and Rhinelanders and Luxembourgers and Hessians and Westphalians oh my!) proclaims the United Empire of All the Netherlands, Rhineland, Westphalia, and Nassau... referred to as the Netherlands or the Dutch for short.

 

[John_Smith12]

What about if it was Emperor of the Dutch not necessarily the Netherland? Could that work?