AHC: Dynastic Wars and Absolute Monarchy in Britain, in a Modern Period?

This possibly belongs in ASB (I don't mind the mods moving it, although I felt it was worth a shot in pre-1900), but might be possible with a significant and early POD.

So this TL premise is gonna sound strange, but I watched this 1995 adaptation of Richard III where the plot of Shakespeare's play is taken from the 1400's and set to the 20th Century, more specifically the 1930's. Britain is ravaged by civil war between royal factions, War of Roses-style, and the king seems to have far more power than in OTL, to the point where the king can pretty much act as a dictator. Britain also appears to be Catholic, but that's less important.

I thought this was a pretty cool idea despite being fairly unrealistic, and wondered how this could have come about historically. By the 20th Century, monarchs had long since started losing power to elected officials, in Britain even earlier than other places, but could this development be reversed? Would it be possible for claims to the throne to be important enough to fight civil wars over in 20th Century Britain? Would the butterflies of such PODs be so huge the world wouldn't be recognizable?

I realize that film was influenced by the Rule of Cool (the king himself even runs around the battlefield machine-gunning enemy soldiers) rather than historical realism, but I've wanted to make a TL on a modern monarchical, autocratic Britain for some time anyways, and figured this tied in nicely.

Any thoughts on possible PODs, consequences, etc?
 
You can, just about, make the King more autocratic/powerful in Britain with a pre-1900 PoD, but it requires at the very least a different set of circumstances surrounding de Montfort's rebellion and Parliament, probably an aversion or swift and strong repudiation of Magna Carta, and possibly even some fiddling about with the Pre-Norman Moots.

Essentially, even by the time of the War of the Roses, the King at least had to have the support of the Barons, and had to have taxes rubberstamped by Parliament. Henry VIII was perhaps the most powerful King we've ever had, but he actually helped make Parliament more powerful due to the fact that the Break with Rome was instigated not through Royal Decree, but through an Act of Parliament, in effect meaning that the King ruled the people for the people. Charles I of course attempted absolutism, and failed spectacularly (though I doubt that anyone could have succeeded really by that point), and once 1688 had passed, you've really got no hope short of some sort of catastrophic slaugherting of the entire Parliament as in LTTW (though even there the PM takes over not the King).

As for dynastic wars, there was the Jacobites of course, but since then the only time there was any tension in the succession would be Edward VIII, and that's not got a chance either. I suppose something involving Hannover and German Unification might work out, but that would be more likely to lead to shouting matches in Parliament than fighting in the streets.
 
Top