AHC: Have England/UK keep as much continental territory as possible

Your challenge is to have the Kingdom of England, or a 'United Kingdom' keep as much continental territory as possible, with any POD after 1300, and before 1800.

Bonus points if it's not (mainly) in France or Northwestern Germany.
 
As I recall, it doesn't take too many deaths to have Queen Anne's husband inherit Denmark-Norway. Combine that with one of the kids living, and you have a reformed North Sea Empire with probable interests in expanding into Sweden (who incidentally have an unmarried queen who may need allies to face down a potential succession conflict with her nephew).

Alternatively, if that's too many PODs, said queen (Ulrika Eleanora) was at one point considered as a wife for the future George II, if you want to content yourself with an Anglo-Swedish union.
 
How about Frisia in the sixteenth century.
Frisia? In the 16th century? How? It seems basicly impossible. I don't see an easy (or reasonably hard) way for that to happen. If you want some sort of union between Frisia and England, you need a way earlier POD, certainly before the "Fryske frijheid"(the time when the Frisians had no feudal lords).
 
Frisia? In the 16th century? How? It seems basicly impossible. I don't see an easy (or reasonably hard) way for that to happen. If you want some sort of union between Frisia and England, you need a way earlier POD, certainly before the "Fryske frijheid"(the time when the Frisians had no feudal lords).
Queen Mary's marriage contract with King Philip dictates that the Netherlands would devolved to their children rather than King Philip's oldest son Don Carlos.
 
Queen Mary's marriage contract with King Philip dictates that the Netherlands would devolved to their children rather than King Philip's oldest son Don Carlos.
The Netherlands ending up English is very different than Frisia ending up English. (mind you, I am still rather sceptical about this variant of an Anglo-Dutch union, but that is a different story).
 
Elizabeth I and Ivan the Terrible marry after the death of his first wife in 1560, when Elizabeth was 27. They have a surviving child who inherits the English throne, who successfully presses a claim on Russia after the extinction of Ivan's children by his first wife (IOTL, Feodor I who died in 1598). Holding all of Russia long-term is unlikely in the extreme, but enclaves along the Baltic and White Sea coasts might be doable.
 
Elizabeth I and Ivan the Terrible marry after the death of his first wife in 1560, when Elizabeth was 27. They have a surviving child who inherits the English throne, who successfully presses a claim on Russia after the extinction of Ivan's children by his first wife (IOTL, Feodor I who died in 1598). Holding all of Russia long-term is unlikely in the extreme, but enclaves along the Baltic and White Sea coasts might be doable.

Wake up, you're not in EUIV:p
 
Perhaps if Mary lives longer and has a son by Philip, Elizabeth becomes a rallying point for Protestant resistance to Catholic Monarchs 2.0, so they marry her off as far away from England as possible.
Alt history isn't about the probable, it's about the possible XD.
 
Your challenge is to have the Kingdom of England, or a 'United Kingdom' keep as much continental territory as possible, with any POD after 1300, and before 1800.

Bonus points if it's not (mainly) in France or Northwestern Germany.

Forget England. It's just the king of England who could reign over other territories.

Consider this : the austrian Habsburgs reigned over Hungary for 4 centuries : Austria did not control Hungary.
 
Forget England. It's just the king of England who could reign over other territories.

Consider this : the austrian Habsburgs reigned over Hungary for 4 centuries : Austria did not control Hungary.

Yes it did, until the Ausgleich. Or at least the court in Vienna did, with some Hungarian influence.

For other territories, it does help if they're close, small, or both. Holding Calais or Normandy from England is doable, holding Riga is mad (even if it might, maybe, have the same ruler for a while), holding Russia in any real sense is impossible.
 
Forget England. It's just the king of England who could reign over other territories.

Consider this : the austrian Habsburgs reigned over Hungary for 4 centuries : Austria did not control Hungary.
I think if the English controlled the Netherlands,the English will clearly be the dominant group in this relationship.It's also probably that this relationship might be much more lasting that then one between Austria and Hungary.
 
I think if the English controlled the Netherlands,the English will clearly be the dominant group in this relationship.It's also probably that this relationship might be much more lasting that then one between Austria and Hungary.
Spain was much more powerful than England, and couldn't hold the Netherlands. I doubt the Catholic English are going to do any better.

That said, the Dutch rebels did offer to swear fealty to Elizabeth I in exchange for aid; that fell through (due to a combination of English reluctance and general English incompetence), but could be managed. I doubt they keep all the Netherlands (despite the Armada, English military performance on the continent in the 1500s was generally dreadful), but they could probably manage more than the OTL Dutch.
 
Spain was much more powerful than England, and couldn't hold the Netherlands. I doubt the Catholic English are going to do any better.

That said, the Dutch rebels did offer to swear fealty to Elizabeth I in exchange for aid; that fell through (due to a combination of English reluctance and general English incompetence), but could be managed. I doubt they keep all the Netherlands (despite the Armada, English military performance on the continent in the 1500s was generally dreadful), but they could probably manage more than the OTL Dutch.
Spain is too far away from the Netherlands to fight in the Netherlands as efficient as the English would be able to otherwise.The Netherlands were also helped by the English in some ways.Besides that,in the event of a revolt,the Dutch would be fighting BOTH the English and the Spanish most likely.It is likely that Spanish tactics and military doctrine would be widely adopted by the English if England became the third Habsburg realm.
 
Your challenge is to have the Kingdom of England, or a 'United Kingdom' keep as much continental territory as possible, with any POD after 1300, and before 1800.

Bonus points if it's not (mainly) in France or Northwestern Germany.

I can certainly see the Brits joining in association with, say, the Netherlands or Denmark(as they did in Tony Jones's Gurkani Alam, IIRC), or something like that. But actually fully merging with a Continental state, including them sending people to London's Parliament? That seems a bit much.
 
Definitely; marching from Spain to the Netherlands never took less than a month, and often two; nowadays, ferries between Dover and Calais take ninety minutes, and even in the age of sail, the English are going to be able to reinforce the Habsburg armies much faster than the Spanish Crowns could. Even if they're not terribly useful on the battlefield, English forces could at least be used to garrison Habsburg territory, freeing up Spanish armies for the actual fighting.
 
I think if the English controlled the Netherlands,the English will clearly be the dominant group in this relationship.It's also probably that this relationship might be much more lasting that then one between Austria and Hungary.

If we're talking Habsburg Netherlands, it seems rather up in the air who would dominate. The Habsburg Netherlands are quite a bit bigger, and the Netherlands-proper already equalled England (plus Scotland) during the 17th century in many fields.

Add in Flanders and Wallonia, and the focus might shift across to the Netherlands, especially if wars force the king of the whole place to direct armies in the Netherlands a lot (from Antwerp/Brussels/... you're a lot closer to the action, so quicker to respond).
 
Top