AHC: Nevermore a King of England after 1649-

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
AHC 1- no monarchical restoration after the English Civil War and execution of Charles I

AHC 1b - loophole, England can have a monarch again, but it has to be an Emperor, not a King

AHC 2 -less challenging challenge, but still challenging: Over 50% of the years from 1649-2015, England has no monarch. So, after 1649, the maximum number of years of England is under a monarch can be 183 years.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
A lasting republican Commonwealth

AHC 1- no monarchical restoration after the English Civil War and execution of Charles I

AHC 1b - loophole, England can have a monarch again, but it has to be an Emperor, not a King

AHC 2 -less challenging challenge, but still challenging: Over 50% of the years from 1649-2015, England has no monarch. So, after 1649, the maximum number of years of England is under a monarch can be 183 years.

A lasting republican Commonwealth or an autocratic Protectorate both seem within the realm of the possible; the various versions of An Agreement of the People offer a path forward to a written constitution, the franchise, and religious freedom, which for the mid-1600s is pretty impressive. Lililburne for president!

A lasting dictatorship is another; not as pleasant to consider, but certainly possible, and could shade from Protector to Emperor, obviously.

Best,
 
1 - Little would change. There would still be an Empire, and perhaps even larger. This may even delay the US' secession, since republican values may take root earlier. Whether there would be an Act of Union between England and Scotland, perhaps. Though I suspect England may continue to outperform Scotland colonially, and the Scots would need English assistance (such as the Darwen expedition).

1b - Emperor as in a dictator like the Roman Caesars? If so, no. I don't believe any English king was ever truly an absolute monarch, from the Anglo-Saxon kings as Athelstan and Harold II, through to William I, the early modern ones like Henry VII/VIII, etc. I believe some form of constitutional monarchy was inevitable, if only based on the excesses that led to the Civil War and Charles I's execution.

2 - I'd say by the 1800s, the UK (or United Republic?) would be the first parliamentary republic in history. If there is no US secession, then this UR would own most of North America through union of the 13 colonies and Canada. If there is a Napoleonic War still, which is likely, then the UR would seize Louisana, though may not be interested in the Western territories. However, with oil and gold reserves, it's likely Mexico may not put up much fight should the UK seek to invade the area.

By the late 1800s, the UR would grant the US/Canada colony self-government, leading to independence eventually.
 
If there is a Napoleonic War still, which is likely, then the UR would seize Louisana, though may not be interested in the Western territories.

Might the Republic of Britain not side with the French Republic/Empire in the French Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars, against the monarchs of Europe? If that were the case, I think the wars would end with a resounding Franco-British victory, since the Continental System would never happen, and France's enemies would never be propped up by British funding.
 

libbrit

Banned
Britain could go all Lord of the Rings, and after Cromwell, be unwilling to allow either the Cromwells, or the Stuarts, and have some sort of `Steward`, guarding the throne of a theoretical monarchy, but one wherein no suitable successor is found.
 
Might the Republic of Britain not side with the French Republic/Empire in the French Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars, against the monarchs of Europe? If that were the case, I think the wars would end with a resounding Franco-British victory, since the Continental System would never happen, and France's enemies would never be propped up by British funding.
Butterflies would probably change the French Revolutionary Wars drastically.

Keeping the Commonwealth seems quite doable; merely have a capable successor in place for Cromwell. OTL there were several candidates who died to early; have one of them survive and you are set. Once a generation or two has past without a monarch, the Stuart pretenders will fade out like the Jacobites did, and a republic will seem the normal form of government.

One interesting butterfly: Bombay was a dowry to Charles II for his wedding; ITTL it will stay Portuguese unless someone else takes it. That might have significant effects on the future development of India.
 
libbrit- pardon my ignorance, which LOTR country/people are you making an analogy with

I believe he's referring to Gondor, with the line of Stewards that became de-facto leaders with the death of the last King. So Denethor and the like.
 
Top