Different wife for Frederick Duke of York and Albany

For George and Fredrieke of Prussia how does this look:

George IV of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (b.1762: d.1830) m Frederica of Prussia (b.1767: d.1820)

Issue:

Charlotte, Princess Royal (b.1792)

Elizabeth of Wales (b.1793)

George V of the United Kingdom (b.1795)
 
Debating a marriage between the Princess Royal and George, Duke of York and Albany, making it a love marriage or some such.
 
Also, would there ever be a serious consideration for the partition of Britain and Hanover, with Britain going to an older son and Hanover to a younger one?
 
Oops, I found out that Louise of Denmark had been married off back in 1784, so no dice on her as a British consort. But I think Louise of Orange-Nassau could take her place. OTL the Stadtholder married his children to each of the powers that helped his restoration in 1787; Prussia and Brunswick. Yet Britain too played a role in the intervention, so how about this; Willem VI marries his Prussian bride like OTL, Frederik (who OTL was in love with Princess Mary) can go to a Brunswick Princess, leaving Louise for York. Frederica can still marry Wales then. Now IDK if Frederica was barren or if the childlessness was due to a mutual aversion though with a lack of definitive evidence of the former I think one could safely go with the later.

@VVD0D95, no way for the Kingdom and the Electorate to be separated. George II already tried it was was told it was illegal. For Hanover to be an Electorate it HAS to follow Primogeniture. Which means to the eldest son. If George III tried to leave Hanover to Frederick it would violate the laws that make Hanover an Electorate and trigger lawsuits and intervention from the Emperor/Imperial Diet. Now the only legal potential would be a bill in Britain that disinherited George IV and his line, leaving Britain for York and sending Georgie-porgie over to Hanover. Now I say legal, not likely. In fact it would be more or less ASB to even ATTEMPT this let alone see it succeed.
 
@VVD0D95, no way for the Kingdom and the Electorate to be separated. George II already tried it was was told it was illegal. For Hanover to be an Electorate it HAS to follow Primogeniture. Which means to the eldest son. If George III tried to leave Hanover to Frederick it would violate the laws that make Hanover an Electorate and trigger lawsuits and intervention from the Emperor/Imperial Diet. Now the only legal potential would be a bill in Britain that disinherited George IV and his line, leaving Britain for York and sending Georgie-porgie over to Hanover. Now I say legal, not likely. In fact it would be more or less ASB to even ATTEMPT this let alone see it succeed.

Technically not so much. Hannover would be bound by primogeniture only inasmuch as what the British princes keep to the whole concept of equal marriages. Ergo, had Frederick, Prince of Wales (eldest son of George II) married Diana Spencer, we would've seen the two crowns split. Had George IV legally married Mrs. FitzHerbert, William IV married Mrs. Jordan, or Kent married Mme St-Laurent (i.e. George III gives his consent to it - it's a stretch, but just go with me on this) and had issue, it would've seen a split of the inheritance. George IV-Mrs. Fitzherbert's kid (I read once that there were rumors about there being kids, so much so that the lawyers had to go to visit her to get her to swear there was no issue - which she refused to do, and I always found odd, cause wouldn't the kid be little better than a bastard anyway?, but I digress) would get Britain when their dad dies, while Hannover would go Frederick>William IV>Edward>Ernst, duke of Cumberland (similarly to how it split with Victoria). Now, of course, the king of Great Britain could always meet the tax to equalize the marriage (and I'm not sure the emperor would/could refuse, parliament might object to coughing up the dosh though), and all that line of thing, we're just working on the basic premise of an unequal marriage.
 
Oops, I found out that Louise of Denmark had been married off back in 1784, so no dice on her as a British consort. But I think Louise of Orange-Nassau could take her place. OTL the Stadtholder married his children to each of the powers that helped his restoration in 1787; Prussia and Brunswick. Yet Britain too played a role in the intervention, so how about this; Willem VI marries his Prussian bride like OTL, Frederik (who OTL was in love with Princess Mary) can go to a Brunswick Princess, leaving Louise for York. Frederica can still marry Wales then. Now IDK if Frederica was barren or if the childlessness was due to a mutual aversion though with a lack of definitive evidence of the former I think one could safely go with the later.

@VVD0D95, no way for the Kingdom and the Electorate to be separated. George II already tried it was was told it was illegal. For Hanover to be an Electorate it HAS to follow Primogeniture. Which means to the eldest son. If George III tried to leave Hanover to Frederick it would violate the laws that make Hanover an Electorate and trigger lawsuits and intervention from the Emperor/Imperial Diet. Now the only legal potential would be a bill in Britain that disinherited George IV and his line, leaving Britain for York and sending Georgie-porgie over to Hanover. Now I say legal, not likely. In fact it would be more or less ASB to even ATTEMPT this let alone see it succeed.

Ahhh okay, so instead of Louise of Denmark, we get Louise of Orange Nassau and still plenty of kids for the Yorks then?

So, perhaps something like this:

Frederick, Duke of York and Albany m Louise of Orange Nassau in 1792:

Issue:

Charlotte of York (b.1793)

George Frederick (b.1796)

Louise of York and Albany (b.1799)
 
Oops, I found out that Louise of Denmark had been married off back in 1784, so no dice on her as a British consort. But I think Louise of Orange-Nassau could take her place. OTL the Stadtholder married his children to each of the powers that helped his restoration in 1787; Prussia and Brunswick. Yet Britain too played a role in the intervention, so how about this; Willem VI marries his Prussian bride like OTL, Frederik (who OTL was in love with Princess Mary) can go to a Brunswick Princess, leaving Louise for York. Frederica can still marry Wales then. Now IDK if Frederica was barren or if the childlessness was due to a mutual aversion though with a lack of definitive evidence of the former I think one could safely go with the later.

@VVD0D95, no way for the Kingdom and the Electorate to be separated. George II already tried it was was told it was illegal. For Hanover to be an Electorate it HAS to follow Primogeniture. Which means to the eldest son. If George III tried to leave Hanover to Frederick it would violate the laws that make Hanover an Electorate and trigger lawsuits and intervention from the Emperor/Imperial Diet. Now the only legal potential would be a bill in Britain that disinherited George IV and his line, leaving Britain for York and sending Georgie-porgie over to Hanover. Now I say legal, not likely. In fact it would be more or less ASB to even ATTEMPT this let alone see it succeed.

If other events go as otl, and the HRE is dissolved as it was otl, would there be a consideration there, once Hanover is its own Kingdom? Or still a nada?
 
If other events go as otl, and the HRE is dissolved as it was otl, would there be a consideration there, once Hanover is its own Kingdom? Or still a nada?

In theory yes but in practicality no. Kingdoms in a personal union being left to two different heirs is basically unheard of past the Medieval era and even then it was quite rare. If you give George IV only daughters then yes it can happen but any other division would be very difficult.
 
In theory yes but in practicality no. Kingdoms in a personal union being left to two different heirs is basically unheard of past the Medieval era and even then it was quite rare. If you give George IV only daughters then yes it can happen but any other division would be very difficult.

Um, Karl V would beg to differ. As would Felipe II, Johann Georg of Brandenburg and if we want to stretch it, not broken personal unions per se, but Louis XIV with Spain and Maria Theresia-François Étienne with Tuscany both skipped over the legitimate heir (the dauphin and duc de Bourgogne; Josef II) and and gave it to a younger son. Karl Theodor tried the same stunt in attempting to "break" his PU of Bavaria and the Palatinate by trading Bavaria for Belgium. Had William III had two sons, England and the Netherlands would presumably have been split as well (the Dutch not wanting a foreign king as ruler and the English not wanting ANOTHER Dutch king)
 
In theory yes but in practicality no. Kingdoms in a personal union being left to two different heirs is basically unheard of past the Medieval era and even then it was quite rare. If you give George IV only daughters then yes it can happen but any other division would be very difficult.
Hmm true and for some reason I can see George Iv wanting any daughter of his married to a son of Frederick duke of york
 
I do wonder, if George and Frederica have a son, how might that son turn out, and would he continue the Hanoverian tradition of going against his father in almost everything.
 
I do wonder, if George and Frederica have a son, how might that son turn out, and would he continue the Hanoverian tradition of going against his father in almost everything.

Probably. Especially since it still hasn't really bred itself out. Charles is still at odds with Brenda and Wills with Charles - although not much over politics (it just doesn't garner as much attention these days IMO since the royal family has been depoliticized)
 
Probably. Especially since it still hasn't really bred itself out. Charles is still at odds with Brenda and Wills with Charles - although not much over politics (it just doesn't garner as much attention these days IMO since the royal family has been depoliticized)
Oh that’s interesting and of course I’d the crown remains political then that’s going to grow
 
I can see George Junior, Junior being somewhat more conservative than his father, and also perhaps having a brief career in the military
 
Technically not so much. Hannover would be bound by primogeniture only inasmuch as what the British princes keep to the whole concept of equal marriages. Ergo, had Frederick, Prince of Wales (eldest son of George II) married Diana Spencer, we would've seen the two crowns split. Had George IV legally married Mrs. FitzHerbert, William IV married Mrs. Jordan, or Kent married Mme St-Laurent (i.e. George III gives his consent to it - it's a stretch, but just go with me on this) and had issue, it would've seen a split of the inheritance. George IV-Mrs. Fitzherbert's kid (I read once that there were rumors about there being kids, so much so that the lawyers had to go to visit her to get her to swear there was no issue - which she refused to do, and I always found odd, cause wouldn't the kid be little better than a bastard anyway?, but I digress) would get Britain when their dad dies, while Hannover would go Frederick>William IV>Edward>Ernst, duke of Cumberland (similarly to how it split with Victoria). Now, of course, the king of Great Britain could always meet the tax to equalize the marriage (and I'm not sure the emperor would/could refuse, parliament might object to coughing up the dosh though), and all that line of thing, we're just working on the basic premise of an unequal marriage.

I had wondered about the Spencer match. Though I've never heard of a tax/fee that would equalize the marriage. If that's true then there are several odd occasions that had children of morganatic marriages passed over even when their mother received a title from the Emperor. Plus couldn't the Elector pay the tax from his Hanoverian revenues? That way Parliament has no issue. Or in Frederick's case he could use part of his wife's massive dowry (and likely some estates from Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough's will) to pay it.

Um, Karl V would beg to differ. As would Felipe II, Johann Georg of Brandenburg and if we want to stretch it, not broken personal unions per se, but Louis XIV with Spain and Maria Theresia-François Étienne with Tuscany both skipped over the legitimate heir (the dauphin and duc de Bourgogne; Josef II) and and gave it to a younger son. Karl Theodor tried the same stunt in attempting to "break" his PU of Bavaria and the Palatinate by trading Bavaria for Belgium. Had William III had two sons, England and the Netherlands would presumably have been split as well (the Dutch not wanting a foreign king as ruler and the English not wanting ANOTHER Dutch king)

I mean Kingdoms, not assorted territories. It would be the equivalent of the Habsburgs splitting Bohemia and Hungary (BTW if anyone can figure out a way to do so in the 18th century I would love to hear it) or Castile and Aragon. Or the Bourbons splitting Naples and Sicily.

Hmm true and for some reason I can see George Iv wanting any daughter of his married to a son of Frederick duke of york

That would keep the PU and the Hanoverian line going.

I can see George Junior, Junior being somewhat more conservative than his father, and also perhaps having a brief career in the military

Do you mean the Duke of York's son or grandson? But if things go similar to OTL then most likely yes. York was highly conservative and George IV ended up as such later on. So I can see the next King opposed to Catholic Emancipation, Parliamentary reform and the other parts of the Whig reform platform.
 
I had wondered about the Spencer match. Though I've never heard of a tax/fee that would equalize the marriage. If that's true then there are several odd occasions that had children of morganatic marriages passed over even when their mother received a title from the Emperor. Plus couldn't the Elector pay the tax from his Hanoverian revenues? That way Parliament has no issue. Or in Frederick's case he could use part of his wife's massive dowry (and likely some estates from Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough's will) to pay it.



I mean Kingdoms, not assorted territories. It would be the equivalent of the Habsburgs splitting Bohemia and Hungary (BTW if anyone can figure out a way to do so in the 18th century I would love to hear it) or Castile and Aragon. Or the Bourbons splitting Naples and Sicily.



That would keep the PU and the Hanoverian line going.



Do you mean the Duke of York's son or grandson? But if things go similar to OTL then most likely yes. York was highly conservative and George IV ended up as such later on. So I can see the next King opposed to Catholic Emancipation, Parliamentary reform and the other parts of the Whig reform platform.

Yeah was meaning more George IV's own son, but agreed with you there. I do wonder if they'd actually be able to do something that might make it more palatable to them.
 
I had wondered about the Spencer match. Though I've never heard of a tax/fee that would equalize the marriage. If that's true then there are several odd occasions that had children of morganatic marriages passed over even when their mother received a title from the Emperor. Plus couldn't the Elector pay the tax from his Hanoverian revenues? That way Parliament has no issue. Or in Frederick's case he could use part of his wife's massive dowry (and likely some estates from Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough's will) to pay it.

I don't think there was ever a tax/fee thought of since AIUI the match was considered b-y Fred to get out from under his parents - hence the stupendous dowry Lady Di was supposed to come with. I'm not sure George II would've raised the fee anyway, since it was in line with his own plans (Britain to Fred, and his beloved Hannover to his much loved second son).
 
Top