Good King George - A Republican Britain and a Monarchist America

Would you like to see

  • More of the United Commonwealth

    Votes: 12 8.5%
  • United Provinces of America

    Votes: 84 59.6%
  • Patagonia

    Votes: 15 10.6%
  • European Affairs

    Votes: 30 21.3%

  • Total voters
    141
Hmm, namely things that I figure would be most affected by the implications of the First British Civil War, like the aforementioned Beatles or anything to do with what OTL calls BBC. Is ABC this universe's counterpart to the former, and does the United Commonwealth have their own counterpart if so?

Right! I'll add all that to the list! And I'll do a Beatles box soon, and what became of each of them! As for the ABC, yes, it's a state-owned mega-company. Which often competes with the BBC over in the UC.

Agree. Looks good to me

Glad you like it! I'll be making more!

Is there a movement to unite the whole of the Italian peninsula?

There is, but it's relatively weak in the south, which had forged a strong national identity. Its strongest supporters are among the Roman Reform movement, who want to see a greater Italy, including the current Most Serene Republic of Italy in the north, the Kingdom of Two Sicilies, the Roman Papal Republic, the Kingdom of Sardinia, and territory from Germany, Hungary, Serbia and Slovenia.

What happened here?
The attacks occurred in Georgetown and resulted in the death of King Henry IX, his wife, and hundreds more.
Pretty much, though I'll have more on that soon. Let's say. It wasn't hundreds killed. It was thousands, and more than just Georgetown was hit.
 
Germany
The German Confederation - Part I
"Germany was my great aunt's dream, what will they do without her?"
Queen Victoria's private comments on the protests

rhMjAHf.png
 
Last edited:
The German Confederation - Part I
"Germany was my great aunt's dream, what will they do without her?"
Queen Victoria's private comments on the protests

rhMjAHf.png

I guess Prussia is known for more absolutistic/anti-democratic tendencies and that's why people are so against the candidacy of Frederick VI?

Or is it the fear that if Prussia ever gets the Emperorship they will dominate the confederation and turn it hereditery?
 
One is a 66-year old, the second is a Hapsburg, and the last is a Hohenzollern. No wonder there are protests, although demand 3 is somewhat unrealistic.
 
I guess Prussia is known for more absolutistic/anti-democratic tendencies and that's why people are so against the candidacy of Frederick VI?

Or is it the fear that if Prussia ever gets the Emperorship they will dominate the confederation and turn it hereditery?

The first one pretty much hits the nail on the head. Prussia still maintains a large local army, still had conscription and is still very authoritarian despite reforms enacted in the 90s that made the place slightly more democratic. Since Frederick gained the throne, he has done almost everything he can to restore the Prussian throne to its pre-reform power. And when asked what he wants to do with the Emperorship, he's rather... vague on that front. Even how he managed to get the votes for a nomination at the Princes Conference is a mystery.

One is a 66-year old, the second is a Hapsburg, and the last is a Hohenzollern. No wonder there are protests, although demand 3 is somewhat unrealistic.
Yeah, though I suppose they might be happy with minimising the powers of the Emperor.

The 66-year-old is the favourite and was the chosen candidate of the smaller states. The Hapsburg was selected to be the candidate of the Catholic South Germans, despite being the Czech King. Which has caused him some...issues in his own realm

Honestly, this can be best seen as a fringe demand and is hardly seen as a likely outcome by anyone. However, it's become quite popular among more left-leaning youth in the Confederation.

How could Konrad Adenauer take charge as Reichskanzler before the formation of the Confederation?

A joint decree of the Monarchs appointed him to oversee the election and formation of certain state bodies.
 
So the OTL GB Union Flag was created in 1606, a few decades before the Commonwealth and the C used the 1606 Union flag. Therefore it would seem logical that a post 1801 Commonwealth would go on to use the 1801 Union flag too.

Question is, would there be clashes between American Royalists and British Republicans over the use of the 1801 Union flag? Not just the Olympics may come to mind but a whole array of occasions where we use the national flags as logos without any reference to any actual state. Just think about an ingredient list at the back of a can of beans.
How is TTL dealing with the issue?

Edit: how did it actually happen that the GB-IR Royalists started to use the post 1801 flag without ever having to actually rule a UK of GB&IR? On what basis because I imagine the Commonwealth would not be happy about Americans stealing their national flag.
 
Last edited:
So the OTL GB Union Flag was created in 1606, a few decades before the Commonwealth and the C used the 1606 Union flag. Therefore it would seem logical that a post 1801 Commonwealth would go on to use the 1801 Union flag too.

Question is, would there be clashes between American Royalists and British Republicans over the use of the 1801 Union flag? Not just the Olympics may come to mind but a whole array of occasions where we use the national flags as logos without any reference to any actual state. Just think about an ingredient list at the back of a can of beans.
How is TTL dealing with the issue?

Edit: how did it actually happen that the GB-IR Royalists started to use the post 1801 flag without ever having to actually rule a UK of GB&IR? On what basis because I imagine the Commonwealth would not be happy about Americans stealing their national flag.
I was wondering, shouldn't the Monarchist Americans be using something like the Colonial Red Ensign?

 
How prominent is Czech in Cezchia?

Outside of the Sudetenland, it's very prominent and has seen quite the revival in Prague as well, thanks to several decades of work to forge a cultural resurgence.

So the OTL GB Union Flag was created in 1606, a few decades before the Commonwealth and the C used the 1606 Union flag. Therefore it would seem logical that a post 1801 Commonwealth would go on to use the 1801 Union flag too.

Question is, would there be clashes between American Royalists and British Republicans over the use of the 1801 Union flag? Not just the Olympics may come to mind but a whole array of occasions where we use the national flags as logos without any reference to any actual state. Just think about an ingredient list at the back of a can of beans.
How is TTL dealing with the issue?

Edit: how did it actually happen that the GB-IR Royalists started to use the post 1801 flag without ever having to actually rule a UK of GB&IR? On what basis because I imagine the Commonwealth would not be happy about Americans stealing their national flag.
I was wondering, shouldn't the Monarchist Americans be using something like the Colonial Red Ensign?

When the United Commonwealth was formed in 1784, they just used the last flag of the Protectorate. It had been intended to be used as a stop-gap, and a more permanent flag would be designed later. That just... never happened. Leading to the current design. By 2022, there will be a growing movement to create a new Union Flag to represent the expanded UC, but it's a somewhat limited force.

There are near-constant clashes over the flag issue. With both sides often getting into fights with the other. That said, it's only really the official American flag. There are several more... popular flags as well. I will post them soon! And it's common enough, even if the UP requests otherwise, for companies to use those instead.

The Province's use of the Union Flag came about as a reflection of their claim to be the rightful rulers of the Home Islands and is a massive point of contention in the Commonwealth, despite the flag change moment. It is a proclamation that the UP believes the UC, on some level, shouldn't exist.
 
Flags of America - Party I
Something I threw together!

The Grand Union Flag

This is what you might call the most common flag used in the Provinces and has been in active use since the late 18th century. The 16 stripes represent the Orignal 16 Provinces that remained loyal to the crown. It is flown at most government buildings. and has had official status since 1880, as it was used heavily during the Civil War as a battle flag. There is a large bi-partisan movement to have it made the official flag of the Union until the day "The Realm is reunited"


16_Star_US_Flag_(Unofficial) (1).png



The Red Ensign


A famous old design that was updated with the New Union Flag in the early 1800s. It is used as the official naval jack of the Provinces. And is a well-beloved national symbol.

Red_Ensign_of_Great_Britain_(1707–1800,_square_canton).png


The Loyalist Flag
Quick disclaimer, I didn't make this; it's real.

This is the Loyalist flag, the well-known symbol of the so-called Ultra-Restorationist movement, and the Unity Party's official flag. It has become controversial in recent decades for... obvious reasons. And is banned in several provinces as a hate symbol. Though, it remains flown in certain more hard-line areas as a symbol of eternal loyalty to the First King and the dream of reunification.

New_York_Union_Flag_(1775).svg.png
 
Last edited:
The Palatinates Part I
As most of you know. I've been rather... opposed to sub-national monarchies except in places where it makes sense. So. Here some are.
Palatinates - Part I
The Princes of Quebec

"Where do you sit on the role of the Prince in the modern era for Quebec?" - Brian Williams.
"To... I... I hold a great deal of respect for Sir Edward Fitzalan-Howard, though I fail to see what purpose he serves in the modern day. We in Quebec should be able to select a local group of candidates for the governorship for the Queen to choose from... like any other Province can," Justin Trudeau.

Prince.png

Edward William Fitzalan-Howard, 4th Prince of Quebec, 18th Duke of Norfolk KG GCB, ISO, DL (born 2 December 1956), styled Earl of Montreal between 1975 and 2002, is an American peer and government official. As Prince of Quebec, he is the Governor of that Province, acting as the monarch's representative. Additionally, he holds the hereditary office of Earl Marshal and, as Duke of Norfolk, is the most senior peer in the peerage of America and the defunct peerage of England. As a Duke, he retains a seat in the House of Lords. However, due to his duties in Quebec, he has rarely attended outside of required ceremonial functions as Earl Marshall and office through which he has several responsibilities.


As Prince, he has played a far more active role in the politics of the Province than his father did, though not by choice. As every Parliament elected since his ascension has been hung, he has hosted and chaired coalition talks in the Citadelle of Quebec as required under the Provincial Constitution. He has won praise from across the Quebec political spectrum for his efforts, with Left-Wing independence leader Yves-François Blanchet, who has called the Principality an insult to the Quebec people, declaring him "Perhaps the best Governer we could ask for, if only we could choose him!"

His moves to force his children into marriages with local Quebec women or members of the French nobility have proved controversial in certain circles as a return to a darker past. Though have received widespread support in Quebec as a sign of respect from the Prince and his family.














































Principality of Quebec

The Prince.png
The Dukes of Norfolk had long retained their Catholicism when the rest of the English peerage had adopted Anglicanism after the reformation. While this had proved to be a permanent block in their efforts to ascend to higher political office e, it would greatly benefit the family after the end of the First Civil War. While Charles Howard, 11th Duke of Norfolk, had intended to renounce his Catholicism u on a political career, instability at home had caused him to delay the move. When he and his father elected to back the King, his subsequent exile and inheritance of his Dukedom further delayed it. By the time he decided to act and abandon his faith, the King had a position in mind for the man that required a Catholic, Governor of Quebec. Hoping the move would placate the Quebecers, King George III tasked the Duke to act as "Warden and Guard over that wretched place" and to ensure that any signs of treason were dealt with swiftly; Charles Howard would be the first in a long line of Norfolk Dukes to watch over the Province, with the posting becoming all but hereditary as a solution to the Catholic issue. A brief attempt to place an Anglican as Governor caused a series of riots that were only ended by the appearance of a young Henry Fitzalan-Howard, the 15th Duke, who had been viewed as too young to act as Governor after inheriting the Dukedom at twelve—further convincing the central government of the need for the system.


The situation was formalized by Edward VIII in 1896, with Henry Fitzalan-Howard, 15th Duke of Norfolk, being raised to the rank of Prince and named the hereditary Governor of the Province by law. This would be a part of s series of reforms granting Quebec greater autonomy, though only as an ordinary province of the Union, renaming it the "Province and Principality of Quebec." a state of affairs that remains in place today. However, there are growing calls for Quebec to be granted the same status as Hawaii, Sioux and the Iroquois nations as a crown dependency in the Union, calling the continued role of the Prince into question as well.

With the coming of the Quiet revolution in the second half of the 20th century and a growing national movement, the Prince-Dukes could no longer rely on their religion to retain their ties to the Province. The reigning Prince promised his heirs would marry Quebecois' to cement further the links between the Province and the Princely Family. As well as end the belief the Dukes are simply "English Land Lords Masquerading as Frenchmen."




































I've elected to have the Calverts maintain a hereditary governorship, and I had an idea I'm working on with Florida and Burr, though that might be ditched.
 
Last edited:
Subnational monarchies make more sense in Russian influenced areas, it's not so much a thing in the core Anglosphere, except for New Zealand. (English is less prevalent in India, Malaysia and Africa where we can find such polities.)
Nonetheless it's interesting to see a subnational entity where the governorship is hereditary.
In OTL CIIIR is King-in-right-of-Québec. Does Quebec having a monarch (a prince) of its own mean that Victoria is not Queen-in-right-of-Quebec?
 
Subnational monarchies make more sense in Russian influenced areas, it's not so much a thing in the core Anglosphere, except for New Zealand. (English is less prevalent in India, Malaysia and Africa where we can find such polities.)
Nonetheless it's interesting to see a subnational entity where the governorship is hereditary.
In OTL CIIIR is King-in-right-of-Québec. Does Quebec having a monarch (a prince) of its own mean that Victoria is not Queen-in-right-of-Quebec?

I happen to agree! Which is why I've resisted the suggestions to do it elsewhere. I think this solution of a ... sort of Subnational monarchy is an interesting one, but it and Maryland, which also makes sense given the proprietary system, are going to be the only ones I'm doing for now.

Many consider it a strange outlier to be something that should be done away with. Same as Maryland once I get there!

She is Queen-in-right-of-Quebec, and the Price is merely a "hereditary nobleman enjoying special authority and autonomy "

All based on this.

 
Last edited:
Is the Penn family still prominent in Pennsylvania? I can see them having some kind of title - e.g. Dukes of Pennsylvania - if they don't have hereditary governorship/proprietorship.

Do any provincial legislatures have some hereditary peers in their legislatures by right, or are they allowed to stand for election as a regular candidate?
 
Top