How could Salic Law end in Hanover?

JJohnson

Banned
Once Victoria was crowned queen in 1837, it ended the personal union with Hanover since only a male could inherit their throne. The simple question is, how could Salic Law be overturned, or changed to semi-Salic at any point after 1787, so that Victoria holds the throne? And had she done so, what effect would it have on Hanover and the future of Germany?
 
Once Victoria was crowned queen in 1837, it ended the personal union with Hanover since only a male could inherit their throne. The simple question is, how could Salic Law be overturned, at any point after 1787, so that Victoria holds the throne? And had she done so, what effect would it have on Hanover and the future of Germany?

First of all WHY would they want to overturn Salic law. Britain HATED being tied to Hanover, many called it a millstone around England's neck, so I can't see the British being thrilled. Second of all, it would be VERY difficult. All of Germany was governed by Salic Law, with the exception of the Austrian Empire, and even then women could only inherit if the ENTIRE male line was extinct. Honestly thats the best you could hope for, a semi-salic law similar to Austria and Russia.
 
First of all WHY would they want to overturn Salic law. Britain HATED being tied to Hanover, many called it a millstone around England's neck, so I can't see the British being thrilled. Second of all, it would be VERY difficult. All of Germany was governed by Salic Law, with the exception of the Austrian Empire, and even then women could only inherit if the ENTIRE male line was extinct. Honestly thats the best you could hope for, a semi-salic law similar to Austria and Russia.

I am not sure that the fact it was normal proves that it could not be different in Hannover. But the "why?" is a significant question.
 
At any point before 1807, by a change to the Brunswick House Succession Laws, approved by the Kaiser. Very simple, providing one was on good terms with the Kaiser. After 1807, I guess the Imperial approval would be unnecessary. There were German states that allowed female succession in various forms.
 

JJohnson

Banned
I just read this article from Wikipedia, which may or may not be correct, saying Hanover had 'semi-salic' law, providing that if Ernest Augustus had not survived 1837, Victoria would've been queen of Hanover. How accurate is that? What would change had that actually occurred?
 
I just read this article from Wikipedia, which may or may not be correct, saying Hanover had 'semi-salic' law, providing that if Ernest Augustus had not survived 1837, Victoria would've been queen of Hanover. How accurate is that? What would change had that actually occurred?

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/royalty/HGBraunschweig.htm#kingdom

You'd have to check who is available besides Ernest to make it clear if Victoria gets it, but this does indeed refer to semi-salic succession.
 
http://www.heraldica.org/topics/royalty/HGBraunschweig.htm#kingdom

You'd have to check who is available besides Ernest to make it clear if Victoria gets it, but this does indeed refer to semi-salic succession.

Ernest had a son,the future George V of Hanover, so it would go to him next. Then the Duke of Sussex, followed by the Duke of Cambridge and his son. So if they all died I guess the throne would go to Victoria since I don't know of any other male line branches of the House of Hanover.
 
Ernest had a son,the future George V of Hanover, so it would go to him next. Then the Duke of Sussex, followed by the Duke of Cambridge and his son. So if they all died I guess the throne would go to Victoria since I don't know of any other male line branches of the House of Hanover.

I'm not so sure. Maybe it could go to the other line of the Welf family, the Dukes of Brunswick.
 
If ALL the issue of Geo III, male and female, were extinct (including the issue of the marriage of the D of Susses to Lady Augusta Murray, illegal by British law, but probably legal by German law); then the next heir to Hanover (as Duke of Brunswick Luneburg, by descent from Ernst I (1497–1546), which is when the lines split, would be Charles II, Duke of Brunswick, who was deposed by his people in favour of his brother William, and was probably insane.

However, the /legal/ heir to the throne of Britain would be the Princess Sophia of Gloucester, eldest daughter of Geo III's brother William Henry, Duke of Gloucester. This was an "improper" marriage, but as it took place in 1766, before the Royal Marriages Act 1772, it was legal under British law (but possibly not under German law, but since there were no male issue that question does not need to be traversed).

The D of Gloucester's older sister Augusta married into the "other" Brunswick line , )married Charles II's grandfather), but the line of succession in Britain takes males first, so goes through the D. of Gloucester's line first.

If Princess Sophia were excluded, then the next heir to the British throne would be Charles II of Brunswick, but through his grandmother , Princess Augusta, not through his father.

Incidentally, neither Charles nor William of Brunswick left children OTL . If that occurred OTL, then the next British heir (assuming Princess Sophia had been excluded) would be the Duke of Wurtemburg, descended from Augusta's daughter. For a Brunswick heir we have to go back to the beyond Henry the Lion of Saxony in the 12th century .ie effectively, no male heir, so the girls get a look in, which /probably/ means the same Duke of Wurtemburg. (EDIT: OTL, or course, Williams heir was Ernst Augustus of Hanover (deposed), the grandson of "our" Ernst, Duke of Cumberland. But TTL, Ernst, Duke of Cumberland is removed, by the term of the PoD)

I think. But this is insanely complicated stuff.
 
Last edited:
So essentially you're more likely to get a Hannover-Brunswick-Wurttemberg-Great Britain PU (what a monster that would be!) than Victoria acceding the throne...

Though that does give an interesting idea- assuming that we have Victoria, but the other male descendents of George III are dead, how would Hannover(+Brunswick)-Wurttemberg affect German politics? We could assume that William is accidentally killed in the rebellion that deposed Charles, meaning that Brunswick would be inherited by Hanover if I'm reading that right, and then the whole lot would go to Wurttemberg in '37.
 
(including the issue of the marriage of the D of Susses to Lady Augusta Murray, illegal by British law, but probably legal by German law);
However, the /legal/ heir to the throne of Britain would be the Princess Sophia of Gloucester, eldest daughter of Geo III's brother William Henry, Duke of Gloucester. This was an "improper" marriage, but as it took place in 1766, before the Royal Marriages Act 1772, it was legal under British law (but possibly not under German law, but since there were no male issue that question does not need to be traversed).
At least the latter marriage would probably have been legal under German law, yes, but I'm not sure about the Duke of Sussex's because arguably the Royal Marriages Act would have counted as a 'house law' on the subject. However I think that under German law both of those marriages would have been counted only as 'morganatic' ones, meaning that the brides weren't 'royal' enough for their children to be counted in the line of succession.

My own suggesion as the least unlikely point for repealing Salic Law in Hanover is as one of the decisions approved at the Congresss of Vienna. The Prince Regent's only child being a daughter might have inspired him to suggest this, but whether he could have got the politicians to go along with it...?
 
At least the latter marriage would probably have been legal under German law, yes, but I'm not sure about the Duke of Sussex's because arguably the Royal Marriages Act would have counted as a 'house law' on the subject. However I think that under German law both of those marriages would have been counted only as 'morganatic' ones, meaning that the brides weren't 'royal' enough for their children to be counted in the line of succession.

My own suggesion as the least unlikely point for repealing Salic Law in Hanover is as one of the decisions approved at the Congresss of Vienna. The Prince Regent's only child being a daughter might have inspired him to suggest this, but whether he could have got the politicians to go along with it...?

Yes, one must liberally besprinkle 'possiblys' and 'probablys'.

From the German point of view the D of Gloucester's was much worse than the D of Sussex's, since the former lady wad illegitimate as well as Unebenbirtig.

Lady Augusta was at least legitimate, and the Manx lordship could be a straw to grasp at. Both were likely, by German law , to be regarded as Ungleiche Ehe ( improper marriage) rather than Morganatische Ehe. A German morganatic marriage had to specifically state that the marriage was morganatic in the marriage contract.

However, arguably, neither was any worse than the marriage of George William to Eleonore d'Olbreuse, their (morganatically illegitimate) daughter, Dorothea of Celle being George I's wife and George II's mother . That marriage was also in flagrant violation of house law.

Acceptability of a marriage was always somewhat dependent on how sharp ones sword was.

By British law, it was almost exactly the reverse. There is no such thing in British law as morganatic marriage, and as the D of Gloucester's preceded the Royal Marriages Act, it was an entirely lawful marriage. The D of Sussex's was null and void in Britain, by the R.M.A.

I rather doubt that there would be support by the powers at Vienna for a change. Prussia would oppose it ( always having a yearning eye on Hanover herself, which would be more difficult with a British union). Austria, I think would likewise prefer to not have Britain potentially involved in Germany. The British Parliament would be strongly opposed, they regarded the sundering of the personal union as a blessing.
 
Lady Augusta was at least legitimate, and the Manx lordship could be a straw to grasp at. Both were likely, by German law , to be regarded as Ungleiche Ehe ( improper marriage) rather than Morganatische Ehe. A German morganatic marriage had to specifically state that the marriage was morganatic in the marriage contract.
The Manx lordship counting for this purpose was an idea that had already occurred to me in the context of a different potential royal weding, but upon checking it seems that Lady Augusta belonged to a different branch of the Murrays rather than to the branch that actually held that position (having inherited it from the [Stanley] Earls of Derby) for a couple of generations.
I had either forgotten or never knew until now that a marriage's 'morganatic' status actually had to be specified in the contract like that instead of simply being the default case for marriages between 'royal' and non-'royal' personages. So, how did an 'improper' marriage differ legally from a 'morganatic' one in terms of the offspring's rights? Was the marriage considered so "improper" that they weren't even counted as legitimate?!?

I rather doubt that there would be support by the powers at Vienna for a change. Prussia would oppose it ( always having a yearning eye on Hanover herself, which would be more difficult with a British union). Austria, I think would likewise prefer to not have Britain potentially involved in Germany. The British Parliament would be strongly opposed, they regarded the sundering of the personal union as a blessing.
I know: After all, I only said "least unlikely"...
 
Last edited:
Top