King Ernest (1840 to ????)

Just a quick query, wasn't Frederick named Augustus, and wasn't he older than Adolphus?

I've been using Frederick as a shorthand for Augustus Frederick outside of the actual 'story' as we'd have to deal with Ernest Augustus and the Sussex children Augustus and Augusta - as well as an Augusta on the Cambridge side too - otherwise.

Have clarified this in the previous post and swapped the order of Frederick and Adolphus around.
 
I look then over and I give my vote for 5, William, King of Wurttemberg. William honestly seem like a perfect match. His reforms, a successful domestic policy that saw Wurtteberg pass the Year without Summer and a common identity, his goals of a 'third Germany' against Prussia and Austria, and he's a Protestant with children.

If there anyone you could do the most with, he's your guy.

It really does seem like it will come down to Cambridge or Wurttemberg if the question is raised - and I'm still leaning towards the immediate royal family not wanting to stab Ernest in the back.

The Brunswicks are either undesirable or have no issue - which, to me, upon reflection, makes me think that William of Wurttemberg is the lead candidate.
 
How likely is a British revolution in this scenario? Ernest Augustus IIRC held some reactionary views and 1848 probably wouldn't be kind to him.
 
How likely is a British revolution in this scenario? Ernest Augustus IIRC held some reactionary views and 1848 probably wouldn't be kind to him.

No a revolution by any means. Even in OTL, Republican ideas never had a place in the UK. The Monarchy never reach that low. Ernest can sour the image of the Monarchy and do a bit of damage, but no revolution.

What is the idea here is a Glorious Revolution Part Two.
 
It really does seem like it will come down to Cambridge or Wurttemberg if the question is raised - and I'm still leaning towards the immediate royal family not wanting to stab Ernest in the back.

The Brunswicks are either undesirable or have no issue - which, to me, upon reflection, makes me think that William of Wurttemberg is the lead candidate.

Eh. Not so much backstabbing Ernest, but with him becoming so dislike, so incredibly unpopular, so unwilling to rule without his arch-reactionary, alienating everyone around him, giving them a bad name, they step to the side and hoping to the best. (Allowing William of Wurttemberg to rise.)

Maybe have Cambridge not want to be King pre-say or something. And hey, Hanover can still get a good deal in William's Third Germany ideas. (Heck, the Hanoverians weren't too happy at having their Kings live in Britain as it was.)
 
If we were writing a television show then I would imagine the finale to the premiere would be the arrival of Ernest and Frederica at Buckingham Palace.

I am currently pondering what to do with Albert as he is now a widower - might he take himself home, to Coburg, or try to carve out a life for himself with Leopold in Belgium.

He will remain in Britain for a little - but I imagine that he would have to move out of Buckingham Palace along with his aunt/mother-in-law and take up residence at another location - with Claremont House, still privately owned by Leopold, the likely home.

Victoria mourned for decades - but Albert is only in his twenties with plenty of room to find a new bride. Are there any obvious candidates that should be considered or that Leopold and the Dowager Duchess might push onto him?

Could Alexandrine of Baden get a look-in for Albert instead of being doomed to a life with Ernest?
 
So, what would a British Revolution of 1848 look like in a scenario where Ernest Augustus screws up badly? Would it be a "Second Glorious Revolution" or create a Republic?
 
So, what would a British Revolution of 1848 look like in a scenario where Ernest Augustus screws up badly? Would it be a "Second Glorious Revolution" or create a Republic?

Well - we have eight years of timeline to travel through before we reach 1848 so I hadn't given that far ahead too much thought.

I have an incredibly rough chain of events noted down for 1840 and 1841, but that has room for development as things are put forward.
 
Well - we have eight years of timeline to travel through before we reach 1848 so I hadn't given that far ahead too much thought.

I have an incredibly rough chain of events noted down for 1840 and 1841, but that has room for development as things are put forward.
Fair enough, but I still have a feeling that Ernest Augustus' reign will end in a bloody revolution in 1848.
 
One does also have to take into account the Treason Act of 1702 which states: t is treason to "endeavour to deprive or hinder any person who shall be the next in succession to the crown ... from succeeding ... to the imperial crown of this realm"
 
William of Wurttemberg made his claim through George IIIs sister, Augusta Sophia (he was her grandson, via her eldest daughter if memory serves).

And re: the Treason Act could be replaced should Parliament have the desire or the majority to do so. The theory would be that he had disqualified himself so hadn't been the natural heir - that would mean preventing the rightful heir (Sussex in this case) would be allowing him to be King. But we shall see.
 
William of Wurttemberg made his claim through George IIIs sister, Augusta Sophia (he was her grandson, via her eldest daughter if memory serves).

And re: the Treason Act could be replaced should Parliament have the desire or the majority to do so. The theory would be that he had disqualified himself so hadn't been the natural heir - that would mean preventing the rightful heir (Sussex in this case) would be allowing him to be King. But we shall see.

Ah I see, and interesting but what would he have done to have disqualified himself, other than being very conservative
 

TruthfulPanda

Gone Fishin'
It's also shaped British politics since it came into being
As long as for the Powers That Be played along - judging adherence to outweigh the disruption from a new Glorious Revolution.
Here we have a King that is 100% certain to clash with Parliament for as long as he lives - and has a blind son ...
 
As long as for the Powers That Be played along - judging adherence to outweigh the disruption from a new Glorious Revolution.
Here we have a King that is 100% certain to clash with Parliament for as long as he lives - and has a blind son ...

This is very true, though surely for them it'd be more beneficial to remove Ernest, and install a regency around George of Cumberland, that wayt they can get ever more power.
 
So, what would a British Revolution of 1848 look like in a scenario where Ernest Augustus screws up badly? Would it be a "Second Glorious Revolution" or create a Republic?

Again, a British Revolution and Republic is just impossible for the UK. Even for someone like Ernest Augustus, no one would want a Republic, just a new King, so "Second Glorious Revolution" it is.

Another point for William of Wurttemberg: He was call "Nestor among the princes of Europe" for his dealings between Russia and France during the Crimean War. What is not more epic title then 'Britannia's Nestor'?

This is very true, though surely for them it'd be more beneficial to remove Ernest, and install a regency around George of Cumberland, that wayt they can get ever more power.

I doubt they try that. He was just as reactionary as his father, and his reputation would be too closely tie to Ernest. The public won'g go for it, and I doubt the political parties would want to deal with him any longer then they had to deal with his father.
 
One does also have to take into account the Treason Act of 1702 which states: t is treason to "endeavour to deprive or hinder any person who shall be the next in succession to the crown ... from succeeding ... to the imperial crown of this realm"
Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason
 
Top