Possible weirdness
USA becomes a monarchy under Henry of Prussia !
Napoleon kills himself in 1814
Victoria is shot by a boy out hunting
Konstantine is in St Petersburg when the Decembrists strike
he ends up "elected" Tsar
-----------------------
-1- How would the USA deal with being a monarchy from the early stages of Independence ? Would King Henry I of America continue to be gay, or would he marry for the sake of his line and office?
-2- No Napoleonic legacy, his suicide means no memoirs, no glorious return, no myth of invincibility
-3- There would be a long period whereby Ernest is obviously the heir to William, lasting from the mid 1820s until his accession in 1837, unless moves are made to prevent it
-4- Konstantine ends up as Tsar, but with a debt to the revolutionaries, a purge of the army, a quasi-independent Poland, and a pledge to institute democratic reforms
- - -
This is all very well but if the American Revolution was monarchical how would the French one go? If we assume that Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton etc, stay loyal to an American KING, then what course does the French Revolution take ?
It may well be that it takes an OTL course but on an OTL schedule, a later overthrow of the monarchy, an attempt first to get abdications for the Orleans line, then a coup against them maybe by Joubert and Carnot. Later this in turn is overthrown by General Bonaparte, aided by Kleber. Maybe things take a different course, a different time-frame so that its maybe 1810 before he declares himself Emperor.
US history would need to be inter-meshed with this - Henry died OTL in 1802; he HAD married in 1752 but had no kids (cos he was gay). Maybe he would have divorced her in the USA and remarried, but to whom? By 1786 he was around sixty, as would have been his wife. A divorce and remarriage would have worked and made sense, to all.
The alternative would be an elected monarchy, as per the Poles. This may well have looked a realistic option. On King Henry's death in 1802, there would have been a candidate lined up, maybe several... There would be a vote in Congress, but a period of inter-regnum.
They would be looking for a Protestant N European prince, certainly not from Britain! If a Prussian option is chosen, then Prince Karl, born 1781, a younger brother of Frederick William III (acceded 1797) would be the option.
There is no Danish option (the line of succession is so narrow), whilst the Swedes may well NOT go for Bernadotte in this world, and stick with the SINGLE Vasa heir. There is also no Dutch heir from the ruling line for the same reason.
Whilst there may be other German princelings, the Prussian option seems most logical. I don't know buggery about Karl - he lived until 1846. In this timeline, with an American heritage always dangled before him and acceded to when he was 21, then he would make an advantageous marriage with his American kingship in mind. Unlike his predecessor, this marriage is likely to have heirs, and whilst the US kingship may be elective, it will become like the Danish or the HRE - ie election is confirmation of hereditary
If we assume he has a kid in around 1805, then he secures his line. His wife would no doubt come from a secondary German power (Anhalt etc).
- - -
Such as Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton are thus Prime Ministers or such to the King of the Americas - oh, they may HAVE the title of President, as until now it does not denote top-level independent ruler
Washington and Hamilton may well be rivals, and a term of Washington be succeeded by a term of Hamilton's. The first president of King Charles I of America's reign also could well be Alexander Hamilton.
A two-party system could well have evolved with leaders and Burr is the Opposition leader to Hamilton's administration. There would be no Washingtonian example of a two-term limit, and it would be more like the system later to evolve in Britain.
- - -
1818 sees the defeat of Napoleon's empire and his despairing sucide
Louis XVIII enters Paris as a puppet of the Allies
As a note on French dynastics - their own people executed the Orleans line, whilst the Conde line survived and was never assassinated. Louis-Philippe (II of Orleans) would have become King Louis XVII on the deposition on Louis XVI. Later the Dauphin of the latter would have died in custody, whilst Louis XVII and his 3 sons (Louis Philippe, Antoine Philippe and Louis Charles) were executed after the turn of the century
The 9th Prince of Conde died in 1830 in OTL his son and heir having been executed by Napoleon in 1804. In terms of enumeration, the 8th Prince dies in 1818, the 9th in 1830 and in this ATL the 10th prince born in 1772 accedes to the title in 1830 at the age of 58. Conde however is further from the succession than Orleans was, and has the Spanish and Parma lines in between. It is, however, a handy reserve line.
- - -
What role does the USA take in the wars?
Up until 1802 King Henry is not going to want to go against the land of his birth, whilst Washington, Arnold and Jefferson want to keep the USA out of the wars in Europe.
Upon the accession of King Charles I in 1802, aged 21, things will get more complicated.
Henry I was uncle to the King of Prussia until 1797, great-uncle thereafter. Upon his accession, King Charles is brother of the extant king, Frederick William III
Prussia is first humbled under Joubert-Carnot, but is finally crushed by Napoleon, probably around 1806, a stepping stone on the road to declaring himself Emperor in 1810, after Kleber's death
Butterflies mean no Egyptian expedition in the late 1790s, BUT after Prussia's defeat, and before Napoleon's accession as Emperor, Russia may well agree to come on board with the division of the Ottoman Empire as the price, and Kleber could well be the Marshal who leads this expedition.
Naval affairs would not be so disastrous in this French Revolution, as this started out as a monarchial revolution, only later over-throwing the alternative monarchy. The navy remains strong, fights in far-off seas etc, and its first disaster is in supporting Kleber when Napoleon's plans for an invasion of Britain, by dragging the RN across the Atlantic and back, serve mainly to keep the French occupied, but allow a second British fleet to enter the Med, pass through to the East and repeat Actium almost exactly by destroying Kleber's fleet at sea.
In this ATL, Napoleon can be assumed to have won the support of Esterhazy who becomes King of Hungary, broken away from the Habsburg empire
As per OTL, Napoleon's downfall is Russia, but in this ATL he is supported by Vasa Sweden and by Esterhazy's Hungary and it is a 3-year war which eventually ends with his defeat in 1817 after Britain knocks out Sweden navally, plus landings at Gothenburg and Stockholm, and . . . something else
- - -
We need to work out the USA and Spain and Portugal in this other world. Joubert and Carnot's regime is unlikely to play hardball with Spain, whilst Napoleon upon his take-over is going to need to rely on Madrid to control a major flank of his naval and defensive policy. Probably only after the failuire of his Invasion (of Britain) plans, and Kleber's defeat and death in Egypt, would Spain attempt a breakaway - maybe the USA is invading Florida at this time, and Madrid is trying to save it by disengaging from the war.
So around 1810 Napoleon invades Spain and triggers the OTL type series of events. With a king in Philadelphia, there is of course a different differential in the New World, and we could well see a revolution in Mexico ask a Catholic prince to become king, whilst maybe Peru declares loyalty to the deposed king and invites a direct Regent, whom in this ATL is appointed from the royal family.
Perhaps the flight of the Portuguese royal family still happens, just a bit later than OTL.
Would Napoleon appoint his brothers to kingships as per OTL ? Since here he doesn't become emperor til 1810, the chances and system available to him is limited and different. The period of his joint rule with Kleber, would see other generals appointed as dictators in other states - eg Murat in Naples, Desaix in the Netherlands.
Once crowned Emperor, Napoleon would begin to change his approach - eg Murat as his bro in law would rise from dictator to King of Naples (but not Sicily which the British fleet defends)
Louis could well end up as King of the Netherlands, Jerome even as King of Westphalia, but Spain would be a reach, so he could well be looking to govern remotely at first (as per OTL) and only overthrow the Borbons when they look likely to desert the alliance. I guess Joseph is the best option here, as his older brother,
We are after all looking for CONVERGENCE and not wild divergence here, looking to ride the horse of history across unfamiliar pastures rather than to change our mount
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
USA becomes a monarchy under Henry of Prussia !
Napoleon kills himself in 1814
Victoria is shot by a boy out hunting
Konstantine is in St Petersburg when the Decembrists strike
he ends up "elected" Tsar
-----------------------
-1- How would the USA deal with being a monarchy from the early stages of Independence ? Would King Henry I of America continue to be gay, or would he marry for the sake of his line and office?
-2- No Napoleonic legacy, his suicide means no memoirs, no glorious return, no myth of invincibility
-3- There would be a long period whereby Ernest is obviously the heir to William, lasting from the mid 1820s until his accession in 1837, unless moves are made to prevent it
-4- Konstantine ends up as Tsar, but with a debt to the revolutionaries, a purge of the army, a quasi-independent Poland, and a pledge to institute democratic reforms
- - -
This is all very well but if the American Revolution was monarchical how would the French one go? If we assume that Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton etc, stay loyal to an American KING, then what course does the French Revolution take ?
It may well be that it takes an OTL course but on an OTL schedule, a later overthrow of the monarchy, an attempt first to get abdications for the Orleans line, then a coup against them maybe by Joubert and Carnot. Later this in turn is overthrown by General Bonaparte, aided by Kleber. Maybe things take a different course, a different time-frame so that its maybe 1810 before he declares himself Emperor.
US history would need to be inter-meshed with this - Henry died OTL in 1802; he HAD married in 1752 but had no kids (cos he was gay). Maybe he would have divorced her in the USA and remarried, but to whom? By 1786 he was around sixty, as would have been his wife. A divorce and remarriage would have worked and made sense, to all.
The alternative would be an elected monarchy, as per the Poles. This may well have looked a realistic option. On King Henry's death in 1802, there would have been a candidate lined up, maybe several... There would be a vote in Congress, but a period of inter-regnum.
They would be looking for a Protestant N European prince, certainly not from Britain! If a Prussian option is chosen, then Prince Karl, born 1781, a younger brother of Frederick William III (acceded 1797) would be the option.
There is no Danish option (the line of succession is so narrow), whilst the Swedes may well NOT go for Bernadotte in this world, and stick with the SINGLE Vasa heir. There is also no Dutch heir from the ruling line for the same reason.
Whilst there may be other German princelings, the Prussian option seems most logical. I don't know buggery about Karl - he lived until 1846. In this timeline, with an American heritage always dangled before him and acceded to when he was 21, then he would make an advantageous marriage with his American kingship in mind. Unlike his predecessor, this marriage is likely to have heirs, and whilst the US kingship may be elective, it will become like the Danish or the HRE - ie election is confirmation of hereditary
If we assume he has a kid in around 1805, then he secures his line. His wife would no doubt come from a secondary German power (Anhalt etc).
- - -
Such as Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton are thus Prime Ministers or such to the King of the Americas - oh, they may HAVE the title of President, as until now it does not denote top-level independent ruler
Washington and Hamilton may well be rivals, and a term of Washington be succeeded by a term of Hamilton's. The first president of King Charles I of America's reign also could well be Alexander Hamilton.
A two-party system could well have evolved with leaders and Burr is the Opposition leader to Hamilton's administration. There would be no Washingtonian example of a two-term limit, and it would be more like the system later to evolve in Britain.
- - -
1818 sees the defeat of Napoleon's empire and his despairing sucide
Louis XVIII enters Paris as a puppet of the Allies
As a note on French dynastics - their own people executed the Orleans line, whilst the Conde line survived and was never assassinated. Louis-Philippe (II of Orleans) would have become King Louis XVII on the deposition on Louis XVI. Later the Dauphin of the latter would have died in custody, whilst Louis XVII and his 3 sons (Louis Philippe, Antoine Philippe and Louis Charles) were executed after the turn of the century
The 9th Prince of Conde died in 1830 in OTL his son and heir having been executed by Napoleon in 1804. In terms of enumeration, the 8th Prince dies in 1818, the 9th in 1830 and in this ATL the 10th prince born in 1772 accedes to the title in 1830 at the age of 58. Conde however is further from the succession than Orleans was, and has the Spanish and Parma lines in between. It is, however, a handy reserve line.
- - -
What role does the USA take in the wars?
Up until 1802 King Henry is not going to want to go against the land of his birth, whilst Washington, Arnold and Jefferson want to keep the USA out of the wars in Europe.
Upon the accession of King Charles I in 1802, aged 21, things will get more complicated.
Henry I was uncle to the King of Prussia until 1797, great-uncle thereafter. Upon his accession, King Charles is brother of the extant king, Frederick William III
Prussia is first humbled under Joubert-Carnot, but is finally crushed by Napoleon, probably around 1806, a stepping stone on the road to declaring himself Emperor in 1810, after Kleber's death
Butterflies mean no Egyptian expedition in the late 1790s, BUT after Prussia's defeat, and before Napoleon's accession as Emperor, Russia may well agree to come on board with the division of the Ottoman Empire as the price, and Kleber could well be the Marshal who leads this expedition.
Naval affairs would not be so disastrous in this French Revolution, as this started out as a monarchial revolution, only later over-throwing the alternative monarchy. The navy remains strong, fights in far-off seas etc, and its first disaster is in supporting Kleber when Napoleon's plans for an invasion of Britain, by dragging the RN across the Atlantic and back, serve mainly to keep the French occupied, but allow a second British fleet to enter the Med, pass through to the East and repeat Actium almost exactly by destroying Kleber's fleet at sea.
In this ATL, Napoleon can be assumed to have won the support of Esterhazy who becomes King of Hungary, broken away from the Habsburg empire
As per OTL, Napoleon's downfall is Russia, but in this ATL he is supported by Vasa Sweden and by Esterhazy's Hungary and it is a 3-year war which eventually ends with his defeat in 1817 after Britain knocks out Sweden navally, plus landings at Gothenburg and Stockholm, and . . . something else
- - -
We need to work out the USA and Spain and Portugal in this other world. Joubert and Carnot's regime is unlikely to play hardball with Spain, whilst Napoleon upon his take-over is going to need to rely on Madrid to control a major flank of his naval and defensive policy. Probably only after the failuire of his Invasion (of Britain) plans, and Kleber's defeat and death in Egypt, would Spain attempt a breakaway - maybe the USA is invading Florida at this time, and Madrid is trying to save it by disengaging from the war.
So around 1810 Napoleon invades Spain and triggers the OTL type series of events. With a king in Philadelphia, there is of course a different differential in the New World, and we could well see a revolution in Mexico ask a Catholic prince to become king, whilst maybe Peru declares loyalty to the deposed king and invites a direct Regent, whom in this ATL is appointed from the royal family.
Perhaps the flight of the Portuguese royal family still happens, just a bit later than OTL.
Would Napoleon appoint his brothers to kingships as per OTL ? Since here he doesn't become emperor til 1810, the chances and system available to him is limited and different. The period of his joint rule with Kleber, would see other generals appointed as dictators in other states - eg Murat in Naples, Desaix in the Netherlands.
Once crowned Emperor, Napoleon would begin to change his approach - eg Murat as his bro in law would rise from dictator to King of Naples (but not Sicily which the British fleet defends)
Louis could well end up as King of the Netherlands, Jerome even as King of Westphalia, but Spain would be a reach, so he could well be looking to govern remotely at first (as per OTL) and only overthrow the Borbons when they look likely to desert the alliance. I guess Joseph is the best option here, as his older brother,
We are after all looking for CONVERGENCE and not wild divergence here, looking to ride the horse of history across unfamiliar pastures rather than to change our mount
Best Regards
Grey Wolf