List of Alternate Monarchs and Aristocratic Lineage

A surviving son of Alexander I AND Helena of Moscow is interesting in a way that his uncle Vasily had epic problems with his divorse IOTL, while at the same time loathed his brothers. So he may well (with condition of conversion) designate his Lithuanian nephew heir to Muscovy - or at least a contender.
OTOH if Alexander has a son with Helena and still dies in 1506 then there would be a mess in Poland and (especially) Lithuania-in such case Sigismund likely succeede, as his nephew would still be a kid, but Ivan would declare, that his grandson is rightful ruler of Lithuania and that Sigismund is usurper, nice way to start a war.
 
Last edited:
Double Dutch match would be something either desperate or stupid given that match of Mary IOTL was something thought below the rank of the eldest daughter of the King.

This.
In which case one imagines Charlie would look either for a more prestigious Protestant marriage or look to a catholic?
 
Alexander Jagiellon and his family-second version (Helena survives too and they have more kids, including future ruler of Muscovy):

Alexander I (1461-1518) Grand Duke of Lithuania 1492, King of Poland 1501, m. Helena of Moscow (1476-1541)

1) Casimir (1497-1550) Grand Duke of Lithuania, King of Poland, m. Eleanor of Austria (1498-1558)

2) Hedwig (1499-1546) m. Stanisław (1500-1524) Duke of Mazovia

3) Vladislaus (1501-1506)

4) Helena (1504-1560) m. Joachim II (1505-1571) Elector of Brandenburg

5) Elizabeth (1507)

6) Alexander (1509-1569) Grand Duke of Moscow 1533, m. Helena Glinska???

Aleksander Aleksandrowicz Jagiellon is declared heir by his uncle Vasily III under condition that he'd convert to Orthodox faith, being more ambitious that religious he agrees-fact, that he has Orthodox mother helps him, and for Glinska-Mikhail Glinski was his father's close friend, so he may know his niece and fall in love with her and secretly marry her Sigismund Augustus-Barbara Radziwiłł style? I'm not sure how likely it was.
@Valena
 
Last edited:
Not gonna happen. Unless there was some sort of change way back when (I'm not even sure how early it would need to be, to be honest, probably with the Carolingians or Ottonians) a woman can't be elected empress for the simple reason that in Germany, Salic Law (the real one, not the French bastardized version of it) applied. And the electors were all male. Which makes it questionable why they would a) elect a woman over her male-line (presumably of age) uncle and b) if there was no other male candidate, why they wouldn't put themselves forward to marry her (since she seems to be single).
You do make a good point, I have to admit, and even if I say that they elected her after the other contender died in their war it would still need some wide explanations on why they would elect her seeing as she had male children (even if a late husband, her brother would have died when she was 37, she was by that point long married with children, including Rudolph IV).

I think in this case I'll need to admit something doesn't work and make that in the end of the succession war instead of her getting the throne her son is elected as emperor (even if he would have been a young teen by that point) while Maria Antonia remains as the ruler of the Hapsburg monarchy (or at least the Crownlands and Hungary), although I admit if (cof cof when cof cof) I do a follow up to this line, I'll probably have the empire become at least male-preference cognatic at some point in the 19th or early 20th centuries and more centralized in the sense of the power of the smaller states waning or being willingly lost to the emperor (which was a bit of what I was trying to indicate with the changes in imperial succession)

Not even post-Westphalia with all Ferdinand III (who was a pretty smart cookie as Habsburgs went) legal finangling of grabbing more power for the Habsburgs/emperor by playing the members of the empire off against one another (Brandenburg vs Neuburg; the Palatinate vs Bavaria; etc) did he try to pass a law that required a Habsburg to be elected. France and Sweden tried to insert a clause at Westphalia that the position couldn't be hereditary (i.e. that two members of the same family couldn't be elected in succession) but a clause to create such a succession? The electors would all have to be underage kids to allow it. France would never allow it.
And even if they did manage to make it hereditary somehow, hereditary in the German sense meant "Salic Law". The Landshut War of Succession and Bavarian War of Succession were all fought by parties who had an interest in either maintaining Salic Law. Pragmatic Sanction of OTL was more an attempt to push what was, in effect, a house law through as an imperial law. You know why Karl VI had an issue pushing it through and had to bribe people to accept it? Because the German princes were afraid that if they allowed such a law to pass that their own lands would become inheritable by the female line.
Even the Second Reich established in the 19th century was a boys' club - had Wilhelm II had seven daughters instead of sons, and his son had died without issue? None of those girls could've inherited as Empress Wilhelmine. Instead, the imperial crown would've gone to his brother. Then his brother's sons. If Heinrich had no sons, then the crown would've gone to Wilhelm I's eldest brother's line.

People often think that the College of Electors was the highest body and that the Empire was an absolute monarchy, but there was both a Reichstag (imperial parliament) and a Reichshof (essentially an imperial law court) that would need to register such a law. Since you've kept all the inter-border insanity that was a pre-1800 empire, that means you have nearly 300 votes in the Reichstag that need to agree on registering a law to not only make the position hereditary (de facto) to the Habsburgs but also allow a woman to succeed/rule. And then, since you decided for still more insanity by allowing people such as Tudors/Stuarts (or whatever dynasty is ruling England) and Bourbons (you mentioned the prince de Condé having lands in the empire) to have territories such as Fulda and Condétown, they would also have a seat/vote in the Reichstag, and no doubt control a few more votes/seats. Which means that France/England are going to use their voice in the Reichstag (as France and Sweden did at Westphalia) to sow chaos and oppose the Habsburgs, since a strong empire means one that stops tearing itself apart and can take them on.
I must admit I also didn't really think about the other components of the HRE's government. But, in light of it, heres me trying to explain after thinking about it for a bit.

The reasoning I have behind the making of the position be de facto hereditary is/was, I admit, confusing, being based around the idea of the Hapsburgs managing to exert a larger influence over the empire due to coming out of the Thirty Years' War analogue with stronger base and through that managing to remain not only the nominal but de facto head honchos of the HRE and being capable of either convincing or forcing a large enough percentage of the empire's states to agree to their changes. About the other states exerting influence through their territories within the HRE (Britain through Fulda, Denmark through Schelswig-Holstein and France through Condé-held Strassbourg), my reasoning about them not getting involved on the changes in the law was that the Hapsburgs did it at a good moment as while France tried to sow chaos (and was the main backer of the uncle in the succession war) on the empire, both Britain and Denmark, which had influence through Fulda and Schelswig-Holstein, had close family ties to the Hapsburgs, with a British princess as Empress and Rudolph III's sister being married to the Danish king.

About the female inheritance, I never really understood why the germans didn't want women inheriting in any way shape or form (since in the end when their males ended they always were gobbled up by some other branch of the family, although short-sighted misoginy is probably the reason), but in this case I admit I may have done a large amount of mental gymnastics to make it work and it would need an impressive amount of explanation for that. The closest thing to an explanation I have is that Karl VI passed the change in the succession of the Hapsburg Monarchy (and not the empire, as he either considered it a given or didn't think about it) in a good moment and even then it was a close call on the Reichstag due to the reasons you mentioned above (reason why the uncle, which I'm going to call Ferdinand, had enough support to start a war over it later on), with the law also specifically mentioning that it would not have any correlation to the other states of the empire in the matter of their own succession (although many of her supporters would change their laws to semi-salic (or "if every single male in this family dies, then a woman can inherit") in the aftermath of the war).

Does that make sense to you? (It does to me, but...)
Sorry if this sounds snarky, but the empire being made any more hereditary than it was (OTL even the elector of Hannover - who under his "letters patent" creating him elector was obliged to always vote Habsburg didn't in 1741 after Karl VI died) seems implausible under the scenario you posited.
It does sound very snarky, but I get why you're being snarky, some things that I wrote sound extremely absurd without some explanation (or even with it)
 
TL idea — ALT William & Mary: Edmund, Duke of Somerset survives infancy and has issue.

Edmund, Duke of York (21 February 1499—4 December 1523), married Lady Margaret Courtenay (b. 1499, d. 1526) in 1517.

1. Henry, Earl of Pembroke (b. 1517, d. 1518)

2. Arthur, Earl of Pembroke (b. 1519, d. 1519)

3. William III, King of England (b. 1520), married Mary I, Queen of England in 1538.

1. Catherine, Princess of England (b. 1539)

2. Edmund, Prince of Wales (b. 1541)

3. Margaret, Princess of England (b. 1543, d. 1544)

4. William, Duke of York (b. 1546)

5. Elizabeth, Princess of England (b. 1549)

6. George, Duke of Somerset (b. 1552, d. 1554)


NOTES: Edmund dies in 1523, aged 24 and is succeeded by his only surviving son. William loses his mother three years later in 1526 and becames a ward of the Crown. He is betrothed to his cousin and childhood companion Mary from 1525 until 1533, the betrothal is broken after the former princess is declared a bastard.

William, having been Henry's heir presumptive for most of his reign, is eyed with some suspicion by the Boleyns and their allies. He leaves court in early 1534 and retires to his estates.

He is summoned back in 1536, shortly after Anne's execution, once again in the King's favour. Mary herself is reconciled with her father around 1537, and the betrothal is reinstated, the couple marries in 1538.
Wouldn't Henry VIII having a nephew to succeed him help prevent his divorce from Catherine and the break from Rome?
 
Wouldn't Henry VIII having a nephew to succeed him help prevent his divorce from Catherine and the break from Rome?
Would be fun though if Henry not caring about having a son would lead him to having a son - he outlived Catherine, if he remarried differently after her death he might have more sons than IOTL.
 
Wouldn't Henry VIII having a nephew to succeed him help prevent his divorce from Catherine and the break from Rome?
Initially it would as succession seemed assured, but things took a turn from 1527 onwards, after Anne Boleyn entered the scene and Henry grew obsessed with her. He didn't mind stepping over his own kid and treating her awfully to get what he wanted, I doubt he would care much for his nephew.
He would still deem England's lack of heirs a curse by fault of Katherine and would be pretty assured of getting a son by younger, healthier Anne. So at this point in his head Mary is a illegitimate and there's no need of William.
 
About the female inheritance, I never really understood why the germans didn't want women inheriting in any way shape or form (since in the end when their males ended they always were gobbled up by some other branch of the family, although short-sighted misoginy is probably the reason), but in this case I admit I may have done a large amount of mental gymnastics to make it work and it would need an impressive amount of explanation for that.
Simply put. If you're the elector of Brandenburg and female succession is allowed, the duke of Mecklenburg has an only daughter. You marry your son to Mecklenburg's daughter and suddenly your grandson is elector of Brandenburg AND duke of Mecklenburg. Which means you can build up a massive power bloc by inheriting (for instance) Mecklenburg, Saxony, Brunswick, Oldenburg. You take it into your head "hmm, what's the emperor done for me lately" and you rise up in rebellion and you end up with the empire having a TTL Seven Weeks War INTERNALLY.
I'll probably have the empire become at least male-preference cognatic at some point in the 19th or early 20th centuries and more centralized in the sense of the power of the smaller states waning or being willingly lost to the emperor (which was a bit of what I was trying to indicate with the changes in imperial succession)
Even the Austrian empire of the 19th century DIDN'T technically allow for female succession. If it DID nobody would've minded that Crown Prince Rudolf's only child was a girl.

Hapsburgs managing to exert a larger influence over the empire due to coming out of the Thirty Years' War analogue with stronger base
If they HAD/DID any better than OTL the deck would be stacked against them. The German princes would be united and find support from everyone else in Europe in trying to curb the Habsburgs. Ferdinand III really had to WORK miracles that by the time he died in 1657 the Habsburg reputation was rehabbed enough that they were willing to stall the election until Leopold I turned 18. But Ferdinand had to GIVE up some things (the idea of a single imperial army, for instance; think there was a tax thing as well @Vitruvius @Benevolence probably know more) to GET the German princes back on side.

It was a balancing act.
 
Would be fun though if Henry not caring about having a son would lead him to having a son - he outlived Catherine, if he remarried differently after her death he might have more sons than IOTL.
Precisely. And his reputation in the rest of Europe wouldn't have been tainted by his treatment of Catherine or Anne's execution. Which increases his chances of getting a princess as second wife, probably one of Catherine's great nieces—Dorothea or Christina of Denmark or Maria of Viseu.
 
Initially it would as succession seemed assured, but things took a turn from 1527 onwards, after Anne Boleyn entered the scene and Henry grew obsessed with her. He didn't mind stepping over his own kid and treating her awfully to get what he wanted, I doubt he would care much for his nephew.
He would still deem England's lack of heirs a curse by fault of Katherine and would be pretty assured of getting a son by younger, healthier Anne. So at this point in his head Mary is a illegitimate and there's no need of William.
Seeing it from this perspective I guess it makes sense and it's not too ASB or out of character for Henry if Anne still refuses to be his mistress.
 
Last edited:
Initially it would as succession seemed assured, but things took a turn from 1527 onwards, after Anne Boleyn entered the scene and Henry grew obsessed with her. He didn't mind stepping over his own kid and treating her awfully to get what he wanted, I doubt he would care much for his nephew.
He would still deem England's lack of heirs a curse by fault of Katherine and would be pretty assured of getting a son by younger, healthier Anne. So at this point in his head Mary is a illegitimate and there's no need of William.
Seeing it from this perspective I guess it makes sense and it's not too ASB or out of character for Henry if Anne still refuses to be his mistress.
Absolutely ASB. The only reason for which Henry divorced Catherine was the need of a son as heir for continuing the Tudor dynasty. If Henry had a nephew by his brother (but likely he would find acceptable also a not royal Tudor boy, if Jasper had left legitimate heirs) then said boy would marry Mary and be named as heir without any need of divorcing Catherine or breaking with Rome. If Catherine died (around her or Jane’s OTL deaths), then Henry would remarry (at that point to Christina or Maria, with the first one as most likely match) and likely get a son of his own
 
Seeing it from this perspective I guess it makes sense and it's not too ASB or out of character for Henry if Anne still refuses to be his mistress.
I guessed the same. And by the way do you have some ideas as to the marriages of Mary & William's surviving kids? I'm open to suggestions.
 
Absolutely ASB. The only reason for which Henry divorced Catherine was the need of a son as heir for continuing the Tudor dynasty. If Henry had a nephew by his brother (but likely he would find acceptable also a not royal Tudor boy, if Jasper had left legitimate heirs) then said boy would marry Mary and be named as heir without any need of divorcing Catherine or breaking with Rome. If Catherine died (around her or Jane’s OTL deaths), then Henry would remarry (at that point to Christina or Maria, with the first one as most likely match) and likely get a son of his own
Thanks for the input. I'll re-think this through, but I honestly don't see Henry relying on one seven-year-old boy to carry his dynasty.
 
I've never heard of any of these possible matches - thank you for giving me such options!


I have never heard of George Holford before but now I'm very, very interested. Two of his sisters married earls so it might not be such a stretch to bump him up to an earldom to make him acceptable. I honestly just want Toria to be happy.
i would love if Toria had married (by my nickname to get an idea of my obsession with wales sisters hahaha). I always wondered if she just didn't want to get married or had an impossible love (Rosebery?).
George holford always seemed like a great match. He was as wealthy as Macduff, owned Dorchester House in london (currently Dorchester Hotel) and Westonbirt House in Gloucestershire, a huge collection of art and looked just handsome at the time. He served as Equerry for the Duke of Clarence (1888 - 1892) and for the Prince of Wales (from 1892) so he was definitely close to the royal family. He married a widow in 1912 (he was 52) and had no children. With his death, an indebted nephew inherited his properties that were later sold.
He would be created 1st Earl of Dorchester (by Queen Victoria) and later 1st Duke of Dorchester (by Edward VII).
 
Simply put. If you're the elector of Brandenburg and female succession is allowed, the duke of Mecklenburg has an only daughter. You marry your son to Mecklenburg's daughter and suddenly your grandson is elector of Brandenburg AND duke of Mecklenburg. Which means you can build up a massive power bloc by inheriting (for instance) Mecklenburg, Saxony, Brunswick, Oldenburg. You take it into your head "hmm, what's the emperor done for me lately" and you rise up in rebellion and you end up with the empire having a TTL Seven Weeks War INTERNALLY.
Thanks for the intel, hadn't really though of it that way (a bit ironic that salic law still caused states to gobble up each other since at some point the closest male relative ends up being the ruler of another state in the empire)
Even the Austrian empire of the 19th century DIDN'T technically allow for female succession. If it DID nobody would've minded that Crown Prince Rudolf's only child was a girl.
I know that, and? (I know this sound snipy, but I know that the Austrians still practiced Salic Law until their empire's end in OTL and I don't really get what's the point on it. Tell me that the Hapsburgs would never ever end salic law?)
If they HAD/DID any better than OTL the deck would be stacked against them. The German princes would be united and find support from everyone else in Europe in trying to curb the Habsburgs. Ferdinand III really had to WORK miracles that by the time he died in 1657 the Habsburg reputation was rehabbed enough that they were willing to stall the election until Leopold I turned 18. But Ferdinand had to GIVE up some things (the idea of a single imperial army, for instance; think there was a tax thing as well @Vitruvius @Benevolence probably know more) to GET the German princes back on side.
About the Hapsburgs ending a bit better, ok, I may have worded it wrong, it was meant to be more that due to the war being even worse than OTL the smaller states of the western and northern HRE were really weak (I know, then you'll ask why they even retained the smaller states instead of just annexing them, but please bear with me here), and so the Hapsburgs ended up stronger in comparison to them. At the same time, the religious changing of the Hapsburgs (I think something in the lines of alt-Ferdinand III being protestant, which caused the war to last longer due to a Hapsburg civil war) resulted in them allying with some of the protestant states of Europe and the Empire (in the previous line I showed a marriage between the heir to the British thrones and a Hapsburg Princess, as well as a daughter of the ruler of the Palatinate being Holy Roman Empress, which was to hint at that), which was what I meant when I said they had a stronger power base, they would still probably need to give concessions in the peace treaties (which could serve as a reasoning for the secularization, as there were probably many princes who would be fine gaining some more lands when some of the ecclesiastical lands were broken up)

By that point most of Europe had been fighting for decades on end and while France could have tried to continue to try and cripple the Hapsburgs (who I think are only better in a German point, since they lost all ties with the Spanish Hapsburgs and so the family block they had is kind of broken now), they had already crushed the Spaniards, which would take decades to recover, and set Belgium as a de facto vassal while expanding their influence on Northern Italy and in the Alsace-Lorraine (with the Princes of Condé also holding Strassbourg), so in the end of the war the Hapsburgs stood better than OTL but not by a wide margin, and it would take years of marriages (since they aren't always marrying their double first cousins the Hapsburgs have a better luck with childbearing, and so have more daughters to offer in marriage alliances) and agreements to reach the point of power they were in the mid 18th century

(I hope this serves as a good explanation)
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the input. I'll re-think this through, but I honestly don't see Henry relying on one seven-year-old boy to carry his dynasty.
He will be enough for now... At least his grandson would sit one day on the English throne and he will be a Tudor boy, the fourth Tudor King of England and that will be enough foe preventing drastic measures by Henry as an heir is much better than the OTL nothing. Naturally everything would change once Katherine died, giving to Henry the chance to get a legitimate son of his own as successor. He will remarry to a young princess (and Kristin’s beauty would likely win over Maria’s bigger dowry) and try to get a Prince of Wales and a Duke of York
 
Philip II of Spain m. Maria Manuela(a) Mary I of England d. 1558(b) Elizabeth of Valois(c) Anna of Austria(d)

1a. Charles, Prince of Asturias b. 1545 d. 1569

2b. Catherine I of England and Netherlands(Catherine Michelle) b. 1555 m. ?

3b. Margarita Eugenia, Duchess of Burgundy b. 1557 m. Archduke Ernest of Austria d. 1595

4c. Isabella Maria Eugenia b. 1566 m. James VI of Scotland

5c. Catherine Michelle b. 1568 m. Charles Emmanuel I of Savoy

6d. Ferdinand, Prince of Asturias b. 1571 - 1578

7d. Carlos Lorenzo b. 1573 – 1575).

8d. Diego, Prince of Asturias b. 1575 - 1582.

9d. Philip III of Spain b. 1578 m. Margaret of Austria

10d. Maria b. 1580 m. Henry IV of France
 
Philip II of Spain m. Maria Manuela(a) Mary I of England d. 1558(b) Elizabeth of Valois(c) Anna of Austria(d)

1a. Charles, Prince of Asturias b. 1545 d. 1569

2b. Catherine I of England and Netherlands(Catherine Michelle) b. 1555 m. ?

3b. Margarita Eugenia, Duchess of Burgundy b. 1557 m. Archduke Ernest of Austria d. 1595
Isn't Catherine supposed to be the ruler of the Netherlands, as previously decided by Mary and Philip's marriage contract? How is Margaret "Duchess of Burgundy"?
 
Top