Republican Ideas

France was the first European country to turn into a revolutionary republic with `Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite' motto (although it was never followed in practice, but that is a different story). Supposing that Revolutionary France had chosen to export her ideas to the remainder of the continent, where else would the republican ideas resonate? What other country could the ideas work in, turning the country republic? Sure there were medieval republics, but these were basically oligarchies. Could the French republican model be replicated elsewhere, starting with a 1789 PoD?
 
It was England in the preceding century that had a revolution and cut off the King's head and substituted a Republic.

In the English case it was a middle class revolution with religious rather than political rhetoric (though Google 'putney debates'.) It never captured the imagination of the general population and treated them as being the ones needing reform. It made a returning King look much more fun and far more stylish.
 
If Poland or a section of Poland manages to keep independence, they may reject monarchy on the grounds that previous monarchs were puppets of foreign nations.

An incomplete Italian or German unification could also result in the creation of Republics-there's plenty of small polities within those areas that could become independent nations under Republican governments inspired by France.
 
It was England in the preceding century that had a revolution and cut off the King's head and substituted a Republic.

In the English case it was a middle class revolution with religious rather than political rhetoric (though Google 'putney debates'.) It never captured the imagination of the general population and treated them as being the ones needing reform. It made a returning King look much more fun and far more stylish.

Yes, but Cromwell ... - well, at best, he is an ambiguous figure. Sure, the beheaded Charles I, but the English revolution never had a revolutionary change in the society. The British parliament tried to accommodate the aristocrats in the House of Lords. They never tried to completely change the established order.

Could Britain have a change on the lines of France, if the ideas are exported across the channel? Large numbers of lords losing their heads to madame la guillotine? A complete change of government with the Monarchy being abolished?
 
My TL has a Republican Russia after the Napoleonic Wars. Not sure how realistic that actually is, though

I am not sure Russia could become Republican. The aristocracy in Russia was heavily entrenched, and there was no power capable of challenging them. I am not sure how realistic it is to have a revolutionary Russia in 1800.
 
If Poland or a section of Poland manages to keep independence, they may reject monarchy on the grounds that previous monarchs were puppets of foreign nations.

An incomplete Italian or German unification could also result in the creation of Republics-there's plenty of small polities within those areas that could become independent nations under Republican governments inspired by France.

Hmm - what I was considering was a Republic of Westfalen in Germany. Could the north and west German duchies (they were really small) end up being abolished to form a republic?

And could the Italians under Austria be made into a republic of north Italy (or maybe even multiple republics), from Genoa in the west to Venice in the east, and from Trent in the north to Urbino in the south?
 
Yes, but Cromwell ... - well, at best, he is an ambiguous figure. Sure, the beheaded Charles I, but the English revolution never had a revolutionary change in the society. The British parliament tried to accommodate the aristocrats in the House of Lords. They never tried to completely change the established order.

Actually, Cromwell abolished the Lords in 1649; "The Commons of England [find] by too long experience that the House of Lords is useless and dangerous to the people of England."

The Protectorate was pretty Revolutionary, but not as revolutionary as it could have been. Quite possible to have a more radical English revolution, however...
 
Actually, Cromwell abolished the Lords in 1649; "The Commons of England [find] by too long experience that the House of Lords is useless and dangerous to the people of England."

The Protectorate was pretty Revolutionary, but not as revolutionary as it could have been. Quite possible to have a more radical English revolution, however...

Yes, but the Rump parliament, and later, Barebones parliament both had too many of the landed gentry in them. You need a wider,and more diverse, representation to change the privileges enjoyed by the landed gentry.
 
Republics

Most of the republics I am seeing occurring in the 1790s were created under the French force of arms. Could there be indigenous uprisings to create republics modelled after the French republic?
 
Doing away with the landed gentry leaves the question of who exactly is making this up. Speaking as a Seegerist Socialist, "the common man" of the fields and sea doesn't have the time to be a representative.
 
Doing away with the landed gentry leaves the question of who exactly is making this up. Speaking as a Segerist Socialist, "the common man" of the fields and sea doesn't have the time to be a representative.

You don't have to do away with them. Just add others to even the odds. With only landed gentry, it leaves other interests completely unrepresented - and the gentry have no reason to change Common law, when they benefited from it. The French revolution, for all its faults, had its philosophers, and thinkers, and radicals who purported to speak for the common man. I don't see many such figures in the Long, Rump or the Barebones' parliaments.
 
Last edited:
You don't have to do away with them. Just add others to even the odds. With only landed gentry, it leaves other interests completely unrepresented - and the gentry have no reason to change Common law, when the benefited from it. The French revolution, for all its faults, had its philosophers, and thinkers, and radicals who purported to speak for the common man. I don't see many such figures in the Long, Rump or the Barebones' parliaments.

I don't either, but I don't see where you're getting them from other than those who also benefit from Common law and have no reason to change it.

You need to change individuals, not classes, if you want "philosophers and thinker and radicals".
 
I don't either, but I don't see where you're getting them from other than those who also benefit from Common law and have no reason to change it.

You need to change individuals, not classes, if you want "philosophers and thinker and radicals".

Oh - I don't have them on hand, and don't propose to add them either. It is also true that the ideas of `Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite' had not evolved very much in 1650. The causes of the revolution were also very different, and was a question of how much power a king should have, rather than a problem with the `Estates' themselves. I am just pointing out that it is very hard to have a very revolutionary parliament in England. What we got IOTL was probably as far as it could go.
 
Top