Republicanism Introduced Earlier On

I've always found it interesting to see how the 19th and 20th century brought republicanism to many countries so quickly. What events or combination of events would have made most European nations republics, not necessarily democracies, earlier on? A lack of unifying religion? No Roman Empire? A longer Hellenistic period? No Middle/Dark Ages? Let us know!
 
The Roman Republic lasts longer, eventually falling apart. The successor states model their governments on Rome.

The HRE changes the title of 'Emperor' to 'Consul.' The Imperial Diet is empowered. Eventually they are able to spread this style of governance to other nations.

Cromwell-style overthrow of the French monarchy occurs. The King get beheaded and a republic-in-name-only is established with a hereditary Lord Protector. Other nations follow suit.

Edit: This is a list of ideas, not a timeline. Butterflies would make all three of these things happening impossible, although the last two are perhaps compatible.
 
Last edited:
The Roman Republic lasts longer, eventually falling apart. The successor states model their governments on Rome.

The HRE changes the title of 'Emperor' to 'Consul.' The Imperial Diet is empowered. Eventually they are able to spread this style of governance to other nations.

Cromwell-style overthrow of the French monarchy occurs. The King get beheaded and a republic-in-name-only is established with a hereditary Lord Protector. Other nations follow suit.
But a longer Republic and no Pater paternalis Augustus means no HRE and France. Butterflies away.
 
The HRE is predicated upon the existence of Catholicism. If your POD is during the time of the Roman Republic, would Christianity or some alternate timeline counterpart still come about? I would say yes, but it would not be entirely the same. If the Roman Republic is seen as the ideal form of government, would concepts like the Senate, Patrician-Plebian divide exist in countries where Roman-style republicanism has been exported?

Like I said earlier, this is a list of ideas. Not a timeline.

To answer the second part of your question, I would imagine these ideas would be exported at first. But societies are not stagnant, they will eventually diverge from early Roman ideas and develop their own. I imagine local ideas will also become common, especially if the elite is not very Romanized.
 
Making it smaller.

The republic collapsed because a system designed to administer a city or a peninsula very quickly was being used to administrate a huge country spanning 3 continents.

If the republic had stayed in Italy for the most part, it would have a better chance at living longer.
 
The problem with that is it would defeat the reason why we want it to last longer: so that when it collapses Europe will be filled with Republican successor states.
 
Making it smaller.

The republic collapsed because a system designed to administer a city or a peninsula very quickly was being used to administrate a huge country spanning 3 continents.

If the republic had stayed in Italy for the most part, it would have a better chance of living longer.

So this POD has to be a good 100 years before the time of Julius Caesar at least. OK, Rome limits itself to a little beyond the Italian peninsula, Greece, and a few minor islands. Would Rome remain a hegemon, yet without Rome expanding far enough, ideas of Republicanism might diverge from the original Roman ideal. What would make Germanic, Celtic, and Slavic tribes adopt Roman practices without conquest? What would make these ideas more appealing than tribal kingship?
 
The problem with that is it would defeat the reason why we want it to last longer: so that when it collapses Europe will be filled with Republican successor states.


If the Roman Republic functioned as the empire in all but name and without the quasi-hereditary succession where a council of a few Patricians in Rome would choose the new Consuls after fielding candidates approved by the Senate. This would make Rome an aristocratic republic with a powerful landowning aristocracy. It could work so long as the Consul system was kept or added a third consul. Having a triarchy of consuls could prevent the two consuls vetoing each other.
 
What about a proper Athenian Empire that learns to expand ports (and eventually republics) up into Europe in a sort of more organised Hanseatic league?

That way, when said empire collapses, the major regional powers are going to be city states which seemed to be more likely to be republican during the OTL middle ages.
 
If the Roman Republic functioned as the empire in all but name and without the quasi-hereditary succession where a council of a few Patricians in Rome would choose the new Consuls after fielding candidates approved by the Senate. This would make Rome an aristocratic republic with a powerful landowning aristocracy. It could work so long as the Consul system was kept or added a third consul. Having a triarchy of consuls could prevent the two consuls vetoing each other.

I’m pretty sure the Republic was a military dictatorship in all but name by the time of Sulla at least. The problem really is that generals like Caesar have too much power, with soldiers loyal to them rather than the Republic. Even in the empire the problem persisted in the form of military usurpers and legions/imperial bodyguards making or breaking emperors.

Actually, you could even say that the empire being an empire in all but name is kinda otl. Augustus took great pains to conceal his autocratic power. The senate lasted beyond the fall of the WRE within the Ostrogothic Kingdom and within the ERE. The empire was still referred to as a republic until the end of its days.
 
Top