Royalist Victory in the English Civil War: Royal Absolutism next?

Absolutely correct. My bad. I forgot to mention them, and they were very important. A good part of the later activity of the Civil War era came down to squabbling between the Presbyterians and the Independents. The latter won. Were the Independents the same as the Congregationalists ? I thought the latter were a sort of offshoot of Presbyterians, same doctrine, but each congregation was completely independent. Someone who knows better may assist.




Yes, the idea of a lawful Protestant male heir of the body of Rupert has always fascinated me. Given such an heir, it would have been well nigh impossible to maintain the claim of the line of Sophie. And the magic of Ruperts reputation would probably reconcile a lot of the Tories , and even some Jacobites. He would have married happily enough if he could have afforded it.

I actually started a thread about an English House of Wittelsbach around Christmas of last year so if anyones interested I can bump it....
 
Pray do.

Although it does not invoke the magic of the name, in many ways it would be even more interesting if Rupert's older brother Charles Louis left a continuing line. OTL he had one son , Charles II ,who died childless, at which point the Electoral Palatinate passed to the Bavarian branch of the Wittlesbachs, but French claims through the distaff line precipitated the devastating War of The Palatinate Succession.

If Charles Louis, or Charles II had left a continuing male line (their Protestant credentials were faultless), then that would have trumped any claim by Sophie, the youngest sister. And it would have meant a personal union between Britain and the KurPfalz, like that OTL between Hanover and Britain. And thus precipitated Britain into control (or at least great influence) over one of the most strategically crucial areas in Europe.

It does have to said however, that unlike Rupert, neither Charles Louis nor Charles II was either intelligent or personable.
 
Top