United Kingdom of Great Britain, Ireland, and Hanover

No 1st Schlewig War in TTL. GB works to convince Christian VII and Frederick William II & IV that Schleswig and Holstein were not and are not eternally bound together, hence can have separate rulers if the Danish crown and Schleswig's must (but not Holstein, which can't) pass through the female line - separatly but to the same person. That's how I'm playing it out in my CoHE TL anyway. We'll see how it works out when Frederick VII dies in the 1860's.

As the male line in Brunswick is nearing a dead end, will Prussia block the ducal title's passage to the British Duke of Cumberland in TTL? Will the unification of Germany be hindered by a continuing British-Hanover union? Perhaps Hanover will revolt against GB to join the empire. IMO, the match between Princess Victoria & Crown Prince Frederick (Frederick III) is less likely in TTL, which means no William II and creates many unkowns for 20th Century European and world "history".
 
!

It doesn't really matter what the POD is. If you want this to happen, you need to manufacture an event in a TL which changes attitudes - and these are rare things.

Well, they shouldn't be. Changing cultures and attitudes is the single most interesting thing about AH!


Following the social trends in the two countries, there's nothing that would convince them to adopt laws of succession to allow themselves to join in permanent union. The Hanoverians disliked the British and had nothing in common with them (except a King) and the British couldn't care less about Hanover - in fact, the British actively wanted to be rid of Hanover as it would mean getting the sole attention of their monarch.

The only way this can happen is by engineering an event which changes these attitudes, and it would need to be a big and completely unexpected event to create enough change. Something along the lines of a catastrophic drought in Hanover rendering the country struggling for self-sufficiency, or something. Coincidentally (or not) such an event would also be pushing the boundaries of likehood and plausibility.

The real problem here is just that both countries were polemically against prolonging the union. Neither of them wanted to be in union as the negatives far outweighed the positives, and the positives were hard to see at all.

Is there a way to engender cooperation between the two states early on in the personal union? George I disliked Great Britain and became its King somewhat begrudgingly. Could a different attitude from him have changed the perspective of his two bodies of countrymen - or at least, begun to change that perspective?

An early death of the Old Pretender, leaving George as the undisputed heir, might make him more universally popular in Britain.

There might be more. But I find it more enjoyable to explore possibilities.
 
Well, they shouldn't be. Changing cultures and attitudes is the single most interesting thing about AH!

Well yes but what I meant was that there were no social trends which were tending towards the two states growing to love one another, so what is needed is a totally unexpected event which changes attitudes and breaks the trends - and this naturally becomes unpredictable and the realm of TLs written for the long term rather than speculation on near history. That is to say, I can't see a single event in the history of the two states which could have gone one way or the other which could have brought about this situation - it would need something unexpected.

Is there a way to engender cooperation between the two states early on in the personal union? George I disliked Great Britain and became its King somewhat begrudgingly. Could a different attitude from him have changed the perspective of his two bodies of countrymen - or at least, begun to change that perspective?

An early death of the Old Pretender, leaving George as the undisputed heir, might make him more universally popular in Britain.

There might be more. But I find it more enjoyable to explore possibilities.

Really what it needs is something to happen which puts Hanover's existence in threat, and which necessitates them seeking British help - it goes to say this event would have to be in the British interest. Of course the reverse could work too but I can't see many situations where the UK needs to rely on Hanover to see it through a dark period. Maybe, given the Prussian unification of Germany, this would provide the required threat to persuade the Hanoverians to bite the bullet and go down on their knees in front of Parliament - it's possible, I'm not sure how averse the Hanoverians were to annexation. But in order for this to work, you need to alter the line of succession - and not the law of succession. As said before, the Hanoverians didn't really like being in Personal Union with the UK because they didn't see themselves getting anything out of it, so they aren't going to change Salic Law before this troublesome event happens. The alternative that I can see is you play with the Napoleonic Wars and have Napoleon play around with Germany in a different way, threatening to eliminate the Electorate and divide it up between...some other local power that the Hanoverians don't want to be a part of. Maybe threaten a partition between Prussia and Westphalia, or something. If the British are then able to stop this plan (probably by beating Napoleon at Waterloo, as I can't see a British invasion of Germany being strategically sensible) and - probably in spite rather than because of their planning - be seen as the country which kept Hanover whole then you could see the start of this situation falling together - but it's hard to say. Or maybe you could have Prussia and Austria both be very heavy-handed with their Zollvereins, leading Hanover to pull away from joining Prussia's, and rely on the British to survive Prussian anti-competitive trade regulations. If, for instance, some other northern German states such as Hamburg, Brunswick, Oldenburg, etc were to ask Hanover to form their own Zollverein it's doubtful the Hanoverians could make it work without British backing. But these situations are all prone to not working out the way you want.

This is what I was talking about when I said you'd need to invent a scenario, though, really. There are too many ways that things like this could improve the situation but not really get you where you want to go. If you were to write a TL and make up your own event to create this situation it would be far easier to control and to actually achieve what you want to achieve. The previous situations, for example, aren't great because as soon as Napoleon is gone Hanover doesn't need British backing and will soon forget their plight, and there's no reason for Prussia to act roughly with Hanover before their wars to unite Germany. Still, hopefully it gave you some ideas.
 
I don't see why Hannover remaining in personal union with the UK has to put a wrench in the unification process--many of the German monarchs kept their thrones, and the Hannoverians might have kept theirs in 1866 as well--had they not sided with Austria and refused to demobilize. If anything, I see an agreement where Hannover joins Germany (it had it's own govt after all), but the monarch of Britain remains the monarch of Hannover--this may cause some problems if any conflict breaks out between Germany and Britain, but considering how the British Parliament stripped titles and privileges from those who bore arms against them during WW1, I can see something similar happening in Germany--where the ruler of Hannover is 'disposed.'
 
I can see something similar happening in Germany--where the ruler of Hannover is 'disposed.'
I hope you meant 'deposed', because 'to dispose with smb.' too often meant 'to shoot smb.' It's hard to imagine George the Fifth, King of the UK and Hannover, Emperor of India, Fidei Defensor, etc., executed by the Prussian firing squad. :)
On the serious note, I'd like to agree with you. If all these German princes-British dukes could be stripped of their dukedoms in 1914, why the Hannoverian Landtag couldn't do the same thing with the King?
So, while the UK of Britain, Ireland and Hannover is too close to ASB, strictly personal union was quite possible after 1837 (with changes in the Hannoverian Succession Law), but it wouldn't change German and British histories too much.
 
I don't see why Hannover remaining in personal union with the UK has to put a wrench in the unification process--many of the German monarchs kept their thrones, and the Hannoverians might have kept theirs in 1866 as well--had they not sided with Austria and refused to demobilize. If anything, I see an agreement where Hannover joins Germany (it had it's own govt after all), but the monarch of Britain remains the monarch of Hannover--this may cause some problems if any conflict breaks out between Germany and Britain, but considering how the British Parliament stripped titles and privileges from those who bore arms against them during WW1, I can see something similar happening in Germany--where the ruler of Hannover is 'disposed.'

The problem I see here is the same one faced by the old Angevin monarchs of England when they had territories in France. If Hannover joins the German Empire but keeps the British monarchy, the British people might see the entire set up as the British King being subservient to the German empire. That would be amazingly unnaceptable to the electorate.
 
Even if such a union happened in the 19th century, wouldn't the language difference prompt a separation in the 20th?
 
Why?

There are a number of succesfull bilingual or more nations today.

The most prominent ones I can think of are Canada and Switzerland.

Switzerland is probably the most prominent exception to the primary language rule. Even Canada has its tensions, with a separatist movement in Quebec.

In the UK, English still presides over the Celtic languages outside of England itself. Even in India, English emerged as the language of the elite and wealthy. Such an arrangement would not happen in Hanover, and that issue would drive separation, radio being a significant contributor.
 
Such an arrangement would not happen in Hanover, and that issue would drive separation, radio being a significant contributor.

But this would be a substantially different UK, English doesn't always have to dominate in an ATL UK of Britain, Ireland, and Hanover. Radio would make no difference...
 
But this would be a substantially different UK, English doesn't always have to dominate in an ATL UK of Britain, Ireland, and Hanover. Radio would make no difference...

I'm rather afraid it does.
99% of England spoke English.
As did half of Scotland and Wales- and that's just geographically speaking, population number wise the English speaking halves had far more.
Ireland...I don't have the numbers to hand but I would guess around half also.
 
Here is an interesting what if scenario.

Before Queen Victoria ascends to the throne the British get the Salic law in Hanover annulled. The personal union remains in effect through Victoria's reign. The Austro Prussian war comes, Queen Victoria declares Hanover's neutrality and sends troops to protect said neutrality.

After the German Confederation is abolished the British Parliament votes to annex Hanover into the "United Kingdom of Great Britain, Ireland, and Hanover".

Quite unlikely. IIRC, after a while, Britain didn't want Hanover. They didn't like being connected by the head to it. No one really enjoyed having a little piece of Germany that happened to embroil Britain in any continental conflict that crossed into Eastphalia.
 
Quite unlikely. IIRC, after a while, Britain didn't want Hanover. They didn't like being connected by the head to it. No one really enjoyed having a little piece of Germany that happened to embroil Britain in any continental conflict that crossed into Eastphalia.

They didn't want Hanover from the start. The law which forces monarchs to seek Parliament's permission merely to leave the country for a while was passed before the Hanoverian ascension, specifically so that they couldn't object to its being passed.
 
I doubt Prussia would start a war with UK over Hanover.


But they did! Albeit indirectly, they were at war with Britain in 1805 and as a consequence lost a vast amount of mercantile trade to the Royal Navy!

Ok so the war was started be Boneys machinations, but both Britain and Prussia did not back off. Indeed Prussia occupied the territory and robed it of its treasury.

Von Lenthe, the Hanovarian Chief Minister and Chancellor folded his opposition to the invasion of Hanover in 1803 by the French because they were broke after the SYW, When the Prussians took over, there was very little cash left, and that went East with the defeat of Prussia in 1806.

The best time for a union with GB, would be after Leipzig with the force sent to support Wallmoden being of a larger size than a minute brigade of all arms. Then promote the union as the British would be able to claim they freed their Hanovarian cousins from the French Yolk. I doubt it would work though as neither the British or the Hanovarians saw themselves as cousins!

At no time in the Napoleonic Wars were the British "content" to see Hanover under the occupation of another state. They might not send an army, but they would oppose by other means.
 

Susano

Banned
There really was no desire at either side of the personal union to have the union become more. The joint Monarch surely had no interest in having Hannover annexed to the UK, because in Hannover he ruled absolute, and in the UK he did not. It would hence be a loss of power for him. And the UK had no interest to get thusly involved in continental affairs. Besides, changing traditional laws of succession isnt all that easy...
 
Top