WI No Queen Victoria?

Basically, Princess Victoria dies before she can take the thrown. I have a POD written up but I'd rather save that, in case I do start a TL.

I've rooted around with the search function that found a couple threads that mention the idea, confirming that Ernest would become king, not splitting the personal union of the UK and Hanover. My question is, however, what sort of King would Ernest I be? I'm not terribly literate in Victorian politics (at least not as much as others) but I'm still interested in such a change. Would Ernest ignore reform demands? Would the Chartism be much more popular?

A secondary question is how this affects German unification.

Thoughts? Comments?
 

Al-Buraq

Banned
What sort of descendant has he left? Prince Ernst of Hanover is pretty good at punching out nightclub bouncers and used to be very knowledgeable about showgirls when younger.
The 19th C Prince Ernst was by all accounts a dolt and about as popular as a dose of cholera--but then none of the Hanoverians shined.
 
To be clear I'm talking about Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, son of George III, brother of George IV and William IV, supposed murderer of De Sellis.

I imagine him to be staunchly against reform, perhaps continuing his brother's actions of appointing unpopular PMs, shooting down Catholic (being a founding member of the Orange Order) and other reforms. Basically I am trying to assess the feasibility of the UK undergoing a revolution at this point in time.
 
To be clear I'm talking about Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, son of George III, brother of George IV and William IV, supposed murderer of De Sellis.

I imagine him to be staunchly against reform, perhaps continuing his brother's actions of appointing unpopular PMs, shooting down Catholic (being a founding member of the Orange Order) and other reforms. Basically I am trying to assess the feasibility of the UK undergoing a revolution at this point in time.
I think there would be lots of political hassle, but the end result is not revolution, but Parliament removing any more power from the hands of the king.

I even suspect that Britain stays a monarchy, but it would be a purely nominal one - OR they invite a new ruler in.
 
I think there would be lots of political hassle, but the end result is not revolution, but Parliament removing any more power from the hands of the king.

I even suspect that Britain stays a monarchy, but it would be a purely nominal one - OR they invite a new ruler in.

Pretty much. But they wouldn't invite a new ruler in unless the King virtually tried to massacre the Members of Parliament or something - it would violate the laws they themselves established, and frankly why bother when you can just take the King's power and legally gag him anyway? Why risk another monarch not doing what you want?
 
King Ernest Augustus I of Hanover was much hated during his time in the UK, but from 1837-1851 he was thought of as not just a good king but maybe a great king in Hanover, so maybe he's never liked or loved in the UK but he isn't dumb and he's not a dolt, he'll do ok.
 
My reply to the last time this came up, pasted.

Evil King Ernie timelines have been done, but they tend to become hyperbole - Ernest had the combination of intelligence, discipline and amazing character flaws that cry out to make him a villain to some people, and enough records about him were lost or never written down in the first place to give an author all too much license.

The continuing personal union between the UK and Hanover throws a monkeywrench in German unification something fierce.

A few predictions about Ernestine Britain, which someone or other will no doubt disagree with: Evil Ernie was staunchly opposed to both Catholic and Jewish Emancipation. He's too late to stop Catholic, but there's no way Jews are getting the vote with him on the throne. Scotland Yard's primary duty in 1837 was reading people's mail to identify dissidents; investigating crime was kind of a sideline for them. They were refocused early in Victoria's reign OTL; another thing Evil Ernie is not interested in. He was the leader of the Orange Lodges, and while he may have been unable to block the law, "voting while Catholic" is an excellent way to get your kneecaps broken during his reign. Running for office while Catholic may be extremely hazardous to one's health. It's going to get more frightening when he kicks off and leaves a large, well-organized reactionary paramilitary group floating about Britain, without centralised Royal leadership; British Klan, anyone? Oddly enough, he favored lowering the property requirements to vote, and was a proponent of change in that one area, although his stated motives were not altruistic; he believed that the poorer, less educated segments of society would be inclined to go along with whatever the King said, and saw extending the franchise as a way to take power away from Parliament and return it to the Crown. He could be considered a class traitor by some, since he was also on record as thinking that the landed nobility were increasingly irrelevant and that true power now belonged to bankers and industrialists, but that alone doesn't make him an egalitarian or friend of the working person. Still, Ernest probably winds up working with the Whigs more than the Tories.

Response to the Irish famine in 1845 will be even worse than OTL; Victoria was at least interested in helping. Ernest doesn't have much use for Catholic subjects. Nastiness echoes down through the ages.
 
Top