SavoyTruffle said:
What would be the monumental and possible changes to British, European, and world history if either
1. Victoria wasn't born in the first place
2. Victoria had a male counterpart who would succeed his father and/or uncle?
1) If Victoria wasn't born, then that would butterfly her children and descendants. This butterflies a lot of people, most notably all British Kings from Edward VII to Elisabeth II and Wilhelm II of Germany.
If things go OTL, then after the reigns of Victoria's two uncle, George IV and William IV, you would have their youngest brother, Ernst-Augustus. However, given Ernst-Augustus' reputation as a reactionnary monarch OTL, Britain would probably face many problems.
Ernst-Augustus being a man, the Personnal Union between England and Hanover wouldn't thus end immediately. This would probably affect the Bismarckian policy of a united Germany. I'm not saying Bismarck won't try to achieve German Unification under Prussia, just that he will have one more opponent than Austria and France.
2) If Victoria is born as a boy, then you would have an 18 year old teenage boy with Victoria's personna succeeding his uncle William IV in 1837 and ruling up to 1901.
Victoria being a boy in that scenario (possible names in my opinion : George, Edward, Henry, William), then she won't marry Albert of Saxe-Cobourg Gotha (for obvious reasons), which once again butterflies Victoria's children and descendants.
Ernst-Augustus also gets no chance to rule Hannover, since the ATL male version of Victoria has no problem with Hannoverian Salic Law. This will once again probably play on Bismarck's policy of a United Germany.
And lastly, this means the House of Hannover doesn't stop ruling Britain in 1901 : OTL, since Victoria was female, her son Edward VII was of the Saxe-Cobourg Gotha Dynasty (the bloodline of Albert).
If the ATL male counterpart as the same personna as Victoria, it would be interresting to see how Franco-British relations fare under Napoleon III. OTL, Napoleon III and Victoria had a quite good relationship, even if Nappy III was a catastrophe in his foreign policy (he made good inner policies though).
EMPEPEROR OF SCANDANAVIA said:
Had Charolette not died in Childbirth,England would have had King Leopold and Queen Charolette.(thus butterflying away victoria's birth)
Her death led to teh terrible reigns of the Prince regent,George IV, and William IV.
Butterflying away Charlotte's death doesn't mean George IV won't acceed the throne as Charlotte was George IV's daughter. As for William IV, he wouldn't rule England, but he would rule Hannover before giving the throne to his brother Ernst-Augustus.
Of course, you (or we, depending on the point of view) may have the wrong Charlotte in mind. William IV aslo had a daughter named Charlotte in 1819, but she was a stillborn child. He also had another daughter (named Elisabeth) in December 1820 but she died in March 1821. These two weren't William's only children but all the others were the illegitimate
Fitzclarence and thus had no right on the crown.
On the other hand, making William IV's daughter Charlotte survive wouldn't butterfly both his reign and the one of his elder brother Georges IV.