WI: Princess Charlotte of Wales Survives

Baby, he better know English well enough to not need a translator - but what would be wrong with one of the British born sisters?
 
So maybe this is a question for a new thread, but what are the effects of Charlotte giving birth to a healthy boy in November 1817 instead of a miscarriage? What would his name and/or title be? Adding to that, supposing she still dies shortly thereafter as OTL or before she has a chance to succeed her father?
 
The effects of her giving birth to a health boy? He's the heir apparent when his mother dies, prior to that, he was second in line to the throne. His father is stuck in England forever, because Belgium doesn't want an Englishman to follow the guy they select as King.
 
So maybe this is a question for a new thread, but what are the effects of Charlotte giving birth to a healthy boy in November 1817 instead of a miscarriage? What would his name and/or title be? Adding to that, supposing she still dies shortly thereafter as OTL or before she has a chance to succeed her father?

The boy is likely named George in honour of his great-grandfather. And the boy then becomes second inline to the throne as Des says. I imagine there'd be plans made for a regency once George IV ascends the throne, perhaps with Leopold serving on it?
 
Yup - regency act is proposed on George IV's accession - probably names Leopold with the same limitations imposed as on Queen Adelaide (if she produced an heir) and upon Victoria Duchess of Kent in the act published under William IV - when the heir was the teenage Victoria. Short regency though assuming George IV dies on schedule - about four/five years before George V is in charge - the big issues will be the reforms of the 1830s will now happen under a regency etc
 
I think someone did a TL a few years back on the idea of Charlotte dying after giving birth to a healthy boy, Alexander the Great of England or something like that. Beyond that, I love the idea of a Charlottine era! It's one of those oft discussed but never fully explored topics, not unlike a failed reformation or united Holy Roman Empire.

Anyway, to start out Charlotte and Leopold would be in a much better position at their accession than Queen Victoria was; Charlotte at thirty-four, would be a grown woman and mother, no doubt with close contacts among the opposition (as was typical for Hanoverian heirs), as apposed to a highly-sheltered eighteen-year-old with no real contact with the elite. Which brings me to what's likely to be the first major issue of Charlotte's reign, Parliamentary reform. While some kind of reform was necessary, a 1817 POD might mean that the reform we get isn't the same as OTL. Remember that what ultimately tipped the scales towards reform was the July revolution in 1830 and the fear something like that could happen in Britain if the people weren't given some kind of relief (Reform or Revolution was an often stated quote from the time). So an 1817 POD could butterfly the July revolution in France and thus push back British reform until the next French revolution or until the British people force the issue. Not saying this is the likely scenario but it's worth mentioning.

Now the most important question in my opinion is that of Royal power; OTL Victoria and Albert were determined to turn back the clock to the glory days of George III and I see no reason to think that Charlotte and Leopold wouldn't have a similar goal in mind. Now I'm not sure if it would be easier to do so in 1830 as opposed to the 1840s-1850s and due to my own biases towards the Crown I'll try not to speculate too much; however I will say that, if Charlotte plays the same role in carrying reform as William IV did, then I think it wouldn't be beyond credulity to see a more politically active Crown emerge. Though it will depend on whether or not the Crown is able to dismiss a government and successfully appoint a new one; William IV tried this in his dismissal of Lord Melbourne in 1834 over the appointment of the Radical Lord John Russell as Leader of the Commons. He invited Sir Robert Peel to form a Government but as the Tories were a minority they resigned after 4 months, which triggered a general election that the Whigs won. Ultimately Melbourne returned as PM and the Sovereign never appointed a Government contrary to the will of Parliament again. So if Charlotte can succeed where her uncle failed then the Crown's in a hella strong position.

As to Belgium, not sure. If we go with no July Revolution then the Belgian revolution is also butterflied (the July revolution inspiring the Belgians) but I'm assuming we're going for an independent Belgium. Realistically Archduke Karl would be the best bet; he was the last Habsburg Governor-General, was a successful commander and wasn't French. The Belgians might be meh over him but Karl's the most likely candidate to receive the support of the Great Powers. Now how Habsburg Belgium is going to look is beyond my knowledge; though considering it was a kingdom with popular sovereignty Karl might have to be strong-armed into accepting such a crown.

As for other domestic (industrialization, child labor laws, welfare laws, ) and foreign (German and Italian unification) policies, I will need to do more research, but I would look to see what OTL Leopold favored in Belgium and advised Victoria and Albert to do as a basis for the Crown's position on such topics TTL. Though their success would be dependent on the Crown finding a willing ministerial partner (ie Albert's relationship with Sir Robert Peel). Might comment more on this later but for now that's all I got.
 
Top