Willem/William V of the Netherlands and Great Britain

No, this is not about a hypothetical son of William III and Mary II. It would be very unlikely that such a son would succeed as Stadtholder of the Netherlands, as that position was not hereditary at that time, and indeed did not exist. Each of the Seven Provinces named its own Stadtholder; William III held all seven titles, but at his death some were left vacant or were filled by different men at different times. The period after William III was known as the Second Stadtholderless Period. Even if William III had left an adult son, nobody in England or the Netherlands really wanted to continue the political union anyway, and with Dutch "succession" completely discretionary, it would have lapsed.

In 1747, with French invasion threatened, the Dutch decided that they needed a single strong leader, and the Second Stadtholderless Period ended. Acting through the States-General of the Seven Provinces (the national assembly), they created the position of Stadtholder General, which they awarded to Prince Willem IV of Orange, and made hereditary in the House of Orange.

Willem's wife was Princess Anne, eldest daughter of King George II of Great Britain. They had one son, Willem, born in 1748. Willem IV died in 1751, and was succeeded by his son, with Princess Anne as regent. In that role she was unpopular, but strong and effective. She died in 1759; other regents filled in till Willem V came of age in 1766.

Meanwhile, George II had had a son, Frederick Louis (2 1/2 years older than Anne), several daughters, then another son, William, Duke of Cumberland. (notorious as the Butcher of Culloden).

Frederick Louis was a dissolute man who clashed with his father, kept mistresses, and did not marry until 1736, after the marriage of Anne and Willem. OTL, he nonetheless begat nine legitimate children, including the future George III, who succeeded George II in 1760, Frederick Lewis having died in 1751.

PoD: Frederick Louis catches a dose of the clap just before his wedding, and transmits it to his new wife. The infection causes scarring that blocks her Fallopian tubes, leaving her infertile. They have no children.

The next person in succession is William of Cumberland. OTL, he died unmarried in 1765. (He was wounded at Dettingen in 1743, and never completely recovered.)

As George II's eldest daughter, Anne is next in succession after Frederick Louis and William of Cumberland, followed by her son Willem V.

OTL Anne died in 1759, aged 50 and George II in 1760. William of Cumberland would succeed as William IV of Great Britain. Anne's son Willem would be heir presumptive to his uncle.

He was already Stadtholder, which wouldn't change, and when William IV died, would become King William V of Great Britain as well.

Both titles are now hereditary, so the union of crowns is automatic, and if Willem/William has descendants, would continue indefinitely, unless one of the countries actively repudiated it.

What would be the effect of this union of crowns? To begin with, a regency for a year, as William does not come of age till 1766. (And different regencies in the Netherlands and Britain.) Of course different policies regarding the American colonies.

How long could this union of crowns last?

(Possible interfering conditions:

With Frederick Lewis and William of Cumberland both childless, Anne's children would be likely to come in succession to George II; that might deter the States-General from making the Stadtholdership hereditary in Anne's husband's line.

Parliament might exclude Anne's son from the succession, leaving it to her daughters or her younger sisters, thereby averting union of crowns. This would be in violation of strict primogeniture, but I doubt if Anne or her husband would protest very hard.)

So... any thoughts?
 
Top