Reign of the Griffin: An Anglo-Prussian Union

[Warning: Longish post!]

This is a new timeline I’m setting up, but based on an idea I’ve had in my head for a year or so now: an Anglo-Prussian Union in the early eighteenth century, hence the title. (British Lion + Prussian Eagle/Hawk Thing = Griffin)

Since the POD doesn’t affect much until the Hanoverians succeed, I’ll just skip the bits that aren’t affected, so I can get onto the TTL bits as soon as I can. This TL also assumes that Frederick II of Prussia has much the same personality and genes as IOTL, and is not recommended for purist Counterfactual Entomologists.

The point of divergence here is in 1707, with the miscarriage and stillbirth of the boy who would otherwise have become OTL Prince Frederick of Wales, of Look To The West fame. This causes complications with his mother, and she is rendered infertile as a result. George II produces no heir, as a result.

Now we head to 1714 and the reign of King George I, and the deaths of Electress Sophia of Hanover and Queen Anne of Great Britain and Ireland. It is hoped that Caroline will be able to produce an heir to the Hanoverian line, as the populace of Great Britain are less than enthralled by the prospect of handing the throne over so quickly, fearing that this could destabilise the monarchy and give the Jacobites a chance to return to power. King George is also alarmed by the possibility of the Prince of Wales not producing an heir, as this would mean that the House of Hanover would leave his descent, governed as it is by Salic law. He blames his son, of course, despite Caroline’s having conceived and miscarried another child in the seven years since the first stillbirth. Hanoverian father-son feuds transcend all common sense, their bitterness blunting Occam’s Razor.

A number of concerned citizens have noted that, should the Prince fail in his attempts at procreation, the throne would pass to his sister Sophia, Queen Consort of Prussia, and mother to the young Crown Prince Frederick. Parliament is ignoring this possibility for the time being, hoping instead that Caroline will beget a child and that they won’t have to commit themselves to anything, as a personal union with Prussia would likely involve getting drawn into Prussian wars. And Prussia is in the neighbourhood of Austria, Sweden, Russia and Poland, so the wars will be fairly large. There are vague whispers of denying the throne to Sophia’s children, should the occasion call for it, but these are only vague whispers, as the British people are sick and tired of playing Royal Roulette, and the King wishes to make it clear that this is not an option. Of course, he will not be able to voice his opinion at the time…

With the Jacobite uprisings of 1715, all talk of denying the succession is ceased, and the matter fades into the background until the 1720's, with the aftermath of the South Sea Bubble Crisis and Walpole's meteoric rise to power. His (theoretically) pacifistic views clash with the Prussian tendency towards militarism, and so he is very much against the idea of the Prussian Succession, reasoning that a Prussian King would want Britain involved in Prussian wars. The alternatives to Prussia would be the King's brothers, Maximilian Wilhelm of Brunswick-Lüneburg and Ernest, Duke of York and Albany. Unfortunately, neither of these two have a wife or children, which simply postpones the issue. As much as Walpole might resent it, Sophia and the Hohenzollerns are the only plausible candidates to the British throne after Prince George, unless George finally sires an heir.

With the death of George I in 1726 from a stroke, his son comes to the throne as George II. His Succession issues are given serious Parliamentary debate for the first time, having previously been referred to as little as possible. While the Prussian Succession is near-guaranteed, it remains to be seen what influence Parliament will tolerate from King Frederick-William. The Prussian monarchy has traditionally been quite autocratic, but Parliament will not waive their duties to become mere advisors once more – as one MP put it, “Our job is to fly in the King’s face”, and it is clear that any attempt to swat Parliamentary interference will not be welcomed.

Walpole and the King do not share as close a relationship as in OTL, mainly because Queen Caroline’s infertility has left her depressed and bitter. Whereas in OTL she saw Walpole as a powerful ally, here she sees only a rival for the king’s influence, and she tries to turn her husband against him to put another in power, such as X. While she is unsuccessful in “deposing” Walpole, he certainly does not have the level of power that he did under George I, and he is often forced to back down on matters important to him, notably including the Prussian Succession. Whig plans to further dilute the power of the monarch in preparation for the Prussian arrival are met with a stony refusal by George II (prompted, of course, by Caroline), who makes unsubtle references to his royal veto – the use of which would be the first since Queen Anne’s opposition to the Scottish Militia. This does nothing to endear him to the Whigs, or indeed the Whigs to him, and he begins to favour the Tories somewhat.

(Walpole’s power is weakened only in terms of his relationship with the King; in Parliamentary terms he has as much if not more power as OTL.)

The matter of the Prussian Succession becomes of vital import in 1732, when George II is struck with typhoid. As he lies on his deathbed, Parliament is forced to ask Sophia to come to England, where [she] will undoubtedly be Queen by the time [she] arrives”. Sophia leaves Berlin, in the company of her son and husband (and numerous servants, of course), and arrives in London in September that year. George II had died that morning, and the Cabinet had re-enacted the Regency Acts from Queen Anne’s death to safeguard the country from Jacobite insurgencies. Plans are made for Sophia’s coronation, and on Christmas Day she is crowned Queen Sophia I of Great Britain and Ireland.

The matter of Frederick William’s coronation is somewhat trickier, as the bills intended to limit his power were passed shortly before George II’s illness, and consequently were never given royal consent. When Queen Sophia reads the bills, she simply refuses to sign it, using her veto to block the legislation. The new Prussian bloc in court have much the same problem as the Hanoverians did upon their arrival, in that their familiarity with an autocratic monarchy leaves them inept when attempting to relate with Parliament. Of course, the Prussians have the additional impediment of not caring. That would soon change.

On the death of George II, the throne of Hanover lay empty. Two candidates claim it: Ernest, Duke of York and Albany [1], through his status as George’s uncle; and Crown Prince Frederick of Prussia, through his status as George’s nephew. Both claims have an element of validity, the conflict rising from the interpretation of the Salic law governing Hanover’s succession. Ernest’s claim is based on the traditional approach of the crown only passing through men, whereas Frederick’s claim is based on a more complex scenario: if the line is in danger of dying out, the claim may pass through a woman to the most eligible male candidate, this being Frederick.

Clearly the situation must be resolved, as Hanover may not have two Electors. Hanover’s geography – at the heart of Europe, straddling the north of Germany to reach both Brandenburg and the United Provinces – makes the issue strategically important, while European fears over the Anglo-Prussian personal union resolve themselves into a firm desire not to let them get any more territory. War is looming in Europe.

Suddenly, the reality of the situation dawns on the Prussian contingent in London. Parliament holds the purse strings to raise money for war, and only its appeasement will let Prussia secure its claim on Hanover. Sophia is forced to retract her veto of the Moderation Bills, and a limit is placed on the royal veto, voiding it in the event of a two-thirds majority. With this, Walpole reluctantly agrees to fund the war, despite his misgivings – far better to throw money away and secure Hanover than to let such an important land fall into the Austrian or – God forbid – French orbits. Britain allies with Prussia, the Netherlands, Russia and Savoy against France, Austria, Poland, Saxony and Bavaria. On February 13th, 1733, the War of the Hanoverian Succession begins in earnest…

[1] He lives longer ITTL, surviving past 1728.




So. Comments? I need to know how plausible this is before I continue, after all!
 
Interesting...
I can't really comment on plausibility: too little knowledge on the era in question, but there's at least nothing blatantly in-your-face implausible to one such as me.
The course of the WHS will be... something to see. One wonders if other states of Europe will join, which, in such a case, and on what side...
 

Faeelin

Banned
Clearly the situation must be resolved, as Hanover may not have two Electors. Hanover’s geography – at the heart of Europe, straddling the north of Germany to reach both Brandenburg and the United Provinces – makes the issue strategically important, while European fears over the Anglo-Prussian personal union resolve themselves into a firm desire not to let them get any more territory. War is looming in Europe.

Why can't Hanover have two electors?
 
[Warning: Longish post!]
an Anglo-Prussian Union in the early eighteenth century, hence the title. (British Lion + Prussian Eagle/Hawk Thing = Griffin)

My area that I tend to focus on is a bit later as well, but it seemed to have plausible motives to me. Have to say I especially love the title and it's symbolism.
 
Why can't Hanover have two electors?

Because the Elector is the ruler of Hanover. It'd be like two Presidents claiming America.

Thanks for the comments, I appreciate it! One minor error - where it says "X", it should say "Townshend".

By the way, how does my alliance-system for the Hanoverian Succession War seem? It's the only real bit I'm not too sure about.
 
Looks very interesting. I'm assuming the War of the Quadruple Alliance (1718-1720) and the Anglo-Spanish War (1727-1729) still occured per OTL, right? With that as a basis lets look at the alliance system...

British Bloc
Britain - obviously
Prussia - yes, since that's the basis of the POD
Netherlands - given their position next to France, they may try for neutrality, but allied with Britain would be the next best guess.
Russia - Tsarina Anna was pro-German so I could see her siding with Britain on this one.
Savoy - yes, as they saw Britain as their protector, especially in keeping newly acquiered Sardinia

French Bloc
France - wants Hannover/wants Britain not to have Hannover
Austria - vested interest in weakening Prussia; wants control of Germany
Poland - trapped between Russia and Prussia, they almost have to choose a side
Saxony and Bavaria - its in their interest in keeping Prussia weak in order to retain their nominal independence

Fighting would/could also occur in North America (almost a given) and India.

This war will most likely avoid (or severly change) the War of Jenkin's Ear and the War of Austrian Succession. Also the War of Polish Succession (1733-1738) and Spanish-Portuguese War (1735-1737) would become part of this war. Looking at the War of Polish Succession, I see that the sides were France, Spain and Sardinia vs Russia and Austria. So this war needs to either be butterflied away or more back room deals need to be made. Given that control of Hannover/Prussia is more important to France and Austria I can see them coming to an agreement regarding Poland so as to ally against Britain in regards to Hannover. Given that Saxony supported Russia in regards to Poland it may be easier for Britain/Prussia to give Saxony assurances, thus moving Saxony to the British Bloc. As Spain and Portugal were involved in the fighting as well their entry into this larger war seems reasonable.

So assuming a conflict still arises in Poland concurrently to the crisis in Hannover we may have the alliances set up more like this...

British Bloc
Britain/Prussia/Russia/Netherlands - per above
Saxony - worried over Poland and given assurances by Britain/Prussia
Sardinia - courted by France/Spain but scared of RN enough to side with UK
Portugal - enemy of Spain
Lithuanian Poles - supportive of Russian cantidate, Augustus III

French Bloc
France/Bavaria - per above
Austria - promised land/inflence in Prussia and/or Hannover, drops support for Augustus III in favor of Stanislaus I in Poland
Spain - support Stanislaus I and dislike UK
majority of Poles - support Stanislaus

Just a few thoughts
Benjamin
 
Nekromans

Interesting idea. Not sure that the situation would go to war. Prussia is still very much a 3rd rank power, albeit a powerful one at this point. Traditionally Britain, Austria and the Netherlands are allies against the French. Fredrick might want to claim the throne and his mother to support his claim but Britain would see little point, in disrupting the peace of Europe over the issue, especially as it would mean another very bloody [and costly] war. While the new queen might think otherwise Parliament holds the purse strings and would want to make sure the new dynasty knows who's boss, at least in Britain. Fair more logical to have the Duke of York become elector, as that would keep the crown of Hanover in friendly hands, possibly with both side thinking to consider the matter again when he dies - as I think you said he also lacked an heir?

If it did become war the situation would be very messy. Can agree that Austria would not like Prussia and Britain being united and definitely not having Hanover added to the mix. However they would also seek to keep the French influence in the empire as weak as possible so it would be an awkward alliance. [OTL the Prussian seizure of Silesia and the fail of Austria to regain it was required to prompt Franco-Austrian friendship and while they might not like the suggested union, they have not lost directly themselves.

Not sure Bavaria would support the Franco-Austrian side. Traditionally its close to France [politically] but that's because its close to Austria [geographically] and long the latter's chief rival in Germany. Austria is by far the big boy in Germany at this point and even given the suggested increase in Prussian power that won't change so any concern about an over-powerful German state would be directed at Vienna not Berlin. Especially since they have swallowed the really huge increase in Prussia power by dynastic merger with Britain. Bavaria might find itself too close to and squeezed between Austria and France and hence stay neutral but, suspect it would be unwilling to openly fight on the Austrian side.

Saxony I think it would depend on whether the French found it politically expedient to drop their rival for the Polish throne. If the French accepted Augustus's claim, which they might do Saxony will side with the Franco-Austria bloc as they will probably be more concerned with the proximity of Prussia. If the French still insist on supporting Stanislaus than the Saxons would side with the Anglo-Prussians. Either way, as you say, presuming the parallel Polish successor is not butterflied the opposing bloc will support a rival claimant.

The thing I am uncertain of would be Russia. Anna may be pro-Germany but would that make he more liable to size with German Prussia or German Austria? Especially since weren't Russia and Austria involved in a join war against the Turks about this sort of time - although that did end rather messily and with some recriminations. the northern bloc needs Russia. If it stayed neutral they would probably be overwhelmed and if it joined the Franco-Austria one the war would be decided in fairly short order. Britain might have plenty of funds but all the big three continental powers are on the other side and weight of numbers would tell fairly quickly. [This is a Prussia that has not had the chance to do a smash and grab on Silesia so it is significantly weaker while Austria is not divided].

You mentioned Spain and can't see any real likelihood they would stay out. This was about the time trade rivalry was brewing, leading to Jenkins Ear and there was the Bourbon Pact as well as the desire to settle old scores.

How old were both the Jacobinian pretenders at this point? 'Charlie' is probably too young as I don't think he was that old in 45 but could well see a heavily supported attempt to restore the Stewards to the British throne.

Anyway, a very interesting idea. Looks like the new dynasty could have a very rocky birth, especially since the wide divergence between the two primary parts of the empire would cause continued tension and centrifugal forces.

Steve
 
But he's the Elector of Hanover and the Elector of Prussia, no?

Legally there's no reason to oppose it.

What? No, what?

Forget the elector bit for a second. You have one person saying he rules Hanover and another person saying he rules Hanover. They are both trying to be prince of this country. It's like two people trying to be King of England - you have to have one. I'm not sure what you're getting at with the Elector thing.

Nekromans

Interesting idea. Not sure that the situation would go to war. Prussia is still very much a 3rd rank power, albeit a powerful one at this point. Traditionally Britain, Austria and the Netherlands are allies against the French. Fredrick might want to claim the throne and his mother to support his claim but Britain would see little point, in disrupting the peace of Europe over the issue, especially as it would mean another very bloody [and costly] war. While the new queen might think otherwise Parliament holds the purse strings and would want to make sure the new dynasty knows who's boss, at least in Britain. Fair more logical to have the Duke of York become elector, as that would keep the crown of Hanover in friendly hands, possibly with both side thinking to consider the matter again when he dies - as I think you said he also lacked an heir?

That would make also sense, but I think I might try to push for war here, if only because I've actually planned for that scenario. If the Prussians push hard enough they can probably get their way, at the risk of alienating much of the political scene in Britain.

A challenge to my readers: find out who, exactly, would become the other claimant when Ernest dies! Because it looks like the other side wouldn't even have a case here from what I see... Hanoverian males appear to be unfortunately sparse for a Salic throne.

If it did become war the situation would be very messy. Can agree that Austria would not like Prussia and Britain being united and definitely not having Hanover added to the mix. However they would also seek to keep the French influence in the empire as weak as possible so it would be an awkward alliance. [OTL the Prussian seizure of Silesia and the fail of Austria to regain it was required to prompt Franco-Austrian friendship and while they might not like the suggested union, they have not lost directly themselves.

Awkward alliances are okay - it'd sort out one of the little kinks in the war.

Not sure Bavaria would support the Franco-Austrian side. Traditionally its close to France [politically] but that's because its close to Austria [geographically] and long the latter's chief rival in Germany. Austria is by far the big boy in Germany at this point and even given the suggested increase in Prussian power that won't change so any concern about an over-powerful German state would be directed at Vienna not Berlin. Especially since they have swallowed the really huge increase in Prussia power by dynastic merger with Britain. Bavaria might find itself too close to and squeezed between Austria and France and hence stay neutral but, suspect it would be unwilling to openly fight on the Austrian side.

Sounds sensible.

Saxony I think it would depend on whether the French found it politically expedient to drop their rival for the Polish throne. If the French accepted Augustus's claim, which they might do Saxony will side with the Franco-Austria bloc as they will probably be more concerned with the proximity of Prussia. If the French still insist on supporting Stanislaus than the Saxons would side with the Anglo-Prussians. Either way, as you say, presuming the parallel Polish successor is not butterflied the opposing bloc will support a rival claimant.

No major butterflies - this is the first real divergence from OTL in this TL. So Saxony could get

The thing I am uncertain of would be Russia. Anna may be pro-Germany but would that make he more liable to size with German Prussia or German Austria? Especially since weren't Russia and Austria involved in a join war against the Turks about this sort of time - although that did end rather messily and with some recriminations. the northern bloc needs Russia. If it stayed neutral they would probably be overwhelmed and if it joined the Franco-Austria one the war would be decided in fairly short order. Britain might have plenty of funds but all the big three continental powers are on the other side and weight of numbers would tell fairly quickly. [This is a Prussia that has not had the chance to do a smash and grab on Silesia so it is significantly weaker while Austria is not divided].

So the Northerners need Russia on their side to succeed here? I guess, if you have France and Austria on one side you'd probably need a bit of a counterbalance.

You mentioned Spain and can't see any real likelihood they would stay out. This was about the time trade rivalry was brewing, leading to Jenkins Ear and there was the Bourbon Pact as well as the desire to settle old scores.

Sounds about right.

How old were both the Jacobinian pretenders at this point? 'Charlie' is probably too young as I don't think he was that old in 45 but could well see a heavily supported attempt to restore the Stewards to the British throne.

James III is only 44 here. Problem is getting the English to accept - or even not fight against - a Catholic for King. Anne probably would have let him succeed to the throne if he'd just renounced his Papal ties, and he could have crossed his fingers behind his back, but he had a full dose of the uncompromising, unreasoning Divine King mentality.

Anyway, a very interesting idea. Looks like the new dynasty could have a very rocky birth, especially since the wide divergence between the two primary parts of the empire would cause continued tension and centrifugal forces.

Steve[/quote]

Thanks!
 
What? No, what?

Forget the elector bit for a second. You have one person saying he rules Hanover and another person saying he rules Hanover. They are both trying to be prince of this country. It's like two people trying to be King of England - you have to have one. I'm not sure what you're getting at with the Elector thing.
You are misunderstanding him.
Both Hanover and Prussia are electorates in the Holy Roman Empire. Having two votes out of nine for the next emperor in one hand would really upset the balance in the HRE. Which is why, afaik, one ruler cannot have to electorates, one has to be given up.
 

Faeelin

Banned
You are misunderstanding him.
Both Hanover and Prussia are electorates in the Holy Roman Empire. Having two votes out of nine for the next emperor in one hand would really upset the balance in the HRE. Which is why, afaik, one ruler cannot have to electorates, one has to be given up.

Yes, I wasn't making myself clear, and also misunderstood what was going on.
 
A challenge to my readers: find out who, exactly, would become the other claimant when Ernest dies! Because it looks like the other side wouldn't even have a case here from what I see... Hanoverian males appear to be unfortunately sparse for a Salic throne.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it looks like that, after the death of Ernest, under Salic law the heir of Hannover should be Ferdinand Albert, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg. And interesting enough, IOTL his eldest son Charles married in 1733 a daughter of Sophie, Philipine Charlotte of Prussia. Would be this marriage and/or their births affected by the POD?
 
Maybe I'm wrong, but it looks like that, after the death of Ernest, under Salic law the heir of Hannover should be Ferdinand Albert, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg. And interesting enough, IOTL his eldest son Charles married in 1733 a daughter of Sophie, Philipine Charlotte of Prussia. Would be this marriage and/or their births affected by the POD?

Thankee, Gonzo!

Now that's just too much of a coincidence. Clearly the Great ASB in the Sky saw this coming. Change of plan: George II dies in late 1733, people! Now, with the new scenario of the heir to the heir marrying a Hohenzollern Princess, will Prussia deem it worth going to war?

A retconned version of all this will be up this evening. Clearly I need to research more...
 

Susano

Banned
I see a number of problems in this.

First of all, wouldnt Frederick William just be named Prince Consort? Espeically if hes considered a problem, so why crown him King at all? That at least postpones the issue for one generation!

Secondly, the Welfs were just as autocratic as the Hohenzollerns, and they eventually got the hang of how things are done in Great Britain. Some would apply to the Hohenzollerns, so I wouldnt focus too much on this opposition of governance styles. So, okay, the British King doesnt have as much power - but the title falls freely to the Hohenzollerns, so I dont think theyll complain all too loudly.

Thirdly, there wont be a dispute over the Electorate of Hannover. At least not at first. The title WILL pass to Ernest, Duke of York and Albany and Prince-Bishop of Osnabrück. Sucession laws are clear on that. If he dies, THEN there might be a certain succession issue. Salic Law in Germany was never as strong as in France, after all. Its possible for a line of a house to die out, its lands passing to another house by marriage, even though other lines of the old house still exist. That has happened countless times in the HREGN. So, if Ernest dies childless, THEN Prussia can raise a claim, which will be competed by Brunswick, most likely.

Oh, and yes, eelctoral votes cant be amassed. When Bavaria and the Palatinate united, the electoral college suddenly had one vote less.
 
I see a number of problems in this.

First of all, wouldnt Frederick William just be named Prince Consort? Espeically if hes considered a problem, so why crown him King at all? That at least postpones the issue for one generation!

Hmm. I guess you're right.

Secondly, the Welfs were just as autocratic as the Hohenzollerns, and they eventually got the hang of how things are done in Great Britain. Some would apply to the Hohenzollerns, so I wouldnt focus too much on this opposition of governance styles. So, okay, the British King doesnt have as much power - but the title falls freely to the Hohenzollerns, so I dont think theyll complain all too loudly.

Okay, I just imagined the initial slight confusion. Certainly "eventually" doesn't apply to the first year of the reign, which is where I had Sophia use her veto. I'll tone it down a bit - but there will still be some slight clashes, I think, given the huge differences between the motives of Prussia and Britain.

Thirdly, there wont be a dispute over the Electorate of Hannover. At least not at first. The title WILL pass to Ernest, Duke of York and Albany and Prince-Bishop of Osnabrück. Sucession laws are clear on that. If he dies, THEN there might be a certain succession issue. Salic Law in Germany was never as strong as in France, after all. Its possible for a line of a house to die out, its lands passing to another house by marriage, even though other lines of the old house still exist. That has happened countless times in the HREGN. So, if Ernest dies childless, THEN Prussia can raise a claim, which will be competed by Brunswick, most likely.

Fair enough, though the retcon-update obsoletes this.

Oh, and yes, eelctoral votes cant be amassed. When Bavaria and the Palatinate united, the electoral college suddenly had one vote less.

So each person who is an Elector gets one vote, and it's not dependent on the number of Electorates. Okay, then.
 
Top