AHC: restore as many native monarchies abolished by foreign invasion as possible after independence

[connacht4096]

if you have not been paying attention, many countries have lost their native monarchies to imperialism (which is why I find it odd that monarchists defend imperialism, British invasions alone ended more native monarchies then radical revolutionary republicanism ever did; in most cases republicanism arrived after the native monarchy was only a memory). many of those countries regained independence decades or centuries later, and became republics. but it is an attested fact that you can find quite a few people in those countries who agree that the last native king (or emperor), was a tragic martyr, and then will tell you they are fervent republicans. a bizarre opinion overall, but in this one context it makes complete sense. anyway the challenge is to maximize the number of countries that choose to restore their native monarchies after independence. it is kind of cheating if their last independent monarch is still alive as of independence, but his heir according to relevant succession laws may take the throne (bonus points if that happens), a new dynasty is allowed if they present themselves as successors to the last pre independence king of the country. the longer the country has been occupied, the more bonus points you get. see how many post colonial restorations of monarchies you can carry out. bonus points if the country lost its native nobility during occupation (for instance Ireland), and that is also restored. the monarch's powers can be absolute or constitutional, the monarchy does not have to survive into the present (more bonus points if it does though), just at least one human lifespan past independence, with at least one succession. native rulers used as instruments of colonial indirect rule keeping power after independence does not count. POD can be pre or post 1900.

 

[connacht4096]

no takers so far?

 

[Anarchomando]

Not a lot of us like monarchy

Or we we know about pre-colonial monarchy

That and it's a very specific niche

 

[connacht4096]

Not a lot of us like monarchy

Or we we know about pre-colonial monarchy

That and it's a very specific niche

I named it not because of liking it, but because it is interisting; also in many countries whose native monarchies were abolished by colonialism, you can find people who if you ask them will agree that the last independent king of the country was a tragic figure, but who are also republicans; in some of those countries this even appears to be the consensus. that's why I thought this question was interesting.

 

[Marc Pasquin]

Nazi Germany might have tried to restore or install a few monarchies to try and lend some legitimacy to their puppet states. For example, some member of the house of Bourbon for France or some random nobs as head of state in occupied Belarus to try and step away from communism.

Following WW2, instead of becoming a republic, Italians *might* have accepted the king stepping in favour of a child or some relative who wasn't tainted with a connection with fascism in a similar manner to what happened in Belgium.

 

[LNSS]

In Mexico there were some proposals to bring Moctezuma's descendants to rule, but that was in the 1800s.

 

[connacht4096]

Nazi Germany might have tried to restore or install a few monarchies to try and lend some legitimacy to their puppet states. For example, some member of the house of Bourbon for France or some random nobs as head of state in occupied Belarus to try and step away from communism.

I was talking countries that lost native monarchies to foreign invasion (such as Ireland, Poland, Madagascar, Korea, Burma etc. to name some of many examples), so monarchies ended by local revolution do not count; France clearly qualifies as a local revolution. it does count if a different outside empire (not the intial colonizers), uses the monarch as a puppet ruler. Moctezuma in Mexico does count. see how many you can manage

 

[overoceans]

Korea

Whenever I've asked Koreans about the possibility of reviving the pre-colonial monarchy, they've evinced a noticable lack of interest in even just the topic itself. Even though King Sejong appears on the money and monarchy-centred historical dramas are popular on TV.

 

[AltoRegnant]

it would help if the ones that weren't deposed weren't used by the colonizers (or, if their claimants were part of conservative resistance). the last sapa inca was a Spanish vassal. same with the later Malagasy and Vietnamese rulers.

 

[overoceans]

WHIG-HISTORY GEEK ALERT

In an age where democracy is the widely favoured(though certainly not always practiced) form of government, most people living in democracies are not going to want to switch to being ruled by a hereditary dictator with actual powers.

Which leaves figurehead monarchs to fulfill the OP's challenge. Problem is, figurehead monarchs just perform the same functions as the president does in a weak presidential system. So, in places like Italy and Ireland, what is the incentive to revert to a figurehead ruler? All you'd basically be doing is making the presidency into an inherited position.

 

[Sarthak]

Don't most African Republics lkeep their monarchies as a cultural figurehead even though they are republics? The main problems for African republics is that of course their country had many kingdoms before the colonial imperialism came forward, so it's really hard for most to choose 1 single native monarchy to be restored. The only country able to in my mind would be Ghana.

 

[overoceans]

Don't most African Republics lkeep their monarchies as a cultural figurehead even though they are republics?

That could be true. But what exactly does it mean to be a "cultural figurehead" in a country that is politically a republic?

 

[Exostrike]

You might be able to make it happen in the early 20th century when monarchism (though usually in a constitutional form) was still a viable practice, however at this time the power of the European empires is still strong enough to repress independence movements.

The other option is some kind of reactionary rejection of European style political systems and a return to old/traditional ways. However such a movement would probably also reject European influence in education, science and technology, economies, industrial policy, culture, religion etc etc. This list goes on and any country in OTL that tried any of this usually suffered terribly.

 

[Welshroyalhistory]

Whenever I've asked Koreans about the possibility of reviving the pre-colonial monarchy, they've evinced a noticable lack of interest in even just the topic itself. Even though King Sejong appears on the money and monarchy-centred historical dramas are popular on TV.

I've noticed the propensity for monarchy themed dramas!

I think a key point to consider is that many dynasties have effectively made pro-Monarchists lives very difficult by not being able to agree amongst themselves who is the rightful dynasty/person to support - such disputes just divide the Monarchist cause. There is no agreed South Korean or Hawaiian candidate for example. There are other numerous examples.

 

[Father Maryland]

it would help if the ones that weren't deposed weren't used by the colonizers (or, if their claimants were part of conservative resistance). the last sapa inca was a Spanish vassal. same with the later Malagasy and Vietnamese rulers.

This was extremely common. Often the monarchies weren't abolished. They and the local traditional nobility/ leadership were coopted and either used to provide a veneer of legitimacy or provided governance on a local level to help the colonizing power rule. The French in Indochina maintained multiple monarchies as puppets and the British in India had about half of all territory nominally ruled by the princely states. Once anti colonialism gained steam and local nationalism emerged those puppet monarchies were seen as the Enemy. We saw this with the Republic of India rapidly annexing or invading the princely states and monarchies in Egypt, Libya, Rwanda, Indochina and elsewhere get abolished by newly independent states.

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

This was extremely common. Often the monarchies weren't abolished. They and the local traditional nobility/ leadership were coopted and either used to provide a veneer of legitimacy or provided governance on a local level to help the colonizing power rule. The French in Indochina maintained multiple monarchies as puppets and the British in India had about half of all territory nominally ruled by the princely states. Once anti colonialism gained steam and local nationalism emerged those puppet monarchies were seen as the Enemy. We saw this with the Republic of India rapidly annexing or invading the princely states and monarchies in Egypt, Libya, Rwanda, Indochina and elsewhere get abolished by newly independent states.

And then you have the republic of Nigeria where there are still a huge number of traditional states within the republic with their own largely symbolic monarchies still intact, hence the Nigerian prince scam.

 

[Aghasverov]

Don't most African Republics lkeep their monarchies as a cultural figurehead even though they are republics? The main problems for African republics is that of course their country had many kingdoms before the colonial imperialism came forward, so it's really hard for most to choose 1 single native monarchy to be restored. The only country able to in my mind would be Ghana.

The Kingdom of Ashanti still exists today within Ghana, in a rather strange semi-federal union with the central government in Accra...
A couple other African examples which spring to mind are Rwanda (briefly, after independence), Burundi (for a few years longer), the Kingdom of Buganda within Uganda...
Lesotho and Eswatini/Swaziland never lost their monarchies....

 

[Aghasverov]

if you have not been paying attention, many countries have lost their native monarchies to imperialism (which is why I find it odd that monarchists defend imperialism, British invasions alone ended more native monarchies then radical revolutionary republicanism ever did; in most cases republicanism arrived after the native monarchy was only a memory). many of those countries regained independence decades or centuries later, and became republics. but it is an attested fact that you can find quite a few people in those countries who agree that the last native king (or emperor), was a tragic martyr, and then will tell you they are fervent republicans. a bizarre opinion overall, but in this one context it makes complete sense. anyway the challenge is to maximize the number of countries that choose to restore their native monarchies after independence. it is kind of cheating if their last independent monarch is still alive as of independence, but his heir according to relevant succession laws may take the throne (bonus points if that happens), a new dynasty is allowed if they present themselves as successors to the last pre independence king of the country. the longer the country has been occupied, the more bonus points you get. see how many post colonial restorations of monarchies you can carry out. bonus points if the country lost its native nobility during occupation (for instance Ireland), and that is also restored. the monarch's powers can be absolute or constitutional, the monarchy does not have to survive into the present (more bonus points if it does though), just at least one human lifespan past independence, with at least one succession. native rulers used as instruments of colonial indirect rule keeping power after independence does not count. POD can be pre or post 1900.

If anything, the British in particular tended to preserve local monarchies, relying heavily upon "Indirect Rule" in many areas...
In Asia and the Pacific, Malaysia (at least the peninsular part) and Tonga are two interesting examples of local monarchs retaining power after independence.
There are 5 nations within the Commonwealth (Brunei, Eswatini, Lesotho, Malaysia, and Tonga) which have Native monarchs rather than Queen Elizabeth as their heads of state...

 

[Fatt Shea]

if you have not been paying attention, many countries have lost their native monarchies to imperialism (which is why I find it odd that monarchists defend imperialism, British invasions alone ended more native monarchies then radical revolutionary republicanism ever did; in most cases republicanism arrived after the native monarchy was only a memory). many of those countries regained independence decades or centuries later, and became republics. but it is an attested fact that you can find quite a few people in those countries who agree that the last native king (or emperor), was a tragic martyr, and then will tell you they are fervent republicans. a bizarre opinion overall, but in this one context it makes complete sense. anyway the challenge is to maximize the number of countries that choose to restore their native monarchies after independence. it is kind of cheating if their last independent monarch is still alive as of independence, but his heir according to relevant succession laws may take the throne (bonus points if that happens), a new dynasty is allowed if they present themselves as successors to the last pre independence king of the country. the longer the country has been occupied, the more bonus points you get. see how many post colonial restorations of monarchies you can carry out. bonus points if the country lost its native nobility during occupation (for instance Ireland), and that is also restored. the monarch's powers can be absolute or constitutional, the monarchy does not have to survive into the present (more bonus points if it does though), just at least one human lifespan past independence, with at least one succession. native rulers used as instruments of colonial indirect rule keeping power after independence does not count. POD can be pre or post 1900.

I think you just need more monarchs or royal people to be inportant in independence movements and really push to restore the monarchy, this did not happen that much and if it did it would likely work in many places as they will have some kind of legitimacy. For example bao dai was not that important to vietnam independence and so was not popular, if he really was committed there is good chance he can return.

 

[Aghasverov]

I think you just need more monarchs or royal people to be inportant in independence movements and really push to restore the monarchy, this did not happen that much and if it did it would likely work in many places as they will have some kind of legitimacy. For example bao dai was not that important to vietnam independence and so was not popular, if he really was committed there is good chance he can return.

Here's one example of this...

Seretse Khama - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org