Maximilian/William I/IV of Great Britain....Plausible?

jkarr

So when the Act of Settlement was passed in 1701, Parliament restricted the succession to the Protestant descendants of the Electress Sophia of Hanover, as we all know.
This, again as we know so well, lead to the House of Hanover coming to the throne on her death with George I, but he was already Elector of Hanover at the time anyways and the resulting union was something that troubled British politics for quite some time, especially during the Napoleonic wars.
Granted alot of the problems with the union weren't visible at the time, but what if Parliament realized that having holdings in Europe would lead them into problems early on, and decided that a reigning sovereign of another nation couldn't inherit the throne (or for no other reason than to not have a German whose sole interest is in protecting his German lands). Could Parliament have bypassed George and given his second brother Maximilian William of Brunswick-Lüneburg the chance?....and if that wasn't doable, who would be in line after them (even going past the House of Hanover itself)?
 

Elfwine

Would be pretty easy to insert such a clause.

But I'm not sure that there were problems - at least not with the king's position in Great Britain etc. being consistently weakened.
 

JedidiahStott

It was discussed in parliament at the time. For the reasons noted. The original act of settlement included clauses limiting the ability of the king to involve England in European wars, and forbidding the king to leave Britain without permission of parliament.

The stumbling block was simply the respect of the English (and Scottish) political class for the rules of descent. Bad enough to exclude the rightful king (so, at least, the Jacobites would say). But then having chosen another royal line, breaking the principles of primogeniture was a (very large) step too far.

Aristocratic members would reflect uncomfortably, that what was done for the descent of the crown , might next be done for the descent of their own titles.

And lords and commoners alike would look with trepidation at what the law books said about Borough English and Gavelkind. They did not want to go there .

Had George refused the offer, that might have been a different matter
 

Johnny Canuck

The problem is, there is literally no Protestant alternative readily available if Electress Sophia is not used - I don't think there was a single living Protestant descendent of Henry VII, & going back that far also undoes the dynastic union between England & Scotland anyway.

If one doesn't want to be tied to Hanover, the obvious solution is Maximilian William. However, in the long-term it actually leads to greater complications - Maximilian William never married, so on his death in 1726 the throne passes to his younger brother Ernest Augustus, who would die a year later without any heirs either. This is where things get interesting - at that point, the succession would be traced through Sophia Charlotte, only daughter of the Electress Sophia. She had died in 1705, so on Ernest Augustus' death in 1727 the throne passes to Sophia Charlotte's eldest son, none other than Frederick William I of Prussia. In other words, by trying to avoid Hanover, England gets tied to Prussia instead. :)
 

JedidiahStott

It is possible, of course, that one of the (many) Roman Catholic claimants would be willing to convert. Some of the Palatine relatives of Sophie were brought up Protestant, but converted to Romanism on marriage. Their children appear to have been equally agnostic. Dangle a crown, and one of them may go Protestant. The Act of Settlement allows (by silence) conversions. (Though if the convert were married his/her spouse would ave to convert also)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top