For those that need a quick reminder, Ernest Augustus was the fifth son of George III of the UK and Hannover, but succeeded to the latter throne thanks to his elder brothers being unable to spawn legitimate male offspring.
He was an arch conservative, both in Westminster and Hannover. He was heartily against the cause of Catholic emancipation, being one of the leading voices opposing it in the Lords. Even for a Tory in the time period, he was one of the forces of reaction.
He also had numerous scandals - both political and personal - to his name. Then again, he was a son of George III, the latter is almost taken as read.
However, he had two close calls in the War of the First Coalition. As a cavalry officer, he was part of a Hannoverian force that went to the Netherlands to help big brother Freddie, the (Grand Old) Duke of York to fight the revolutionary French. In 1793, he suffered a gnarly facial wound after being struck with a sabre near Tournai. The next year, a cannonball injured his left arm at Turcoing.
If he cops it from either of these injuries, there's big changes to Hannover and the United Kingdom coming. That's before we consider the ramifications of a son of George dying in service. If the butterfly net holds, Augustus Frederick (otl Duke of Sussex) is next in line for Hannover. He's a whig: in favour of rights for Catholics, Jews and Dissenters; an abolitionist. Altogether a different Duke and potential king to his brother. Does removing the arch-reactionary change things like Catholic emancipation? I imagine King Augustus Frederick wouldn't throw out the Liberal constitution of Hannover, nor dismiss the professors such as the Grimms from Gottingen.
Any thoughts?
He was an arch conservative, both in Westminster and Hannover. He was heartily against the cause of Catholic emancipation, being one of the leading voices opposing it in the Lords. Even for a Tory in the time period, he was one of the forces of reaction.
He also had numerous scandals - both political and personal - to his name. Then again, he was a son of George III, the latter is almost taken as read.
However, he had two close calls in the War of the First Coalition. As a cavalry officer, he was part of a Hannoverian force that went to the Netherlands to help big brother Freddie, the (Grand Old) Duke of York to fight the revolutionary French. In 1793, he suffered a gnarly facial wound after being struck with a sabre near Tournai. The next year, a cannonball injured his left arm at Turcoing.
If he cops it from either of these injuries, there's big changes to Hannover and the United Kingdom coming. That's before we consider the ramifications of a son of George dying in service. If the butterfly net holds, Augustus Frederick (otl Duke of Sussex) is next in line for Hannover. He's a whig: in favour of rights for Catholics, Jews and Dissenters; an abolitionist. Altogether a different Duke and potential king to his brother. Does removing the arch-reactionary change things like Catholic emancipation? I imagine King Augustus Frederick wouldn't throw out the Liberal constitution of Hannover, nor dismiss the professors such as the Grimms from Gottingen.
Any thoughts?
Last edited: