Clarification for the ending of the video [Spoiler warning] I realized this as I was editing, the way I phrased it sounds as if France will completely annex the whole world or something, which is not what I had in mind. By world domination, I mostly meant something like the hegemonic position Britain had in our timeline, but on an even higher level. Of course, should England, Spain, Austria, the Netherlands and Russia all team up to stop France, they will most certainly succeed, but the point is, France is in a really powerful position, and unless such a gigantic alliance gets formed, the future of the French Kingdom looks very bright.
My favorite thing about this channel is definitely how unique the videos are compared to the rest of what you see on RUclips so it always refreshing to see. Keep it up man I’m rooting for you
Who is "him" exactly, and which part of the video are we talking about? If you mean Charles fleeing to Ireland during the civil war, then yeah, that's certainly possible, but I think that Scotland is much more likely option
Wasn't expecting this tbh but very interesting. Suggestion: what if Hannibal won against Rome in the second Punic War?? What will this do to European culture and can his conquests survive?
Britain never eclipsed France in Europe lol and how was the Austrian war of Succession about containing French expansion. Britain was colonising India, North America and Australia in the 18th century. More expansionist than any European power.
Yes they did though, after the Seven Years war. Of course, with the French revolution that was kinda reversed, but after France was once again defeated, Britain emerged on top once more Also I never said that the Austrian war of Succession was about containing French expansion, I said that that was the reason Britain joined the war
@@nuttygeezer708 It's clear; if the coalition forces won, France would gain the Austrian Netherlands, and their main continental rival, Austria, would have been destroyed On top of that, Bavaria, a close ally would expand massively It sure sounds an expansionist war for the French
@@justagreekhistorian France and Prussia did win militarily as Frederick beat the Austrians and took silesia and de Saxe cleared the Low Countries of the Allied military presence through his famous victories at lauffeld, Fontenoy, Rocoux and finally Maastricht and got the Austrian Netherlands. Then Louis XV gave it back at Aix La Chapelle to try and bring French - Hapsburg rivalry. So giving back won territory seems pretty anti expansionist compared to Prussia that doubled in size after winning their new land and the British empire would later be the largest European empire globally in terms of sqkm so they are the most expansionist of any country.
@@nuttygeezer708 I never said that Britain wasn't being expansionist lmfao, all I am saying is that the French were trying to expand, and they were stopped in their tracks by Britain Why do you think the French gave up the Austrian Netherlands? Were they being kind and sympathetic? Of course not, Britain FORCED them, because such a French expansion would be a threat to British power
The Jacobites reached Derby and could have marched on London from there. It is highly likely if they had the King would have fled to Hannover and Charlie would eventually have become King Charles III.
1. It was heavily religious, basically about Traditional Christian interpretations around hierarchy and the role of Kings in God's order, this was against the non-conformist dominated parliament would had created liberalism to morally and philosophically justify their seizure of power. A change to who won this dispute would have very serious ramifications. 2. The North of England was sympathetic though less so than in previous rebellions due to changing religious demographics, they didn't flock to the cause out of self-preservation, previous rebels had had their lands stripped or even been sold into slavery. The Jacobites by their disorganization and rampant pillaging did not give confidence in ultimate success. Though it should be noted that a disappointing reaction did not mean a small one, considerable numbers of Englishmen would join the jacobites, both red cloaks who turned coat and veteran military officers who were mostly sent North to train and lead new Scottish recruits were particularly valued, but the Scots also found themselves with a mass of English and Irish volunteers who donned scraps of tartan and amalgamated themselves into existing units. The expectations were too high from the start, frankly even when it came to the highlanders themselves. 3. There have been several depositions with French support in England's history, they have never altered the English policy towards France much, hence why the French support for this one was half-hearted, it would have not taken any time of England to be back to England things and the repercussions would have little effect on the map, but would fundamentally reshape the ideologies, theology and culture of the future. The erasure of Whig history alone would be monumental.
Dmitri Shostakovich Waltz No 2 From Russia with Love I Huma Huma I melmanos Hearts of Iron IV Operation Barbarossa Hungarian Dance no 1, 5 Sprengisandi Icelandic Folk Song Strauss ~ The Blue Danube Waltz Web Weaver Dance When Johnny Comes Marching Home Hope this helps!
I have done a collab with Videntis believe or not, though I do think that video was kinda half assed, I would like to try again sometime in the future US of Z is also a really good althist youtuber
William of Orange was James’s nephew via his sister Mary Stuart so the closest male heir before James’s son was born. He wasn’t just Mary’s husband. The French were Britain’s natural rival & old enemy. Religion wasn’t the only division between the two nations. There’s no way a Stuart Catholic king would have been accepted especially one in hock to the French absolute monarchy. 1688 established the primacy of Parliament over the Devine Rights of the Crown as exemplified by James II. Mary Tudor was the last Catholic monarch & she was widely despised for her religious persecution of Protestants & foreign alliance with Spain. The Spanish failed to invade England in 1588 & I can’t see how the combined forces would have done much better or had domestic local popular support. Remember Scotland was essentially a Protestant country by 1688. While the some of the Highland clans may have wanted restoration most in Scotland didn’t & the most powerful landholders were anti Stuart & anti-Catholic. Likewise in England there’s no way that an invasion would have realistically succeeded. As for the American colonies they would have revolted long before your timeline suggests given US was essential founded by puritans who were strongly anti-Catholic. This seems more like fantasy game of thrones based on no real credible evidence? If may be perhaps based on a wish to try to erase Britain & its empire from history but frankly another Stuart Restoration wouldn’t have done it. If the Hanoverians were unpopular & “foreign” they were accepted because they were both Protestants & willing to accept Parliamentary rule with the king. The Stuart Pretenders were entirely raised in France with no real understanding of even Scotland never mind England (the richer & politically dominate part of GB). Also your alternative timeline doesn’t give enough credence to the English Civil War which has already settled matters both in terms of the dominate religion & system of government. There was no real appetite to re-fight this some 50-100 years later. England, Wales & most of Scotland were monarchist & Protestant & with a Parliamentary form of government. Louis XIV’s France was seen as the great threat both to the Reformation & independence of many of the smaller Protestant States emerging in Central & Eastern Europe. Read Churchill on the period how Louis was seen as forerunner of Hitler in terms of the fate of Europe & why his defeat by Marlborough was such a significant victory. A General who had been loyal to James but switched to William once he saw how he ruled as King. A little more understand of wider British history would help to see why this was never going to happen as described.
Okay lol, that doesn't really have any serious impact on the scenario, I can't mention every detail Yes, I am aware that France and England were not only divided by religion, I am not stupid; the Stuarts would still have allied themselves with France because, as you said later in your comment, they were literally raised in France and they were extremely loyal. In a couple of generations, the Franco-British rivalry would have certainly came up again, but that was interrupted by the Second English Civil war outlined in the video Never said that this was a very realistic scenario, in my channel I don't strictly focus on "realistic" alternate history scenarios (such thing doesn't even exist) and that part of the video was made specifically in order to achieve the scenario. If that doesn't happen, then the Stuarts would have no shot at victory, meaning this video wouldn't exist The American colonies could indeed rebel earlier, but I consider it more likely that this takes time, with them beginning to tie their grip over their own territory and then launching full revolts during the Second English Civil War Also yes, the English Civil War did indeed open the gates to all that stuff, but it can be argued that the reforms passed during William's reign were more significant. No matter what laid the ground for England's, and by extension the rest of Britain's governments, such as a sudden return to absolutism wouldn't be seen kindly by said populations. It'd be difficult to see them just accept such a situation and do nothing I don't know what this has to do with the scenario And yeah, the scenario seems very plausible still.
I am a direct descendant of the old chiefs of clan MacNeil, and the son of the chief I am related to fought in almost all of the battles with his 6 brothers
Clarification for the ending of the video [Spoiler warning]
I realized this as I was editing, the way I phrased it sounds as if France will completely annex the whole world or something, which is not what I had in mind. By world domination, I mostly meant something like the hegemonic position Britain had in our timeline, but on an even higher level. Of course, should England, Spain, Austria, the Netherlands and Russia all team up to stop France, they will most certainly succeed, but the point is, France is in a really powerful position, and unless such a gigantic alliance gets formed, the future of the French Kingdom looks very bright.
My favorite thing about this channel is definitely how unique the videos are compared to the rest of what you see on RUclips so it always refreshing to see. Keep it up man I’m rooting for you
Glad you like them!
@@justagreekhistorianyou should become like living ironically in Europe
A Serbian Channel which is pretty funny tbh
Suggestion: What if William. Queen anne and prince george son lived? No union with hanover
Yeah, that sounds good
Kid has 3 parents 😂
As a French I’m this is a great scenario a reverse one
a more interesting and realistic scenario is a Taiwan type of situation, with him ruling Ireland, while still claiming the title of king of England.
Who is "him" exactly, and which part of the video are we talking about? If you mean Charles fleeing to Ireland during the civil war, then yeah, that's certainly possible, but I think that Scotland is much more likely option
@ James 2
That'd mean irish people would be happy, which can't be allowed to happen
I love the editing! Very smooth
Thank you! Davinci Resolve is generally so much better than Filmora
What if Hellenoturkism were achieved?
That'd be quite an interesting prospect, though I'd have to move it for later down the line since my next video will be on Greece and Turkey lol
@justagreekhistorian Yay! I love alternate histories regarding Greece. ♥️
Finally someone did this scenario
yeah I was surprised that no one else has done this before
@ genuinely crazy. Any ways, wha’ll be king but Charlie?
@That-One-Georgia-Bear I mean, wha wadna fecht for Cherlie?
Welcome back! Love your content ❤❤❤❤❤
Πολύ ωραίο βίντεο, χρονια πολλα κι όλας αν και καθυστερημένα Ανδρέα.
Ευχαριστώ πολύ φίλε μου!
Finally someone writes an interesting alternative history.
Thank you!
very interesting alternate history
Wasn't expecting this tbh but very interesting. Suggestion: what if Hannibal won against Rome in the second Punic War?? What will this do to European culture and can his conquests survive?
W scenario
As a fan of the Outlander show, I'm happy to having find out about this video.
Yeah Outlander was a really big inspiration for me to make this haha
What if the hundred years war ended in a stalemate with england keeping its continental possessions but failing to conquer france?
Welcome to the two hundred years war
Hm I haven't seen anyone do this before, so much hype about England winning, this could add some spice to that
What if Henry VI/the Lancasters won the Wars of the Roses against the Yorks?
French america existing is the best thing in alternate history...
I agree lol
Nice
Χρονια αργοπορημενα πολλα🎉
ευχαριστώ πολύ!!
I just wondering would it includes the alternate history that america became a monarchy
But ideas. Not hereditary but kind of like elective monarchy
Britain never eclipsed France in Europe lol and how was the Austrian war of Succession about containing French expansion. Britain was colonising India, North America and Australia in the 18th century. More expansionist than any European power.
Yes they did though, after the Seven Years war. Of course, with the French revolution that was kinda reversed, but after France was once again defeated, Britain emerged on top once more
Also I never said that the Austrian war of Succession was about containing French expansion, I said that that was the reason Britain joined the war
How did Britain @ joining the war under that pretext?
@@nuttygeezer708 It's clear; if the coalition forces won, France would gain the Austrian Netherlands, and their main continental rival, Austria, would have been destroyed
On top of that, Bavaria, a close ally would expand massively
It sure sounds an expansionist war for the French
@@justagreekhistorian France and Prussia did win militarily as Frederick beat the Austrians and took silesia and de Saxe cleared the Low Countries of the Allied military presence through his famous victories at lauffeld, Fontenoy, Rocoux and finally Maastricht and got the Austrian Netherlands. Then Louis XV gave it back at Aix La Chapelle to try and bring French - Hapsburg rivalry. So giving back won territory seems pretty anti expansionist compared to Prussia that doubled in size after winning their new land and the British empire would later be the largest European empire globally in terms of sqkm so they are the most expansionist of any country.
@@nuttygeezer708 I never said that Britain wasn't being expansionist lmfao, all I am saying is that the French were trying to expand, and they were stopped in their tracks by Britain
Why do you think the French gave up the Austrian Netherlands? Were they being kind and sympathetic? Of course not, Britain FORCED them, because such a French expansion would be a threat to British power
The Jacobites reached Derby and could have marched on London from there. It is highly likely if they had the King would have fled to Hannover and Charlie would eventually have become King Charles III.
Yeah that's pretty much what I explored in the video
What if Catherine of Aragon conquered Scotland?
1. It was heavily religious, basically about Traditional Christian interpretations around hierarchy and the role of Kings in God's order, this was against the non-conformist dominated parliament would had created liberalism to morally and philosophically justify their seizure of power. A change to who won this dispute would have very serious ramifications.
2. The North of England was sympathetic though less so than in previous rebellions due to changing religious demographics, they didn't flock to the cause out of self-preservation, previous rebels had had their lands stripped or even been sold into slavery. The Jacobites by their disorganization and rampant pillaging did not give confidence in ultimate success. Though it should be noted that a disappointing reaction did not mean a small one, considerable numbers of Englishmen would join the jacobites, both red cloaks who turned coat and veteran military officers who were mostly sent North to train and lead new Scottish recruits were particularly valued, but the Scots also found themselves with a mass of English and Irish volunteers who donned scraps of tartan and amalgamated themselves into existing units. The expectations were too high from the start, frankly even when it came to the highlanders themselves.
3. There have been several depositions with French support in England's history, they have never altered the English policy towards France much, hence why the French support for this one was half-hearted, it would have not taken any time of England to be back to England things and the repercussions would have little effect on the map, but would fundamentally reshape the ideologies, theology and culture of the future. The erasure of Whig history alone would be monumental.
is this a video? sorry i'm new to youtube
Good ending
Hi Greek Historian
Which is the music that you use in your videos?
Cuz' i've heard it before and searches it for a long time (no success x"d)
Dmitri Shostakovich Waltz No 2
From Russia with Love I Huma Huma I melmanos
Hearts of Iron IV Operation Barbarossa
Hungarian Dance no 1, 5
Sprengisandi Icelandic Folk Song
Strauss ~ The Blue Danube Waltz
Web Weaver Dance
When Johnny Comes Marching Home
Hope this helps!
what if listenbourg was real
You should collab with US of Z or Videntis 🔥🔥
I have done a collab with Videntis believe or not, though I do think that video was kinda half assed, I would like to try again sometime in the future
US of Z is also a really good althist youtuber
What if Michael the brave's union succeded
oo I'd love to do that one
William of Orange was James’s nephew via his sister Mary Stuart so the closest male heir before James’s son was born. He wasn’t just Mary’s husband.
The French were Britain’s natural rival & old enemy. Religion wasn’t the only division between the two nations. There’s no way a Stuart Catholic king would have been accepted especially one in hock to the French absolute monarchy.
1688 established the primacy of Parliament over the Devine Rights of the Crown as exemplified by James II. Mary Tudor was the last Catholic monarch & she was widely despised for her religious persecution of Protestants & foreign alliance with Spain.
The Spanish failed to invade England in 1588 & I can’t see how the combined forces would have done much better or had domestic local popular support. Remember Scotland was essentially a Protestant country by 1688. While the some of the Highland clans may have wanted restoration most in Scotland didn’t & the most powerful landholders were anti Stuart & anti-Catholic. Likewise in England there’s no way that an invasion would have realistically succeeded.
As for the American colonies they would have revolted long before your timeline suggests given US was essential founded by puritans who were strongly anti-Catholic.
This seems more like fantasy game of thrones based on no real credible evidence? If may be perhaps based on a wish to try to erase Britain & its empire from history but frankly another Stuart Restoration wouldn’t have done it.
If the Hanoverians were unpopular & “foreign” they were accepted because they were both Protestants & willing to accept Parliamentary rule with the king. The Stuart Pretenders were entirely raised in France with no real understanding of even Scotland never mind England (the richer & politically dominate part of GB). Also your alternative timeline doesn’t give enough credence to the English Civil War which has already settled matters both in terms of the dominate religion & system of government. There was no real appetite to re-fight this some 50-100 years later. England, Wales & most of Scotland were monarchist & Protestant & with a Parliamentary form of government.
Louis XIV’s France was seen as the great threat both to the Reformation & independence of many of the smaller Protestant States emerging in Central & Eastern Europe. Read Churchill on the period how Louis was seen as forerunner of Hitler in terms of the fate of Europe & why his defeat by Marlborough was such a significant victory. A General who had been loyal to James but switched to William once he saw how he ruled as King.
A little more understand of wider British history would help to see why this was never going to happen as described.
Okay lol, that doesn't really have any serious impact on the scenario, I can't mention every detail
Yes, I am aware that France and England were not only divided by religion, I am not stupid; the Stuarts would still have allied themselves with France because, as you said later in your comment, they were literally raised in France and they were extremely loyal. In a couple of generations, the Franco-British rivalry would have certainly came up again, but that was interrupted by the Second English Civil war outlined in the video
Never said that this was a very realistic scenario, in my channel I don't strictly focus on "realistic" alternate history scenarios (such thing doesn't even exist) and that part of the video was made specifically in order to achieve the scenario. If that doesn't happen, then the Stuarts would have no shot at victory, meaning this video wouldn't exist
The American colonies could indeed rebel earlier, but I consider it more likely that this takes time, with them beginning to tie their grip over their own territory and then launching full revolts during the Second English Civil War
Also yes, the English Civil War did indeed open the gates to all that stuff, but it can be argued that the reforms passed during William's reign were more significant. No matter what laid the ground for England's, and by extension the rest of Britain's governments, such as a sudden return to absolutism wouldn't be seen kindly by said populations. It'd be difficult to see them just accept such a situation and do nothing
I don't know what this has to do with the scenario
And yeah, the scenario seems very plausible still.
Based. Very based indeed
Vive la France !
William was also third in line to the English throne, behind his wife and her sister, Anne.
As a Catholic Classical Republican with Monarchist sympathies, I will enjoy this video very much. 👍
Good to hear haha
@@justagreekhistorian Can you do what if Pyotr Wrangel took charge of the White Army Forces earlier?
P.S. Vive La Frois! Vive La France!
@@AmericanImperium1776 Sure, could be interesting
Also yes, Vive la France
@@justagreekhistorian Great thanks. 👍 A good source for Wrangel would be his memoir, “Always With Honor.”
I am a direct descendant of the old chiefs of clan MacNeil, and the son of the chief I am related to fought in almost all of the battles with his 6 brothers
Yoo that is super epic, glad to see you here!
@@justagreekhistorian epic indeed.