That is true. But, they were both boring, I can't see that either was an interesting person.
George of Denmark was a younger son. He was financially dependent on Anne and forced to live in her country as her subject. He had some influence with her, but it only went so far. If he’d had real clout, he would have made her end her intimate friendships with Sarah Churchill and Abigail Masham after gossip started circulating about them at the English and Continental courts.
George of Hanover was rich and a ruler in his own right, so he would have had no need to tolerate her aforementioned friendships. He would have been a better protector than GD, for he would not have allowed the Churchills and other jackals to prey on her. It’s probable that he would have cheated on her, but her father, brother-in-law, and Uncle Charles cheated on their wives, as did many of their courtiers, so it’s highly unlikely that she would have made scenes over it, etc. I don’t think they would have been happy, but they might have made a go of their marriage anyway.
You described Anne as dull; you’re entitled to your opinion. I think that she was a sympathetic figure and far more likeable than Mary. Anne was a poor little rich girl who was often preyed upon by people who knew how little she thought of herself. She was surrounded by users and takers, not real friends. It must have been unbelievably painful for her to have lost all of her children and to have found so little sincere sympathy from anyone. After William of Gloucester’s death, she underlined her alienation from the English court by contacting her father – a dangerous political step - in order to weep on his shoulder, so to speak, over her dead children. That's not dull, in my opinion, but tragic.
As for your opinion that George of Hanover was boring, etc., generations of English historians certainly back you up on that. I recently read a book by one of them, John Brown, called
Anecdotes and Characters of the House of Brunswick. Here are two brief excerpts:
“
George the first was a prince of no extraordinary depth or acuteness of understanding…his character was radically coarse, and wholly unsusceptible of grace, delicacy, or refinement: his passions, when roused, were violent, and they were neither associated with generous sympathies, nor ennobled by magnanimous sentiments. By his conduct to his unhappy wife, he manifested a vindictive spirit, and a brutal insensibility to the feelings of compassion or the claims of justice. His malignant antipathy to his son betrayed a callousness of heart, revolting to nature, and a groveling suspicion, disgraceful to a manly character.” “
On the fatal day when Count Konigsmark was murdered, I was made a prisoner of state, a guard was stationed at my chamber-door, and the infamous women, van Platen and Meissenbourg, obtruded their hateful presence to enjoy the spectacle of my ruin, and mock the misery they had caused. Just after the bloody deed was finished, the Elector…entered to announce the murder, and my speedy removal. ‘The sooner the better,’ said I. ‘Send me where you may, you cannot fix upon a residence so infamous as your palace or so loathsome to me.’ … I did not fear death, it would have been welcome; but, my children! ... As I leaned over the innocents, the cruel fiends laughed at me, and said, ‘See! How she mourns the death of their father!” “Wretches!’ said I, ‘their father lives; and the God that knows my innocence will avenge our wrongs!” … I saw nor thought of any one but my infants, -from them I was to be torn, to leave them in the power of wolves and tigers!”Brown’s book is chock-full of misinformation meant to make the Hanoverians in general and George in particular look like the scum of the earth. Books like his were so common in the 19th century that some of the ridiculous claims made in them found their way into a lot of history books, i.e. the myth of Sophia Dorothea’s last letter to George, which allegedly triggered his death. Brown
et al wrote this malicious bibble babble because Jacobite books had become fashionable and sold very well. They also wrote this garbage as a means of griping about the fact that the rulers of Great Britain were of German ancestry and proud of it (it was not until World War I that the royal family’s positive attitude towards their German ancestry changed). Most people chose to put their faith in the tripe spewed forth by Brown
et al because it's always easier to follow the herd than to seek out and stand up for the truth.
George was a skilled commander, a brilliant politician, a believer in religious tolerance, and a patron of musicians. He divorced and imprisoned his wife because she'd cheated on him and had caused a scandal in the process. His action seems cruel in this day and age, but back then many thought he'd been more merciful than she deserved: he would have been within his rights to behead her for treason.