Jacobite?? Or not!

[Cameronian]

@Rebel

Deposed by 'a union of English Parliamentarians with the Dutch stadtholder William III of Orange-Nassau (William of Orange).'

Why? A justifiable suspicion of James' motives as he had already proved himself untrustworthy. The issues in contention were important to people then; repeal of the Test Act, increase in size of standing army and Catholic officers being appointed to it. There was a fear of a return to arbitrary rule.

[Motorway]

The decision by the Dutch to invade England was made independent of English support, (J. Israel, The Dutch republic, in his chapter on William III). James II was another victim on the powerplay between the French, the German Empire and the French.

[Graf Bretlach]

wow a forum full of Jacobites!!

Personally I think they should never have let them back in after they got rid of Charles I, so no Jacobite or Protestant cause for me, just anti-Monarchy, then and now.

[Friedrich August I.]

.....was another victim on the powerplay between the French, the German Empire and the French.

Hope you ment the Holy Roman Empire, yes?

[j1mwallace]

The decision by the Dutch to invade England was made independent of English support, (J. Israel, The Dutch republic, in his chapter on William III). James II was another victim on the powerplay between the French, the German Empire and the French.

The Dutch would never have been able to carry this off without Enlish collusion. A Dutch invasion force couldnt have crossed the channel and fought England and France on its own.

Mike you are correct it is Sir Walter Scott who was an earlier version of Hollywood. Mr Russian James sir I count the chaps on here as exempt from the hollywood effect...... Unless you are 12 or under!

[Russian James]

While I accept that the Dutch would have had severe difficulty in taking on the might of France, I would have thought that they could easily have crossed the Channel with an invasion force...

I'm sure there would have been enough disaffected factions in England that there would have been some support onshore...

oh wait, that IS what happened in 1688!

[obriendavid]

A justifiable suspicion of James' motives as he had already proved himself untrustworthy. The issues in contention were important to people then; repeal of the Test Act, increase in size of standing army and Catholic officers being appointed to it. There was a fear of a return to arbitrary rule.

Even the majority of catholics in England were starting to worry about what James was getting up to, they could see he was moving too strongly and quickly to promote what was very much a religious minority. They could see that his actions would bring down retaliation on them when a protestant king came back to the throne.
Cheers
Dave

[obriendavid]

BTW Can highly recommend John Callow's 2 volume biography of James.
- Mike.

Thanks for the recommendation Mike, I'll see if I can get it through my local library.
Cheers
Dave

[Captain of Dragoons]

Jacobite because my roots are Irish and Catholic. My great-great grandfather left Ireland as a indenture servant to Newfoundland. The ironic thing is that my great uncle was killed on the Somme July 1st and my grandfather lost his leg in North Africa in 1943, both fighting in the British Army.

However I also have a soft spot for the Huguenot Battalions fighting for the same reasons but on the other side of the coin.

cheers
Edward

[quindia]

Jacobite... why the hell am I painting a Williamite army?

[wdrenth]

Judging from the popularity of the Jacobites, I might conclude they won the war (Just as the popularity of anything Napoleon and anything German for 39-45 may vouch for a different turn in history).

[Motorway]

.....was another victim on the powerplay between the French, the German Empire and the French.

Hope you ment the Holy Roman Empire, yes?

Of course!, Meine Entschuldigungen nach Wien!

[Motorway]

The decision by the Dutch to invade England was made independent of English support, (J. Israel, The Dutch republic, in his chapter on William III). James II was another victim on the powerplay between the French, the German Empire and the French.

The Dutch would never have been able to carry this off without Enlish collusion. A Dutch invasion force couldnt have crossed the channel and fought England and France on its own.

It seems that British history books differ with Dutch ones on this matter, and it's always nice to see a British historian accepting the Dutch version..

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 65642.html

(Of course there are more, like Professors Lisa Jardine and Steve Pincus.)

[j1mwallace]

Thats an extremely interesting article. Its as I've always felt. we are only taught what is politically expedient.
Very plausible and interesting. Thanks.
its funny how old "prejudices" still come through.
By the way I'd add another to the list of defeated who still gain considerable support by waragamers... The Confederates of the ACW.

[turrabear]

well i'm going to buck the trend here i'm a williamite.