A more vocal Jacobite presence in England in 1745?

After arriving in Derbyshire, Prince Charles's council decided to break the momentum and reunite with Jacobite armies in Scotland, knowing that the Jacobites couldn't defeat any assembled government force in mass. Now Charles wanted to march on London, thinking that much like in Manchester, the people would rise in his support, while also claiming that should he capture London, the French had assured him that they would send a force to land in Kent to back up the claim of James to the throne of England and Scotland, the claim of House Stuart, although surely they would just claim the title of King of Great Britain. However, given that Charles had no contact with the English Jacobites, his officers redirected his forces north. So, assuming that any POD before the beginning of the campaign wouldn't affect the outcome of the rebellion up until the arrival of Bonnie Prince Charlie and his force of 6,000 or so to Swarkestone Bridge, what can we do to assure that the Jacobites within England would be in contact with the Prince? And if they were to gain contact with him, and the Stuart Prince did march on London, what would have been the result?

Would their be a popular Jacobite rising in England? Was there enough to support to overthrow the Hanoverians? Even if Charles captures London, is this a surefire win? I've been pretty interested in this as of late.

Enigmajones said:

After arriving in Derbyshire, Prince Charles's council decided to break the momentum and reunite with Jacobite armies in Scotland, knowing that the Jacobites couldn't defeat any assembled government force in mass. Now Charles wanted to march on London, thinking that much like in Manchester, the people would rise in his support, while also claiming that should he capture London, the French had assured him that they would send a force to land in Kent to back up the claim of James to the throne of England and Scotland, the claim of House Stuart, although surely they would just claim the title of King of Great Britain. However, given that Charles had no contact with the English Jacobites, his officers redirected his forces north. So, assuming that any POD before the beginning of the campaign wouldn't affect the outcome of the rebellion up until the arrival of Bonnie Prince Charlie and his force of 6,000 or so to Swarkestone Bridge, what can we do to assure that the Jacobites within England would be in contact with the Prince? And if they were to gain contact with him, and the Stuart Prince did march on London, what would have been the result?

Would their be a popular Jacobite rising in England? Was there enough to support to overthrow the Hanoverians? Even if Charles captures London, is this a surefire win? I've been pretty interested in this as of late.

Click to expand...

Ah the Jacobites, a particular favorite ATL of mine. The main problem you have with the English Jacobites is they were always a reluctant ally. They had much more to lost in a failed rising and knew it. The second problem, the Jacobite army was untrained and mainly got as far as they did on luck and the fact that the bulk of the British armies were on the continent. Even if the English Jacobites had risen their troops would also be untrained. To have a successful Jacobite Restoration, you needed French support. French money, arms soldiers. At least something. And the French were reluctant allies at best. After Louis XIV the French never gave full support. Have the French be more willing to give aid. Releasing the Irish Brigade would have gone very far to help.

But if the Jacobites were able to successfully take London, then it would be all over for the Hanovarians. By that point, the Hanovarians would have no doubt fled to Hanover, allowing Charles to summon a Parliament, dominated by Tories, which would proclaim the restoration/ formal ascension of James III & VIII. No doubt the reign would be backdated to have started in either 1701 or 1714. But in a case where the bulk of the Jacobite army came from Scotland, I think James would have no choice but to repeal the Act of Union. The main question is what will the British continental armies and the Royal Navy do? Side with the new King, or the Hanovarians?

Emperor Constantine said:

To have a successful Jacobite Restoration, you needed French support. French money, arms soldiers. At least something. And the French were reluctant allies at best. After Louis XIV the French never gave full support. Have the French be more willing to give aid. Releasing the Irish Brigade would have gone very far to help.

Click to expand...

The downside is, a king who is propped up by the French is going to be and going to be seen as a French puppet. That won't go over well.

Obviously diehard Jacobites will find a way to rationalize it, but most of England will not be as charitable.

But if the Jacobites were able to successfully take London, then it would be all over for the Hanovarians. By that point, the Hanovarians would have no doubt fled to Hanover, allowing Charles to summon a Parliament, dominated by Tories, which would proclaim the restoration/ formal ascension of James III & VIII. No doubt the reign would be backdated to have started in either 1701 or 1714. But in a case where the bulk of the Jacobite army came from Scotland, I think James would have no choice but to repeal the Act of Union.

Click to expand...

The only sense I can see it being all over is that they'd only manage to take London if they were in a position where they had completely overwhelmed the opposition.

Elfwine said:

The downside is, a king who is propped up by the French is going to be and going to be seen as a French puppet. That won't go over well.

Obviously diehard Jacobites will find a way to rationalize it, but most of England will not be as charitable.



The only sense I can see it being all over is that they'd only manage to take London if they were in a position where they had completely overwhelmed the opposition.

Click to expand...

Pretty much. I've come to the conclusion that Jacobite Restoration was only realistic in the early years, 1689-maybe 1719. After that the Hanoverian dynasty would be too well established, with most potential supporters apathetic or removed from power. The best bet for a restoration, in my opinion, would be a coup after Anne's death in 1714. By the time of the '45 there were to many variables. I mean MAYBE the French could keep the bulk of British troops pinned on the Continent, but the dutch could still send Regiments to aid the British forces at home. And that's not even mentioning what the British forces outside the mainland would do.

But I agree with the London part. The only way the Jacobites could take London is if they had already won the rest of the country. And even if they made it to the Gates of the city, I can almost guarantee the majority of British troops will be in or near London to defend it.

One of the main problems for the '45 was time. The Jacobites had a limited amount of time to capture the Country before the Continental forces arrived. The Hanovarians, on the other hand, only had to keep delaying the Jacobites long enough for reinforcements to arrive, and for the majority Scottish Jacobite forces to start deserting.

Emperor Constantine said:

Pretty much. I've come to the conclusion that Jacobite Restoration was only realistic in the early years, 1689-maybe 1719. After that the Hanoverian dynasty would be too well established, with most potential supporters apathetic or removed from power. The best bet for a restoration, in my opinion, would be a coup after Anne's death in 1714. By the time of the '45 there were to many variables. I mean MAYBE the French could keep the bulk of British troops pinned on the Continent, but the dutch could still send Regiments to aid the British forces at home. And that's not even mentioning what the British forces outside the mainland would do.

But I agree with the London part. The only way the Jacobites could take London is if they had already won the rest of the country. And even if they made it to the Gates of the city, I can almost guarantee the majority of British troops will be in or near London to defend it.

One of the main problems for the '45 was time. The Jacobites had a limited amount of time to capture the Country before the Continental forces arrived. The Hanovarians, on the other hand, only had to keep delaying the Jacobites long enough for reinforcements to arrive, and for the majority Scottish Jacobite forces to start deserting.

Click to expand...

Not hugely interested in the possibility of a Jacobite Restoration in general, more interested in solidifying the legacy. I think, that after a good show, even if Charles had lost, he would be better remembered in British folklore. Plus....the Highlander aspect is just goddamn badass, there's no words to describe it. I honestly feel slightly dirty, given my known opinions on monarchies and monarchs.

Emperor Constantine said:

Pretty much. I've come to the conclusion that Jacobite Restoration was only realistic in the early years, 1689-maybe 1719. After that the Hanoverian dynasty would be too well established, with most potential supporters apathetic or removed from power. The best bet for a restoration, in my opinion, would be a coup after Anne's death in 1714. ...

Click to expand...

I agree FWIW. By 1745 Britain had gotten used to the Hanovers, the Stuarts were just a memory of long ago and far away . A romantic dream.

And there was no big event after 1714, until at best the end of the 18th century, to make men stop and think "just who do i want to support". One George followed another there was nothing to disturb the process. Only if the Hanover line died out or became seriously compromised would there be any chance .

JedidiahStott said:

I agree FWIW. By 1745 Britain had gotten used to the Hanovers, the Stuarts were just a memory of long ago and far away . A romantic dream.

And there was no big event after 1714, until at best the end of the 18th century, to make men stop and think "just who do i want to support". One George followed another there was nothing to disturb the process. Only if the Hanover line died out or became seriously compromised would there be any chance .

Click to expand...

Just a thought I had but do you think the Jacobites could get an independent Scotland? I'm thinking the Jacobites, instead of a risky and ultimately failed invasion of England, focus on fully securing Scotland. If they can hold Scotland for long enough, with French support no doubt, could a deal between the Hanovarians and the French be reached where Scotland is given up?

In 1714 I think they could certainly (assuming a different James Edward, and some better luck than OTL) seize Scotland and hold it for a time (some months, a year or two) .

But without major French ( or Spanish) support, to the extent that Scotland became a French client, I do not see them being able to resist an invading England long term. They would be up against the army of Marlborough ( even if he were not involved himself) , that was a very good army, once England mobilized, no way could Scotland, then, resist that.

It is possible that a stable Jacobite regime in Scotland might be enough to encourage Jacobite supporters in England to actively support the cause, rather than merely murmuring good wishes from the sidelines.

James Edward had a lot of support in England. But his supporters did not want to commit themselves until they were confident he could win.James VIII securely on the throne of Scotland might be enough to do that.

In 1745? No I do not think so. The bird had flown by then.

JedidiahStott said:

And there was no big event after 1714, until at best the end of the 18th century, to make men stop and think "just who do i want to support". One George followed another there was nothing to disturb the process. Only if the Hanover line died out or became seriously compromised would there be any chance .

Click to expand...

Ironically, it might have helped that they let Parliament run things in practice. Given their attitudes towards England, monarchs as "bad" as the Stuarts had been and as active might have that event happen suddenly.

That is ,to be sure, another consideration of any possible Jacobite restoration in Scotland.

A Catholic monarch, in a fervently Protestant and Presbytarian country. A divine right King,in a country where very heavy taxes will certainly be necessary to try to resist a devastating English invasion.

It is Charles I all over again.

The Scots might be pleased to restore James VIII to the throne of his fathers. But unless James is very much more canny than any other of his family (excepting perhaps Charles II) , they may well soon be equally pleased to pull him off it again.

Scotland would be a mess

As lowland Scotland was rabidy prespatarian it would be very difficualt for a roman catholic monarch to control the country.
I am not sure what the relevent population ratios were but I would expect lowland prodestant scotland would have a majority of the population in the middle 18th centuary

Emperor Constantine said:

But if the Jacobites were able to successfully take London, then it would be all over for the Hanovarians. By that point, the Hanovarians would have no doubt fled to Hanover, allowing Charles to summon a Parliament, dominated by Tories, which would proclaim the restoration/ formal ascension of James III & VIII.

Click to expand...

Has anyone names of potential ministers in James's government after a 1745 restoration? Who would have played a important role politically?

Westphalian said:

Has anyone names of potential ministers in James's government after a 1745 restoration? Who would have played a important role politically?

Click to expand...

Hmmm, I'll have to go threw my bio on Bonnie Prince Charlie and see if any are listed. However, preliminary guessing would be a combo of Tories and returning Jacobites. I can't see any Whigs being accepted into the government.