WI: Jacobite Ireland

[FesteringSpore]

Suppose that James II's attempt to regain his kingdoms goes rather more well for him than it does in real life- but not too well. That being that James manages to capture Ireland and evict the Williamites from the island, but is not capable of capturing England and Scotland. How would such a change in history affect the development of Ireland, as well as Britain and the world compared to what happened historically? How would the British deal with a French puppet and buffer state right on their doorstep, as well as Jacobite attempts to regain England and Scotland from Ireland? Would there be Jacobite attempts to capture Britain but launched from Ireland instead of overseas?

Killing William in Ireland would definitely cause the Dutch to go home, but how would that affect Mary's war effort? (Mary herself would probably be despondent, AFAIK she loved William) What about if William survived?

 

[FesteringSpore]

Bumping

 

[vgh...]

Could Jacobite Ireland survive militarily long term if it doesn't restore the Stuarts in Britain? At what point does British naval superiority over Catholic France become inevitable enough to doom it?

 

[Emperor Constantine]

Could Jacobite Ireland survive militarily long term if it doesn't restore the Stuarts in Britain? At what point does British naval superiority over Catholic France become inevitable enough to doom it?

Not really. A navy doesn't translate to a full land invasion, just to a blockade. If Ireland builds up a strong, well-trained army (like it would basically have to do), then it would be very difficult for Britain to reconquer. Moreover, the longer Ireland is independent, the less and less chance the British have. Not to mention, would the British even WANT Ireland back? It was always a headache to deal with.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

@VVD0D95

 

[VVD0D95]

For Ireland tk be secure you need them to develop a good navy. You also need James to sort out the situation within the army I feel. Have a proper officer corps as it were

 

[AsukaEMP]

Could Jacobite Ireland survive militarily long term if it doesn't restore the Stuarts in Britain? At what point does British naval superiority over Catholic France become inevitable enough to doom it?

Britain didn't get complete naval dominance iotl until the French decapitated their own navy, both literally and figuratively, during the French Revolution. Britain did come out on top most of the time but rarely were they uncontested, or capable of putting their enemies entirely out of action. For example in the War of the Austrian Succession Britain didn't score a major naval victory until the Second Battle of Cape Finisterre, which only happened in October 1747 (7 years into the war, and more than a year after peace negotiations had already started).​

 

[Archaembald]

Not to mention, would the British even WANT Ireland back? It was always a headache to deal with.

The answer to that is, and will always be, yes. Pre-1900 Britain just can't afford to let an independent Ireland be, especially one hostile to London. Control over Ireland is basically required for Britain to ever secure total dominance of the Isles, which a united Britain is guaranteed to seek. Letting it be independent and risk it becoming aligned to someone hostile to Britain is just too risky a chance for London to swallow.

As for the thread question, expect a couple of attempted invasions of Jacobite Ireland after Britain's got its shit together. Though whether or not they'll succeed isn't a guarantee.

 

[H.Flashman(VC)]

Killing William in Ireland would definitely cause the Dutch to go home, but how would that affect Mary's war effort? (Mary herself would probably be despondent, AFAIK she loved William) What about if William survived?

Not sure if the Dutch would pull out immediately. They were quite strongly commited to an anti-French policy at the time. The expulsion of the Hugenots and the sack of the palatinate were two of the main reasons many regents abandoned the earlier neutral policy. Those two events wouldn't be forgotten in 1690. Being Dutch though, they would try to renegotiate who would be paying for it all.

 

[WhatSantayanaSaid]

The answer to that is, and will always be, yes. Pre-1900 Britain just can't afford to let an independent Ireland be, especially one hostile to London. Control over Ireland is basically required for Britain to ever secure total dominance of the Isles, which a united Britain is guaranteed to seek. Letting it be independent and risk it becoming aligned to someone hostile to Britain is just too risky a chance for London to swallow.

As for the thread question, expect a couple of attempted invasions of Jacobite Ireland after Britain's got its shit together. Though whether or not they'll succeed isn't a guarantee.

Especially if it's being ruled by someone with a claim on the British thrones. The Jacobites kept on attempting uprisings 50 years after they lost their last holdings, imagine how long they'd keep on going if they had an actual base out of which to organize and flee to in defeat?

 

[BELFAST]

Not really. A navy doesn't translate to a full land invasion, just to a blockade. If Ireland builds up a strong, well-trained army (like it would basically have to do), then it would be very difficult for Britain to reconquer. Moreover, the longer Ireland is independent, the less and less chance the British have. Not to mention, would the British even WANT Ireland back? It was always a headache to deal with.

Britain would want Ireland back if for no other reason that the ports in Ireland that control the sea lanes approaching Britain.

 

[FesteringSpore]

Britain would want Ireland back if for no other reason that the ports in Ireland that control the sea lanes approaching Britain.

Also I'd expect that in a Jacobite Ireland scenario the French would be basing troops on Ireland, and the British would legitimately quake at how close French troops are

 

[Basileus_Komnenos]

At what point does British naval superiority over Catholic France become inevitable enough to doom it?

It only really became a surefire thing after the Napoleonic Wars. And prior to the Revolution, France had an actual navy that legitimately threatened the British Royal Navy. This was partly why Britain held back some of its resources to defend the Home Islands during the American Revolution once France and then later Spain began openly supporting it.

 

[AsukaEMP]

Britain didn't get complete naval dominance iotl until the French decapitated their own navy, both literally and figuratively, during the French Revolution. Britain did come out on top most of the time but rarely were they uncontested, or capable of putting their enemies entirely out of action. For example in the War of the Austrian Succession Britain didn't score a major naval victory until the Second Battle of Cape Finisterre, which only happened in October 1747 (7 years into the war, and more than a year after peace negotiations had already started).​

Adding to my previous post

An independent Ireland is going to be a massive thorn in the side of the British navy. Any time Ireland decides to join France in a war the British will have to divert a large share of their fleet away from France to blockade the entirety of the Irish coast in order to 1. prevent the French from sending them reinforcements and 2. prevent Irish privateers from going ham on their shipping lanes. This in turn will weaken the efficiency of any blockade against France and/or Britain's ability to defend its colonies and threaten those of other countries. The Irish don't even need a real navy for this, which allows them to focus their resources on maintaining an army large enough to dissuade the British from trying a proper invasion instead. Not to mention the loss of Ireland will deprive the British of a source of income and manpower, further weakening them.​

 

[VVD0D95]

Adding to my previous post

An independent Ireland is going to be a massive thorn in the side of the British navy. Any time Ireland decides to join France in a war the British will have to divert a large share of their fleet away from France to blockade the entirety of the Irish coast in order to 1. prevent the French from sending them reinforcements and 2. prevent Irish privateers from going ham on their shipping lanes. This in turn will weaken the efficiency of any blockade against France and/or Britain's ability to defend its colonies and threaten those of other countries. The Irish don't even need a real navy for this, which allows them to focus their resources on maintaining an army large enough to dissuade the British from trying a proper invasion instead. Not to mention the loss of Ireland will deprive the British of a source of income and manpower, further weakening them.​

Tbf a decent navy would be needed to protect their merchants and such. Cause the English will try torpedoing rheir trade through piracy etc

 

[AsukaEMP]

Tbf a decent navy would be needed to protect their merchants and such. Cause the English will try torpedoing rheir trade through piracy etc

yeah they'll need a fleet for that purpose, but that constitutes mostly just frigates. I meant more they wouldn't need a navy with dozens of larger warships capable of going toe-to-toe with the Royal Navy in the line of battle.

 

[Andristan]

From what I have read, the Battle of the Boyne seems to have been undecided till relatively late in the day, so if James had chosen things differently, possibly even defeating the Williamites in detail, using his interior lines to first defeat the main force under William then turning on the diversionary detachment of 1/4 of the army sent across the river in the south. Victory would do wonders for the Jacobite forces, and we know it is possible due to it happening OTL later at the 1st Siege of Limerick, even if its just a limited victory, a bloody nose for the main 3/4 of Williams army and then destroying the diversionary corps. It would greatly increase the supply situation, giving more of their troops weapons/muskets, better ones as well. It could increase the amount of support from France, seeing as the French are winning a naval battle against the Allied fleet at Beachy Head a week later, giving them control of the seas around England, especially Western England. In fact, that could be what sets up our independent Jacobite Ireland, William captured in Ireland in the aftermath of the battle or captured/killed by the French navy returning to England for reinforcements.

 

[FesteringSpore]

From what I have read, the Battle of the Boyne seems to have been undecided till relatively late in the day, so if James had chosen things differently, possibly even defeating the Williamites in detail, using his interior lines to first defeat the main force under William then turning on the diversionary detachment of 1/4 of the army sent across the river in the south. Victory would do wonders for the Jacobite forces, and we know it is possible due to it happening OTL later at the 1st Siege of Limerick, even if its just a limited victory, a bloody nose for the main 3/4 of Williams army and then destroying the diversionary corps. It would greatly increase the supply situation, giving more of their troops weapons/muskets, better ones as well. It could increase the amount of support from France, seeing as the French are winning a naval battle against the Allied fleet at Beachy Head a week later, giving them control of the seas around England, especially Western England. In fact, that could be what sets up our independent Jacobite Ireland, William captured in Ireland in the aftermath of the battle or captured/killed by the French navy returning to England for reinforcements.

Wonder if there would be a difference in scenarios between William getting captured and William straight up dying

 

[FesteringSpore]

Another thing I’ve wondered about is the Jacobite coinage- James II issued coins in lesser materials like brass and pewter which served essentially as interest notes to be redeemed in silver when the king finally reclaimed his throne in England. What is he gonna do if he takes Ireland, and just that country? Ireland has very little of British silver or gold, and James is going to have to come up with ways to pay his 40,000 Irish troops. Louis XIV’s subsidies might help, but where else is James gonna get money?

 

[Janprimus]

Wonder if there would be a difference in scenarios between William getting captured and William straight up dying

I like the idea of the OP, I'm just not fond of this idea regarding the king-Stadtholder Willem III, the Dutch hero of the Rampjaar (Dutch Disaster Year) of 1672. Even a defeated, yet escaped Willem III will have a harder time in Great Britain too.