James II landing in 1692

So I was having a read of the Nine Years War online, and saw that there were plans for James II to invade England in 1692, but as with everything during this period, luck turned against him, and the naval engagement suffered as a result. However, one thing that got me thinking was, William III was heavily involved in the mainland fighting in Europe during this time, what would happen if say during one battle, in 1692, William III dies from wounds, naturally Mary would remain as Mary II, but to add onto the chaotic nature of it all, James II manages to land with a force of men on English soil. What happens from there?
 
Interesting. I believe that William was the dominant one in the William and Mary relationship and with her husband dead, Mary might have been more open to try and reach some sort of agreement with her father. Though I doubt she would have voluntarily surrendered the throne, she might have put forward a proposal that her brother be brought up as her heir, provided he was raised as a protestant. However, I doubt James II would have been agreeable to this. But, if it became apparent to James that he had insufficient support in England to stage a return to power he might have been more willing to at least ensure that his son did in time come to the throne. I believe that Mary was wracked with guilt over deposing her father and with the rather more hard headed (and less closely related ) William out of the picture I certainly think there's more chance for some sort of compromise solution being agreed upon.
 
Interesting. I believe that William was the dominant one in the William and Mary relationship and with her husband dead, Mary might have been more open to try and reach some sort of agreement with her father. Though I doubt she would have voluntarily surrendered the throne, she might have put forward a proposal that her brother be brought up as her heir, provided he was raised as a protestant. However, I doubt James II would have been agreeable to this. But, if it became apparent to James that he had insufficient support in England to stage a return to power he might have been more willing to at least ensure that his son did in time come to the throne. I believe that Mary was wracked with guilt over deposing her father and with the rather more hard headed (and less closely related ) William out of the picture I certainly think there's more chance for some sort of compromise solution being agreed upon.

Alright interesting, so could we see a return of English troops back to the country and away from the front lines in mainland Europe? And given Mary died in 1694 otl, might this mean James II either comes to the throne anyway, or Anne herself pushes for her brother to return?
 
I guess whether the troops would return would depend on what agreement, if any, was reached between Mary and James. As Mary was childless herself she wouldn't be pushing for any child of hers to take the throne and I think that at this point her relationship with Anne was not the best so she probably wouldn't have been pushing for Anne and her then surviving son to succeed. The real question would be how flexible James himself was willing to be. If James was willing to stop pushing the Catholic cause in England (unlikely but possible as exile might have given him a slightly more realistic view on the best way to keep the English throne) then perhaps his son could have been named as Mary's successor provided he was raised as a protestant. The problem is what to do with James himself as I can't see the English being willing to have him back on the throne.
 
I guess whether the troops would return would depend on what agreement, if any, was reached between Mary and James. As Mary was childless herself she wouldn't be pushing for any child of hers to take the throne and I think that at this point her relationship with Anne was not the best so she probably wouldn't have been pushing for Anne and her then surviving son to succeed. The real question would be how flexible James himself was willing to be. If James was willing to stop pushing the Catholic cause in England (unlikely but possible as exile might have given him a slightly more realistic view on the best way to keep the English throne) then perhaps his son could have been named as Mary's successor provided he was raised as a protestant. The problem is what to do with James himself as I can't see the English being willing to have him back on the throne.

Hmm very true, perhaps he starts the negotiations, if he comes to his senses and realises his son stands a greater chance than him, he could agree to that, and then perhaps someone bumps him off?
 
If Mary did any of that it would add a whole, but predictable, layer to Albion's perfidiousness in the era. I'd expect the English to fight on until the end of their current war, and then align away from the Dutch anti-French alliance system immediately after.

That will change many things; some of them might even end up being harmful to Britain and good for the Netherlands (the war of Spanish succession ended the Republic as a Great Power due to cost and continued loss of investment to England. An early split of the Dutch-English alliance might preempt both).
 
Hmm interesting, so is it feasible though that James II gives up his rights in order to see his son as Mary's heir and eventual successor?
 
Top