WI: Jacobite Risings Work?

What if the Jacobite Risings of the 17th and 18th centuries worked? What would have happened if, in 1691, James II and VII had won the Williamite war in Ireland? What if the Williamite war was still won by Will and Mary, but George I lost the Jacobite Rising of 1715 and was replaced with James Stuart? How would this effect history?
 
The fundamental problem OTL with the Jacobite risings was that anti-Jacobites were already much stronger in England in 1688 and only got stronger relative to the English Jacobites as time went on. If the Jacobite cause had been at all popular in England, James VII and II would have been able to raise an army to oppose William of Orange's invasion.

And without England, the Jacobites are doomed. They had considerable support among Irish Catholics and the Highland clans, but England's got the money, the manufacturing base, the infrastructure, and the population to dominate any support the Jacobites can assemble in Scotland and Ireland. The pattern of the '15 and '45 risings is not far from the best-case scenario for the Jacobites: an initial flush of success as the Highlanders flock to the Jacobite banner and catch the English with their pants down, then the tide turns as England mobilizes its latent military might and grinds down the Jacobite armies.

French support can only help so much, since the naval balance of power in this era means that France can occasionally get the drop on Britain and slip a small army across the channel, but any operation too big and protracted to be completed before the British get word and concentrate their navy to contest it (such as assembling, transporting, and supplying a large enough army to install a Jacobite Pretender) is doomed. With a bit of luck, they could help more than OTL (perhaps supplying a couple thousand troops to support the Cornwall rising in parallel with the Scottish rising of 1715), but not enough to change the outcome.

In order to change the dynamic and get a Jacobite Restoration, you'd need at least one of the following:

  1. Better Jacobite pretenders. James VII and II had the political acumen of a cauliflower, and by his overthrow 1688 he was showing such steep mental decline that some historians have suggested syphilitic madness as a cause. His son, the Old Pretender, was not very popular even among Jacobites: most of his support seems to have come from anti-Hannoverian sentiment rather than actual support for him, and he acquired such an unfavorable reputation during the '15 rising that there were arrangements made in the lead-up to the '45 rising that if it were successful, the Old Pretender would probably have abdicated in favor of his son Charles.
  2. Jacobite pretenders renounce Catholicism. England is firmly a Protestant country by this point, and is firmly anti-Catholic and will have deep misgivings about supporting any Catholic for the throne. Bloody Mary, the Spanish Armada, the Black Legend, and the Gunpowder Plot are all beyond living memory, but they cast a very long shadow on English national consciousness. In the minds of most English of this time, "Popery" = Tyranny.
  3. Worse Orangist/Hannoverian rulers and heirs. Apart from favoring the Whigs (who were a legitimate majority anyway for most of the period in question) to varying degrees, William III, Mary II, Anne, and the Georges didn't do a whole lot to inspire their subjects to risk their lives and fortunes in rebellion against them. The worse the incumbent is, the better the Jacobite pretenders would look.
  4. Breakdown in British naval strength. If the naval balance of power changes enough for France or an alternative Jacobite sponsor to defeat Britain at sea and invade in force, or if a significant portion of the British navy for some reason were to defect to the Jacobite cause, things would be different.
Some of the better opportunities, I think would be:

  1. William III is killed in battle in Ireland, leading to the breaking of personal union with the Dutch, and leaving Mary II as sole ruler. Combined with better-than-OTL Jacobite performance in Ireland, a settlement might be reached where James VII and II would abdicate his claim in favor of his infant son (who would late be the Old Pretender IOTL), who would be raised in England as a Protestant with Mary II as his regent in England and Scotland, and James VII and II as his regent in Ireland.
  2. The Old Pretender (James VIII and III) doesn't take up his father's claim immediately, and instead returns to England to take up his automatic title as Duke of Cornwall, renounces Catholicism, and distinguishes himself as a Tory political leader. He'd then have a chance of being named Queen Anne's heir, or failing that, successfully contesting the Hanoverian ascension upon Anne's death.
  3. A very different George I, who rather than being content to appoint well-respected Whigs to positions of responsibility and trusting them with the day-to-day business of ruling, winds up being a much more direct and confrontational ruler, to the point that the Jacobites don't look that bad by comparison and the '15 rebellion or its equivalent attracts enough English support to have a chance of succeeding.
I know you asked about aftermath, not POD, but the path to the throne would make a huge difference in how the restored Jacobites would rule and how their rule would be received.
 
Top