WI: King James II escapes, Prince James doesn't?

IOTL King James II of England's wife, Mary of Modena, fled to France with their six-month old son, James Francis Edward Stuart, a day before the king himself tried to flee and was captured.

What if the elder James managed to flee and the Prince of Wales was captured? Originally, William of Orange had only come to give military support to Parliament and was only crowned alongside Mary when it was decided James II had effectively abdicated. In these different circumstances, somehow putting the warming pan myth aside, would Parliament instead have had the baby prince crowned James III and raised in the Anglican faith?
 
Last edited:
IOTL James II of England's wife, Mary of Modena, fled to France with the six-month old son, James Francis Edward Stuart, a day before the king himself tried to flee and was captured.

What if the elder James managed to flee and the Prince of Wales was captured? Originally, William of Orange had only come to give military support to Parliament and was only crowned alongside Mary when it was decided James II had effectively abdicated. In these different circumstances, somehow putting the warming pan myth aside, would Parliament instead have had the baby prince crowned James III and raised in the Anglican faith?

Very possible, I mean they do now have the keys to the kingdom there, and a chance to shape this child however they want.
 
IOTL James II of England's wife, Mary of Modena, fled to France with the six-month old son, James Francis Edward Stuart, a day before the king himself tried to flee and was captured.

What if the elder James managed to flee and the Prince of Wales was captured? Originally, William of Orange had only come to give military support to Parliament and was only crowned alongside Mary when it was decided James II had effectively abdicated. In these different circumstances, somehow putting the warming pan myth aside, would Parliament instead have had the baby prince crowned James III and raised in the Anglican faith?

I'd say the chance is near 100%. People forget just how close the votes in the House of Lords were to depose James II and offer the throne to William and Mary. There was a large group that wanted the two as Regents, either for the King or for the Prince of Wales. If the Prince was somehow left behind or caught before his father fled, no question that the Lords would insist on making him James III & VIII.

At this point William's between a rock and a hard place. He either acquiesces to the Lords and becomes co-regent for his infant brother-in-law or refuses and proclaims himself King on the authority of his army. If he does the later his support in England would dissipate as he'd go from the hero of the Protestant religion to a usurper defying the succession and the laws of the realm. This could easily cause a civil war, which could lead to James II managing to reclaim his throne in the confusion. Hm, this could be a VERY interesting TL.....
 
I'd say the chance is near 100%. People forget just how close the votes in the House of Lords were to depose James II and offer the throne to William and Mary. There was a large group that wanted the two as Regents, either for the King or for the Prince of Wales. If the Prince was somehow left behind or caught before his father fled, no question that the Lords would insist on making him James III & VIII.

At this point William's between a rock and a hard place. He either acquiesces to the Lords and becomes co-regent for his infant brother-in-law or refuses and proclaims himself King on the authority of his army. If he does the later his support in England would dissipate as he'd go from the hero of the Protestant religion to a usurper defying the succession and the laws of the realm. This could easily cause a civil war, which could lead to James II managing to reclaim his throne in the confusion. Hm, this could be a VERY interesting TL.....

It seems to me that William might be able to reach a compromise with parliament. He was more concerned with Louis XIV and his actions against the Dutch Republic, so while he remained on the continent, he could be represented in Britain by Mary.

I've been thinking about who the future TTL James III might marry and so far the best candidate I've found is Ulrika Eleanora of Sweden. IOTL she became Queen of Sweden when her brother Charles died childless. IOTL Denmark wanted to ally with Sweden through a marriage with Charles XII and Princess Sophia Hedwig of Denmark. Perhaps with his sister married to the English heir to the throne, Charles might be more interested.
 
Queen Mary and and Prince James will be allowed to escape by William III.

Think about what happened to King James II, he was captured in Kent on his way out of England, brought back towards London whereupon William III put him under the guard of his personal Dutch Blue Guards who despite being elite troops "accidentally" let James and his entire party escape complete with horses, carriages and cash to hire a ship. If Prince James and his mother are caught by overenthusiastic Englishmen William will get them transferred to his control so they can be taken out of the country.

Because as Emperor Constantine points out as long as any of them are in England it is much, much harder for William and Mary to get the votes in Parliament to make themselves Monarchs, if not impossible. Therefore he being reasonably intelligent will get them out of the way. If necessary kicking and screaming.
 
Queen Mary and and Prince James will be allowed to escape by William III.

Think about what happened to King James II, he was captured in Kent on his way out of England, brought back towards London whereupon William III put him under the guard of his personal Dutch Blue Guards who despite being elite troops "accidentally" let James and his entire party escape complete with horses, carriages and cash to hire a ship. If Prince James and his mother are caught by overenthusiastic Englishmen William will get them transferred to his control so they can be taken out of the country.

Because as Emperor Constantine points out as long as any of them are in England it is much, much harder for William and Mary to get the votes in Parliament to make themselves Monarchs, if not impossible. Therefore he being reasonably intelligent will get them out of the way. If necessary kicking and screaming.

But what if James III was caught by Anglican Tories, separated from his mother forcibly who then flees abroad, then gets proclaimed king James III before William and Mary even get his hands on him? Because in this scenario, the Tories would flock to James III.
 
Queen Mary and and Prince James will be allowed to escape by William III.

Think about what happened to King James II, he was captured in Kent on his way out of England, brought back towards London whereupon William III put him under the guard of his personal Dutch Blue Guards who despite being elite troops "accidentally" let James and his entire party escape complete with horses, carriages and cash to hire a ship. If Prince James and his mother are caught by overenthusiastic Englishmen William will get them transferred to his control so they can be taken out of the country.

Because as Emperor Constantine points out as long as any of them are in England it is much, much harder for William and Mary to get the votes in Parliament to make themselves Monarchs, if not impossible. Therefore he being reasonably intelligent will get them out of the way. If necessary kicking and screaming.
Then would that not worsen Parliament's view of him, its one thing to do it to a grown man, but a babe, surely that impedes on their views of chivalry or what not?

But what if James III was caught by Anglican Tories, separated from his mother forcibly who then flees abroad, then gets proclaimed king James III before William and Mary even get his hands on him? Because in this scenario, the Tories would flock to James III.

Hmm interesting, very interesting. James raised as a anglican, a severe change to history, no act of union?
 
But what if James III was caught by Anglican Tories, separated from his mother forcibly who then flees abroad, then gets proclaimed king James III before William and Mary even get his hands on him? Because in this scenario, the Tories would flock to James III.

Now that is very interesting. In fact you might well get a three sided Civil War. On one hand you have William III, his Dutch army and those Whig's who want to not only replace the Monarch but also get a more constitutional government like the Netherlands where the Monarch is chosen by Parliament not God. They will be using the Bedpan Plot as their basis to claim that Prince James is a changeling and can't rule and anyway they've anointed William.
Then you would have the Tories and moderate Whigs probably led by Thomas Osborne Earl of Danby wielding Prince James aka James III as the Anglican (unlike the Dutch Calvinist William) King England we really need with Parliament and Crown in harmony not with Parliament dominant as the Whig's would prefer. On the downside they don't have a large standing army but they do probably have the most popular and Parliamentary support.
Finally you have the Jacobites going all out for a Catholic Absolutist regime backed by France. On one hand they are going to be incredibly unpopular in Britain. On the other hand Ireland is theirs for the taking and with French support and Irish cannon fodder they might just win.

All in all an interesting scenario.

Then would that not worsen Parliament's view of him, its one thing to do it to a grown man, but a babe, surely that impedes on their views of chivalry or what not?

I didn't mean Prince James would have an "accident", you are right that would be beyond the pale. What I meant was that he and his mother would if necessary be loaded onto a Dutch ship and dumped ashore at Calais all while William III loudly proclaimed his regret at their "escape" and considering the politics of the day most people would go along with it. Just as they went along with James II's "escape".
 
Now that is very interesting. In fact you might well get a three sided Civil War. On one hand you have William III, his Dutch army and those Whig's who want to not only replace the Monarch but also get a more constitutional government like the Netherlands where the Monarch is chosen by Parliament not God. They will be using the Bedpan Plot as their basis to claim that Prince James is a changeling and can't rule and anyway they've anointed William.
Then you would have the Tories and moderate Whigs probably led by Thomas Osborne Earl of Danby wielding Prince James aka James III as the Anglican (unlike the Dutch Calvinist William) King England we really need with Parliament and Crown in harmony not with Parliament dominant as the Whig's would prefer. On the downside they don't have a large standing army but they do probably have the most popular and Parliamentary support.
Finally you have the Jacobites going all out for a Catholic Absolutist regime backed by France. On one hand they are going to be incredibly unpopular in Britain. On the other hand Ireland is theirs for the taking and with French support and Irish cannon fodder they might just win.

All in all an interesting scenario.


Probably the best outcome if this happened is that William's horse would trip on a mole hill before any fighting happens, and James II's ship is wrecked on it's way to Ireland. Or perhaps William and James II fight a battle in Ireland and both get killed in battle.

If that happened, the Jacobites would have to go to the Anglican Tories under James III, and Willliam's cause, well what do you think would happen to Mary II in this case? Would still be Queen regnant? Or would she be merely regent?

As for the Whigs, in this scenario, would they be tainted with treason like the Tories in OTL after 1715?
 
Wouldn't there be people in the rest of Europe (particularly Louis XIV) be upset if Parliament/William of Orange basically keep the baby James and forcibly separating him from his parent forever (especially if Mary of Modena is captures along with the Prince of Wales and then sent into forced exile separate from her son - what kind of impression would that make)? If James II and Mary of Modena still have their daughter Louisa in exile in France, what about her? That is another possible heir.

Also Anne is super-ambitious and was the one behind the warming pan claim that the Prince of Wales was not really her brother. She was the one who convinced Mary of it (who died believing it). William even used the pretext about the "supposed Prince of Wales" as one of the reasons for the invasion. Even after the birth of her half-sibling Louisa (who's parentage no one questioned) -she never acknowledge either of her half-siblings as being the children of James II. Is she (and her camp which included the Bishop of London) going to be hunky-dory with a Regency? Will William for that matter? How do they defend this diplomatically - they claim the Prince is not really James II's son but then split him from his parents for the rest of his life so they can raise him an Anglican?
 
Wouldn't there be people in the rest of Europe (particularly Louis XIV) be upset if Parliament/William of Orange basically keep the baby James and forcibly separating him from his parent forever...

Not really. Raison d'état, after all. James VI and I was separated from his mother Mary Queen of Scots in 1566, when he was only a year old. A junta of Scottish lairds forced Mary to abdicate and had James crowned, one of them becoming Regent. Mary never saw James again.

For the next seven years, there was a struggle between the "Queen's men", supporting the restoration of Mary, and the forces of the Regents (there were four in succession).

No one seems to have condemned the Regents for separating a mother and child.
 
Last edited:
How would things play out if James III reached his majority and married? Would the Stuarts hold onto their remaining powers in the 18th Century or lose them to Parliament as the Georges did?
 
How would things play out if James III reached his majority and married? Would the Stuarts hold onto their remaining powers in the 18th Century or lose them to Parliament as the Georges did?

Well in this scenario there wouldn't be a British constitution or the whole George I language barrier thing to help parliamentary sovereignty and the idea of a Prime Minister along. I doubt the nation will go backwards toward absolutism but things might stagnate where both parliament and the king have some actual power.
 
Well in this scenario there wouldn't be a British constitution or the whole George I language barrier thing to help parliamentary sovereignty and the idea of a Prime Minister along. I doubt the nation will go backwards toward absolutism but things might stagnate where both parliament and the king have some actual power.


Good points. It would be interesting how an adult James III would handle politics both in the UK and Europe. If he had surviving adult children, would they marry into the German principalities or try to merge into other bloodlines?
 
Good points. It would be interesting how an adult James III would handle politics both in the UK and Europe. If he had surviving adult children, would they marry into the German principalities or try to merge into other bloodlines?

Maybe some of the Electorates but nothing lower. The Stuarts had a tendency to try and be elitist when it came to marriages, something that didn't always work out mind you, but it still existed. What would most interesting would be marriage laws. Would James III, upon his majority, object to not being able to marry an Austrian Archduchess, a Portuguese Infanta or even a French Princesse? While the last is probably ASB, the other two are potentially likely. After all Britain had close relations with both Portugal and Austria during the Nine years and Spanish succession wars.

Another thing to consider is what happens to James III's family in France. OTL there was several discreet offers by William III to adopt the Prince of Wales as his heir, meaning that James Francis would have succeeded him instead of Anne. James II obviously refused them. Here, however, we have a very different situation. Assuming that William and Mary accept a mere Regency (which is possible, after all in his later years William seemed to basically wash his hands of the English political mess and he really only wanted English resources in support of his war efforts) and allow James III & VIII to ascend the throne, part of the Jacobite movement would collapse.

After all the Tories and legitimists that were supporters of the King over the Water would have less to feel awkward about: here they would have only brought about the early accession of the Prince of Wales, not removed the God-given rights of King and Prince in favor of a daughter and a foreigner. Plus even if James was restored his son would still be the heir. At the very least, after things settle down in Britain, it will become obvious to Louis XIV that James is the wrong horse to bet on. Sure he'll no doubt let James stay and continue to treat him as De-jure King, as to do otherwise would go against his principles, but I can't see him offering invasion forces to his cousin. Ireland would probably still go as OTL but no real support beyond that.

What I'm getting at is this: could a situation develop that would allow James II to return to England peacefully? Its a long-shot but not impossible. At the very least I can see Queen Mary Beatrice and any other child(ren) they have allowed to come back after James and William both die. Thoughts on this?
 
Well in this scenario there wouldn't be a British constitution or the whole George I language barrier thing to help parliamentary sovereignty and the idea of a Prime Minister along. I doubt the nation will go backwards toward absolutism but things might stagnate where both parliament and the king have some actual power.

I'd imagine it to be similar to the reign of George III, just without a Prime Minister. However, I do have to say this: OTL James III, after leaving France, tended to be dependent on a series of favorites, the Earl of Mar, the Duke and Duchess of Inverness and the Duchess's brother the Earl of Dunbar. Now I don't know if he'd have the same personality weakness here but I'm just saying it did exist.

From what I've read he preferred those who had fought for his cause in the 1715 rising or shortly afterward, so TTL he might prefer officers to MPs and Politicians. If so we could see Lord Marlborough and the Duke of Orsmonde wield significant influence in the early years of James' actual reign.
 
I didn't mean Prince James would have an "accident", you are right that would be beyond the pale. What I meant was that he and his mother would if necessary be loaded onto a Dutch ship and dumped ashore at Calais all while William III loudly proclaimed his regret at their "escape" and considering the politics of the day most people would go along with it. Just as they went along with James II's "escape".
Since that's basically what happened to James II and VII, it wouldn't surprise me.
 
\
What I'm getting at is this: could a situation develop that would allow James II to return to England peacefully? Its a long-shot but not impossible. At the very least I can see Queen Mary Beatrice and any other child(ren) they have allowed to come back after James and William both die. Thoughts on this?

I don't think James II would be allowed back but Mary of Modena (and any other children like Louisa if she exists in this TL although any child of James and Mary born in France would certainly be raised as Catholics) definitely - especially after James III comes into his majority and/or William/Mary die (who never paid Mary of Modena's dowry back which was unlawful for them to keep). I don't think we can assume that James III would be like James I (who had very little feeling for the mother he never really saw in life). I still wonder how Anne would react. She definitely wanted the crown and she NEVER accepted the Prince of Wales as her brother and here she would have to bend the knee to him for the rest of her life.
 
How would things play out if James III reached his majority and married? Would the Stuarts hold onto their remaining powers in the 18th Century or lose them to Parliament as the Georges did?

In what sense did the Georges have less power than William III or Anne? What powers did they lose to parliament? Did not George I and II more or less drag Britain along into various unpopular foreign commitments meant to serve Hanoverian goals? Did not George III hire and fire prime ministers more or less at will? Didn't he, in 1783, dismiss a government with an absolutely solid parliamentary majority and appoint one with very little parliamentary support, and then dissolve parliament and more or less bribe that government into a majority in the Commons? Did he not a quarter century later dismiss another government with an absolute parliamentary majority because they wanted to push through Catholic Emancipation?

The power of the British monarchy declined measurably

a) when William IV assented to the Reform Act in 1832, which more or less destroyed the crown's ability to secure a parliamentary majority at will;

b) when George V assented to the Parliament Act in 1911, which made his key remaining political prerogative - the ability to create peers at will, or to refuse to do so - became irrelevant.
 
She definitely wanted the crown and she NEVER accepted the Prince of Wales as her brother and here she would have to bend the knee to him for the rest of her life.

I doubt she would attempt to usurp the throne, but I do wonder what her actions would be if James III's position at any point looks any more shaky than usual.
 
Top