Wasn't the Bill of Rights passed in 1689 the year earlier?Well exactly, which is the fascinating aspect. There would also be (presumably) no deposing of her father so I would presume no Bill of Rights
Wasn't the Bill of Rights passed in 1689 the year earlier?
William as full King rather than consort was pretty much in return for his support of Parliament, lacking that could mean greater chance of a Jacobite restoration.
What if she wasn't rendered infertile by it? Or if it was only to do with William himself?I don't think it changes much really. Even if Mary remarries, IIRC she was rendered infertile by a pregnancy/illness in 1679/80. AFAIK the only place she really exercised power was in the CoE since they'd just gotten rid of a papist king and weren't in favour of a Calvinist one being in control. If she still dies on schedule, then Anne has a longer reign. Of course, they don't know Mary's barren (I think) so they'll still go about finding her some acceptable mild-mannered Germanic princeling as consort
However, the changes in the Netherlands could make for interesting times. @Janprimus @pompejus etc might know more.
The Dutch republic did suffer from the fact that a lot of Dutch people moved with William III to England. If William III only rules for 2 years, that effect will be somewhat lessened,I think. There probably will be a minor power struggle between the Orangists and the republicans. Not sure who would win, but I think the Republicans might win this time too. Not sure though.It could go both ways.However, the changes in the Netherlands could make for interesting times. @Janprimus @pompejus etc might know more.
The Dutch republic did suffer from the fact that a lot of Dutch people moved with William III to England. If William III only rules for 2 years, that effect will be somewhat lessened,I think. There probably will be a minor power struggle between the Orangists and the republicans. Not sure who would win, but I think the Republicans might win this time too. Not sure though.It could go both ways.
This was what I was thinking too, but I was also thinking about 1672, when people were clamoring for the stadholder to return. As long as there is still a stadholder in the north, I don't think the role of the orangists is completely over.This could very well mean the end for the Orangists.
The biggest problem for the Orange-faction is that they don't really have a champion. Which was the biggest reason for the second Stadholderless-period. ATL Johan Willem Frisk is only three years old. This could very well mean the end for the Orangists.
What if she wasn't rendered infertile by it? Or if it was only to do with William himself?
The Hohenzollers are irrelevant. The stadholdership was not hereditary (at least at the time of William III). That is why before and after William III there wasa stadholderless period and why the Frisian stadholders became the stadholder general instead of the more closely related Hohenzollers. Simply put the Dutch will not accept a Hohenzoller as stadholder, except if they were truly Dutch, thus raised by the Dutch. Simply put, I think the Dutch would prefer no stadholder over a foreign stadholder, including a significant part of the Orangists.He's only 3-years old, but IIRC his dad was still around and kicking - so why couldn't he make a play for it? Not to mention there might still be a Hohenzollern younger son with a claim to the stadtholderate available (the Great Elector was trying to get William III to name his son Ludwig as heir in the event of William III being childless).
The Hohenzollers are irrelevant. The stadholdership was not hereditary (at least at the time of William III). That is why before and after William III there wasa stadholderless period and why the Frisian stadholders became the stadholder general instead of the more closely related Hohenzollers. Simply put the Dutch will not accept a Hohenzoller as stadholder, except if they were truly Dutch, thus raised by the Dutch. Simply put, I think the Dutch would prefer no stadholder over a foreign stadholder, including a significant part of the Orangists.
Sorry if I wasn't clear - from what I can make out it wasn't as heir to the stadholderate but rather to the Nassau-Orange lands that weren't covered by Salic Law. However there was also treaty signed in the 18th century between the Nassau-Dietzes and Friedrich Wilhelm I of Prussia (who's eldest two sons who died in infancy are listed in some sources as having been titled "prince of Orange"), concerning the inheritance.