Question: Could the Jacobites have won in 1745?

The AltHistorian

Could Charles Edward Stuart won in 1745? The Jacobites could have won in 1715 if they had been smarter, but what about 1745?
 
Last edited:

Porsenna

In my opinion, no. Time was with the Hannoverians; the longer they were in power, the more their rule became the normal state of things, business as usual, the guys in charge who make things more or less work. After 30 years, there were plenty of people who knew no other kings than the Georges.

Furthermore, I reckon in 30 years numbers would have tilted more and more against the Catholics.

Ultimately the Stuarts just couldn't put together enough support.
 

Ensign Elliott

In my opinion no. Not without massive French military and naval support. By the time Charles Edward got to Derby, Cumberland's forces were camped between Northampton, Coleshill and Lichfield, with Wade's force closing in South of Doncaster. Any Jacobite advance further South would have been intercepted eventually. Support for the young pretender was lacking the further South he got, with only Manchester providing any notable body of troops. The Jacobites were also suffering from logistical problems the further South they went.

The French were in no position in 1745 to launch an invasion of Southern England as they were too pre-occupied with events on the continent. They actually came off best during the actual rising as the majority of the British Army were recalled from Flanders in order to deal with the rebellion. By providing a little money and a token number of troops to Charles Edward, the French managed to force the British to leave the European theatre for the Winter of 45/46.
 

duke of bedford

The AltHistorian said:
A majority of the Jacobite clans were Episcopalian IIRC. Episcopalianism was the Jacobite church in Scotland.
Click to expand...

But who else supported Stuart Pretenders besides Catholics in England? Heck, Englishmen were not fond of German-born kings, but at least these foreigners didn't piss of the Parliament.
 

Ensign Elliott

The AltHistorian said:
IIRC, 150 Englishmen joined at Manchester, and I doubt that those were all Catholics.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's much evidence to say the Manchester Regt were all Catholics (although Col Francis Townly was). They were mainly volunteers and unemployed.

There was a lot of Tory support in the early 18th Century for the Jacobite cause, though this was seldom very public and declined as the century wore on. Sir Watkin Williams-Wynn, a Welsh MP was among the most well known and outspoken Tory Jacobite supporters during the '45.
 

duke of bedford

Ensign Elliott said:
I don't think there's much evidence to say the Manchester Regt were all Catholics (although Col Francis Townly was). They were mainly volunteers and unemployed.

There was a lot of Tory support in the early 18th Century for the Jacobite cause, though this was seldom very public and declined as the century wore on. Sir Watkin Williams-Wynn, a Welsh MP was among the most well known and outspoken Tory Jacobite supporters during the '45.
Click to expand...
Ok. To say that they're all Catholic is an overstatement. But nonetheless, Jacobitism in England was too involved with Catholics that the majority of the English wouldn't join the cause. Besides, whose to say that those rebels from Manchester were necessarily pro-Stuart, they were just trying to overthrow the government. And If the said Tories had went out there way to back James II in the first place, Glorious Revolution would not have happened in the first, their sympathies were not going to change the regime, but actual physical support does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top