The Orange Succession

The Orange Succession
A History of the Monarchy from the Glorious Revolution
William III & Mary II
By the Grace of God
King and Queen of England, Scotland, France and Ireland,
Stadtholder of the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands,
Prince of Orange, Count of Nassau, Defenders of the Faith, etc.

williammary.png

JE MAINTIENDRAI


Chapter I: The Lives of William & Mary and the Glorious Revolution

William III was born on 4 November 1650 (O.S.), the only child of William II, Prince of Orange, and his wife, Mary, Princess Royal. His father, who died shortly before his own birth, had been the Stadtholder of the Netherlands before him, and was a member of the House of Orange-Nassau, which had dominated the United Provinces since William III’s great-grandfather, William I, had led a successful rebellion against the Spanish Hapsburgs in the mid seventeenth century. His mother, on the other hand, was a member of the House of Stuart, being the daughter of Charles I and, thus, the sister of Charles II and James II.

As his father had died before his birth, William was born the sovereign of the Principality of Orange, and some saw him as destined to follow his ancestors as stadtholder. In his young age, however, the Dutch Council of State ruled against William II’s unsigned will, and awarded joint custodianship over the young prince to three parties: his mother, his paternal grandmother, Amelia of Solms-Braunfels, and his paternal uncle by marriage, Frederick William of Hohenzollern, the Elector of Brandenburg. He was raised mostly by a variety of Dutch governesses and educated by a variety of tutors, brought up an adherent of Calvinism in the strict Dutch Reformed Church. The politics of his regency were thrown into question when, after the death of his mother, the Dutch Estates General attempted to take control of William’s tutorship and, though they gained influence, the intervention of his Uncle Charles II dismayed many Dutch republicans and anti-Orangists.

William was, despite the influence of his mother and Charles II in his upbringing, a Dutch patriot, though had a fairly friendly relationship with his Stuart relations as he reached adulthood, and began his own political maneuvering in the Dutch Republic. He and his supporters managed to force Dutch leadership to admit William into the Council of State, in a voting position, in 1670. However, his uncle betrayed the Netherlands in 1672, when he joined France’s Louis XIV in a war with the Dutch. In the panic of the invasion, William seized power as the Captain-General and, ultimately, secured the stadtholdership for himself in the crisis. His fleets acted decisively, defeating the English several times at sea and, in conjunction with the English Parliament, forced Charles II to make peace in 1674, and finally drove the French from the United Provinces in 1678. His military victories secured his political dominance in the Netherlands and, after an agreement with Charles II, he strengthened his claims to the English throne by marrying his cousin Mary.

Mary II was born on 30 April 1662 (O.S.), the eldest daughter and surviving child of James II, then the Duke of York, and Lady Anne Hyde. Despite her parents’ Catholic faith, Mary was, at the insistence of her uncle, Charles II, brought up as a member of the Church of England. Mary, along with her younger sister, Anne, was raised apart from her parents by governesses chosen by the King. As Mary and Anne were their parents’ only surviving children, Mary spent much of her life as the second in line to the English throne, after her father.

At the respective ages of 27 and 15, William and Mary were married in London in 1677, to the chagrin of the latter and her father. Despite Mary’s initial reluctance, however, the marriage turned out to be a strong and successful one. The couple proved to be a fertile one, and Mary became pregnant almost immediately after the marriage, and there was much relief in England when the Duke of York’s daughter had not only married a Protestant prince, but had successfully given birth to a male heir. Their son was given the name William, after his father, in 1678. William’s birth was followed in quick succession by that of his brother, Charles, who died in infancy in 1680, and his three sisters, Mary, born in 1683, and twins Amelia and Anne (the latter of whom died in infancy), born in 1686.

Despite having made peace with the French shortly after his marriage to Mary, William continued to be wary of Louis XIV of Bourbon, the King of France and Navarre. The peace was, ultimately, doomed to failure by the attitudes of both rulers: William was suspicious of his much larger, Catholic neighbor, who had attacked him before and who he believed aimed to dominate all of Europe, while Louis XIV saw William as a desperate warmonger, describing the stadtholder-prince as his “mortal enemy.”

In 1686, in the aftermath of the War of the Reunions (which Spain had lost handily to the French), William joined into the League of Augsburg, an anti-French coalition which united him with several other European states. The League was formed in view of France taking advantage of Ottoman incursions in the east to seize German lands in the War of the Reunions, as well as the sudden monopolization of power in France which resulted from the wholesale expulsion of the Huguenots, France’s Protestant population. This latter angered many Protestants throughout Europe, especially those in the Dutch Republic, many of whom came forward in support of William’s efforts to limit Louis XIV’s wider influence.

Meanwhile, in England, James II’s policy of ignoring Parliamentary laws in favor of his new toleration acts was making waves. James II, due, no doubt, to his Catholic faith, served poorly in his role, as his subjects saw it, as Supreme Governor of the Church of England. Being, respectively, the heiress to the throne and her husband, Mary and William were intrinsically tied into the ongoing political intrigue in England. After it was revealed that James II’s wife, Mary of Modena, was with child, events there began coming very quickly to a head.

Unfortunately, at the same time, events elsewhere began to converge. After having been in a position not long earlier of being able to dictate his terms to any power in Europe, Louis XIV’s prestige sank after he had revoked the longstanding Edict of Nantes, which had granted tolerance to French Protestants. Anti-Huguenot persecution in France magnified incredibly, with thousands upon thousands of the Huguenots fleeing to the Holy Roman Empire, the Netherlands, Orange and England. Louis XIV also made moves toward expanding French territories in the Rhineland, threatening both smaller German states and larger powers such as the United Provinces and eastern Hapsburg Empire.

As the time for Mary’s stepmother to give birth approached, William began gathering an army in the Netherlands. His worries were twofold: first, of course, was the removal of Mary from the direct line of succession, jeopardizing the Protestant succession in England; second was worrying developments in which James II had treated with Louis XIV, treaties which included the possibility of France funding an English fleet in the Channel. While William may have been able to tolerate losing his grasp on the throne of England, allowing England to fall into the French sphere at such a critical moment, with a new great war fast approaching, was unacceptable to him. However, William was unwilling to take direct action on his own, and risk losing to patriotic Englishmen resisting what would quite probably be seen as a foreign invasion. He insisted that the Protestant conspirators in England formally invite him to intervene to, as Gilbert Burnet put it, “rescue the nation and the religion.”

When James Francis Edward Stuart was born, and declared the Prince of Wales, the Immortal Seven complied with William’s request. These seven conspirators included Charles Tabot (the Duke of Shrewsbury), William Cavendish (the Duke of Devonshire), Thomas Osborne (the Earl of Danby), Richard Lumley (the Viscount Lumley), Henry Compton (the Bishop of London), Admiral Edward Russell and Henry Sidney - a mix of both Covaners and Cavaliers - wrote to William: “your highness may be assured, there are nineteen parts of twenty of the people throughout the kingdom, who are desirous of a change; and who, we believe, would willingly contribute to it.”

This was all the encouragement William needed. To secure his borders, he wrote to the Hapsburg Emperor, Leopold, acquiring his support after promising not to persecute English Catholics. He secured the neutrality of nearby German states, and acquired financial support from many sources, including from Amsterdam, the wealthiest city in the Netherlands, as well as from such disparate sources as Jewish banking families and Pope Innocent XI himself, an avowed rival to Louis XIV.

The final decision to invade England was made when Louis XIV finally committed his forces, launching his initial invasion to the east, into Germany. After a dispute between Louis XIV and Leopold over the succession to the electoral archbishopric of Cologne, France committed its forces to attack the Hapsburgs and their allies in Germany. Louis XIV sent intimidating letters to the United Provinces, warning them, first, not to intervene in English political affairs and, second, not to interfere in Germany. The combined effect of the letters convinced the other powers that be in the Netherlands to approve William’s invasion, as a preemptive act to prevent an Anglo-French alliance threatening Dutch security.

William invaded England in October of 1688, and several strategic missteps by both Louis XIV and James II facilitated the intervention’s success. In short order, uprisings against the King’s officials, especially Catholics, began throughout the kingdom. Many prominent English - including John Churchill, the future Earl of Marlborough, and Princess Anne of Denmark, Mary’s sister - defected to William, and in fairly short order, William arrived at London.

After James II’s wife and son fled England, he entered into terse negotiations with William, it soon becoming apparent that William had no intention of allowing James to keep the throne. After his first attempt to flee failed, James was finally able to escape England in late December, shortly before Christmas. It has been speculated that William intentionally allowed James’ escape, both to discredit him as king and to solve the question of what to do with him, with England still uneasy in the memory of the regicide of James’ father, Charles I.

A provisional government of lords of the realm appointed William the effective regent, and the Convention was called. As it was not technically a Parliament, the Convention could be called in the absence of a royally summoned assembly, setting a precedent that would come to haunt future monarchs. The Convention, after long debates, adopted the Bill of Rights 1689, and, after intense negotiations between the Convention’s leaders, William, Mary, and Anne, the Convention agreed to the Coronation Oath Act. The two monarchs were established by acclamation of the Convention on 13 February 1689 (O.S.), and, after William’s family arrived in London, and on 11 April 1689 (O.S.), William’s namesake son was proclaimed the Prince of Wales, and, with their formal coronation, the reign of William & Mary had begun.
 
Last edited:
Sounds intresting. Oranian dynasty on British throne and perhaps including Netherlands too. If protestant rulers are more tolerant with Catholics there maybe not be so much problems with them and speciality with Ireland.
 
That almost sounded mythological to me.

Also, as a sidenote...is it really any wonder why William and Mary actually had no children in OTL considering how interbred they both were, especially the former. *shudders*
 
I can see the Anglo-Dutch union surviving only if the pro-stadtholder faction won in the Republic; after all the position of Stadtholder wasn't hereditary and didn't cover all the province until late in the Republic's existence.
 
I can see the Anglo-Dutch union surviving only if the pro-stadtholder faction won in the Republic; after all the position of Stadtholder wasn't hereditary and didn't cover all the province until late in the Republic's existence.
True, Willem/William III was only stadholder of Holland, Zeeland, Utrecht, Gelderland and Overijssel. Drenthe, Friesland and Groningen had another stadholder. There was no stadholder of the Netherlands. Also I believe he wasn't a count of Nassau, the Frisian stadholders were.

Still I could see the personal union continue for a while, at least for one generation. Usualy the Dutch only dumped the stadholder when there was no stadholder or a weak stadholder, like before William III when his father died before his birth or when Willem/William III died without leaving a clear heir. In this timeline William III has a clear heir, so I think that at least his son will become stadholder. But if he ignores the Netherlands (while still making demands, like taxes or involvement in his wars), people will soon want him replaced by another stadholder (like his brother or the Frisian branche), ending the personal union. Still, that could just mean a militairy action against the Netherlands, to bring them back into the fold and either becoming the king of the Netherlands or a hereditairy stadholder general.
 
That almost sounded mythological to me.

Also, as a sidenote...is it really any wonder why William and Mary actually had no children in OTL considering how interbred they both were, especially the former. *shudders*

Not really.. Baroque Europe was filled with such royal matches. Certainly no worse than the Spanish Habsburgs, were nieces were giving birth to their uncles children. Yeah, they were first cousins and shared Charles I and Henrietta Maria as common grandparents, but they were distant enough that it wasn't a huge deal. The marriage of William's mother to his father was the first match between the Houses of Stuart and Orange, so it's not as if they were continually inbreeding. The huge reason of their lack of children was a miscarriage that she suffered in 1678 that may of impaired her from having any children. She was also fairly ill in the early years of her marriage. It's not really anything about how close they were related as there were other, closer related matches in Europe that had healthy children (such as Louis XIV and Maria Theresa, who were double first cousins; his mother and her father were brother and sister). The fact is, Mary and William may of simply not of been a good 'match' genetically. But a simple POD could give them a surviving child, even with Baroque mortality rates.
 
Interesting timeline so far.

Just one thing: the relationship between Louis XIV and William III was worse than how you describe it. It wasn't just waryness: both ment really HATED each other like guts. Louis XIV once proposed the hand of one of his illegitimate daughters to William III: the latter denied by claiming that the house of Orange "doesn't wed Bastards" or something like that. Needless to say, the Sun King was quite pissed by the response...

Adûnakhôr said:
Also, as a sidenote...is it really any wonder why William and Mary actually had no children in OTL considering how interbred they both were, especially the former. *shudders*

Like DrakeRlugia, I'd say this has nothing to do with how close they were. I think the POD of this timeline is basically that Mary II's miscarriage in 1678 turns out as a successful pregnancy: as a result, she remains fertile. OTL, it was a miscarriage that rended her sterile.

Plus, from the look of things, Mary II and William III were only first cousins: William's mother and Mary's father were siblings. That rarely stopped a family from siring children. And Mary II was not the only Stuart that married a first cousin in those times: her aunt Henrietta Anne married Philippe, Duke of Orléans and brother of Louis XIV, in 1661. Philippe's father Louis XIII was the brother of Henrietta Anne's mother, Henriette of France (wife of Charles I of England) making them also first cousins. Although Henrietta Anne died of illness in 1670 (there were rumors of poisons, but it's probably an illness by the look of things) and the Duke was a known Homosexual, that didn't stop them from siring three children: two daughters (one which became Queen of Spain by marrying Charles II, the other which married a Savoy) and a son that eventually died in infancy. There is nothing that tells us that Philippe of Olréans and Henriette wouldn't have been able to have a couple more of children had Henriette Anne lived.

As for the Orange inbreeding... Well it can't be worst than that of the Hapsburg: it took pretty long for the Hapsburg to die out despite numerous cosanguine marriages (including three uncle-nieces match in Spain). In fact, the House is still around if you're willing to count the Hapsburg-Lorraine.
 
Last edited:
True, Willem/William III was only stadholder of Holland, Zeeland, Utrecht, Gelderland and Overijssel. Drenthe, Friesland and Groningen had another stadholder. There was no stadholder of the Netherlands. Also I believe he wasn't a count of Nassau, the Frisian stadholders were.

I am aware that he was only stadtholder of those five, but, my research has indicated (though it could be incorrect) that his title in England explicitly declared he was Stadtholder of the Seven United Netherlands. My thoughts were that he may have been playing with a technicality that he was a Stadtholder from the political union called the "Seven United Netherlands", even though he was only Stadtholder over five of them.

My sources also show that he was a titular Count of Nassau from the Nassau-Dillenburg line, as, for some reason, though the County passed from William I of Nassau-Dillenburg to a different line, his son, William the Silent and his descendants still held the title. He did not actually rule over Nassau.

Interesting timeline so far.

Just one thing: the relationship between Louis XIV and William III was worse than how you describe it. It wasn't just waryness: both ment really HATED each other like guts. Louis XIV once proposed the hand of one of his illegitimate daughters to William III: the latter denied by claiming that the house of Orange "doesn't wed Bastards" or something like that. Needless to say, the Sun King was quite pissed by the response...

Yeah, I'm going to go more into that in future; this section really was mostly intended to build up to the Glorious Revolution; when we get into the meat of William's reign, the relationship between William and Louis is going to be much more in the spotlight.

Like DrakeRlugia, I'd say this has nothing to do with how close they were. I think the POD of this timeline is basically that Mary II's miscarriage in 1678 turns out as a successful pregnancy: as a result, she remains fertile. OTL, it was a miscarriage that rended her sterile.

This is, in fact, the PoD. Instead of a disastrous miscarriage, she bears a (fairly) healthy son, and, thus Prince William and Princesses Mary and Amelia are all around when the Glorious Revolution occurs.

I did put out a bit of butterfly net to ensure that the Glorious Revolution happened essentially as OTL, except the presence of William & Mary's ready-made heirs. Now that it's happened, butterflies are going to start spreading slowly out from London to the rest of Europe and the world. The early years are going to be similar to OTL due primarily to historical inertia, for lack of a better term, but things are going to start changing more drastically as things move forward.
 
Last edited:
I am aware that he was only stadtholder of those five, but, my research has indicated (though it could be incorrect) that his title in England explicitly declared he was Stadtholder of the Seven United Netherlands. My thoughts were that he may have been playing with a technicality that he was a Stadtholder from the political union called the "Seven United Netherlands", even though he was only Stadtholder over five of them.

That kind of makes sense in a strange 17th century way. Nobles often were quite creative with titles, like after William's death when there were 3 people who used the title Prince of Orange.

My sources also show that he was a titular Count of Nassau from the Nassau-Dillenburg line, as, for some reason, though the County passed from William I of Nassau-Dillenburg to a different line, his son, William the Silent and his descendants still held the title. He did not actually rule over Nassau.

So you mean it was just an empty title, without any power within (any of) the county(s) of Nassau, while the Frisian branche ruled actually over (part of) Nassau? That could be (never seen it though), but I would have expected that the Prussians would have taken over that title too, just like they did with the county of Lingen and the county of Moers (you could add those titles to William's list too, I believe).
 
This wont look too much like Anglo-Dutch World, will it?

I loved Anglo-Dutch world but I didn't like the lack of detail on the timeline.

I hope this one is super detailed and well researched. I look forward to reading more. I always thought the Dutch and the English were a match made in heaven.
 
That kind of makes sense in a strange 17th century way. Nobles often were quite creative with titles, like after William's death when there were 3 people who used the title Prince of Orange.



So you mean it was just an empty title, without any power within (any of) the county(s) of Nassau, while the Frisian branche ruled actually over (part of) Nassau? That could be (never seen it though), but I would have expected that the Prussians would have taken over that title too, just like they did with the county of Lingen and the county of Moers (you could add those titles to William's list too, I believe).

AS far as I know it was quite common in medieval times for the noble families in the Holy Roman Empire to share titles, so every son of count would be a count. Furthermore they could rule it together or they all ruled a part of the inheritance.
Although there was a move towards primogeniture (after the middle ages), however that doesn't affect the already existing branches.
 
What fun! A continuing Anglo-Dutch Personal Union... or at the very least the beginning of an Orange-Nassau Dynasty in England. I'm sure this timeline will be just glorious :D

Add one more subscriber to your roster!
 
William III & Mary II
By the Grace of God
King and Queen of England, Scotland, France and Ireland,
Stadtholder of the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands,
Prince of Orange, Count of Nassau, Defenders of the Faith, etc.

williammary.png

JE MAINTIENDRAI

Chapter II: Securing the Throne

Unfortunately for the new monarchs, the transition of power was not to be so easy as that.Because of the various mutinies against Catholic officers and innumerable defections by prominent military officers, nobility and the middling sorts to their side, England was firmly and completely under their control almost immediately. There, the Glorious Revolution could be called almost bloodless, especially by contrast to the long Civil War, still in living memory. However, the transition of power was not so neat in the rest of the British Isles.

Even before their coronation, trouble began stirring in the other domains that William & Mary had seized from James II. In both Scotland and Ireland, there were a significant number of people from every level of society that rose up in support of the deposed monarch. This faction became known as the Jacobites, which derived from the Latin form of James’ name. At the same time, forces in both countries began to rise in favor of the newly proclaimed monarchs, moving against the Jacobites. These forces became known as Orangists, deriving their name from the new ruling dynasty, William and his children’s House of Orange-Nassau. This was not all, though, as the Glorious Revolution also led to unrest in England’s far-flung American colonies. Louis XIV, seeing an opportunity to prevent the William and the United Provinces from having as great an effect in Europe, provided both soldiers and money to support the Jacobite cause. In March 1689, James arrived in Ireland with a French army, bringing support for the Jacobites in that country.

At the same time, a Convention called in Edinburgh split, with the Convention proper in Edinburgh acclaiming William & Mary as King and Queen of Scotland in early May. However, the splitters, led by John Graham, Viscount Dundee, formed a separate convention in Stirling that declared that James still held the throne. First, to suppress the Jacobite rebellion in Scotland, William appointed a Scottish soldier long in Dutch service, General Hugh Mackay. Mackay, an experienced mercenary who had served in France, the Netherlands and the Mediterranean, marched to Scotland with a small, but significant, Orangist army from England. However, when Mackay met Dundee in battle at the Battle of Killiecrankie in July, he suffered a disastrous defeat, losing most of his army and his own life despite facing a smaller force. Unfortunately for the Jacobites, however, Dundee was killed in action, and would not be able to benefit them with his strategic genius in future battles. Not long afterward, despite losing their original commander, the Jacobites, now under the command of Colonel Alexander Cannon, began to make for Edinburgh. In a panic, the Estates of Parliament moved to abandon the city, and ordered William Cleland, the eventual 1st Duke of Kinross, to hold off the Jacobites as long as he could at Dunkeld so they could make their escape. However, in an even greater upset, Kinross’ outnumbered Orangists defeated the Jacobites in August, routing the enemy army. Kinross became a peculiarly Orangist heroic figure almost immediately after the battle. Kinross ultimately defeated the last remnants of the Jacobite forces at the Battle of Kingussie March 1690, settling Scotland firmly under William & Mary’s control.

While Scotland ultimately turned out to be a fairly small conflict, with a fairly small insurrection crushed relatively quickly, Ireland turned out to be far more troublesome. In fact, unlike Scotland, Ireland became a major front of the Nine Years’ War, which is, as a result, often called the Two Kings War there. Irish Catholics, from both the poorer parts of the population and from the larger landowning classes, rose up en masse to support James, with Jacobite and Orangist irregulars clashing in Ulster from March. Having landed at Kinsale on the twelfth, James marched on Dublin, summoning an Irish Parliament made up almost entirely of Catholics. The Irish Parliament, after numerous concessions from James, formally declared itself, and the entire Kingdom of Ireland, for James, and soon after, Jacobites and Orangists further clashed near Enniskillen, with an Orangist victory. Though the French and Jacobites laid a siege at Derry, Orangist forces under William’s trusted general, Marshal Frederick Schomberg, 1st Duke of Schomberg, relieved the siege with a Dutch and English army. As part of a counterattack into the island, Schomberg moved in and seized Carrickfergus and Dundalk for the Orangists.

However, Schomberg stopped shortly afterward. Between serious supply problems and Schomberg’s reluctance to risk his fairly green army in open battle with the Jacobites, no further action was taken until William took up command in Ireland himself in 1690. After landing his army in Ulster, William moved almost immediately, going quickly south toward Dublin and, after defeating the Jacobites in several small skirmishes, faced James II at the Battle of the Boyne in July. Both armies fought fiercely at the Boyne, with numerous casualties on both sides, including Marshal Schomberg. The battle was largely inconclusive; though, initially, Jacobites were heartened by having fought William to a standstill, James fled Ireland in the aftermath of the battle, irresolute at the capability shown by the Orangist forces in the battle. Some scholars hold that James could have ultimately won in Irelandhad he not abandoned his armies; his flight was, in the end, a crippling blow to Jacobite morale throughout the British Isles. When William began negotiations to end the war, however, he was uncompromising in his stance against the ruling Catholic Parliament, unwilling to give them any guarantees of their lands or rights. The Irish were unwilling to end the war, however, without these concessions, and it continued unabated for another long year. The Irish war was finally concluded with the Battle of Kinneigh in March 1692. However, though he had defeated the Jacobites consistently in nearly every battle, William was desperate to quickly finish his business in Ireland and see to the ongoing war on the continent. In the end, he was forced to grant essentially what the Irish Parliament had demanded after the Boyne: a guarantee of the religious tolerance of Roman Catholicism in Ireland, along with Catholic land rights and expanded rights for those who would swear an oath of fealty to William & Mary.

The Glorious Revolution also had a variety of effects in the English colonies spread out along North America’s east coast. As part of a policy (originally conceived by Charles II) of reorganization and rationalization, James II had abolished the charters of several colonies, merging Connecticut, Massachusetts Bay, New Hampshire, Plymouth, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, and, later, the colonies of East Jersey, West Jersey and New York into a single Dominion of New England. This policy was very unpopular in the colonies, which not only had a long history of self-government, but which had significant religious and cultural differences between each other and with England. The colonials’ attitude was worsened further by the Royal Governor, Sir Edmund Andros. Andros was a competent administrator, but his pro-Anglican policies were incredibly unpopular in the largely religiously Independent colonies of the north. Though his policies were generally measured, the presence of Anglican powers that be in these colonies was considered intolerable by the local communities, many of which had based citizenship rights on membership in Independent congregations.

After word arrived in Massachusetts Bay of the Glorious Revolution in England, leaders of the local community quickly organized and, in April 1689, seized Andros, putting him under arrest and proclaiming the governor a Jacobite pledged against William & Mary. The leadership seized ships in the harbor and the local English fort, and promptly reestablished their old governments. Some colonies, such as Connecticut, had managed to retain their old charters, while other colonies, like Massachusetts Bay, were forced to do without their original governing documents and simply rule by old tradition. Not long after, Andros’ lieutenant-governor in New York, Francis Nicholson, was overthrown in an Orangist action, which was led by a German-born colonist named Jacob Leisler. Leisler, however, proceeded to establish a what was effectively a military dictatorship governed from New York, governing in the name of William & Mary. Around the same time, after a long string of grievances against their government, a Puritan in Maryland named John Coode led a rebellion against the government instituted by the colony’s proprietors, the Catholic House of Calvert, the Barons of Baltimore. Coode, however, went even further than Leisler, not only banning Roman Catholicism, but also Anglicanism, and established a Cromwell-style Puritan dictatorship in the colony.

Given the colonies’ distance from England, it took some time for affairs there to be settled. In the northern colonies, the overthrow of Andros was accepted as a fait accompli by the monarchs, and, for the most part, William & Mary officially reconstituted the old colonial governments by their own authority. In Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth, however, the Puritan- and Separatist-dominated government was replaced with a more tolerant system, more like the other surrounding colonies. This was considered a major blow to Massachusetts’ Puritan community, and started a quite literal crisis of faith throughout the colony. Even more, the two colonies was merged, forcing the established Separatists and Puritans to work together in the new government, along with the newly-enfranchised Anglican and other Protestant residents.

Unlike in upper New England, New York and Maryland were reorganized very differently in the aftermath of the 1689 disorders. Leisler, despite his declaration of loyalty to William & Mary, was seized by the new governor they appointed - Colonel Henry Sloughter - and executed for treason (though his heirs eventually convinced the Privy Council to rehabilitate his memory). In Maryland, Coode’s Puritan government was abolished in favor of an Anglican one, but Coode’s ban on Catholicism in what was, ironically, intended as a safe haven for Catholics, stood under the new government.

Through all of this, William & Mary finally secured their place throughout James II’s former domains. By the Spring of 1692, a period of just three years, the monarchs had full control of their lands, and were ready, finally, to turn their attention to the ongoing conflict in Europe.
 
Last edited:
I assume Mary II is in better health TTL, then?

In terms of bearing children, at least, yes. Otherwise, also, yes, though not so dramatically as you might think. Since it was, at least to my understanding, one freak accident that led to her barrenness, she isn't necessarily much healthier than in real life apart from this, though the lessening of the stress of worrying about the succession may also have its effect.
 
Last edited:
Very nice time line!!

Mary might be of poor health, William had a problematic health as well, maybe even worse than Mary...

Just a sides show , but it would be fun to see New York return to New Amsterdam from 1673 under Dutch rule. (Even most of the colonist were Germans, Scots, Waloon and English)
 
Top