Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
James II of England
View on Wikipedia
James II and VII (14 October 1633 O.S. – 16 September 1701) was King of England and Ireland as James II and King of Scotland as James VII from the death of his elder brother, Charles II, on 6 February 1685, until he was deposed in the 1688 Glorious Revolution. The last Catholic monarch of England, Scotland, and Ireland, his reign is now remembered primarily for conflicts over religion. However, it also involved struggles over the principles of absolutism and divine right of kings, with his deposition ending a century of political and civil strife by confirming the primacy of the English Parliament over the Crown.[4]
Key Information
James was the second surviving son of Charles I of England and Henrietta Maria of France, and was created Duke of York at birth. He succeeded to the throne aged 51 with widespread support. The general public were reluctant to undermine the principle of hereditary succession after the trauma of the brief republican Commonwealth of England 25 years before, and believed that a Catholic monarchy was purely temporary. However, tolerance of James's personal views did not extend to Catholicism in general, and both the English and Scottish parliaments refused to pass measures viewed as undermining the primacy of the Protestant religion. His attempts to impose them by absolutist decrees as a matter of his perceived divine right met with opposition.
In June 1688, two events turned dissent into a crisis. Firstly, the birth of James's son and heir James Francis Edward Stuart on 10 June raised the prospect of a Catholic dynasty, displacing his Protestant daughter Mary in the line of succession. Secondly, the state prosecution of the Seven Bishops was seen as an assault on the Church of England, and their acquittal on 30 June destroyed his political authority. Ensuing anti-Catholic riots in England and Scotland led to a general feeling that only James's removal could prevent another civil war.[5]
Leading members of the English political class invited William of Orange, James's nephew and son-in-law, to assume the English throne. When William landed in Brixham on 5 November 1688, James's army deserted and he went into exile in France on 23 December. In February 1689, a special Convention Parliament held James had "vacated" the English throne and installed William and Mary as joint monarchs, thereby establishing the principle that sovereignty derived from Parliament, not birth. James landed in Ireland on 14 March 1689 in an attempt to recover his kingdoms, but, despite a simultaneous rising in Scotland, in April a Scottish Convention followed England in ruling that James had "forfeited" the throne, which was offered to William and Mary.
After his defeat at the Battle of the Boyne in July 1690, James returned to France, where he spent the rest of his life in exile at Saint-Germain, protected by Louis XIV. While contemporary opponents often portrayed him as an absolutist tyrant, some 20th-century historians have praised James for advocating religious tolerance, although more recent scholarship has tended to take a middle ground between these views.
Early life
[edit]Birth
[edit]James, second surviving son of King Charles I and his wife, Henrietta Maria of France, was born at St James's Palace in London on 14 October 1633.[6] Later that same year, he was baptized by William Laud, the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury.[7] He was educated by private tutors, along with his older brother, the future King Charles II, and the two sons of the Duke of Buckingham, George and Francis Villiers.[8] At the age of three, James was appointed Lord High Admiral; the position was initially honorary, but became a substantive office after the Restoration, when James was an adult.[9] He was designated Duke of York at birth,[10] invested with the Order of the Garter in 1642,[11] and formally created Duke of York in January 1644.[7][10]
Wars of the Three Kingdoms
[edit]
In August 1642, long running political disputes between Charles I and his opponents in Parliament led to the First English Civil War. James and his brother Charles were present at the Battle of Edgehill in October, and narrowly escaped capture by Parliamentarian cavalry.[12] He spent most of the next four years in the Royalist wartime capital of Oxford,[12][13] where he was made a Master of Arts by the University on 1 November 1642 and served as colonel of a volunteer regiment of foot.[14] Following the surrender of Oxford in June 1646, James was taken to London and held with his younger siblings Henry, Elizabeth and Henrietta in St James's Palace.[15]
Frustrated by their inability to agree terms with Charles I, and with his brother Charles out of reach in France, Parliament considered making James king. James was ordered by his father to escape, and, with the help of Joseph Bampfield, in April 1648 successfully evaded his guards and crossed the North Sea to The Hague.[16] Following their victory in the 1648 Second English Civil War, Parliament ordered the execution of Charles I in January 1649.[17] The Covenanter regime proclaimed Charles II King of Scotland, and after lengthy negotiations agreed to provide troops to restore him to the English throne. The invasion ended in defeat at Worcester in September 1651. Although Charles managed to escape capture and to return to the exiled court in Paris, the Royalist cause appeared hopeless.[18]
Exile in France
[edit]
James, like his brother, sought refuge in France, serving in the French army under Turenne against the Fronde, and later against their Spanish allies.[19] In the French army James had his first true experience of battle, in which, according to one observer, he "ventures himself and chargeth gallantly where anything is to be done".[19] Turenne's favour led to James being given command of a captured Irish regiment in December 1652, then appointed Lieutenant-General in 1654.[20]
In 1657, France, then engaged in the Franco-Spanish War (1635–1659), agreed an alliance with the Commonwealth of England, and when Charles responded by signing a treaty with Spain, James was expelled from France.[21] James quarrelled with his brother over this choice, but ultimately joined Spanish forces in Flanders led by the French exile Condé. Given command of six regiments of British volunteers,[20] he fought against his former French comrades at the Battle of the Dunes.[22]
After France and Spain made peace with the 1659 Treaty of the Pyrenees, James considered taking a Spanish offer to be an admiral in their navy, but declined the position. Soon after, the 1660 Stuart Restoration returned his brother to the English throne as Charles II.[23]
Restoration
[edit]First marriage
[edit]
After the collapse of the Commonwealth in 1660, Charles II was restored to the thrones of England, Ireland and Scotland. Although James was the heir presumptive, it seemed unlikely that he would inherit the Crown, as Charles was still a young man capable of fathering children.[24] On 31 December 1660, following his brother's restoration, James was created Duke of Albany in Scotland, to go along with his English title, Duke of York.[25] Upon his return to England, James prompted an immediate controversy by announcing his engagement to Anne Hyde, the daughter of Charles's chief minister, Edward Hyde.[26]
In 1659, while trying to seduce her, James promised he would marry Anne.[27] Anne became pregnant in 1660, but following the Restoration and James's return to power, no one at the royal court expected a prince to marry a commoner, no matter what he had pledged beforehand.[28] Although nearly everyone, including Anne's father, urged the two not to marry, the couple married secretly, then went through an official marriage ceremony on 3 September 1660 in London.[28]
The couple's first child, Charles, was born less than two months later, but died in infancy, as did five further children.[28] Only two daughters survived: Mary (born 30 April 1662) and Anne (born 6 February 1665).[29] Samuel Pepys wrote that James was fond of his children and his role as a father, and played with them "like an ordinary private father of a child", a contrast to the distant parenting common with royalty at the time.[30][31]
James's wife was devoted to him and influenced many of his decisions.[32] Even so, he kept mistresses, including Arabella Churchill and Catherine Sedley, and was reputed to be "the most unguarded ogler of his time".[31] Samuel Pepys recorded in his diary that James "did eye my wife mightily".[31] James's taste in women was often maligned, with Gilbert Burnet famously remarking that James's mistresses must have been "given [to] him by his priests as a penance".[33] Anne Hyde died in 1671.
Military and other offices
[edit]

| Settlement on Duke of York Act 1663 | |
|---|---|
| Act of Parliament | |
| Long title | An Act for setling the Proffitts of the Post Office and Power of graunting Wyne Lycences on his Royall Highnes the Duke of Yorke and the Heires Males of his Body. |
| Citation | |
| Territorial extent | England and Wales |
| Dates | |
| Royal assent | 27 July 1663 |
| Commencement | 18 February 1663[c] |
| Repealed | 28 July 1863 |
| Other legislation | |
| Amended by | Post Office Revenues Act 1670 |
| Repealed by | Statute Law Revision Act 1863 |
| Relates to | Post Office Act 1660 |
Status: Repealed | |
| Text of statute as originally enacted | |
| Post Office Revenues Act 1670 | |
|---|---|
| Act of Parliament | |
| Long title | An Act for explaining of a Proviso conteyned in an Act, entituled "An Act for settling the Profitts of ye Post-Office and Power of granteing Wine-Licences on His Royall Highnes ye Duke of Yorke and the Heyres Males of his Body." |
| Citation | 22 & 23 Cha. 2. c. 27 |
| Territorial extent | England and Wales |
| Dates | |
| Royal assent | 22 April 1671 |
| Commencement | 24 October 1670[c] |
| Repealed | 28 July 1863 |
| Other legislation | |
| Amends | Settlement on Duke of York Act 1663 |
| Repealed by | Statute Law Revision Act 1863 |
| Relates to | Post Office Act 1660 |
Status: Repealed | |
| Text of statute as originally enacted | |
After the Restoration, James was confirmed as Lord High Admiral, an office that carried with it the subsidiary appointments of Governor of Portsmouth and Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports.[34] In October 1660, Charles II appointed his brother the Governor of the Royal Adventurers into Africa ("the company" which was later reformed as the Royal African Company in 1672). The company had senior courtiers (including the King), ministers and admirals among its investors. Its purpose was to exploit trade opportunities in West Africa. Gold, ivory, redwood and other products from the region were sought-after cargoes. The slave trade to the Americas represented only 25 per cent of its income in 1665,[35] but over its lifetime, it went on to carry more enslaved Africans across the Atlantic than "any other single institution".[36]
To achieve a dominant commercial presence on the West African coast, it was believed that the Dutch needed to be displaced from their trading posts there.[37] The company sent ships to capture them, supported, in 1664, by the Royal Navy frigate Jersey, under the command of Robert Holmes.[36] This was a major cause of the Second Anglo-Dutch War (1665–1667).[38]
The Navy was used in later years to assist the company, showing a distinct blurring of the responsibilities between the state and a commercial enterprise.[36] James continued in his role in the company until after the Glorious Revolution, when he was forced to resign.
James was very active in his role in the Royal Navy. Immediately after the Restoration, he worked on confirming the posts of ships' officers and officials in the administration of the Navy, and making new appointments to replace those ousted by the change in regime. He was a regular attendee at meetings of the Admiralty committees[d]. In the Second Anglo-Dutch War, he commanded the fleet at the Battle of Lowestoft, being in the thick of the fighting. Three courtiers standing beside him on the deck of Royal Charles were decapitated by one chain shot from the Dutch flagship, spattering James with blood and brains. After this event, and perhaps with the security of the Royal succession in mind, the King removed James from active service for the rest of the war. The same sequence was repeated in the Third Anglo-Dutch War (1672–1674), with James commanding the fleet at the Battle of Solebay, where he had to move his flag twice as his successive flagships were disabled by enemy action, the captain of the first, Prince, being killed beside him. In the midst of the intense fighting, James strode along the deck, encouraging the gun crews. James's undoubtedly brave performance in this battle is marred by some accusing him of issuing unclear orders to the French squadron (allies of the British fleet). As before, he was removed from front-line service after this battle.[39][40]
Following the raid on the Medway in 1667, James oversaw the survey and re-fortification of the southern coast.[41] The office of Lord High Admiral, combined with his revenue from post office and wine tariffs (positions granted him by Charles II upon his restoration), gave James enough money to keep a sizable court household.[42]
In 1664, Charles II granted American territory between the Delaware and Connecticut rivers to James. Following its capture by the British, the former Dutch territory of New Netherland and its principal port, New Amsterdam, were renamed the Province and City of New York in James's honour. James gave part of the colony to proprietors George Carteret and John Berkeley. Fort Orange, 150 miles (240 km) north on the Hudson River, was renamed Albany after James's Scottish title.[28] In 1683, James became the Governor of the Hudson's Bay Company, but did not take an active role in its governance.[28]
In September 1666, Charles II put James in charge of firefighting operations during the Great Fire of London, in the absence of action by Lord Mayor Thomas Bloodworth. This was not a political office, but his actions and leadership were noteworthy. "The Duke of York hath won the hearts of the people with his continual and indefatigable pains day and night in helping to quench the Fire", wrote a witness in a letter on 8 September.[43]
In 1672, the Royal African Company received a new charter from Charles II. It set up forts and factories, maintained troops, and exercised martial law in West Africa in pursuit of trade in gold, silver and African slaves. In the 1680s, the RAC transported about 5,000 slaves a year to markets primarily in the English Caribbean across the Atlantic. Many were branded on the chest with the letters "DY" for "Duke of York", the RAC's Governor.[44]
Conversion to Roman Catholicism and second marriage
[edit]
James's time in France had exposed him to the beliefs and ceremonies of the Roman Catholic Church, and both he and his wife Anne became drawn to that faith.[45][e] James took Catholic Eucharist in 1668 or 1669, although his conversion was kept secret for almost a decade as he continued to attend Anglican services until 1676.[47] In spite of his conversion, James continued to associate primarily with Anglicans, including John Churchill and George Legge, as well as French Protestants such as Louis de Duras, 2nd Earl of Feversham.[48]
Growing fears of Roman Catholic influence at court led the English Parliament to introduce a new Test Act in 1673.[49] Under this Act, all civil and military officials were required to take an oath (in which they were required to disavow the doctrine of transubstantiation and denounce certain practices of the Roman Church as superstitious and idolatrous) and to receive the Eucharist under the auspices of the Church of England.[50] James refused to perform either action, instead choosing to relinquish the post of Lord High Admiral. His conversion to Roman Catholicism was thereby made public.[49]
King Charles II opposed James's conversion, ordering that James's daughters, Mary and Anne, be raised in the Church of England.[51] Nevertheless, he allowed the widowed James to marry Mary of Modena, a fifteen-year-old Italian princess.[52] James and Mary were married by proxy in a Roman Catholic ceremony on 20 September 1673.[53] On 21 November, Mary arrived in England and Nathaniel Crew, Bishop of Oxford, performed a brief Anglican service that did little more than recognise the marriage by proxy.[54] Many British people, distrustful of Catholicism, regarded the new Duchess of York as an agent of the Papacy.[55] James was noted for his deep devotion, once remarking, "If occasion were, I hope God would give me his grace to suffer death for the true Catholic religion as well as banishment."[56]
Exclusion Crisis
[edit]In 1677, King Charles II arranged for James's daughter Mary to marry the Protestant Prince William III of Orange, son of Charles's and James's sister Mary. James reluctantly acquiesced after his brother and nephew had agreed to the marriage.[57][f] Despite the Protestant marriage, fears of a potential Catholic monarch persisted, intensified by the failure of Charles II and his wife, Catherine of Braganza, to produce any children. A defrocked Anglican clergyman, Titus Oates, spoke of a "Popish Plot" to kill Charles and to put the Duke of York on the throne.[59] The fabricated plot caused a wave of anti-Catholic hysteria to sweep across the nation.

In England, the Earl of Shaftesbury, a former government minister and now a leading opponent of Catholicism, proposed an Exclusion Bill that would have excluded James from the line of succession.[60] Some members of Parliament even proposed to pass the crown to Charles's illegitimate son, James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth.[61] In 1679, with the Exclusion Bill in danger of passing, Charles II dissolved Parliament.[62] Two further Parliaments were elected in 1680 and 1681, but were dissolved for the same reason.[63] The Exclusion Crisis contributed to the development of the English two-party system: the Whigs were those who supported the Bill, while the Tories were those who opposed it. Ultimately, the succession was not altered, but James was convinced to withdraw from all policy-making bodies and to accept a lesser role in his brother's government.[64]
On the orders of the King, James left England for Brussels.[65] In 1680, he was appointed Lord High Commissioner of Scotland and took up residence at the Holyrood Palace in Edinburgh to suppress an uprising and oversee the royal government.[66] James returned to England for a time when Charles was stricken ill and appeared to be near death.[67] The hysteria of the accusations eventually faded, but James's relations with many in the English Parliament, including the Earl of Danby, a former ally, were forever strained and a solid segment turned against him.[68]
On 6 May 1682, James narrowly escaped the sinking of HMS Gloucester, in which between 130 and 250 people perished.[69] James argued with the pilot about the navigation of the ship before it ran aground on a sandbank, and then delayed abandoning ship, which may have contributed to the death toll.[70]
Return to favour
[edit]In 1683, a plot was uncovered to assassinate Charles II and his brother and spark a republican revolution to re-establish a government of the Cromwellian style.[71] The conspiracy, known as the Rye House Plot, backfired upon its conspirators and provoked a wave of sympathy for the King and James.[72] Several notable Whigs, including the Earl of Essex and the Duke of Monmouth, were implicated.[71] Monmouth initially confessed to complicity in the plot and implicated fellow conspirators, but later recanted.[71] Essex committed suicide, and Monmouth, along with several others, was obliged to flee into exile in continental Europe.[73] Charles II reacted to the plot by increasing the repression of Whigs and dissenters.[71] Taking advantage of James's rebounding popularity, Charles invited him back onto the Privy Council in 1684.[74] While some in the English Parliament remained wary of the possibility of a Roman Catholic king, the threat of excluding James from the throne had passed.
Reign
[edit]Accession to the throne
[edit]
Charles II died on 6 February 1685 from apoplexy, after supposedly converting to Catholicism on his deathbed.[75] Having no legitimate children, he was succeeded by his brother James, who reigned in England and Ireland as James II and in Scotland as James VII. There was little initial opposition to James's accession, and there were widespread reports of public rejoicing at the orderly succession.[76] He wished to proceed quickly to the coronation, and he and Mary were crowned at Westminster Abbey on 23 April 1685.[77]
The new Parliament that assembled in May 1685, which gained the name of "Loyal Parliament", was initially favourable to James, who had stated that most former exclusionists would be forgiven if they acquiesced to his rule.[76] Most of Charles's officers continued in office, the exceptions being the promotion of James's brothers-in-law, the earls of Clarendon and Rochester, and the demotion of Halifax.[78] Parliament granted James a generous life income, including all of the proceeds of tonnage and poundage and the customs duties.[79] James worked harder as king than his brother had, but was less willing to compromise when his advisers disagreed with his policies.[80]
Two rebellions
[edit]
Soon after becoming king, James faced a rebellion in southern England led by his nephew, James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth, and another rebellion in Scotland led by Archibald Campbell, 9th Earl of Argyll.[81] Monmouth and Argyll both began their expeditions from Holland, where James's nephew and son-in-law, the Prince of Orange, had neglected to detain them or put a stop to their recruitment efforts.[82]
Argyll sailed to Scotland where he raised recruits, mainly from his own clan, the Campbells.[83] The rebellion was quickly crushed, and Argyll was captured at Inchinnan on 18 June 1685.[83] Having arrived with fewer than 300 men and unable to convince many more to flock to his standard, he never posed a credible threat to James.[84] Argyll was taken as a prisoner to Edinburgh. A new trial was not commenced because Argyll had previously been tried and sentenced to death. The King confirmed the earlier death sentence and ordered that it be carried out within three days of receiving the confirmation.
Monmouth's rebellion was coordinated with Argyll's, but was more dangerous to James. Monmouth had proclaimed himself King at Lyme Regis on 11 June.[85] He attempted to raise recruits but was unable to gather enough rebels to defeat even James's small standing army.[86] Monmouth's soldiers attacked the King's army at night, in an attempt at surprise, but were defeated at the Battle of Sedgemoor.[86] The King's forces, led by Feversham and Churchill, quickly dispersed the ill-prepared rebels.[86] Monmouth was captured and later executed at the Tower of London on 15 July.[87] The King's judges—most notably, George Jeffreys—condemned many of the rebels to transportation and indentured servitude in the West Indies in a series of trials that came to be known as the Bloody Assizes.[88] Around 250 of the rebels were executed.[87] While both rebellions were defeated easily, they hardened James's resolve against his enemies and increased his suspicion of the Dutch.[89]
Religious liberty and dispensing power
[edit]To protect himself from further rebellions, James sought safety by enlarging his standing army.[90] This alarmed his subjects, not only because of the trouble soldiers caused in the towns, but because it was against English tradition to keep a professional army in peacetime, being seen as both legally dubious and a dangerous instrument for a would-be autocrat.[91] Even more alarming to Parliament was James's use of his dispensing power to allow Roman Catholics to command several regiments without having to take the oath mandated by the Test Act.[90] When even the previously supportive Parliament objected to these measures, James ordered Parliament prorogued in November 1685, never to meet again in his reign.[92] At the beginning of 1686, two papers were found in Charles II's strong box and his closet, in his own hand, stating the arguments for Catholicism over Protestantism. James published these papers with a declaration signed by his sign manual and challenged the Archbishop of Canterbury and the whole Anglican episcopal bench to refute Charles's arguments: "Let me have a solid answer, and in a gentlemanlike style; and it may have the effect which you so much desire of bringing me over to your church." The Archbishop refused on the grounds of respect for the late king.[93]

James advocated repeal of the penal laws in all three of his kingdoms, but in the early years of his reign he refused to allow those dissenters who did not petition for relief to receive it.[g][94] James sent a letter to the Scottish Parliament at its opening in 1685, declaring his wish for new penal laws against refractory Presbyterians and lamented that he was not there in person to promote such a law. In response, the Parliament passed an Act that stated, "whoever should preach in a conventicle under a roof, or should attend, either as preacher or as a hearer, a conventicle in the open air, should be punished with death and confiscation of property".[95] In March 1686, James sent a letter to the Scottish Privy Council advocating toleration for Roman Catholics but not for rebellious Presbyterian Covenanters.[96] Presbyterians would later call this period "The Killing Time".
James allowed Roman Catholics to occupy the highest offices of his kingdoms, and received at his court the papal nuncio, Ferdinando d'Adda, the first representative from Rome to London since the reign of Mary I.[97] Edward Petre, James's Jesuit confessor, was a particular object of Anglican ire.[98] When the King's Secretary of State, the Earl of Sunderland, began replacing office-holders at court with "Papist" favourites, James began to lose the confidence of many of his Anglican supporters.[99] Sunderland's purge of office-holders even extended to the King's brothers-in-law (the Hydes) and their supporters.[99] Roman Catholics made up no more than one-fiftieth of the English population.[100] In May 1686, James sought to obtain a ruling from the English common-law courts that showed he had the power to dispense with Acts of Parliament. He dismissed judges who disagreed with him on this matter, as well as the Solicitor General, Heneage Finch.[101] The case of Godden v Hales affirmed his dispensing power,[102] with eleven out of the twelve judges ruling in the king's favour after six judges were dismissed for refusing to promise to support the king.[103][104]
In 1687, James issued the Declaration of Indulgence, also known as the Declaration for Liberty of Conscience, in which he used his dispensing power to negate the effect of laws punishing both Roman Catholics and Protestant Dissenters.[105] In the summer of 1687 he attempted to increase support for his tolerationist policy by a speaking tour of the western counties of England. As part of this tour, he gave a speech at Chester in which he said, "suppose... there should be a law made that all black men should be imprisoned, it would be unreasonable and we had as little reason to quarrel with other men for being of different [religious] opinions as for being of different complexions."[106] At the same time, James provided partial toleration in Scotland, using his dispensing power to grant relief to Roman Catholics and partial relief to Presbyterians.[107]

In 1688, James ordered the Declaration read from the pulpits of every Anglican church, further alienating the Anglican bishops against the Supreme Governor of their church.[108] While the Declaration elicited some thanks from its beneficiaries, it left the Established Church, the traditional ally of the monarchy, in the difficult position of being forced to erode its own privileges.[108] James provoked further opposition by attempting to reduce the Anglican monopoly on education.[109] At the University of Oxford, he offended Anglicans by allowing Roman Catholics to hold important positions in Christ Church and University College, two of Oxford's largest colleges. He also attempted to force the Fellows of Magdalen College to elect as their President Anthony Farmer, a man of generally ill repute who was believed to be a Roman Catholic,[h] which was seen as a violation of the Fellows' right to elect someone of their own choosing.[109]
In 1687, James prepared to pack Parliament with his supporters, so that it would repeal the Test Act and the Penal Laws. James was convinced by addresses from Dissenters that he had their support and so could dispense with relying on Tories and Anglicans. He instituted a wholesale purge of those in offices under the Crown opposed to his plan, appointing new lord-lieutenants of counties and remodelling the corporations governing towns and livery companies.[114] In October, James gave orders for the lord-lieutenants to provide three standard questions to all Justices of the Peace: 1. Would they consent to the repeal of the Test Act and the Penal Laws? 2. Would they assist candidates who would do so? 3. Would they accept the Declaration of Indulgence? During the first three months of 1688, hundreds of those who gave negative replies to those questions were dismissed.[115] Corporations were purged by agents, known as the Regulators, who were given wide discretionary powers, in an attempt to create a permanent royal electoral machine.[116] Most of the regulators were Baptists, and the new town officials that they recommended included Quakers, Baptists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians and Roman Catholics, as well as Anglicans.[117] Finally, on 24 August 1688, James ordered the issue of writs for a general election.[118] However, upon realising in September that William of Orange was going to land in England, James withdrew the writs and subsequently wrote to the lord-lieutenants to inquire over allegations of abuses committed during the regulations and election preparations, as part of the concessions he made to win support.[119]
Deposition and the Glorious Revolution
[edit]
In April 1688, James re-issued the Declaration of Indulgence, subsequently ordering Anglican clergy to read it in their churches.[120] When seven bishops, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, submitted a petition requesting the reconsideration of the King's religious policies, they were arrested and tried for seditious libel.[121] Public alarm increased when Queen Mary gave birth to a Roman Catholic son and heir, James Francis Edward, on 10 June that year.[122] When James's only possible successors were his two Protestant daughters, Anglicans could see his pro-Catholic policies as a temporary phenomenon, but when the prince's birth opened the possibility of a permanent Roman Catholic dynasty, such men had to reconsider their position.[123] Threatened by a Roman Catholic dynasty, several influential Protestants claimed the child was supposititious and had been smuggled into the Queen's bedchamber in a warming pan.[124] They had already entered into negotiations with the Prince of Orange when it became known the Queen was pregnant, and the birth of a son reinforced their convictions.[125]

On 30 June 1688, a group of seven Protestant nobles invited William, Prince of Orange, to come to England with an army.[126] By September, it had become clear that William sought to invade.[127] Believing that his own army would be adequate, James refused the assistance of King Louis XIV of France, fearing that the English would oppose French intervention.[127] When William arrived on 5 November 1688, many Protestant officers, including Churchill, defected and joined William, as did James's own daughter Anne.[128] James lost his nerve and declined to attack the invading army, despite his army's numerical superiority.[129] On 11 December, James tried to flee to France, first throwing the Great Seal of the Realm into the River Thames.[130] He was captured in Kent; later, he was released and placed under Dutch protective guard. Having no desire to make James a martyr, William let him escape on 23 December.[130] James was received by his cousin and ally, Louis XIV, who offered him a palace and a pension.[citation needed]
William summoned a Convention Parliament to decide how to handle James's flight. It convened on 22 January 1689.[131] While the Parliament refused to depose him, they declared that James, having fled to France and dropped the Great Seal into the Thames, had effectively abdicated, and that the throne had thereby become vacant.[132][i] To fill this vacancy, James's daughter Mary was declared Queen; she was to rule jointly with her husband William, who would be King. On 11 April 1689, the Parliament of Scotland declared James to have forfeited the throne of Scotland as well.[134] The Convention Parliament issued a Declaration of Right on 12 February that denounced James for abusing his power, and proclaimed many limitations on royal authority. The abuses charged to James included the suspension of the Test Acts, the prosecution of the Seven Bishops for merely petitioning the Crown, the establishment of a standing army, and the imposition of cruel punishments.[135] The Declaration was the basis for the Bill of Rights enacted later in 1689. The Bill also declared that henceforth, no Roman Catholic was permitted to ascend the English throne, nor could any English monarch marry a Roman Catholic.[136]
Attempt to regain the throne
[edit]War in Ireland
[edit]
With the assistance of French troops, James landed in Ireland in March 1689.[137] The Irish Parliament did not follow the example of the English Parliament; it declared that James remained King and passed The Great Act of Attainder against those who had rebelled against him.[138] At James's urging, the Irish Parliament passed an Act for Liberty of Conscience that granted religious freedom to all Roman Catholics and Protestants in Ireland.[139] James worked to build an army in Ireland, but was ultimately defeated at the Battle of the Boyne on 1 July 1690 O.S. when William arrived, personally leading an army to defeat James and reassert English control.[140] James fled to France once more, departing from Kinsale, never to return to any of his former kingdoms.[140] Because he deserted his Irish supporters, James became known in Ireland as Séamus an Chaca or "James the shit".[141] Despite this popular perception, later historian Breandán Ó Buachalla argues that "Irish political poetry for most of the eighteenth century is essentially Jacobite poetry",[142] and both Ó Buachalla and fellow-historian Éamonn Ó Ciardha argue that James and his successors played a central role as messianic figures throughout the 18th century for all classes in Ireland.[143]
Return to exile, death and legacy
[edit]

In France, James was allowed to live in the royal château of Saint-Germain-en-Laye.[144] James's wife and some of his supporters fled with him, including the Earl of Melfort; most, but not all, were Roman Catholic.[145] In 1692, James's last child, Louisa Maria Teresa, was born.[146] Some supporters in England attempted to assassinate William III and II to restore James to the throne in 1696, but the plot failed and the backlash made James's cause less popular.[147] In the same year, Louis XIV offered to have James elected King of Poland. James rejected the offer, fearing that accepting the Polish crown might (in the minds of the English people) disqualify him from being King of England. After Louis concluded peace with William in 1697, he ceased to offer much assistance to James.[148]
During his last years, James lived as an austere penitent.[149] He wrote a memorandum for his son advising him on how to govern England, specifying that Catholics should possess one Secretary of State, one Commissioner of the Treasury, the Secretary at War, with the majority of the officers in the army.[150]
James died aged 67 of a brain haemorrhage on 16 September 1701 at Saint-Germain-en-Laye.[151] James's heart was placed in a silver-gilt locket and given to the convent at Chaillot, and his brain was placed in a lead casket and given to the Scots College in Paris. His entrails were placed in two gilt urns and sent to the parish church of Saint-Germain-en-Laye and the English Jesuit college at Saint-Omer, while the flesh from his right arm was given to the English Augustinian nuns of Paris.[152]
The rest of James's body was laid to rest in a triple sarcophagus (consisting of two wooden coffins and one of lead) at the St Edmund's Chapel in the Church of the English Benedictines in the Rue Saint-Jacques, Paris, with a funeral oration by Henri-Emmanuel de Roquette.[3] James was not buried, but put in one of the side chapels. Lights were kept burning round his coffin until the French Revolution. In 1734, the Archbishop of Paris heard evidence to support James's canonisation, but nothing came of it.[3] During the French Revolution, James's tomb was raided.[3][b]
Later Hanover succession
[edit]
James's younger daughter Anne succeeded when William died in 1702. The Act of Settlement provided that, if the line of succession established in the Bill of Rights were extinguished, the crown would go to a German cousin, Sophia, Electress of Hanover, and to her Protestant heirs.[155] Sophia was a granddaughter of James VI and I through his eldest daughter, Elizabeth Stuart, the sister of Charles I. Thus, when Anne died in 1714 (less than two months after the death of Sophia), she was succeeded by George I, Sophia's son, the Elector of Hanover and Anne's second cousin.[155]
Subsequent uprisings and pretenders
[edit]James's son James Francis Edward was recognised as king at his father's death by Louis XIV of France and James II's remaining supporters (later known as Jacobites) as "James III and VIII".[156] He led a rising in Scotland in 1715 shortly after George I's accession, but was defeated.[157] His son Charles Edward Stuart led a Jacobite rising in 1745, but was again defeated.[158] The risings were the last serious attempts to restore the Stuart dynasty.
Charles's claims passed to his younger brother Henry Benedict Stuart, the Dean of the College of Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church.[159] Henry was the last of James II's legitimate descendants. He died childless, and no relative has publicly acknowledged the Jacobite claim since his death in 1807.[160]
Historiography
[edit]

Historical analysis of James II has been somewhat revised since Whig historians, led by Lord Macaulay, cast James as a cruel absolutist and his reign as "tyranny which approached to insanity".[161] Subsequent scholars, such as G. M. Trevelyan (Macaulay's great-nephew) and David Ogg, while more balanced than Macaulay, still characterised James as a tyrant, his attempts at religious tolerance as a fraud, and his reign as an aberration in the course of British history.[162] In 1892, A. W. Ward wrote for the Dictionary of National Biography that James was "obviously a political and religious bigot", although never devoid of "a vein of patriotic sentiment"; "his conversion to the church of Rome made the emancipation of his fellow-catholics in the first instance, and the recovery of England for catholicism in the second, the governing objects of his policy."[163]
Hilaire Belloc, a writer and Catholic apologist, broke with this tradition in 1928, casting James as an honourable man and a true advocate for freedom of conscience, and his enemies "men in the small clique of great fortunes ... which destroyed the ancient monarchy of the English".[164] However, he observed that James "concluded the Catholic church to be the sole authoritative voice on earth, and thenceforward ... he not only stood firm against surrender but on no single occasion contemplated the least compromise or by a word would modify the impression made."
By the 1960s and 1970s, Maurice Ashley and Stuart Prall began to reconsider James's motives in granting religious toleration, while still taking note of James's autocratic rule.[165][166] Modern historians have moved away from the school of thought that preached the continuous march of progress and democracy, Ashley contending that "history is, after all, the story of human beings and individuals, as well as of the classes and the masses."[167] He cast James II and William III as "men of ideals as well as human weaknesses".[167] John Miller, writing in 2000, accepted the claims of James's absolutism, but argued that "his main concern was to secure religious liberty and civil equality for Catholics. Any 'absolutist' methods ... were essentially means to that end."[168]
In 2004, W. A. Speck wrote in the new Oxford Dictionary of National Biography that "James was genuinely committed to religious toleration, but also sought to increase the power of the crown."[169] He added that, unlike the government of the Netherlands, "James was too autocratic to combine freedom of conscience with popular government. He resisted any check on the monarch's power. That is why his heart was not in the concessions he had to make in 1688. He would rather live in exile with his principles intact than continue to reign as a limited monarch."[169]
Tim Harris's conclusions from his 2006 book summarised the ambivalence of modern scholarship towards James II:
The jury will doubtless remain out on James for a long time ... Was he an egotistical bigot ... a tyrant who rode roughshod over the will of the vast majority of his subjects (at least in England and Scotland) ... simply naïve, or even perhaps plain stupid, unable to appreciate the realities of political power ... Or was he a well-intentioned and even enlightened ruler—an enlightened despot well ahead of his time, perhaps—who was merely trying to do what he thought was best for his subjects?[170]
In 2009, Steven Pincus confronted that scholarly ambivalence in 1688: The First Modern Revolution. Pincus claims that James's reign must be understood within a context of economic change and European politics, and makes two major assertions about James II. The first of these is that James purposefully "followed the French Sun King, Louis XIV, in trying to create a modern Catholic polity. This involved not only trying to Catholicise England ... but also creating a modern, centralising, and extremely bureaucratic state apparatus."[171] The second is that James was undone in 1688 far less by Protestant reaction against Catholicisation than by nationwide hostile reaction against his intrusive bureaucratic state and taxation apparatus, expressed in massive popular support for William of Orange's armed invasion of England. Pincus presents James as neither naïve nor stupid nor egotistical. Instead, readers are shown an intelligent, clear-thinking strategically motivated monarch whose vision for a French authoritarian political model and alliance clashed with, and lost out to, alternative views that favoured an entrepreneurial Dutch economic model, feared French power, and were outraged by James's authoritarianism.
Scott Sowerby countered Pincus's thesis in 2013 in Making Toleration: The Repealers and the Glorious Revolution. He noted that English taxes remained low during James II's reign, at about 4% of the English national income, and thus it was unlikely that James could have built a bureaucratic state on the model of Louis XIV's France, where taxes were at least twice as high as a proportion of GDP.[172] Sowerby also contends that James's policies of religious toleration attracted substantial support from religious nonconformists, including Quakers, Baptists, Congregationalists and Presbyterians, who were attracted by the king's push for a new "Magna Carta for liberty of conscience".[173] The king was overthrown, in Sowerby's view, largely because of fears among the Dutch and English elites that James might be aligning himself with Louis XIV in a supposed "holy league" to destroy Protestantism across northern Europe.[174] Sowerby presents James's reign as a struggle between those who believed that the king was sincerely devoted to liberty of conscience and those who were sceptical of the king's espousals of toleration and believed that he had a hidden agenda to overthrow English Protestantism.
Titles, styles, honours, and arms
[edit]
Titles and styles
[edit]- 14 October 1633 – 6 February 1685: The Duke of York
- 10 May 1659 – 6 February 1685: The Earl of Ulster[10]
- 31 December 1660 – 6 February 1685: The Duke of Albany
- 6 February 1685 – 23 December 1688 (by Jacobites until 16 September 1701): His Majesty The King
The official style of James in England was "James the Second, by the Grace of God, King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc." The claim to France was only nominal, and was asserted by every English king from Edward III to George III, regardless of the amount of French territory actually controlled. In Scotland, he was "James the Seventh, by the Grace of God, King of Scotland, England, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc."[175]
James was created Duke of Normandy by King Louis XIV of France on 31 December 1660.[10]
In 1734 the Archbishop of Paris opened the cause for the canonisation of James as a saint, making him a Servant of God among Catholics.[176]
Honours
[edit]- KG: Knight of the Garter, 20 April 1642[10]
- Appointments
- Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, 1660–1669[177]
Arms
[edit]Prior to his accession, James's coat of arms was the royal arms (which he later inherited), differenced by a label of three points Ermine.[178] His arms as king were: Quarterly, I and IV Grandquarterly, Azure three fleurs-de-lis Or (for France) and Gules three lions passant guardant in pale Or (for England); II Or a lion rampant within a double tressure flory-counter-flory Gules (for Scotland); III Azure a harp Or stringed Argent (for Ireland).
Family tree
[edit]In four generations of Stuarts, there were seven reigning monarchs (not including Hanover's George I). James II was the fourth Stuart monarch in England, the second of his generation and the father of two more.
Issue
[edit]Legitimate issue
[edit]| Name | Birth | Death | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| By Anne Hyde | |||
| Charles, Duke of Cambridge | 22 October 1660 | 5 May 1661 | |
| Mary II | 30 April 1662 | 28 December 1694 | married 1677, William III, Prince of Orange; no issue |
| James, Duke of Cambridge | 11 or 12 July 1663 | 20 June 1667 | |
| Anne, Queen of Great Britain | 6 February 1665 | 1 August 1714 | married 1683, Prince George of Denmark; no surviving issue |
| Charles, Duke of Kendal | 4 July 1666 | 22 May 1667 | |
| Edgar, Duke of Cambridge | 14 September 1667 | 8 June 1671 | |
| Henrietta | 13 January 1669 | 15 November 1669 | |
| Catherine | 9 February 1671 | 5 December 1671 | |
| By Mary of Modena | |||
| Unnamed child | March or May 1674 | stillbirth[179] | |
| Catherine Laura | 10 January 1675 | 3 October 1675 | died of convulsions[179] |
| Unnamed child | October 1675 | stillbirth[179] | |
| Isabel (or Isabella) | 28 August 1676 | 2 or 4 March 1681 | buried in Westminster Abbey on 4 March (Old Style) as "The Lady Isabella, daughter to the Duke of York"[180] |
| Charles, Duke of Cambridge | 7 November 1677 | 12 December 1677 | died of smallpox[179] |
| Elizabeth | c. 1678 | ||
| Unnamed child | February 1681 | stillbirth[179] | |
| Charlotte Maria | 16 August 1682 | 16 October 1682 | died of convulsions[179] and buried in Westminster Abbey on 8 October (Old Style) as "The Lady Charlotte-Marie, daughter to the Duke of York"[181] |
| Unnamed child | October 1683 | stillbirth[179] | |
| Unnamed child | May 1684 | stillbirth[182] | |
| James, Prince of Wales "the Old Pretender" | 10 June 1688 | 1 January 1766 | married 1719, Clementina Sobieska; had issue |
| Louisa Maria Teresa | 28 June 1692 | 18 April 1712 | no issue |
Illegitimate issue
[edit]| Name | Birth | Death | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| By Arabella Churchill | |||
| Henrietta FitzJames | 1667 | 3 April 1730 | Married, firstly, Henry Waldegrave; had issue. Married, secondly, Piers Butler, 3rd Viscount Galmoye; no issue. |
| James FitzJames, 1st Duke of Berwick | 21 August 1670 | 12 June 1734 | Married, firstly, Lady Honora Burke (a.k.a. Lady Honora de Burgh) and had issue. Married, secondly, Anne Bulkely and had issue.[183] |
| Henry FitzJames, 1st Duke of Albemarle | August 1673 | December 1702 | Married Marie Gabrielle d'Audibert de Lussan; had issue. |
| Arabella FitzJames | 1674 | 7 November 1704 | Became a nun under the name Ignatia.[183] |
| By Catherine Sedley | |||
| Catherine Darnley | c. 1681 | 13 March 1743 | Alleged daughter. Married, firstly, James Annesley, 3rd Earl of Anglesey and had issue. Married, secondly, John Sheffield, 1st Duke of Buckingham and Normanby and had issue.[183] |
| James Darnley | 1684 | 22 April 1685 | |
| Charles Darnley | Died young[183] | ||
Notes
[edit]- ^ An assertion found in many sources that James died on 6 September 1701 (17 September 1701 New Style) may result from a calculation done by an author of anonymous "An Exact Account of the Sickness and Death of the Late King James II, as also of the Proceedings at St. Germains thereupon, 1701, in a letter from an English gentleman in France to his friend in London".[1] The account reads: "And on Friday the 17th instant, about three in the afternoon, the king died, the day he always fasted in memory of our blessed Saviour's passion, the day he ever desired to die on, and the ninth hour, according to the Jewish account, when our Saviour was crucified." As 17 September 1701 New Style falls on a Saturday and the author insists that James died on Friday, "the day he ever desired to die on", so the author may have miscalculated the date, which later made it to various reference works.[2]
- ^ a b MacLeod and Waller wrote that all of James's remains were lost in the French Revolution. The English Illustrated Magazine's article on St. Germain from September 1903 claimed that parts of his bowel interred at the parish church of St. Germain-en-Laye were rediscovered in 1824 and reburied.[153] Hilliam disputed that his remains were either scattered or lost, stating that when revolutionaries broke into the church, they were amazed at the body's preservation and it was put on public exhibition where miracles were said to have happened. Hilliam stated that the body was then kept "above ground" until George IV heard about it and ordered the body buried in the parish church of St Germain-en-Laye in 1824.[154]
- ^ a b Start of session.
- ^ James's presence was often not minuted by Pepys, especially when James became a problematic political entity
- ^ Anne "made the greatest single impact upon his thinking" and that she converted shortly after the Restoration, "almost certainly before her husband".[46]
- ^ According to Turner, James's reaction to the agreement was "The King shall be obeyed, and I would be glad if all his subjects would learn of me to obey him".[58]
- ^ Covenanters, as they did not recognise James (or any uncovenanted king) as a legitimate ruler, would not petition James for relief from the penal laws.
- ^ Historians are unclear on Farmer's exact religious affiliation. Macaulay wrote that Farmer "pretended to turn Papist".[110] Prall called him a "Catholic sympathizer".[111] Miller wrote that "although he had not declared himself a Catholic, it was believed he was no longer an Anglican".[112] Ashley did not refer to Farmer by name, but only as the King's Catholic nominee.[113] All these sources agreed that Farmer's bad reputation as a "person of scandalous character" was as much a deterrent to his nomination as his uncertain religious loyalties.[111]
- ^ Harris analyses the legal nature of the abdication; James did not agree that he had abdicated.[133]
References
[edit]- ^ Somers, John. Tracts. Vol. XI 1809–1815. pp. 339–342.
- ^ Browning, Andrew, ed. (2001). English Historical Documents 1660–1714. Routledge. pp. 136–138.
- ^ a b c d Miller (2000), p. 240.
- ^ Quinn, Stephen. "The Glorious Revolution". Economic History Association EH.net. Retrieved 3 January 2019.
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 264–268.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 1.
- ^ a b Callow (2000), p. 31.
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 34.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 10; Callow (2000), p. 101
- ^ a b c d e Weir, Alison (1996). 258. Britain's Royal Families: The Complete Genealogy. Revised Edition. Random House, London. ISBN 0-7126-7448-9.
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 36.
- ^ a b Miller (2000), p. 3.
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 42.
- ^ White, Geoffrey H.; Lea, R.S. (eds.). "Duke of York". The Complete Peerage. Vol. XII. p. 914.
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 45.
- ^ Callow (2000), pp. 48–50.
- ^ Royle (2004), p. 517.
- ^ Miller 2000, p. 15.
- ^ a b Miller (2000), pp. 16–17.
- ^ a b The Complete Peerage, p. 915.
- ^ Miller 2000, pp. 19–20.
- ^ Miller 2000, pp. 19–25.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 24–25.
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 89.
- ^ Gibbs, Vicary (1910). Cokayne, George Edward (ed.). The Complete Peerage. Vol. I. p. 83.
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 90.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 44.
- ^ a b c d e Miller (2000), pp. 44–45.
- ^ Waller (2002), pp. 49–50.
- ^ Pepys, Samuel (12 September 2007). "Monday 12 September 1664". The Diary of Samuel Pepys.
- ^ a b c Miller (2000), p. 46.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 45–46.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 59.
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 101.
- ^ Tattersfield (1991), ch 2.
- ^ a b c Davies (2017), p. 180.
- ^ Davies (2008), p. 48.
- ^ Barry (2018), pp. 26–27.
- ^ Davies (2017), pp. 192, 208–216.
- ^ Anderson (1946), p. 96.
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 104.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 42.
- ^ Spelling modernised for clarity; quoted by Adrian Tinniswood (2003). 80. By Permission of Heaven: The Story of the Great Fire of London. London: Jonathan Cape.
- ^ "The Royal African Company (RAC) is Founded". African American Registry. Archived from the original on 14 November 2022. Retrieved 14 November 2022.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 58–59; Callow (2000), pp. 144–145
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 144.
- ^ Callow (2000), pp. 143–144; Waller (2002), p. 135
- ^ Callow (2000), p. 149.
- ^ a b Miller (2000), pp. 69–71.
- ^ Kenyon (1986), p. 385.
- ^ Waller (2002), p. 92.
- ^ Waller (2002), pp. 16–17.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 73.
- ^ Turner (1948), pp. 110–111.
- ^ Waller (2002), pp. 30–31.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 99.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 84; Waller (2002), pp. 94–97
- ^ Turner (1948), p. 132.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 87.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 99–105.
- ^ Harris (2006), p. 74.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 93–95.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 103–104.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 90.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 87–91.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 95.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 98–99.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 89; Callow (2000), pp. 180–183
- ^ "Shipwreck The Gloucester hailed most important since Mary Rose". BBC News. 10 June 2022.
- ^ Thomas, Tobi (10 June 2022). "Wreck of Royal Navy warship sunk in 1682 identified off Norfolk coast". The Guardian.
- ^ a b c d Miller (2000), pp. 115–116.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 116; Waller (2002), pp. 142–143
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 116–117.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 117.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 118–119.
- ^ a b Miller (2000), pp. 120–121.
- ^ Harris (2006), p. 45.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 121.
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 44–45.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 123.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 140–143; Harris (2006), pp. 73–86
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 139–140.
- ^ a b Harris (2006), pp. 75–76.
- ^ Harris (2006), p. 76.
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 82–85.
- ^ a b c Miller (2000), p. 141.
- ^ a b Harris (2006), p. 88.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 141–142.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 142.
- ^ a b Miller (2000), pp. 142–143.
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 95–100.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 146–147.
- ^ Macaulay (1889), pp. 349–350.
- ^ Macaulay (1889), p. 242; Harris (2006), pp. 480–481
- ^ Macaulay (1889), p. 242; Harris (2006), p. 70
- ^ Macaulay (1889), pp. 385–386; Turner (1948), p. 373
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 142; Macaulay (1889), p. 445
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 195–196.
- ^ a b Miller (2000), pp. 150–152.
- ^ Macaulay (1889), p. 444.
- ^ Macaulay (1889), p. 368.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 156–157; Harris (2006), pp. 192–195
- ^ Macaulay (1889), pp. 368–369; Harris (2006), p. 192
- ^ Dixon, Dennis (20 November 2006). "Godden v Hales revisited – James II and the dispensing power". The Journal of Legal History. 27 (2): 129–152. doi:10.1080/01440360600831162. ISSN 0144-0365.
- ^ Kenyon (1986), pp. 389–391.
- ^ Sowerby (2013), p. 42.
- ^ Macaulay (1889), p. 429; Harris (2006), pp. 480–482
- ^ a b Harris (2006), pp. 216–224.
- ^ a b Harris (2006), pp. 224–229.
- ^ Macaulay (1889), p. 264.
- ^ a b Prall (1972), p. 148.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 170.
- ^ Ashley (1996), p. 89.
- ^ Jones (1988), p. 132.
- ^ Jones (1988), pp. 132–133.
- ^ Jones (1988), p. 146.
- ^ Sowerby (2013), pp. 136–143.
- ^ Jones (1988), p. 150.
- ^ Jones (1988), p. 159.
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 258–259.
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 260–262; Prall (1972), p. 312
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 186–187; Harris (2006), pp. 269–272
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 271–272; Ashley (1996), pp. 110–111
- ^ Gregg, Edward (2000). Queen Anne. Routledge & Kegan Paul. p. 58. ISBN 978-0-710-00400-0.
- ^ Waller (2002), pp. 43–46; Miller (2000), pp. 186–187
- ^ Ashley (1996), pp. 201–202.
- ^ a b Miller (2000), pp. 190–196.
- ^ Waller (2002), pp. 236–239.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 201–203.
- ^ a b Miller (2000), pp. 205–209.
- ^ Claydon, Tony (2008). "William III and II". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/29450. ISBN 978-0-198-61412-8. (Subscription, Wikipedia Library access or UK public library membership required.); Plumb, J. H. (1937). "The Elections to the Convention Parliament of 1689". The Cambridge Historical Journal. 5 (3): 235–254. doi:10.1017/S1474691300001529. JSTOR 3020731.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 209.
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 320–328.
- ^ Devine (2006), p. 3; Harris (2006), pp. 402–407
- ^ Ashley (1996), pp. 206–209; Harris (2006), pp. 329–348
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 349–350.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 222–224.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 226–227.
- ^ Harris (2006), p. 440.
- ^ a b Harris (2006), pp. 446–449.
- ^ Fitzpatrick, Brendan (1988). New Gill History of Ireland 3: Seventeenth-Century Ireland – The War of Religions. Gill and Macmillan. p. 253. ISBN 0-7171-1626-3.; Szechi, Daniel (1994). The Jacobites, Britain and Europe, 1688–1788. Manchester University Press. p. 48. ISBN 0-7190-3774-3.
- ^ Ó Buachalla, Breandán (Spring–Summer 1992). "Irish Jacobite Poetry". The Irish Review (12): 40–49. doi:10.2307/29735642. JSTOR 29735642.
- ^ Ó Buachalla (1996); Ó Ciardha (2002)
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 235.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 235–236.
- ^ "Burke's Peerage" (Second World War ed.). p. 228. Retrieved 23 June 2021.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 238; Waller (2002), p. 350
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 239.
- ^ Miller (2000), pp. 234–236.
- ^ Macaulay (1889), p. 445.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. 240; Parish register of Saint-Germain-en-Laye, with transcription, at Association Frontenac-Amériques Archived 10 November 2012 at the Wayback Machine (in French)
- ^ Mann (2014), p. 223.
- ^ Hilliam (1998), p. 205.
- ^ Waller (2002), p. 401; MacLeod (1999), p. 349
- ^ a b Harris (2006), p. 493.
- ^ MacLeod (1999), p. 349.
- ^ MacLeod (1999), pp. 361–363.
- ^ MacLeod (1999), pp. 365–371.
- ^ MacLeod (1999), pp. 371–372.
- ^ MacLeod (1999), pp. 373–374.
- ^ Macaulay (1889), p. 239.
- ^ See Prall, vii–xv, for a more detailed historiography.
- ^ . Dictionary of National Biography. London: Smith, Elder & Co. 1885–1900.
- ^ Belloc, Hilaire (1928). James the Second. J. B. Lippincott Company. p. vii. ISBN 978-0-8369-5922-2.
{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - ^ Ashley (1996), pp. 196–198.
- ^ Prall (1972), pp. 291–293.
- ^ a b Ashley (1996), p. 9.
- ^ Miller (2000), p. ix.
- ^ a b Speck, W.A. (September 2004). "James II and VII (1633–1701)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online May 2006 ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/14593. Retrieved 15 October 2007.
He 'wished that all his subjects could be as convinced as he was that the Catholic church was the one true church. He was also convinced that the established church was maintained artificially by penal laws that proscribed nonconformity. If these were removed, and conversions to Catholicism were encouraged, then many would take place. In the event his optimism was misplaced, for few converted. James underestimated the appeal of Protestantism in general and the Church of England in particular. His was the zeal and even bigotry of a narrow-minded convert...'
- ^ Harris (2006), pp. 478–479.
- ^ Pincus, Steven (2009). 1688: The First Modern Revolution. Yale University Press. p. 475. ISBN 978-0-3001-1547-5.
- ^ Sowerby (2013), pp. 51–53.
- ^ Sowerby (2013), pp. 43–44.
- ^ Sowerby (2013), pp. 227–239.
- ^ "No. 2009". The London Gazette. 16 February 1684. p. 1.
- ^ Coulombe, Charles (5 March 2019). "The forgotten canonisation Cause of King James II". Catholic Herald. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
- ^ "List of Lord Wardens". The Confederation of Cinque Ports. Retrieved 31 March 2024.
- ^ Velde, Francois R. "Marks of cadency in the British royal family". Heraldica.
- ^ a b c d e f g Weir, p. 260
- ^ Chester, J. L. (1876). The Marriage, Baptismal, and Burial Registers of the Collegiate Church or Abbey of St. Peter, Westminster. Vol. 10. Harleian Society. p. 201.
- ^ Chester (1876), p. 206.
- ^ Weir, 261
- ^ a b c d Weir, p. 263
Sources
[edit]- Anderson, R C (1946). Journals and Narratives of the Third Dutch War (PDF). London: Navy Records Society. p. 96. Retrieved 27 June 2025.
- Ashley, Maurice (1996). The Glorious Revolution of 1688. Charles Scribner's Sons. ISBN 0-340-00896-2.
- Barry, Quintin (2018). From Solebay to the Texel: the third Anglo-Dutch war, 1672-1674. Warwick: Helion & Company. ISBN 9781911628033.
- Callow, John (2000). The Making of King James II: The Formative Years of a King. Sutton. ISBN 0-7509-2398-9.
- Davies, J. D. (2008). Pepys's navy: ships, men & warfare, 1649-1689. Barnsley: Seaforth Pub. ISBN 978-1-84832-014-7.
- Davies, J. D. (2017). Kings of the sea: Charles II, James II and the Royal Navy. Barnsley: Seaforth Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84832-400-8.
- Devine, T. M. (2006). The Scottish Nation 1700–2007. Penguin. ISBN 0-1410-2769-X.
- Harris, Tim (2006). Revolution: The Great Crisis of the British Monarchy, 1685–1720. Allen Lane. ISBN 0-7139-9759-1.
- Hilliam, David (1998). Kings, Queens, Bones & Bastards. Sutton. ISBN 0-7509-3553-7.
- Jones, J. R. (1988). The Revolution of 1688 in England. Orion Publishing Group, Limited. ISBN 0-2979-9467-0.
- Kenyon, J. P. (1986). The Stuart Constitution 1603–1688, Documents and Commentary (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-31327-9.
- MacLeod, John (1999). Dynasty, the Stuarts, 1560–1807. Sceptre. ISBN 0-3407-0767-4.
- Macaulay, Thomas Babington (1889). The History of England from the Accession of James the Second (Popular in two volumes ed.). Longmans.
- Mann, Alastair (2014). James VII: Duke and King of Scots, 1633–1701. John Donald. ISBN 978-1-907-90909-2.
- Miller, John (2000). James II (3rd ed.). Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-08728-4.
- Ó Buachalla, Breandán (1996), Aisling ghéar: na Stíobhartaigh agus an taos léinn, 1603–1788 (in Irish), An Clóchomhar, ISBN 0-903-75899-7
- Ó Ciardha, Éamonn (2002), Ireland and the Jacobite Cause, 1685–1766, Dublin: Four Courts Press, ISBN 1-851-82534-7
- Prall, Stuart (1972). The Bloodless Revolution: England, 1688. Univ of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 978-0-299-10294-4.
- Royle, Trevor (2004). The British Civil Wars: The Wars of the Three Kingdoms, 1638–1660. Macmillan. ISBN 0-312-29293-7.
- Sowerby, Scott (2013). Making Toleration: The Repealers and the Glorious Revolution. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-07309-8.
- Tattersfield, Nigel (1991). The Forgotten trade: Comprising the log of the "Daniel and Henry" of 1700 and accounts of the slave trade from the minor ports of England, 1698-1725. London: J. Cape. ISBN 978-0224029155.
- Turner, Francis C. (1948). James II. Creative Media Partners, LLC. ISBN 978-1-346-30578-3.
{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - Waller, Maureen (2002). Ungrateful Daughters: The Stuart Princesses who Stole Their Father's Crown. Macmillan. ISBN 0-312-30711-X.
Further reading
[edit]- Ashley, Maurice (1978). James II. J.M. Dent & Sons. ISBN 978-0-4601-2021-0.
- DeKrey, Gary S. (2008). "Between Revolutions: Re-appraising the Restoration in Britain" History Compass 6 (3): 738–773.
- Earle, Peter (1972). The Life and Times of James II. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.[ISBN missing]
- Glassey, Lionel, ed. (1997). The Reigns of Charles II and James VII and II. [ISBN missing]
- Goodlad, Graham (2007). "Before the Glorious Revolution: The Making of Absolute Monarchy? Graham Goodlad Examines the Controversies Surrounding the Development of Royal Power under Charles II and James II" History Review 58: 10 ff.
- Johnson, Richard R. (1978). "Politics Redefined: An Assessment of Recent Writings on the Late Stuart Period of English History, 1660 to 1714." William and Mary Quarterly 35 (4): 691–732. doi:10.2307/1923211
- Miller, John (1997). The Glorious Revolution (2nd ed.). Longman. ISBN 0-5822-9222-0.
- Miller, John (2004). The Stuarts. ISBN 978-1-8528-5432-4.
- Mullett, M. (1993). James II and English Politics 1678–1688. ISBN 0-4150-9042-3.
- Ogg, David (1957). England in the Reigns of James II and William III, 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Speck, W. A. (2002). James II. Longman. ISBN 978-0-5822-8712-9.
- Van der Kiste, John (2021). James II and the first modern revolution. Barnsley: Pen & Sword. [ISBN missing]
- Walcott, Robert (1962). "The Later Stuarts (1660–1714): Significant Work of the Last Twenty Years (1939–1959)" American Historical Review 67 (2): 352–370 doi:10.2307/1843428
External links
[edit]- James VII & II at the official website of the British monarchy
- James II at the official website of the Royal Collection Trust
- James II at BBC History
- Portraits of King James II at the National Portrait Gallery, London
James II of England
View on GrokipediaEarly Life
Birth and Family Background
James Stuart, who would reign as James II of England and VII of Scotland, was born on 14 October 1633 at St. James's Palace in London.[2][7] He was the third child but second surviving son of King Charles I (1600–1649) and his queen consort, Henrietta Maria (1609–1669).[8] Charles I had ascended the throne in 1625 following the death of his father, James I, and sought to rule as an absolute monarch, which sowed seeds of conflict with Parliament over issues of taxation, religion, and royal prerogative.[9] Henrietta Maria, the youngest daughter of King Henry IV of France and Marie de' Medici, married Charles I in 1625 in a union intended to strengthen Anglo-French ties but marked by religious tensions due to her devout Catholicism amid England's Protestant establishment.[10] The couple had nine children in total, of whom five survived to adulthood: Charles (born 1630, later Charles II), Mary (born 1631), James, Elizabeth (born 1635), and Henrietta (born 1644).[11] Henrietta Maria's faith influenced the upbringing of her children, though they were formally raised in the Church of England; her Catholicism later fueled Puritan suspicions of popery at court, contributing to the polarized religious climate preceding the Wars of the Three Kingdoms.[11] As the younger son, James was initially destined for a naval or military career rather than the throne, but the execution of Charles I in 1649 during the English Civil War elevated the surviving royal children's prospects upon the Restoration.[12] His early family environment, steeped in royal absolutism and cross-confessional marriage dynamics, foreshadowed the religious and political challenges that would define his later life and reign.[8]Involvement in the Wars of the Three Kingdoms
James, then Duke of York, was nine years old when the First English Civil War erupted in August 1642 amid escalating tensions between King Charles I and Parliament.[6] Accompanying his father and elder brother, the Prince of Wales, he was present at the royalist headquarters during the Battle of Edgehill on 23 October 1642, the first major engagement, where the king narrowly avoided defeat and the young princes escaped capture by parliamentary forces.[13] His presence underscored the royal family's commitment to the cause, though his age precluded any combat role. From October 1642 until the royalist surrender of Oxford in June 1646, James resided with the court at Oxford, which served as the de facto royal capital and a center of Cavalier resistance.[13] Formally created Duke of York in January 1644 amid the ongoing conflict, he witnessed the deteriorating royalist position, including the execution of his father on 30 January 1649 following the Second Civil War's failure.[13] The broader Wars of the Three Kingdoms, encompassing parallel Scottish and Irish campaigns, indirectly shaped his early experiences through the strain on royal resources, but his involvement remained confined to the English theater as a royal dependent rather than a participant.[6] After Oxford's capitulation, Parliament ordered James's transfer to St James's Palace in London in July 1646, where he was held under guard as a bargaining chip against remaining royalists, effectively a prisoner amid the republican regime's consolidation.[13] On 20 April 1648, during the Third English Civil War's prelude, loyalists orchestrated his escape; disguised in women's clothing after a diversionary game, he reached the Thames, boarded a boat, and sailed to Middelburg in the Dutch Republic, evading recapture and joining exiled royalists. This flight marked the end of his direct exposure to the kingdoms' wars, transitioning him to continental exile as the conflicts concluded with Cromwell's victories in Ireland (1650) and Scotland (1651).[6]Exile in France and Restoration
Following the royalist defeat at the surrender of Oxford on 24 June 1646, the fourteen-year-old James was transported to London and confined at St. James's Palace under the guardianship of Parliament to prevent his removal abroad.[14] On the night of 20 April 1648, he escaped custody with assistance from royalist agents, including Colonel Joseph Bampfield, and sailed from Lion Quay on the Thames to reach The Hague in the Dutch Republic.[15] [16] In The Hague, James resided under the protection of his elder sister Mary, Princess Royal, and her husband, William II, Prince of Orange, until the prince's death in November 1650.[17] The execution of his father, Charles I, on 30 January 1649 at Whitehall further solidified his exile, prompting him to join his mother, Queen Henrietta Maria, at the French court in Paris by mid-1649.[18] There, lacking independent resources, he depended on French hospitality while his brother Charles II coordinated royalist efforts from various European courts. In April 1652, James enlisted in the French army under the command of Marshal Henri de La Tour d'Auvergne, Vicomte de Turenne, participating in four campaigns against the Fronde insurgents and Habsburg Spain; Turenne noted his personal bravery in action.[17] [19] This service ended in October 1655 following the Franco-English treaty that aligned Cromwell's Commonwealth with France against Spain, prompting James's departure from French ranks in 1656 to avoid conflicting with his brother's pro-Spanish diplomacy.[20] He transferred to Spanish service in the Spanish Netherlands, leading a contingent of approximately 2,000 English royalist exiles.[21] James commanded cavalry at the Battle of the Dunes on 14 June 1658 near Dunkirk, where Spanish forces, bolstered by his troops, faced a Franco-English army; despite a valiant charge that temporarily disrupted enemy lines, the Spanish were routed, allowing French capture of the port.[21] [20] He retreated to Brussels afterward, evading capture, and briefly visited Italy before rejoining Charles II in the Netherlands amid shifting Commonwealth politics after Cromwell's death on 3 September 1658.[22] The Protectorate's collapse and Convention Parliament's invitation led to Charles II's proclamation as king on 8 May 1660; James accompanied his brother on the fleet from Scheveningen, landing at Dover on 25 May and entering London triumphantly on 29 May, marking the monarchy's Restoration after eleven years of republican rule.[23] .aspx)Pre-Reign Career
Military and Administrative Roles
During the English Civil War, James, then Duke of York, resided at the royalist stronghold of Oxford from October 1642 until its surrender in June 1646, after which he was briefly held under parliamentary control.[24] In April 1648, at age 14, he escaped from St. James's Palace in London disguised in women's clothing, aided by loyalists including Anne Halkett, and fled to the Netherlands to join his sister Mary and exiled royalists.[24] [25] In exile, James pursued a military career on the continent. He joined the French army in April 1652 under Marshal Turenne, participating in campaigns during the Franco-Spanish War until the 1655 peace treaty with England compelled his departure to avoid diplomatic friction.[17] Later aligning with the Spanish against France, he commanded a British exile contingent at the Battle of the Dunes on 14 June 1658, where French forces under Turenne defeated the Spanish-allied army, contributing to the fall of Dunkirk.[26] These experiences honed his tactical acumen in infantry and cavalry operations. Following the Restoration in 1660, James was appointed Lord High Admiral of England on 29 January 1661, a substantive role succeeding the ceremonial one held since his infancy, and also Warden of the Cinque Ports.[27] [28] As commander-in-chief of the fleet during the Second Anglo-Dutch War, he led the English squadron to victory at the Battle of Lowestoft on 3 June 1665 (O.S.), personally aboard the Royal Charles amid close-quarters combat that sank or captured numerous Dutch vessels, though pursuit was hampered by wind and orders.[29] [26] He commanded again at the Battle of Solebay on 7 June 1672 (O.S.) in the Third Anglo-Dutch War, where the Anglo-French fleet repelled a Dutch attack but failed to achieve decisive gains.[27] Administratively, James oversaw naval reforms, enhancing fleet efficiency through better organization and maintenance, while engaging in colonial and commercial enterprises.[30] In 1663, Charles II granted him proprietorship over territories including New Netherland; James dispatched Colonel Richard Nicolls with a fleet that captured New Amsterdam on 8 September 1664 without resistance, renaming it New York in his honor and establishing English colonial administration.[31] [32] As governor of the Royal Adventurers into Africa (rechartered as the Royal African Company in 1672), he directed trade in goods and enslaved Africans, with company slaves often branded "DY" for Duke of York, reflecting his direct involvement in monopoly operations along the African coast.[33] [34]First Marriage and Early Family
James, Duke of York, first encountered Anne Hyde during the Stuart exile in the Spanish Netherlands, where she served as a maid of honour to his elder sister, Mary, Princess Royal and Princess of Orange, from 1654 onward.[35] Their relationship developed amid the court's peripatetic existence, leading James to promise marriage by late 1659 despite Anne's non-royal status as the daughter of Edward Hyde, a prominent royalist advisor.[36] Following the Restoration of Charles II in May 1660, the couple wed secretly on 3 September 1660 at the home of Anne's father in London, a union initially opposed by the king and courtiers due to concerns over her social rank and potential dynastic implications.[37] Anne's subsequent pregnancy compelled public acknowledgment of the marriage, with an official ceremony conducted on 20 September 1662 at the Chapel Royal, Whitehall.[36] The marriage produced eight children between 1660 and 1669, though infant and childhood mortality claimed six: Charles, born 22 October 1660 and died 5 December 1660; Mary, born 30 October 1662 and died 28 December 1694; James, born 12 February 1663 and died 17 December 1667; Anne, born 6 February 1665 and died 1 August 1714; Charles, born 4 October 1666 and died 22 October 1667; Edgar, born 14 September 1667 and died 8 June 1671; Henrietta, born 13 January 1669 and died 21 November 1669; and Isabel, born circa 1669 and died in infancy.[38] Only the daughters Mary and Anne survived to adulthood, both later ascending as queens regnant of England, Scotland, and Ireland—Mary jointly with William III from 1689 to 1694, and Anne from 1702 to 1714.[7] Anne Hyde exerted intellectual influence on James during their decade together, remaining Protestant until her deathbed conversion to Catholicism on 31 March 1671 at St James's Palace, attributed to advanced breast cancer at age 34.[36]Conversion to Catholicism and Its Implications
James, Duke of York, secretly converted to Roman Catholicism in 1669, during a period of personal religious reflection amid England's entrenched Protestant establishment and legal prohibitions on Catholic office-holding under the Test Acts.[12] [39] The decision stemmed from his conviction that Catholic doctrine aligned more closely with scriptural authority and historical church tradition, as evidenced by his later writings defending the faith against Anglican critiques, though contemporaries speculated on influences from Jesuit confessors or dissatisfaction with Restoration court's moral laxity.[40] Initially, King Charles II, aware of the political risks, compelled James to outwardly conform by receiving Anglican sacraments until 1672, delaying public disclosure to preserve his brother's viability as heir presumptive.[41] The conversion became public in 1673 when James resigned as Lord High Admiral rather than take the required Anglican sacrament or oath excluding Catholics from office, triggering immediate backlash in Parliament and among the Anglican elite fearful of "popery" and absolutist tendencies associated with Continental Catholicism.[39] This act violated the Corporation Act of 1661 and Test Act of 1673, which mandated Protestant conformity for public roles, forcing James's temporary withdrawal from key naval and administrative duties he had rebuilt post-Restoration.[5] Politically, it amplified Whig agitation against Catholic influence, culminating in the Exclusion Crisis (1679–1681), where bills sought to bar James from succession in favor of his Protestant nephew or daughter, reflecting causal fears that a Catholic monarch would undermine the Church of England and invite foreign papal interference, as stoked by the fabricated Popish Plot hysteria of 1678.[42] Despite these setbacks, Charles II's staunch defense of hereditary right thwarted exclusion, allowing James to retain his position and later remarry a Catholic, Mary of Modena, in 1673, which further entrenched dynastic tensions by prioritizing Catholic alliances over Protestant matrimonial securities.[12] The implications extended to James's familial and military spheres: his daughters from the Protestant Anne Hyde—Mary and Anne—were raised Anglican, creating potential rival claimants and underscoring the conversion's disruption to Stuart Protestant continuity, while his naval expertise suffered short-term as anti-Catholic sentiment sidelined him during the Third Anglo-Dutch War.[43] Economically and administratively, James adapted by accepting a Scottish pension and brief exile in Brussels (1678–1679) to evade plot accusations, yet this resilience highlighted causal realism in monarchical politics: personal faith clashed with constitutional anti-Catholic safeguards, eroding elite trust without immediate deposition due to Charles's absolutist maneuvering and lack of viable alternatives.[40] Long-term, the conversion sowed seeds for James's reign challenges, as Protestant majorities viewed Catholic toleration bids not as pragmatic equity but as subversive threats to parliamentary sovereignty and religious settlement post-1688.[44]Second Marriage, Exclusion Crisis, and Political Recovery
James, Duke of York, entered into his second marriage following the death of Anne Hyde on 31 March 1671. He wed Mary Beatrice d'Este, the 15-year-old daughter of Alfonso IV, Duke of Modena, by proxy on 30 September 1673 in a Catholic ceremony. Mary arrived in England on 21 November 1673 (O.S.), where the marriage was solemnized in person shortly thereafter in a private Catholic rite at Dorset House, avoiding public Anglican formalities due to the couple's faith.[2][42] The union produced several children, though most died in infancy, and served diplomatic aims by allying the Yorkists with Catholic Italian interests amid Stuart efforts to balance French and continental ties.[45] The timing amplified tensions over James's religion: he had privately converted to Catholicism circa 1668–1669 but maintained Anglican appearances until 1673. That year, the Test Act compelled officeholders to receive Anglican communion; James resigned as Lord High Admiral in June rather than comply, openly declaring his Catholicism and prompting parliamentary alarm over a potential Catholic successor.[6] This fueled Whig opposition, led by figures like Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, who viewed James's faith as a threat to Protestant liberties and the 1689 settlement's anti-Catholic provisions. The Exclusion Crisis erupted in 1679 amid the fabricated Popish Plot, revealed by Titus Oates in September 1678, which alleged a Jesuit conspiracy to assassinate Charles II and install James via Catholic dominance—claims that ignited anti-papist panic, resulting in over 35 executions and the dismissal of James's Catholic courtiers.[46] Three Exclusion Bills sought to bar James from the throne on religious grounds, proposing alternatives like Charles's Protestant illegitimate son James Scott, Duke of Monmouth; the first passed the Commons in May 1679 but failed in the Lords, while subsequent parliaments in October 1680 and March 1681 met similar fates as Charles II dissolved them, rejecting statutory alteration of succession as a royal prerogative.[45] James, fearing for his safety, briefly exiled himself to Brussels in March 1679 before proceeding to Scotland in November to assert authority and quell Covenanting unrest, remaining there until March 1682.[47] James's political recovery accelerated post-crisis through royalist consolidation. Charles II, reliant on Tory Anglican support, avoided further parliaments after 1681, governing via prerogative and revenue from customs/Dutch wars, which marginalized Whig extremists. The pivotal Rye House Plot of 1683—a Whig scheme to ambush Charles and James near Hoddesdon as they returned from Newmarket races—collapsed when a fire delayed the royal party; revelations implicated Monmouth, Lord William Russell, Algernon Sidney, and others, leading to executions and Monmouth's flight, decisively eroding Whig credibility.[48] Tories, emphasizing hereditary right and non-resistance, regained dominance, rehabilitating James as a dutiful heir instrumental in naval victories like the 1672 Battle of Solebay; by Charles's death on 6 February 1685, James's position appeared unassailable, with no viable exclusion enacted.[49] This episode highlighted causal divides: empirical fears of popery drove exclusionists, yet Charles's pragmatic absolutism and plot failures preserved Stuart legitimacy against parliamentary overreach.Reign
Accession and Early Governance
Charles II died on 6 February 1685 without legitimate issue, leading to the immediate accession of his brother James, Duke of York, as James II of England and Ireland and James VII of Scotland.[12] The transition occurred peacefully, bolstered by James's military experience and the existence of standing armies totaling nearly 20,000 men, which provided a firm foundation for his authority despite widespread awareness of his Catholic faith.[12] On 7 February, James addressed the Privy Council, declaring his intent to emulate Charles II's governance, particularly in exercising clemency and tenderness toward his subjects, while emphasizing continuity in policy.[50] James's coronation took place on 23 April 1685 at Westminster Abbey, where he was anointed and crowned alongside his second wife, Mary of Modena, in a ceremony adhering to traditional Anglican rites despite his personal Catholicism.[2] The event included a grand banquet in Westminster Hall, underscoring the pomp of Restoration monarchy, though underlying religious tensions persisted among Protestant elites.[51] In early May 1685, James convened his first Parliament, which proved predominantly Tory and loyal, granting him generous revenues including an estimated £600,000 annually for life—far exceeding Charles II's settlements—reflecting initial broad support across political factions.[5] James assured legislators of his commitment to upholding the Church of England as the established religion and refraining from arbitrary innovations, statements intended to mitigate fears of Catholic dominance; however, his administration soon appointed Catholics to military and advisory roles, signaling early deviations from these assurances that would strain relations.[52] This period of apparent stability was tested by the outbreak of the Monmouth Rebellion in June 1685, which James moved decisively to suppress, leveraging his forces to reassert control.[52]Pursuit of Religious Toleration
Upon ascending the throne in February 1685, James II initially sought accommodation with the Church of England, appointing Anglican clergy and avoiding overt Catholic favoritism in governance.[12] However, tensions arose from his insistence on commissioning Catholic officers in the army and navy, which violated the Test Act of 1673 requiring officeholders to receive Anglican communion and deny transubstantiation.[5] By 1686, facing resistance from Anglican-dominated institutions, James shifted strategy to court Protestant dissenters—such as Presbyterians, Baptists, and Quakers—by easing enforcement of the penal laws against their nonconformity, aiming to build a coalition against the Anglican establishment to repeal restrictive statutes like the Test and Corporation Acts.[53] On 4 April 1687, James issued the Declaration of Indulgence, a royal proclamation suspending all penal laws enforcing attendance at Church of England services or reception of Anglican sacraments, as mandated by the Act of Uniformity of 1662.[54] The declaration permitted private worship for those declining Anglican communion and allowed public worship by groups other than Quakers (who were excluded due to their refusal of oaths), effectively granting de facto toleration to Catholics, Protestant nonconformists, and potentially other minorities including Jews and Muslims, though enforcement focused on Christians.[55] Intended as temporary, it was designed to pave the way for parliamentary repeal of the penal code, with James explicitly stating it would persist until Parliament convened to enact permanent reforms.[56] This use of the royal dispensing power bypassed statutory requirements, reflecting James's belief in monarchical prerogative to mitigate religious strife, though critics viewed it as an overreach undermining parliamentary sovereignty.[5] To secure a compliant Parliament, James in October 1687 directed lords lieutenant to canvass county gentry and officeholders with three questions: whether they would support candidates favoring liberty of conscience by repealing penal laws, repeal the Test Act to allow nonconformists in office, and elect MPs independent of religious tests.[57] Returns showed mixed support, with many Anglicans refusing endorsement, revealing the limits of James's alliance-building; dissenters, while benefiting from relaxed prosecutions, remained suspicious of Catholic ascendancy and preferred preserving Anglican dominance as a bulwark against popery.[58] James also permitted Catholic chapels at royal palaces, mass in barracks, and the construction of Catholic schools, while disbanding the Ecclesiastical Commission in 1686 after it clashed with bishops over these indulgences.[12] In April 1688, James reissued the Declaration, extending its terms and ordering its reading from Anglican pulpits on two successive Sundays to publicize the policy.[53] This provoked the Petition of the Seven Bishops, who objected to the mandate as contrary to law and potentially endorsing Catholic doctrine; their trial for seditious libel in June 1688, though acquittal, galvanized opposition by framing James's toleration as a veiled Catholic power grab rather than genuine pluralism.[5] James's efforts, rooted in his personal Catholic conviction and pragmatic politics, failed to reconcile factions, as empirical resistance from Anglican elites—evident in low canvass compliance rates—underscored causal barriers: entrenched Protestant fears of absolutism outweighed benefits to dissenters, who numerically lacked leverage without Anglican buy-in.[59]Military Reforms and Defense Policies
Upon his accession in February 1685, James II inherited a modest standing army primarily composed of a few regiments of foot and horse, totaling around five regiments of infantry and one of cavalry in England.[60] Drawing on his extensive prior experience as Lord High Admiral and commander in the Anglo-Dutch Wars, he prioritized military strengthening to safeguard the realm against internal dissent and external threats, expanding the forces across England, Scotland, and Ireland fourfold by 1688 through recruitment and organizational measures.[61] The Monmouth Rebellion of 1685 provided the immediate catalyst for expansion; following its decisive suppression at the Battle of Sedgemoor on 6 July 1685, James more than doubled the English standing army's size to approximately 20,000 men, integrating professional soldiers while emphasizing discipline and loyalty.[3] [12] This growth, funded partly through parliamentary grants and royal revenues, aimed to create a reliable instrument for maintaining public order, surpassing the limited capabilities under Charles II, and included the establishment of training camps such as the annual reviews at Hounslow Heath starting in 1685, where up to 15,000-20,000 troops drilled under royal supervision to foster professionalism and deter urban unrest near London.[3] [62] A key reform involved officer appointments, where James bypassed the Test Acts—requiring Protestant oaths—by commissioning Roman Catholic officers deemed loyal and experienced, particularly after the 1685 rebellions, to counter perceived disaffection among Protestant ranks.[12] [3] This included purges, such as in the Irish Army under Richard Talbot, Earl of Tyrconnel, and instances like the dismissal of six officers at Portsmouth in September 1688 for resisting Catholic recruits, reflecting a policy of centralizing command under trusted personnel amid fears of treason.[3] Concurrently, James neglected the traditional militia, reorganizing its command structure by removing uncooperative lords lieutenant and deputy lieutenants, which disorganized local forces and shifted reliance to the standing army for policing and rapid response.[63] Defense policies emphasized proactive deterrence, with the enlarged army deployed to influence elections—such as stationing dragoons in Gloucester in October 1686—and to merge unofficially the forces of the three kingdoms for unified control, while maintaining naval readiness inherited from his admiralty tenure, including preparations against potential continental incursions by 1688.[3] These measures, though effective in quelling immediate threats like the simultaneous Argyll Rising in Scotland, prioritized absolutist efficiency over parliamentary traditions, viewing a professional standing force as essential for monarchical stability in an era of religious and factional volatility.[63]Suppression of Rebellions
Upon James II's accession on 6 February 1685, coordinated rebellions challenging his legitimacy emerged in England and Scotland, driven by Protestant fears of Catholic influence and exclusionist sentiments from the prior crisis. In England, James Scott, Duke of Monmouth—Charles II's illegitimate son—landed at Lyme Regis, Dorset, on 11 June 1685 with approximately 82 supporters, proclaiming himself king on the basis of alleged Protestant precedence and rumors of James's marriage invalidity.[64] He rapidly recruited around 4,000 poorly equipped volunteers from the West Country, attempting unsuccessfully to seize Bristol before withdrawing to Bridgwater, Somerset.[65] Royal forces, comprising about 3,000 professional soldiers inherited from Charles II supplemented by militia, advanced under Louis Duras, 2nd Earl of Feversham, with key subordinates including John Churchill and Percy Kirke. On 6 July 1685, Monmouth's nocturnal assault on the royal encampment at Sedgemoor ended in decisive defeat after royal artillery and disciplined infantry repelled the rebels, inflicting heavy casualties—estimated at over 1,000 rebels killed or wounded against fewer than 100 royal losses.[66] Monmouth fled but was captured near Ringwood on 8 July and beheaded on Tower Hill on 15 July 1685 following a brief imprisonment where he petitioned James for mercy, which was denied due to the treasonous nature of the uprising.[67] Concurrently in Scotland, Archibald Campbell, 9th Earl of Argyll, landed near Campbell lands in late May 1685 with Dutch-backed forces, aiming to rally Presbyterian Covenanters against James's rule but suffering from internal disarray and failure to coordinate with Monmouth. Royal troops under the Earl of Dumbarton swiftly contained the rising; Argyll was captured near Inchinnan on 18 June and executed in Edinburgh on 30 June 1685 after trial for treason.[68] To consolidate control post-defeat, James II dispatched judicial commissions led by George Jeffreys, Lord Chief Justice, initiating the "Bloody Assizes" from 25 August 1685 in Winchester and proceeding westward to Dorchester, Taunton, and Exeter. Over 1,000 rebels faced swift trials with limited defenses; approximately 315 were sentenced to death by hanging, drawing, and quartering, while around 856 able-bodied men received transportation to the West Indies or American colonies as indentured laborers, with women and elderly often whipped or imprisoned.[69][70] James endorsed these measures as necessary deterrents against sedition, personally reviewing pardons for about 400 but upholding executions to underscore the peril of rebellion, thereby restoring order without further major unrest during the initial phase of his reign.[68]Use of Royal Prerogatives: Dispensing and Suspending Powers
James II employed the royal dispensing power to grant individual exemptions from statutes such as the Test Acts, which required officeholders to swear allegiance to the Church of England and deny transubstantiation, thereby enabling the appointment of Catholics to military commissions and civil positions despite parliamentary prohibitions.[5] This practice intensified after 1685, with over 300 Catholic officers commissioned in the army by 1688, reflecting James's aim to integrate Catholic loyalists into the state apparatus amid perceived Protestant disloyalty during earlier plots.[52] Contemporaries, including Anglican clergy and MPs, viewed these dispensations as subverting legally enacted religious tests, arguing that the king lacked authority to override acts of Parliament without consent, a position rooted in precedents like the 1663 Case of the Bakers where dispensing was limited to minor infractions.[71] More controversially, James invoked the suspending power—a prerogative allowing temporary halt of laws without parliamentary approval—to issue the Declaration of Indulgence on April 4, 1687, which universally suspended penal laws enforcing conformity to the Church of England, extending toleration to both Catholic recusants and Protestant dissenters.[5] The declaration explicitly stated that "the penal laws which require conformity to the Church of England" were "suspended," permitting private Catholic worship and nonconformist assemblies, motivated by James's conviction that such measures would foster loyalty and undermine Anglican monopoly, as evidenced by his earlier overtures to dissenters during the Exclusion Crisis.[52] While some nonconformists initially welcomed the relief—leading to increased conventicle meetings—Anglican leaders protested that suspension encroached on legislative sovereignty, citing historical rejections like Charles II's 1672 indulgence, which Parliament forced to be withdrawn via the Test Act of 1673.[5] In April 1688, James reissued the declaration and mandated its reading from all Anglican pulpits over two Sundays, escalating tensions as seven bishops petitioned against the order, claiming it promoted "popery" and lacked legal basis.[52] Their trial for seditious libel on June 29-30, 1688, resulted in acquittal amid public jubilation, highlighting widespread elite opposition to the suspending power's use, which was seen not merely as indulgent but as a prelude to Catholic dominance, given James's simultaneous purges of non-compliant magistrates and university fellows.[71] These actions, while defended by James as exercises of ancient prerogative for the realm's welfare, alienated the Anglican establishment and fueled invitations to William of Orange, culminating in the 1689 Bill of Rights' explicit abolition of both dispensing and suspending powers without parliamentary sanction.[5]Birth of the Prince of Wales and Dynastic Crisis
Mary of Modena, James II's second wife, had endured multiple miscarriages and stillbirths in prior years, but her pregnancy in 1688 was publicly announced earlier that year, prompting special prayers in Anglican churches for the safe delivery of an heir.[72] On June 10, 1688 (Old Style), at St. James's Palace in London, she went into labor, and the birth chamber was filled with an unprecedented number of witnesses, including Protestant peers such as the Duchess of Northumberland, physicians, and privy council members, to ensure transparency amid growing political tensions.[73] [74] The child, a healthy boy named James Francis Edward, was delivered after a prolonged labor, immediately presented to those present, and baptized Catholic three days later, securing the prospect of a Catholic succession that displaced James's Protestant daughters, Mary and Anne, from the immediate line of inheritance.[75] [3] Despite the corroboration from dozens of attendants who signed affidavits attesting to the natural birth, rumors swiftly proliferated among Protestant elites and Whig propagandists that the infant was supposititious—a substitute smuggled into the bedchamber in a warming pan after a stillborn child, orchestrated by James II to impose a Catholic dynasty.[76] [77] These claims gained traction due to prior skepticism about Modena's pregnancies, including allegations from Princess Anne of a false pregnancy, and were amplified by anti-Catholic fears stoked by James's religious policies, though no empirical evidence of fraud emerged and the logistical improbability of substituting a living child under such scrutiny undermines the tale's credibility.[78] [79] James II countered by issuing a detailed maie (official bulletin) of the birth, publishing witness testimonies and council oaths, and creating the boy Prince of Wales in July, but these measures only intensified suspicions among opponents who viewed them as Jesuitical deceptions.[73] [80] The prince's birth transformed latent discontent into an acute dynastic crisis, as it dashed hopes that the throne would revert to Protestant hands via Mary or Anne upon James's death, prompting seven influential peers to issue the Invitation to William of Orange in early June—coinciding with the delivery—and accelerating his invasion fleet's preparations.[81] [82] Whig historiography, dominant in 19th-century accounts like Macaulay's, framed the scandal as probable fact to legitimize the Revolution, reflecting a bias toward portraying James as duplicitous while overlooking the political incentives for fabrication amid widespread establishment Protestantism; contemporary Catholic and neutral observers, however, affirmed the birth's legitimacy based on direct testimonies, highlighting how causal fears of absolutist popery, rather than verifiable imposture, drove the upheaval.[73] [76]Invasion, Deposition, and Alternative Perspectives on the "Glorious Revolution"
In June 1688, seven prominent English figures, known as the Immortal Seven, secretly invited William, Prince of Orange and stadtholder of the Dutch Republic, to intervene against James II's rule, citing concerns over the king's Catholic policies and the birth of a Catholic heir.[83] William, motivated by strategic interests against Louis XIV of France and assurances of Protestant support, assembled a fleet of approximately 463 ships and an army of about 15,000 men, departing the Netherlands in late October.[84] Despite adverse winds delaying the voyage, William's forces landed unopposed at Brixham in Torbay, Devon, on 5 November 1688 (Old Style), where he issued a declaration promising to uphold Protestantism and convene a free parliament.[85] James II mobilized an army of around 25,000, initially outnumbering the invaders, and advanced westward, but suffered critical setbacks from mass desertions among his officers and troops, including key figures like John Churchill and James's own son-in-law, Prince George of Denmark.[86] Morale collapsed amid rumors of further defections and the spread of William's propaganda portraying James as a papist tyrant intent on absolutism. Without significant combat—limited to minor skirmishes—James retreated to London, then to Rochester, discarding the Great Seal of the Realm into the River Medway on 11 December 1688 (Old Style) as a symbolic act of dissolution. He fled to France, arriving at Ambleteuse on 23 December, effectively abandoning his throne. A Convention Parliament convened in January 1689, declaring James's flight an abdication due to his breach of the social contract and offering the crowns jointly to William III and Mary II, James's Protestant daughter, conditional on acceptance of the Bill of Rights, which curtailed royal prerogatives like suspending laws.[85] This settlement passed with support from Whig and Tory elements fearing Catholic succession more than James's brief reign, though non-jurors and Jacobites rejected it as illegal, arguing no king could abdicate unilaterally without consent. The traditional narrative, epitomized in Thomas Babington Macaulay's 19th-century History of England, frames the events as a "Glorious Revolution"—a bloodless, consensual triumph of constitutional liberty, parliamentary sovereignty, and Protestantism over arbitrary rule, crediting it with establishing limited monarchy. However, revisionist historians, such as J.R. Jones, contend it was less a popular uprising than an oligarchic coup orchestrated by elite interests to safeguard property and exclude Catholics from power, with minimal broad public mobilization and reliant on foreign military intervention rather than domestic revolution.[87] Critics like Angus Donald highlight the treachery of defections and the invited invasion as undermining claims of glory, portraying it as a pragmatic power shift driven by dynastic anxieties post the June 1688 birth of James Francis Edward Stuart, rather than systemic tyranny, given James's actual policies of religious toleration via declarations that eased penalties on nonconformists.[88] Jacobite perspectives, echoed in later assessments, view the deposition as a usurpation violating hereditary right and divine monarchy, with James retaining significant loyalty among the populace and military until elite betrayal, and the "abdication" fiction masking parliamentary overreach.[89] These alternatives underscore how Whig historiography, often privileged in academic traditions despite its partisan origins, minimized the event's coercive elements and foreign agency while exaggerating its transformative consent-based nature.Post-Deposition Efforts
Irish Campaign and Williamite War
![The Battle of the Boyne, painting by Jan van Huchtenburgh]float-right Following his deposition in the Glorious Revolution, James II sought to reclaim his throne by leveraging support in Catholic-majority Ireland, where Richard Talbot, Earl of Tyrconnell, had raised an army of approximately 25,000 Irish Catholic soldiers by early 1689.[90] On 12 March 1689, James landed at Kinsale with 6,000 French troops provided by Louis XIV, marking the start of his Irish campaign amid the broader Williamite War, which lasted until October 1691.[91] He quickly advanced to Dublin, where he established a Patriot Parliament that repealed anti-Catholic legislation and confiscated Protestant estates, aiming to consolidate Jacobite control.[92] Initial Jacobite efforts faltered at the Siege of Derry, beginning 18 April 1689, where Williamite defenders under Protestant apprentices held out against James's forces until relieved in August, preventing consolidation in Ulster.[93] James's army, comprising inexperienced Irish recruits supplemented by French regulars, faced logistical challenges and desertions, while William III prepared a multinational force including English, Scottish, Dutch, and Danish troops. By June 1690, William landed at Carrickfergus with around 35,000 men, outnumbering James's 23,000 positioned along the River Boyne south of Dublin.[90] The Battle of the Boyne on 1 July 1690 (Old Style) saw William's forces cross the river under artillery cover, overwhelming James's center despite fierce resistance from Irish infantry; James, observing from a safe distance, fled to Dublin and then to France upon hearing of the defeat, abandoning his troops and contributing to morale collapse.[94] Casualties were light—about 2,000 Jacobites and 750 Williamites killed—but the battle's psychological impact favored William, who advanced to Dublin without further major opposition. Patrick Sarsfield emerged as the key Jacobite commander, conducting guerrilla actions like the destruction of William's siege train at Ballymore in August 1690.[95] Jacobite resistance persisted into 1691, with French reinforcements under the Comte de Lauzun arriving too late to alter the strategic balance. Godert de Ginkel's Williamite army besieged Limerick in August-September 1691, where 14,000 defenders under Sarsfield repelled assaults but faced starvation and disease; a failed sortie led to negotiations.[96] The Treaty of Limerick, signed 3 October 1691, allowed Jacobite soldiers to depart for France in the Flight of the Wild Geese or receive protection if swearing allegiance to William and Mary, though its civil articles promising religious toleration were later violated by Parliament, entrenching Protestant ascendancy.[97] James's campaign ultimately failed due to superior Williamite resources, his own premature departure, and limited French commitment amid the Nine Years' War in Europe.[98]Jacobite Mobilizations and Continental Support
Upon his arrival in France on 15 December 1688, James II received immediate refuge from Louis XIV, who hosted him at the Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye from January 1689 onward, providing a substantial pension initially amounting to 40,000 livres annually, later increased.[99] Louis XIV's support stemmed from both personal alliance—having been godfather to James's son—and strategic calculations to undermine William III, England's new ruler and a key opponent in the Nine Years' War (1688–1697), by maintaining the threat of Stuart restoration to divert British resources.[100] Jacobite mobilization in Scotland began in 1689, independent of but coordinated with James's Irish efforts, when John Graham, Viscount Dundee, raised the standard for James on 16 April at Dalcomera in the Highlands, rallying approximately 2,000 clansmen against Williamite forces. Dundee's forces achieved a decisive victory at the Battle of Killiecrankie on 27 July 1689, routing a larger government army led by Hugh MacKay, though at the cost of heavy casualties and Dundee's own death from wounds sustained in the fighting.[101] The rising faltered thereafter due to leadership vacuum and government reinforcements, culminating in defeat at the Battle of Dunkeld on 21 August 1689 and full suppression by spring 1690, failing to secure a foothold for James despite initial successes.[101] Continental backing extended to naval operations in 1692, when Louis XIV dispatched a fleet of 44 ships of the line under Admiral Anne Hilarion de Tourville from Brest on 17 May to escort an invasion force intended to land James II with 14 battalions of troops on England's southwest coast, aiming to exploit discontent and restore him amid the ongoing war. James accompanied the expedition, embarking on the ship Loyal, but the Anglo-Dutch fleet intercepted at Barfleur on 19–24 May (O.S.), inflicting severe damage on 15 French vessels; retreating ships were subsequently destroyed at La Hogue between 29 May and 2 June (O.S.), thwarting the landing and ending French hopes of direct invasion support for James during his lifetime.[102] [103] Throughout the 1690s, James's court at Saint-Germain-en-Laye served as a hub for Jacobite exiles, including Irish officers forming regiments in French service, while agents in England orchestrated conspiracies such as the 1696 assassination plot against William III, involving figures like Sir John Fenwick, who planned to seize Portsmouth and proclaim James upon the king's death; the scheme was exposed, leading to executions and further discrediting overt Jacobite action.[104] These efforts yielded no territorial gains, constrained by French war priorities and British vigilance, with James's direct involvement limited after 1692 as Louis prioritized continental campaigns.[105]Final Exile, Death, and Succession
Following his defeat at the Battle of the Boyne on July 1, 1690, James retreated permanently to France, where Louis XIV granted him residence at the Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye near Paris.[106] There, he established a modest court in exile, supported by French subsidies, and devoted himself to religious devotion, penance, and intermittent schemes for restoration, though active military efforts waned after 1690.[107] His life at Saint-Germain was marked by austerity, contrasting his earlier royal pomp, as he focused on Catholic piety amid declining hopes of regaining the throne.[108] James died on September 16, 1701 (New Style), at age 67, from a cerebral hemorrhage at the château.[6] His body was interred in the Church of the English Benedictines in Paris, but the tomb was desecrated during the French Revolution in 1793.[2] His heart, removed post-mortem, was enshrined in a silver-gilt locket presented to Louis XIV and later transferred to the Scots College (now English College) in Paris for safekeeping.[109] In Jacobite eyes, James's legitimate son and heir, James Francis Edward Stuart (born June 10, 1688), immediately succeeded him as James III of England and VIII of Scotland upon his father's death.[75] Louis XIV promptly recognized the young prince as the rightful king, affirming the Stuart male-line succession against the Protestant parliamentary settlement that excluded Catholics..aspx) This claim persisted through Jacobite supporters, viewing it as the lawful continuation of the monarchy deposed in 1688, though it received no domestic English or Scottish recognition beyond exile circles.[75]Legacy and Assessment
Constitutional and Monarchical Impacts
James II's employment of the royal dispensing power to exempt Catholics from the Test Acts and his issuance of the Declaration of Indulgence on April 4, 1687, which suspended penal laws against nonconformists and Catholics without parliamentary consent, provoked widespread opposition as an unconstitutional extension of prerogative authority.[5] [110] These actions, justified by James under longstanding legal precedents like the Godden v. Hales ruling of 1686, were viewed by parliamentary leaders and the Church of England as subverting statutory law and threatening Protestant establishment, culminating in the acquittal of the Seven Bishops on June 30, 1688, after their trial for seditious libel.[81] The deposition of James in December 1688 and the subsequent Convention Parliament's Declaration of Right, enacted as the Bill of Rights on December 16, 1689, explicitly condemned his suspending and dispensing powers as illegal, prohibiting their future use without parliamentary approval and abolishing the suspending power outright.[111] [112] Additional provisions barred standing armies in peacetime without consent, required parliamentary approval for taxation and expenditures, guaranteed frequent parliaments, free elections, and freedom of speech therein, and forbade excessive bail, fines, or cruel punishments, thereby codifying limits on monarchical authority and affirming parliamentary sovereignty in legislative matters.[111] These measures shifted the balance of power, rendering the crown reliant on parliamentary grants for revenue and military maintenance, and establishing that no monarch could alter laws unilaterally. On the monarchical front, the Bill of Rights settled the succession on William III and Mary II, then Anne, explicitly excluding Catholics from the throne and requiring future monarchs to pledge in their coronation oath to uphold Protestantism and parliamentary statutes, effectively subordinating divine right claims to contractual governance.[112] This precedent of parliamentary intervention in succession—framed as James's flight constituting abdication—undermined absolute hereditary legitimacy, fostering a constitutional framework where the crown's tenure depended on legislative consent, though revisionist analyses contend this entrenched aristocratic oligarchy and religious exclusion rather than universal liberty, as James's broader toleration efforts were rejected in favor of selective Protestant relief under the 1689 Toleration Act.[113] [114] The resulting system prioritized stability through Protestant exclusion over James's vision of prerogative-driven religious accommodation, influencing subsequent developments like the Act of Settlement in 1701.[115]Jacobitism, Pretenders, and Hanoverian Settlement
Jacobitism emerged as a political movement dedicated to restoring James II of England and his legitimate heirs to the thrones of England, Scotland, and Ireland following his deposition in the Glorious Revolution of 1688.[105] Supporters, known as Jacobites—derived from the Latin Jacobus for James—viewed the revolution as an illegal usurpation and maintained allegiance to the Stuart dynasty, emphasizing divine right monarchy and opposition to the Protestant settlement imposed by William III and Mary II.[104] The movement drew significant backing from Catholic sympathizers, Highland clans in Scotland, and some Tory elements in England disillusioned with the Hanoverian succession, though its strength waned over time due to repeated military failures and legal entrenchment of Protestant rule.[116] Central to Jacobitism were the Stuart pretenders who claimed the throne in exile. James Francis Edward Stuart, born on 10 June 1688 as the son of James II and Mary of Modena, became the primary claimant upon his father's death on 16 September 1701, styling himself James III of England and VIII of Scotland, though derisively called the "Old Pretender" by opponents.[117] Smuggled out of England as an infant during the revolution, he resided primarily in France at Saint-Germain-en-Laye, where Louis XIV recognized him as king, and later attempted invasions, including a failed landing in Scotland in 1708 and brief involvement in the 1715 rising before withdrawing to France.[118] His son, Charles Edward Stuart (1720–1788), known as the "Young Pretender" or Bonnie Prince Charlie, led the most ambitious Jacobite effort in 1745, raising the standard at Glenfinnan on 19 August and advancing to Derby in England before retreating due to lack of broader support.[119] Jacobite risings posed intermittent threats to the post-revolution regime, with major uprisings in 1715—sparked by the death of Queen Anne and George I's accession—and 1745. The 1715 rebellion, led by John Erskine, Earl of Mar, mobilized around 10,000 Highlanders but ended in government victories at Preston on 12 November and the inconclusive Battle of Sheriffmuir, resulting in over 1,000 Jacobite prisoners and the execution of key leaders.[105] The 1745 rising saw Charles Edward's forces defeat Hanoverian troops at Prestonpans and Carlisle but culminate in decisive defeat at Culloden on 16 April 1746, where government artillery and disciplined infantry under the Duke of Cumberland overwhelmed the Jacobite army, leading to approximately 1,500 casualties and the dispersal of survivors.[120] These failures, compounded by French support that proved unreliable, eroded Jacobite momentum.[121] The Hanoverian settlement, formalized by the Act of Settlement passed on 12 June 1701, directly countered Stuart claims by excluding Catholics from the throne and designating the Protestant Electress Sophia of Hanover—granddaughter of James I—as heir after William III and Anne's lines, should they fail.[115] This parliamentary statute ensured succession passed to Sophia's son George I upon Anne's death on 1 August 1714, bypassing over 50 closer Catholic relatives including James Francis Edward, while mandating royal adherence to the Church of England and judicial independence.[122] By embedding the monarchy within Protestant constitutional limits and diminishing divine right pretensions, the act solidified Hanoverian rule, rendering Jacobitism a fringe cause after Culloden's suppression, which included the abolition of heritable jurisdictions in Scotland in 1747 and bans on tartans and arms to dismantle clan structures.[120] Jacobitism persisted culturally into the 18th century but ceased as a viable political force, with the last pretender, Henry Benedict Stuart, converting to Catholicism and accepting a cardinalate in 1747, effectively ending dynastic ambitions.[105]Historiographical Evolution and Debunking Whig Narratives
The historiographical portrayal of James II's reign was long dominated by the Whig narrative, which depicted him as a despotic Catholic monarch bent on imposing absolutism and undermining Protestant constitutionalism through policies like the suspension of penal laws and promotion of co-religionists in office and the military. This view, most influentially articulated by Thomas Babington Macaulay in his History of England from the Accession of James the Second (1848–1861), framed the events of 1688 as a triumphant, bloodless assertion of parliamentary sovereignty and religious liberty against royal tyranny, embedding a teleological progress toward modern liberalism in historical consciousness.[123] Whig accounts, rooted in the post-Revolution Protestant establishment's need to legitimize the Hanoverian settlement, often exaggerated James's intentions as existential threats, reflecting systemic anti-Catholic prejudices rather than dispassionate analysis of his pragmatic governance.[89] Twentieth-century revisionism began eroding this framework, with historians like J.P. Kenyon emphasizing that Stuart monarchs, including James, operated within longstanding prerogative traditions rather than pursuing continental-style absolutism, which English institutions and fiscal realities precluded. Evidence from James's reign shows his Declarations of Indulgence (1687–1688) extended toleration to Protestant dissenters as well as Catholics, aiming to broaden political support amid exclusionary Anglican dominance, not to dismantle parliamentary authority outright.[124] Scott Sowerby's examination of primary sources, including James's personal diary entries equating religious and racial intolerance, reveals a genuine commitment to pluralism—more advanced than contemporaries like John Locke—evidenced by his advocacy for persecuted Quakers and collaboration with William Penn to secure their relief.[125] This challenges the Whig assertion of feigned toleration masking Catholic hegemony, highlighting instead James's strategic response to religious divisions that had fueled civil wars.[125] Further debunking portrays the Glorious Revolution not as a popular or inevitable milestone of liberty, but as a contingent elite maneuver—facilitated by foreign invasion and James's military miscalculations—driven by dynastic anxieties over his newborn Catholic heir and entrenched anti-Popery, rather than systemic constitutional crisis. Tim Harris's analysis underscores the interplay of absolutist tendencies with toleration efforts, noting resistance stemmed from fears of Catholic influence amid broader European conflicts, not abstract defense of ancient rights.[126] Catholic historians like Hilaire Belloc, in James the Second (1928), explicitly countered Whig distortions by documenting James's naval prowess—such as victories predating 1688—and portraying his deposition as a betrayal of monarchical legitimacy, attributing biased narratives to Protestant historiographical dominance that sidelined empirical royal achievements.[127] Contemporary scholarship thus privileges causal factors like elite factionalism and religious realpolitik over Whig myth-making, revealing James as a flawed but not tyrannical ruler whose policies sought stabilization through inclusion, undermined by inherited prejudices and opportunistic opposition.[88]Personal and Formal Aspects
Family Tree and Issue
James II was the second surviving son of King Charles I (19 November 1600 – 30 January 1649) and Henrietta Maria of France (13 November 1609 – 31 August 1669), born at St James's Palace on 14 October 1633.[2][7] His elder brother was Charles II (29 May 1630 – 6 February 1685), who preceded him on the throne; other siblings included Elizabeth (1635–1650), Henry (1640–1660), and several who died in infancy.[7] James married Anne Hyde (12 March 1637 – 31 March 1671), daughter of Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, on 3 September 1660 in a private ceremony following her pregnancy.[4] They had eight children between 1660 and 1671, though six died in infancy or early childhood:| Name | Birth–Death | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Charles, Duke of Cambridge | 22 October 1660 – 5 May 1661 | Died aged six months.[128] |
| Mary | 30 October 1662 – 28 December 1694 | Later Queen Mary II; married her cousin William III, Prince of Orange, in 1677; no surviving issue.[129][130] |
| James, Duke of Cambridge | 12 July 1663 – 17 December 1667 | Died aged four from convulsions. |
| Charles, Duke of Kendal | 4 July 1664 – October 1664 | Died in infancy. |
| Anne | 6 February 1665 – 1 August 1714 | Later Queen Anne; married Prince George of Denmark in 1683; 17 pregnancies but no surviving legitimate issue.[129][130] |
| Henrietta | 13 July 1669 – 21 November 1669 | Died aged four months.[131] |
| Henry, Duke of Kendal | 1670 – 1670 | Stillborn or died immediately. |
| Catherine | February 1671 – 1671 | Died shortly after birth; mother died weeks later of breast cancer.[131][130] |
| Name | Birth–Death | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Catherine Laura | 10 January 1675 – 3 October 1675 | Died aged nine months.[133] |
| Isabella | 28 August 1676 – 2 March 1681 | Died aged four from convulsions.[133] |
| Charles, Duke of Cambridge | 18 July 1677 – 1677 | Twin who died in infancy. |
| James Francis Edward | 10 June 1688 – 1 January 1766 | Known as the Old Pretender; proclaimed heir but birth sparked legitimacy rumors; exiled Jacobite claimant.[132] |
| Louisa Maria | 28 June 1692 – 18 February 1712 | Died of smallpox aged 19; no issue.[133] |
Titles, Styles, Honours, and Arms
James was styled Duke of York from birth on 14 October 1633 as the second surviving son of King Charles I.[1] He was formally created Duke of York and Earl of Ulster in the Peerage of Ireland on 6 January 1644. Following the Restoration, on 31 December 1660, he received the additional Scottish title of Duke of Albany.[134] Upon the death of his brother Charles II on 6 February 1685, James acceded to the thrones as James II of England and Ireland and James VII of Scotland.[4] His full regal style was "James the Second, by the Grace of God, King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith."[135] This incorporated the traditional Angevin claim to the French throne alongside the realms over which he directly ruled. In official documents, he was addressed as "His Majesty" or "His Sacred Majesty."[136] After his deposition in 1688, Jacobite supporters continued to recognize and style him as king in exile until his death on 6 September 1701 (O.S.).[137] James's principal honour was membership in the Order of the Garter, into which he was invested as a child in 1642 and later served as a knight during his time as Duke of York.[138] As king, he appointed new knights to the order, including the Duke of Norfolk in May 1685.[139] In 1687, he formally revived and established the Order of the Thistle for Scotland, rewarding service to the Crown despite its informal existence since 1603.[140] As Duke of York, James's coat of arms consisted of the royal arms of England (grandquartered with France) differenced by a label of three points argent for the second son of the sovereign, the central point often charged with an anchor azure reflecting his role as Lord High Admiral.[141] Upon accession, he assumed the undifferenced royal arms: quarterly, first and fourth grandquarters combining azure three fleurs-de-lis or (France ancient) and gules three lions passant guardant in pale or armed and langued azure (England); second quarter or a lion rampant gules within a double tressure flory-counterflory of the second (Scotland); third quarter azure a harp or stringed argent (Ireland), the whole ensigned by a royal crown.[142] These arms symbolized dominion over the claimed territories and were carved in wood for naval and public displays, often in the elaborate style associated with Grinling Gibbons.[143]| Period | Principal Titles |
|---|---|
| 1633–1644 | Duke of York (by courtesy) |
| 1644–1685 | Duke of York; Earl of Ulster; Duke of Albany (from 1660) |
| 1685–1701 | James II, King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland; James VII, King of Scots |
