| June 10 |  |
Editor says, what if General Leslie's Scottish Covenanting Army had been crushed by Royalist forces at Duns Law (instead of disengaging to sign the Treaty of Berwick)? Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s).
| Share this Article on: |  Facebook |  Twitter |
In 1688, on this day James Francis Edward Stuart (the future monarch King James III) was born to the reigning king and his Roman Catholic second wife, Mary of Modena.
Birth of King James III
By Ed, Jeff Provine & Jared MyersThe continuing primacy of Stuart authority had been firmly established during the Bishops' War of 1639. To nip that rebellion in the bud, his grandfather Charles I had marched the English Army to the Northern Border and mercilessly crushed a larger force of Scottish Covenanters. The most significant aspects of his stoicism was an ommission; he had not troubled himself to seek the permission of both Houses of the Parliament.
But by the time he ascended the throne in 1701, the power struggle had moved on, and James III realised that the time for absolutism had well and truly passed. A bold visionary, he would drive a radical process of modernisation, devolving power not just to the Imperial Parliament, but also to the assemblies of the American Colonies. And in so doing, he would build a glorious future, protecting his grandfather's colourful legacy by ensuring that the flavour of British Society remained forever embued with the unique Scottish flamboyance of the House of Stuart.
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Alternate Historian, 2004-.Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Politicians Source: Wikipedia Labels: King James III, Stuart, Jacobite, General Leslie, Duns Law. Editor says, in authoring this article we explore a central idea proposed by Niall Ferguson in "A Virtual History, 1646-1996". We have also repurpose content from Wikipedia. The central concept is that backing down during the First Bishop's War was fatal for the House of Stuart.
~ But doesn't this mean no Bonnie Prince Charlie and his 1745 Highland revolt...which did so much to launch the modern war of national liberation?
~ An Act of Union probably wouldn't happen under a Stuart king, and American independence would have most likely been a peaceful (albeit belated) transition of power.
~ Wouldn't they still have found some excuse to get rid of James II? A lot of the Glorious Revolution happened because James II was so inept.
~ Seems the key to good rule is to bend to parliaments at times and crush bishops at others.
comments powered by Disqus
Related posts from the same era that you may also like
 "Nieuw-Nederland" founded by Peter Minuit |  The Foundation of "Nieuw Zwolle" and the Republic of New Holland | |
 The "Defenestration" of Prague |  March 24, 1603 - "Anne Stanley" Succeeds Elizabeth I |  Linkoping Bloodbath includes "King Sigismund" |
 Birth of "Lionel Sackville" Irish King of the Roads |  The Execution of "Robert Devereux" |  The Fortuitous Death of "Thomas Wentworth" |
_(lighter).jpg) Dutch keep control of "New Netherlands" |  "Queen Mary II" survives smallpox |  Pyrrhic Danish Victory at the "Battle of Lund" |
© Today in Alternate History, 2013-. All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
