William III was born on 4th November 1650. A Dutchman by birth, part of the House of Orange, he would later reign as King of England, Scotland and Ireland until his death in 1702.
Title King William III, crossing the Boyne July 1st 1690 Summary Print shows King William III, full-length portrait, seated on horseback, facing slightly left, with right hand raised, holding sword, on the shore of the Boyne, leading attack. William Hill born May 16, 1753 in King William County, Virginia. James Hill born March 11, 1755 in King William County, Virginia. Elizabeth Hill born February 2, 1756 in King William County, Virginia. ROBERT HILL born February 5, 1758 in King William County, Virginia died January 15, 1822 married REBECCA CALDWELL on June 7, 1787. Historical events from year 1690. Learn about 25 famous, scandalous and important events that happened in 1690 or search by date or keyword.
William’s reign came at a precarious time in Europe when religious divide dominated international relations. William would emerge as an important Protestant figurehead; the Orange Order in Northern Ireland is named after him. His victory at the Battle of Boyne on 12th July is still celebrated by many in Northern Ireland, Canada and parts of Scotland.
The Battle of Boyne, by Jan van Huchtenburg
William’s story begins in the Dutch Republic. Born in November in The Hague he was the only child of William II, Prince of Orange and his wife Mary, who also happened to be the eldest daughter of King Charles I of England, Scotland and Ireland. Unfortunately, William’s father, the prince, died two weeks before he was born, resulting in him assuming the title of Prince of Orange from birth.
As a young man growing up, he received tutelage from various governesses and later received lessons daily from a Calvinist preacher called Cornelis Trigland. These lessons instructed him as to the destiny he must fulfil as part of Divine Providence. William had been born into royalty and had a role to fulfil.
When William was only ten years old, his mother died of smallpox whilst visiting her brother in England. In her will, Mary wished her brother Charles II to take care of William’s interests. This proved to be a contentious issue as his general education and upbringing was brought into question by those who supported the dynasty and others in the Netherlands who supported a more republican system.
In the years that followed, the English and Dutch would continue to jostle for influence over the young royal to the point at which during the Second Anglo-Dutch War, one of the peace conditions included an improvement in William’s position, as requested by his uncle Charles II in England.
For the young William back in the Netherlands, he was learning to be an astute autocrat, entitled to rule. His roles were two-fold; leader of the House of Orange and stadtholder, a Dutch word referring to the head of state of the Dutch Republic.
This initially proved difficult due to the Treaty of Westminster which ended the First Anglo-Dutch War. In this treaty Oliver Cromwell demanded the Act of Seclusion be passed, forbidding Holland to appoint a member of the royal House of Orange to the role of stadtholder. However, the impact of the English restoration meant that the act was voided, allowing William to attempt to once again assume the role. His first attempts to do this however proved fruitless.
William of Orange, by Johannes Voorhout
By the time he was eighteen, the Orangist party were making a concerted effort to secure William’s role as stadtholder and Captain-General, whilst the leader of the States Party, De Witt allowed for an edict which declared that the two roles could never be held by the same person in any province. Nevertheless, De Witt was unable to suppress William’s rise to power, especially when he became a member of the Council of State.
In the meantime, international conflict was brewing across the water, with Charles making an agreement with his French allies for an imminent attack on the Republic. The threat forced those in the Netherlands who had been resistant to William’s power to concede and allow him to assume the role of States General for the summer.
The year 1672 for many in the Dutch Republic proved to be devastating, so much so that it became known as the ‘Disaster Year’. This was largely due to the Franco-Dutch War and the Third Anglo-Dutch War whereby the country was invaded by France with its allies, which at the time included England, Cologne and Münster. The ensuing invasion had a great impact on the Dutch people who were appalled at the presence of a French army in the heart of their beloved Republic.
The result for many was to turn their backs on the likes of De Witt and welcome William as stadtholder on the 9th July of the same year. A month later, William published a letter from Charles which demonstrated that the English king had instigated war due to the aggression of De Witt and his men. De Witt and his brother, Cornelis were fatally attacked and murdered by civil militia loyal to the House of Orange. This allowed William to introduce his own supporters as regents. His involvement in the lynching was never fully established but his reputation was somewhat damaged by the violence and barbarity used that day.
Now in a strong position, William took control and continued to fight off the threat from the English and French. In 1677 he tried, through diplomatic measures, to improve his position through his marriage to Mary, the daughter of the Duke of York who would later become King James II. This was a tactical move which he anticipated would allow him to acquire Charles’s kingdoms in the future and both influence and redirect the French-dominated policies of the English monarchy towards a more favourable Dutch position.
A year later peace with France was declared, however William continued to maintain a mistrustful opinion of the French, joining other anti-French alliances, notably the Association League.
Meanwhile, a more pressing issue remained back in England. As a direct result of his marriage, William was emerging as a likely candidate for the English throne. The likelihood of this was strongly based on James’s Catholic faith. William issued a secret plea to Charles, asking the king to prevent a Catholic from succeeding him. This did not go down well.
James II
By 1685 James II was on the throne and William was desperately looking for ways to undermine him. He admonished James’s decision not to join the anti-French associations at the time and in an open letter to the English public he criticised James’s policy of religious toleration. This led many to subsequently oppose King James’s policy after 1685, particularly in political circles due to genuine concerns with not only his faith but his close ties to France.
James II had converted to Catholicism and had also married a Catholic princess from Italy. In Protestant majority England, concerns soon spread that any son who would succeed the throne would rule as a Catholic King. By 1688, the wheels had been set in motion and on 30th June, a group of politicians who became known as the ‘Immortal Seven’ sent William an invitation to invade. This soon became public knowledge and on 5th November 1688 William landed in the southwest of England at Brixham. Accompanying him was a fleet that was both imposing and considerably larger than the English had encountered during the Spanish Armada.
William III and Mary II, 1703
1690 King Billy's On The Wall
The ‘Glorious Revolution‘ as it became known successfully saw King James II deposed from his position with William allowing him to flee the country, keen not to see him used as a martyr for the Catholic cause.
On 2nd January 1689, William summoned a Convention Parliament which decided, through a Whig majority, that the throne was vacant and it would be safer to allow a Protestant to assume the role. William successfully ascended the throne as William III of England with his wife Mary II, who reigned as joint sovereigns until her death in December 1694. After Mary’s death William became the sole ruler and monarch.
Jessica Brain is a freelance writer specialising in history. Based in Kent and a lover of all things historical.
a talk by Gregor Kerr at WSM Open Meeting 7/7/97It is often said that history is written by the victors. It is probably more true to say however that history is written by the rulers or by those with ambition to rule. In this talk I want to look at the events of a period of Irish history which has had a profound effect on the events of the three centuries since and which is the source of many of the sectarian myths which people - especially those in the Six Counties - are still suffering the consequences of. Over three hundred years ago two contenders for the English throne fought their way around Ireland. Nationalist historians extol the virtues of the 'Patriotic' Irish forces and their French allies which fought with King James II in defence of Catholicism and Ireland. Unionist politicians and historians on the other hand praise the memory of King William of Orange and his great victory at the Battle of the Boyne in defence of 'Civil and Religious Liberty'. The truth however is vastly different.
The Orange Parades on and around the twelfth of July have long been a bone of serious contention and indeed a source of sectarian conflict in the Six Counties. Members of the Orange Order demand their unalienable right to march the Queen's highway, as their forefathers before them have done, in commemoration of the victory of King William of Orange at the battle of the Boyne - a victory (as the Orangemen see it) for religious and civil liberty. Nationalists, on the other hand, see the Orange Parades as nothing more than a coat-trailing exercise designed to keep the Catholic population in their place and to pound forward the message that Northern Ireland is an Orange state and that nationalists are and will always remain second class citizens in that state.
It is interesting in this context to look back at the events of just over 300 years ago and to analyse exactly what was involved in the war between William of Orange (King Billy as he is popularly known) and James II of England. This war - popular mythology would have us believe - was a struggle to defend the Protestant religion against the Roman Catholic Church. In reality, however, the Williamite War - in Ireland - was effectively a war between two factions for mastery over the Irish people. And far from being a war to defend Protestantism against the Catholic Church, William of Orange counted among his allies none other than the Pope of Rome - the head of the Roman Catholic Church!! The Pope and King Billy were in fact political buddies engaged in a bitter European power struggle in which Ireland's people - both Catholic and Protestant - were mere sacrificial pawns.
England - and even more so Ireland - were for William of Orange (the ruler of Holland) simply useful tools in his campaign to free Holland from French domination. James II of England had fled to France and to the protection of Louis XIV following an unsuccessful attempt to give all chief state offices in England to Catholic aristocrats. An alliance composed of wealthy landowners and merchants and the Church of England - alarmed by James' actions - invited his son-in-law, the ruler of Holland - William of Orange - to take over!
On November 5th 1688, William landed in England and James found himself deserted by his army, navy, court functionaries, the Law, the Church, the City and even his own family. Fearing for his life, he fled to France and the safety of the Court of Louis XIV. William and his wife Mary were installed as joint monarchs of England after they had agreed a Bill of Rights and an Act of Settlement (which limited the royal succession exclusively to Protestants, even marriage to a Catholic being a disqualification).
In order to understand the effects of all this on Ireland, we must first of all understand what was going on in Europe at the time. We must ask why did William, a Dutchman, come to England, and why did James seek political asylum in France? Louis XIV, autocrat of France and supreme representative of feudalism in Europe, was busily engaged at the time in spreading French dominance in the western world. In the struggle to achieve control Louis required allies, and to upset the balance of power he needed England on his side. James' flight to France was thus mutually beneficial for both the French monarch and the deposed English monarch. James saw his alliance with Louis as a means whereby he could re-establish his dominance at home whereas Louis saw the potential of a re-installed James in terms of his own efforts to dominate Europe.
William of Orange, on the other hand, was fighting for the independence of Holland against Louis and as such was very interested in having England on his side. Thus William's view of the throne of England was its usefulness in defending the national independence of Holland.
It is because William - a Protestant - came to England at the invitation of the Whigs to help them defeat James - a Catholic - that the Williamite war has since been described as a struggle to defend the Protestant religion against the Roman Catholic Church. However the historical realities of the alliances formed in Europe at the time explode this Orange-Unionist-Protestant myth. In fact Catholic Spain was one of William's main allies in the fight against the spread of French dominance. And - wait for it - the Pope - as temporal monarch of Italy - was a fervent supporter of William's claim to the English throne and a military ally in the fight against Louis and France. When William and his army arrived on English soil, he brought with him a Papal blessing and a banner proclaiming the support of Italy and the Pope!!
The maintenance of Protestant England's independence thus coincided with William's interests which in turn coincided with the interest of Catholic Spain and the Pope himself. For Ireland the story was somewhat different. Whoever won the power struggle between William and James the mass of Irish people stood to lose. The events in Ireland during James' attempts to win back the English monarchy proved that neither William and his allies, including the Pope, or James and his ally Louis XIV were in the slightest bit interested in the welfare of the Irish people.
In Ireland the accession of the Catholic James II to the throne of England had excited great interest among the Catholic landlord class. This loyalty to James was purely economic in base with many of them hoping that the Cromwellian settlements would be revoked enabling them to return to ownership of lands which they, or their ancestors had owned in pre-Cromwell times ( having, of course, robbed them from Irish people in a previous settlement). Over two-thirds of Ireland's good arable land was at the time owned by less than one-sixth of the total population, the land-owning minority being almost completely members of the Protestant landlord class. Thus the Catholic landlord class welcomed James, the Protestant landowners feared him and for the mass of Irish people whoever won nothing was likely to change.
In Ireland the struggle known as the Williamite Wars was effectively a fight between two factions of landlordism to decide which of them should have the right to exploit the Irish people. As James Connolly was to write in 'Labour in Irish History' in 1910
'Éall the political struggles of the period were built upon the material interests of one set of usurpers who wished to retain, and another who wished to obtain, the mastery of those landsÉ'
In March 1689, James II landed at Kinsale in Co. Cork with a small army comprised of French and Irish troops to launch his bid to win back the English crown. James had in fact little or no interest in Ireland but hoped to use it as a landing post to get to Scotland. On 7th May James called together a parliament to meet in Dublin - a parliament which, because it declared that the English parliament was incompetent to pass laws for Ireland, was to become known as the 'Patriot Parliament'.
The extent of the parliament's 'patriotism' soon became clear however. The problems of the Irish people as a whole were ignored completely as this parliament quickly set about the task of attempting to secure ownership of the lands of Ireland for the landlords assembled in parliament and to prevent further displacement by other adventurers from England. The landlord class who controlled the parliament used the occasion to carve up Ireland for themselves, ignoring the mass of people and leaving them landless. To quote Connolly again:
'The so-called Patriot Parliament was in reality, like every other that sat in Dublin, merely a collection of land thieves and their lackeys; their patriotism consisted in an effort to retain for themselves the spoils of the native peasantry; the English influence against which they protested was the influence of their fellow thieves in England hungry for a share of the spoilÉ'
William of Orange sent his first battalion of troops to Ireland on August 13th 1689 and William himself arrived over on 14th June 1690. With an army of 36,000 men he left Belfast on the march to Dublin. Despite the myth, the actual Battle of the Boyne was of little significance as it did not end the war. Indeed we should also remember that, despite the fact that he was supposedly fighting for England and Protestantism, the English parliament was extremely reluctant to give William the army he needed to conquer Ireland saying that he had plenty of Dutchmen anyway. So when William did cross the Boyne on July 1st 1690, he had an army consisting of the riffraff of Europe's mercenaries. His army was made up of Dutch, Danes, Swedes, Prussians and French Huguenots plus a few English, Scottish and Ulster regiments.
William's army was slightly superior in numbers to James' and indeed the most capable soldier on James' side - Patrick Sarsfield advised against entering battle on the Boyne. James, however, overruled the advice, was overrun and beat a hasty retreat to Dublin where he immediately set sail for France, leaving the Irish people to suffer the consequences of his actions.
William's victory at the Boyne was greeted with enthusiasm in Rome. The Pope welcomed the victory of the 'European Alliance' forces and Pontifical High Mass was celebrated in thanksgiving for the deliverance from the power of the Catholic Louis XIV and the Catholic James II. Meanwhile King Billy marched on and on July 7th entered Dublin. In rapid succession Drogheda, Kilkenny and Waterford surrendered but William's troops were repulsed at Athlone.
James' army, under the command of Patrick Sarsfield had fallen back to defend the line of the River Shannon. William laid siege to the city of Limerick, and leaving his army under the command of baron de Ginkel, King Billy left for England. The war between the two armies - both of whose 'leaders' had fled the country was to continue until October 1691 with significant battles taking place at Athlone, Aughrim Galway and, of course, Limerick. On October 13th 1691 the Articles of Capitulation - to become known as the Treaty of Limerick - were signed and King Billy's victory was assured. Over 20,000 Irish men fled to France (becoming known in history as the 'Wild Geese') and entered the service of the King of France where they formed the 'Irish Brigade' and indeed it is reckoned that over the next fifty years 450,000 Irishmen died in the service of the King of France.
Thus an inglorious period of Irish history came to an end - a period around which there have been more myths propagated than Hans Christian Andersen or any other great storyteller could have dreamt of. It is a period of Irish history which the history books portray variously as a war between Protestantism and Catholicism or as one between the English King Billy and Irish patriots supported by King James II and the French. For a true perspective on these events, however, James Connolly's 'Labour in Irish History' explodes the myths and I would in conclusion like to quote extensively from it.
'It is unfortunately beyond all question that the Irish Catholics shed their blood like water and wasted their wealth like dirt in an effort to retain King James upon the throne. But it is equally beyond all question that the whole struggle was no earthly concern of theirs; that King James was one of the most worthless representatives of a race that ever sat upon the throne; that the 'pious, glorious and immortal' William was a mere adventurer fighting for his own hand, and his army recruited from the impecunious swordsmen of Europe who cared as little for Protestantism as they did for human life; and that neither army had the slightest claim to be considered as a patriot army combating for the freedom of the Irish race.'
King Billy 1690
'The war between William and James (Connolly continues) offered a splendid opportunity to the subject people of Ireland to make a bid for freedom while the forces of their oppressors were rent in civil war. The opportunity was cast aside, and the subject people took sides on behalf of the opposing factions of their enemiesÉÉÉ. The Catholic gentlemen and nobles who had the leadership of the people of Ireland at the time were, one and all, men who possessed considerable property in the country, property to which they had, notwithstanding their Catholicity, no more right to title than the merest Cromwellian or Williamite adventurer. The lands they held were lands which in former times belonged to the Irish people - in other words, they were tribe-lands.'
Finally from Connolly:
'The forces which battled beneath the walls of Derry or Limerick were not the forces of England and Ireland but were the forces of two English political parties fighting for the possession of the powers of government; and the leaders of the Irish Wild Geese on the battlefields of Europe were not shedding their blood because of their fidelity to Ireland, as our historians pretend to believe, but because they had attached themselves to the defeated side in English politics. This fact was fully illustrated by the action of the old Franco-Irish at the time of the French Revolution. They in a body volunteered into the English army to help put down the new French Republic, and as a result Europe witnessed the spectacle of the new republican Irish exiles fighting for the French Revolution, and the sons of the old aristocratic Irish exiles fighting under the banner of England to put down that Revolution. It is time we learned to appreciate and value the truth upon such matters, and to brush from our eyes the cobwebs woven across them by our ignorant or unscrupulous history-writing politicians.'