William III

[michag]

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_III_of_England, during the reign of William III, as I believe to be the starting monarch in Brit Campagien, William III was also the Stadtholder of Holland which was the ruler of Holland (United Provinces).

So technically, Britain rules UP at the start of the camapagian. Which is incorrect form the game,.

[Yoram777]

So technically, Britain rules UP at the start of the camapagian. Which is incorrect form the game,.

Simple answer: No.. and even if it were yes, then it would be the other way around, William was a Dutchman.

(and this has been discussed on twc before)

[Tullaris]

Indeed I have argued that Britain should be a Dutch protectorate at the start of the game.

In 1688 the Dutch invaded England and put their stadholder on the throne and effectively won the Anglo-Dutch wars.

[Slaxi]

Indeed I have argued that Britain should be a Dutch protectorate at the start of the game.

In 1688 the Dutch invaded England and put their stadholder on the throne and effectively won the Anglo-Dutch wars.

Hmm, it's not quite an invasion, he was after all invited to come over by those protestants with power, who then forced him to accept parliamentary authority.

I think that an argument could be made either way as to who should be who's protectorate in game terms, but in real life neither was. They shared the same king but only foreign policy affairs were conducted jointly, so perhaps in game terms an alliance is the best representative of the state of affairs.

[Y-M4N]

Hmm, it's not quite an invasion, he was after all invited to come over by those protestants with power, who then forced him to accept parliamentary authority.

I think that an argument could be made either way as to who should be who's protectorate in game terms, but in real life neither was. They shared the same king but only foreign policy affairs were conducted jointly, so perhaps in game terms an alliance is the best representative of the state of affairs.

Exactly, and it´s important to note that the stadhouder (William III) and staten-generaal (UP parliament) had a limited amount of control over the nation. They were mainly there to deal with foreign policy, ie war and the taxes needed to wage it, with each individual province retaining control of most other areas of governance. You couldn't represent William III's split role with a protectorate or anything resembling a personal union.

[Jihada]

Rofl..the Dutch invaded England. In 1688 the British got rid of the catholic papist James II and invited the Dutch stadhouder William to take the throne as he was a protestant.There was no military campaign and it is called the Glorious Revolution ,not that there was anything particularly glorious about it. The British at the beginning of this game were defending the Dutch against the French..Marlborough in a war in the low countries.
Anyway some time after beating the Irish catholics at the Battle of the Boyne,William 's horse tripped on a mole hill and he fell off and died. So my old Irish grandfather used to drink to the 'little man in the velvet jacket' ie the mole. There was even a flower named after him Sweet William, but in Scotland and Ireland I heard they call it Stinking Billy.

[Tullaris]

Rofl..the Dutch invaded England. In 1688 the .

Actually modern historians disagree with you. The 7 nobles that invited William III were not of real importance. The decision to send an army was made in the Dutch Republic. It was an invasion in the fullest sense of the word.

The Dutch were not interested in 'conquering' England or dominating it in anyway, they only wanted to prevent another Anglo-French alliance against the Dutch Republic like in 1672.

As such once they defeated James and occupied England, they were more than happy to accept any 'parliamentary control' over domestic affairs. As long as English foreign affairs remained pro-Dutch.

What makes this so little known is a combination of British pride and Dutch propaganda. The Dutch wanted the population on their side so tried to mask it as an 'invitation' and 'friendly intervention'. Quite smart on their side.

You can read all about it here
http://books.google.com/books?id=NCv...ment#PPA108,M1

Its an influential English historian called Jonathan Israel's work on the issue. Its really a good read. Basicly the Republic took a huge gamble with the invasion. He basicly says that William III and the Dutch were by no means invited. They planned and paid for the invasion and spread 60.000 pamphlets in England to convince the English that the Dutch only came to 'help'.

[TehSuperPete]

Simple answer: No.. and even if it were yes, then it would be the other way around, William was a Dutchman.

(and this has been discussed on twc before)

The thing is, even if William III was a Dutchman, once he became King of England that was his primary title, not Stadtholder. So if anything, United Provinces should be a British Protectorate.

[Tullaris]

That's certainly not the case, because the Dutch Republic wasn't a monarchy and William III was only its stadtholder. The states-general had the power.

England in contrast was still a monarchy. Also in Dutch history/culture his title remained Stadtholder William III of Orange. So it is hard to say what his primary title really was.

Look at the facts. James II was the English king. The Dutch Republic mounted an invasion force to put its stadtholder William III on the throne. They succeeded.

The Dutch Republic and England remained seperate countries, only allied through the personal union of the Stadtholder and the King of England. Make no mistake over where William III's priorities lay: in defending the Republic (and the rest of Europe) against the evil tyrant Louis XIV.

[Gen. Discomfort]

Stadtholders were actually elected by the provinces. In theory every single province could have a different stadtholder. There were usually two stadholders. Also, again in theory, it could be anyone. It wasn't an official hereditary title through the male line until 1747, although in practice it pretty much was from the start in 1572. The most important stadtholder was always the prince of Orange and when there were two, the other one was a brother, uncle or nephew (too lazy right now to look 'em up). The title of prince was not related to the republic, it came from the sovereign princedom of Orange in southern France.

Willem III was stadholder of Holland, Zeeland, Utrecht, Gelderland and Overijssel (Friesland, Groningen and Drenthe traditionally had their own stadtholder). King of England, Scotland and Ireland. And King of France, because this was a thing the English kings did to annoy the French I guess.

The role of the stadtholder was actually quite limited. The performed a small role in the administration of the province, but their core bussiness was head of the armed forces. Provinces funded and raised their own armies, usually on request by the states general. The prince appointed officers and planned and executed military campaigns. In reality stadtholders drew a lot of power to themselves resulting in a constant struggle with the states general (but that's a opening a whole new can of worms).

Nevertheless the highest authority and souvereign power of the Republic always lay with the states general no matter how many cronies the stadtholder worked into it. So, no, the United Provinces couldn't be a vassal of England. Quite the other way around, but that would be absurd really. But the whole situation did pose quite an odd administrative reality. And it did raise some serious concern in the Republic, which was all quite elegantly resolved by a mole in Ireland.

P.S. The invasion of England was actually a full fledged naval invasion that surpassed anything the world had ever seen. It involved an incredible amount of logistical nightmares, because it involved not only the navy but a massive amount of merchant vessels. Not to mention the army itself, with it's cannons, horses and men. And was made up of most of the elite force of the Republic (too bad I've lent out the relevant book with all the numbers) and despite ETW's claims it was one of the most modern and effective forces of Europe. There are actually some descriptions left about this whole invasion from foreign officials and they all speak of the logistical genius of the Dutch and some warn their overlords to stop underestimating this strange republican anarchist rabble.

[jarnomiedema]

Rofl..the Dutch invaded England.

The Dutch fleet that sailed from Hellevoetsluis and landed on English shores was four times the size of the Spanish Armada and was actually going to be intercepted by the British navy if it hadn't been for bad wind (good wind for the Dutch). Furthermore, that same navy landed twenty-one thousand troops. In many ways you could say that constitutes an invasion; the landing of foreign troops on another country's soil.

In any case, as has been pointed out before, there's a big debate raging on to what extent the 'Glorious Revolution' was actually an invasion or not. I should know, since I actually followed a class on William III and his time as stadholder, right up to the invasion. In most cases, there seems to be a deeply national split between historians on this one: British historians refuse to see anything of an invasion in the events, whereas Dutch historians try (sometimes desperately) to prove that it was. British historians put a lot of emphasis on the invitation, which would somehow negate the fact that a Dutch army landed on British soil and succesfully helped drive out James II..

I'm happy to say that Dr. Edward Vallance, who posted the following information on the BBC History website agrees: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british...ution_03.shtml

[Tullaris]

It's interesting to see that nowadays so little Brits know that this happened! I have read several times here that '1066' was the last invasion of Britain.

[Tony83]

Here's a pretty good account of the Glorious Revolution that resulted in Britain becoming a constitutional monarchy.

[Inhuman One]

When bringing along so many troops and ships it cant be anything else than an invasion.

That the english didnt fight it doesnt mean it was not.

As for Willem III, he may have been one of the greatest rulers we had as the Dutch. Willem IV and V didnt seem to have accomplished much. The following up Willem I seemed to have been a good ruler though, but thats after this period.

[Vade101]

There was even a flower named after him Sweet William, but in Scotland and Ireland I heard they call it Stinking Billy.

Ah, not that William - the story there goes that the flower is named after William Augustus, Duke of Cumberland. The son of George II who was in command at Culloden, and its the Scots that call it Stinking Billy.

[Skins]

It's interesting to see that nowadays so little Brits know that this happened! I have read several times here that '1066' was the last invasion of Britain.

You would have to see it as a invasion first

In 1685, William's father-in-law came to the English Throne as James II, a Roman Catholic who was unpopular in his Protestant realms. William attempted to conciliate James, whom he hoped would join the League of Augsburg, whilst at the same time trying not to offend the Protestant party in England. But by 1687, it became clear that James II would not join the League. To gain the favour of English Protestants, William expressed his disapproval of James's religious policies. Seeing him as a friend, many English politicians began to negotiate an armed invasion of England. His wife had a blood line to the English Crown making him

The Dutch ships flew the English flag and the princes’ flag had the motto THE PROTESTANT RELIGION OF ENGLAND

The Bloodless Revoloution was a win win win for England in terms of democracy and that UP merchants were moving operations to England. The very impressive UP trade fleet got obsorbed more and more into trading too and from England makeing the profits flow through Her and not UP. This was the beginning of Britians rise of power and the demise of UP

If good old William of Orange had not took the offer of coming to England would it of been the sun never sets on the UP Empire

[Generaal Van Heutsz]

If good old William of Orange had not took the offer of coming to England would it of been the sun never sets on the UP Empire

I dont think so. I was surprised to learn Holland had an alliance with Austria in the game, so I checked up on this and learned about the various alliances Holland was in at the time, seemingly flipflopping sides endlessly, the one year in an alliance against France, the next year in alliance with France against one of our former allies, I mean dont we just hate France and want to kick their ass, why change? Until it dawned on me that there was a continous struggle on going in Holland between the royalists and the republicans and this internal struggle lead to the decline of dutch power more so, especially when the republicans supported the United States and thereby provoking the 4th anglo-dutch war, which meant the definitive end of Holland as a major power.

[Tullaris]

You would have to see it as a invasion first

In 1685, William's father-in-law came to the English Throne as James II, a Roman Catholic who was unpopular in his Protestant realms. William attempted to conciliate James, whom he hoped would join the League of Augsburg, whilst at the same time trying not to offend the Protestant party in England. But by 1687, it became clear that James II would not join the League. To gain the favour of English Protestants, William expressed his disapproval of James's religious policies. Seeing him as a friend, many English politicians began to negotiate an armed invasion of England. His wife had a blood line to the English Crown making him

The Dutch ships flew the English flag and the princes’ flag had the motto THE PROTESTANT RELIGION OF ENGLAND

The Bloodless Revoloution was a win win win for England in terms of democracy and that UP merchants were moving operations to England. The very impressive UP trade fleet got obsorbed more and more into trading too and from England makeing the profits flow through Her and not UP. This was the beginning of Britians rise of power and the demise of UP

If good old William of Orange had not took the offer of coming to England would it of been the sun never sets on the UP Empire

Oh dear. Start reading the topic first. Thats the British revisionist version of events.

[Inhuman One]

The Netherlands where never considered a major power army wise I believe, but saying they where on decline might be a bit far.

During the games time frame they kept repelling attacks from far larger countries after all, and that cant have been easy.

And just think about the amount of power, wealth and influence the Dutch had in comparison to how small their country is. That is quite an accomplishment, far more in the games time frame when they fought in many wars and when troop numbers mattered a lot more than today.

I do not believe there has ever been a country so small with wealth, power and influence so far out of proportion as the Dutch. We have had some colonies, but they where always few compared to the many of other countries, and the goals where more on trade and very little on settling.

[Generaal Van Heutsz]

Rome was a mere city yet conquored much of the known world. I honestly don't know about the dutch armies numerical strenght but I do know (eventhough I am a republican) that Maurits was one awsome general. It doesn't really say on his wikipedia but I believe fire by rank and square where some of his innovations; anyway whether he did or didn't he changed modern warfare and reintruced discipline (after the romans of course) into the army again..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice...ilitary_career