| |

Battle of the Boyne: King William III’s Victory in IrelandMilitary History | 5 comments | Print This Post | Email This Post
In August 1689, 10,000 soldiers under the command of William’s most trusted officer, Marshal Frederick Herman Schomberg, landed unopposed at Groomsport, in County Down. The army’s composition reflected the international character of the war then engulfing the European continent. William’s troops included not only English and Dutch soldiers, but Danish mercenaries and French Huguenots–the latter including the 75-year-old Schomberg himself. Jamesâ Jacobite supporters were reinforced by a 6,000-man French brigade commanded by Antonin Nompar de Caumont, comte de Lauzun, although one of its six battalions was made up of Walloons and two of Protestant Germans who until recently had been French prisoners of war. William soon became disillusioned with the lethargic way Schomberg was handling the campaign, and he wrote several letters to the marshal, urging him to attack the Jacobites, as Jamesâ supporters called themselves (after the Latin term for James, Jacobus). Instead of taking the initiative, however, Schomberg gave excuses, making much of the strength of Jamesâ army, and complaining about the weather, disease and lack of medicine. On June 14, 1690, a frustrated William, determined to take personal charge of the Irish campaign, landed at Carrickfergus with 36,000 troops, to an enthusiastic welcome from the townspeople. Along the way, bonfires lit up the hills of Antrim and Down, spreading the news of the king’s arrival. William remained in Belfast for five days while Schomberg advised caution. Then, impatient to end the Irish nuisance, William organized his troops and set out southward to seek out and engage the Jacobites. James remained elusive for a time, but finally, on June 29, he halted his army near the Boyne River, a few miles from Drogheda, indicating his intention to stand and fight. The next morning, William gazed down from the high ground into the Boyne Valley and surveyed the Jacobitesâ tents lining the south bank. ‘I am glad to see you gentlemen,’ he is reported to have said. ‘If you escape me now, the fault will be mine.’ While his troops made camp, William and his officers rode down to the north bank to get a better assessment of the enemy–during which they stopped to sit down for a picnic lunch. Some of Jamesâ officers spotted the king, wearing his Star of Garter, and could not believe their good fortune. They quickly brought up and mounted two cannons behind a clump of bushes. As William and his entourage mounted their horses, the Jacobites fired two shots. The first struck the horse of Prince George of Hesse, while the second ripped through the sleeve of William’s uniform. William slumped over on the neck of his horse. His followers gasped in horror, while Jacobites across the river shouted joyfully. News of William’s apparent death spread through the Jacobite camp with lightning speed and James dispatched messengers to France to convey the good news to King Louis. For 48 hours, the Jacobites celebrated. Some staged a mock funeral, while others made a dummy of straw and wax, christened it the ‘Prince of Orange’ and shot at it all night long. To paraphrase future humorist Mark Twain, however, reports of William’s death proved to be greatly exaggerated. He had merely suffered a slight shoulder injury. Within a few hours of the incident, he was riding along the ranks of his army, waving his right arm to show that he was all right. That brush with death only stiffened his determination to engage his adversaries–he had waited long enough. At 9 a.m. on June 30, he called a council of war and informed his officers that they would attack the enemy the next morning. The battle began on July 1 (later altered to July 12 when England changed from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar in 1752), when William’s Blue Dutch Guards crossed the Boyne. The Jacobites fired at them, but fled when the Guards reached the south bank. The Danes and Huguenots then tried to cross, but were driven back into the river. The battle’s outcome remained much in doubt, but William’s troops held firm and repulsed three charges by Jamesâ cavalry. As the Jacobite horsemen attacked once more, William came up on the left wing, having forded the river a mile downstream at Drybridge, and struggled to the south bank through the marshy ground. Unable to use his right arm, he drew his sword with his left and addressed the Inniskilling Cavalry with the exhortation, ‘Men of Enniskillen, what will you do for me?’ They replied by following him without hesitation to a hill at Donore, where they became embroiled in an engagement so confused that on several occasions Williamite units found themselves fighting one another. William’s bravery proved to be a decisive factor in the battle’s outcome. One bullet had grazed his leg, tearing away a piece of his boot, but he refused to leave the field. At one point, one of William’s men failed to recognize him and pointed a gun at his head. William pushed the weapon way and chided the officer, saying, ‘What, do you not know your own friends?’ Less fortunate was Marshal Schomberg, who upon seeing the Williamite foothold on the south bank endangered near the village of Oldbridge, personally led his fellow Huguenots to reinforce them, only to be hacked twice by sabers and fatally shot in the back–by one of his own panicky troops or by a deserter to the Jacobite side, depending on whose account one reads. At about 2 p.m., a messenger brought James the news that Williamsâ forces had secured Oldbridge and the right wing of the Jacobite army was defeated. James still had not committed the main part of his army, which he had held in readiness for what he thought would be the main Williamite effort at Rosnaree. At that point, however, he also became aware that Williamite dragoons, commanded by Marshal Schomberg’s son, Count Meinhard Schomberg, were flanking him to the south. His friend Lauzun persuaded him to withdraw to Dublin before that dragoon force cut off his escape route. His army followed in disarray, leaving behind its baggage and artillery. Continuing his flight to the south coast, where a squadron of French frigates awaited him, James sailed to France. He would never set foot in the British Isles again. On July 6, William entered Dublin in triumph. William’s victory at the Boyne was less than overwhelming, but the outcome of the Irish campaign was no longer in doubt. Spain and Austria, William’s partners in the Grand Alliance against Louis XIV, rejoiced upon learning of it. Illustrated brochures of the battle circulated in many parts of Europe. In Ireland itself, William’s victory was to have importance that reached well beyond the politics of the day and enshrined his name in its history and folklore. William remained in Ireland until late August, but the Jacobites reorganized and fought on under the leadership of Colonel Patrick Sarsfield, Earl of Lucan. Bitterly disappointed at his failure to break the back of Jacobite resistance, William returned to England. The subordinates he left behind to conduct the war did not finally defeat their stubborn opponents until the fall of 1891. The Pacification of Limerick, signed on October 13, 1691, provided for an honorable settlement, guaranteeing the rights and property of the Irish Catholics in return for their sworn loyalty to King William and Queen Mary. Although the treaty was ratified by the English Parliament, its liberal terms were rejected by the Protestant Irish, who enacted a harshly anti-Catholic Penal Code of their own, which drove Sarsfield and a multitude of other Irish Jacobites out of the country and into service with the French army. William’s war against Louis XIV dragged on, with neither king able to gain the upper hand. Finally, a stalemated peace came in the form of the Treaty of Ryswyck, signed by France, England, Spain, the Netherlands and the German principalities between September 20 and October 30, 1697. During the last years of his life, William became concerned with the possibility that the death of the childless Spanish King Charles II might lead to the accession of a French Bourbon to the Spanish throne, thus bringing Spain, her prosperous colonial empire and the Spanish Netherlands under French influence. That fear became a reality in 1700, on March 13, Charlesâ will revealed that Philip of Anjou, Louisâ second grandson, had been declared the heir to the Spanish throne; and Charles died on November 1 of 1700. Louis continued to aggravate relations with William by sheltering James II and, after Jamesâ death in 1701, recognizing his son as the rightful heir to the English throne. While England and the Netherlands prepared for another war, French forces occupied the Spanish Netherlands, which were also claimed by the counterclaimant to the Spanish throne, Emperor Leopold I, in March 1701. With France and Austria at war, King William III again showed his immense diplomatic skill by negotiating another Grand Alliance against Louis XIV on September 7, 1701. This alliance involved Austria, England, the Netherlands, Prussia, most of the other German states and later, Portugal. William was not destined to long outlive the man he had deposed, however, nor would he see England launch the all-out campaign against France that had been his life-long ambition. While riding at Hampton Court in London on March 19, 1702, he was thrown from his horse and died at age 51. Assessing William III’s place in history has led to much controversy over the years. One of his biographers, Nesca A. Robb, has said that ‘it may be the force of his living personality, as well as a measure of his greatness, that he can still arouse passionate hero worship and passionate animosity.’ William was a soldier king, one of the last European monarchs to lead his troops into battle. He is not regarded as an outstanding strategist, but it should be noted that he constantly had to face Louisâ generals, some of whom were the greatest military geniuses of the century, and who commanded larger armies than William could muster. William proved adapt at the diplomatic aspect of warfare, particularly in his organization of effective alliances against France. This would prompt British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to later say of William that ‘perhaps he has never been surpassed in the sagacity, patience, and discretion of statecraft.’ It was as an English monarch that William left his greatest mark on history. By coming to England and accepting the crown, he made possible the Glorious Revolution, which led to great changes in English politics and society, and paved the way for many of the freedoms enjoyed by Britishers–and Americans–today. As for his impact on his native Netherlands, it is true that he saved the republic in 1672 and transformed the Dutch army into one of the world’s best fighting forces. It is also true, however, that his obsessive fight with Louis XIV drained the Netherlands financially and that in the years following his death, that once-formidable Dutch naval and commercial power declined to second-rate status. Ironically, it is in Ireland, which least interested him and where he spent the least amount of time, that ‘King Billy,’ whether loved or hated, is best remembered today.
This article was written by Ron Chepesiuk and originally published in the June 2001 issue of Military History magazine. For more great articles be sure to subscribe to Military History magazine today! Subscribe Today
Tags: 17th - 18th Century, Historical Conflicts
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
What is HistoryNet?The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines. If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest. |
From Our Magazines
|
Weider History Group |
Weider History Network: HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer! Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. |
||
5 Comments to “Battle of the Boyne: King William III’s Victory in Ireland”
Since when was an “invitation” to invade one’s country and harm one’s citizens in the name of bigotry and greed not TREASON?
By Truth on Aug 17, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Sorry, Ron, but “King Billy” was not on the side of liberty, if anything it was King James efforts, both for his country and beyond, that showed that HE was the TRUE model for religious tolerance and fairness.
William invaded England with paid mercenaries and slave labour. Of course, Winston Churchill would have respect for him, but then again, he practically hero-worshipped his own ancestor, John Churchill, who was a amoral man whose greed and selfishness not only caused him to betray his King and benefactor, but his very own troops and countrymen.
What freedoms did King Billy make possible for today’s english and americans? Racial and religious tolerance. Thanks for the laugh.
By Truth on Aug 17, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Don’t slag King Billy because he is the defender of the fenians and
he’s the one who has made Northern Ireland the beautiful way it
is.
By br andon squires on Oct 23, 2008 at 10:52 am
“Don’t slag King Billy because he is the defender of the fenians and
he’s the one who has made Northern Ireland the beautiful way it
is.
”
Well, in MY country, we have something called free speech, so get over your ignorance, you fool.
So there.
Northern Ireland beautiful? LOL Good God, you Orangemen are as stupid and pigheaded as you are abusive and destructive.
By Orangemen are fools on Apr 25, 2009 at 4:24 pm
That’s a laugh.
You can’t apply 21st century conceptions of democracy and freedom to the 17th century!
Basically, James represented French-style absolutist monarchy and the divine right of kings.
William represented a constitutional monarchy, tempered by and ruling in accordance with the rules of a democratically elected parliament.
If you want to know how that played out, compare England’s social and political developments in the 18th century to France’s, especially circa 1789.
By Marc with a C on May 26, 2009 at 11:50 pm