essay on the glorious revolution

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Glorious Revolution

By: History.com Editors

Updated: September 6, 2019 | Original: February 20, 2018

The Glorious Revolution, also called “The Revolution of 1688” and “The Bloodless Revolution,” took place from 1688 to 1689 in England. It involved the overthrow of the Catholic King James II, who was replaced by his Protestant daughter Mary and her Dutch husband, William of Orange. Motives for the revolution were complex and included both political and religious concerns. The event ultimately changed how England was governed, giving Parliament more power over the monarchy and planting seeds for the beginnings of a political democracy.

King James II

King James II took the throne in England in 1685, during a time when relations between Catholics and Protestants were tense. There was also considerable friction between the monarchy and the British Parliament .

James, who was Catholic, supported the freedom of worship for Catholics and appointed Catholic officers to the army. He also had close ties with France—a relationship that concerned many of the English people.

In 1687, King James II issued a Declaration of Indulgence, which suspended penal laws against Catholics and granted acceptance of some Protestant dissenters. Later that year, the king formally dissolved his Parliament and attempted to create a new Parliament that would support him unconditionally.

James’s daughter Mary, a Protestant, was the rightful heir to the throne until 1688 when James had a son, James Francis Edward Stuart, whom he announced would be raised Catholic.

The birth of James’s son changed the line of succession, and many feared a Catholic dynasty in England was imminent. The Whigs, the main group that opposed Catholic succession, were especially outraged.

The king’s elevation of Catholicism, his close relationship with France, his conflict with Parliament and uncertainty over who would succeed James on the English throne led to whispers of a revolt—and ultimately the fall of James II.

William of Orange

In 1688, seven of King James’s peers wrote to the Dutch leader, William of Orange, pledging their allegiance to the prince if he invaded England.

William was already in the process of taking military action against England, and the letter served as an additional propaganda motive.

William of Orange assembled an impressive armada for the invasion and landed in Torbay, Devon, in November 1688.

King James, however, had prepared for military attacks and left London to bring his forces to meet the invading army. But several of James’s own men, including his family members, deserted him and defected to William’s side. In addition to this setback, James’s health was deteriorating.

James decided to retreat back to London on November 23. He soon announced that he was willing to agree to a “free” Parliament but was making plans to flee the country due to concerns for his own safety.

In December 1688, King James made an attempt to escape but was captured. Later that month, he made another attempt and successfully fled to France, where his Catholic cousin Louis XIV held the throne and where James eventually died in exile in 1701.

Bill of Rights

In January 1689, the now-famous Convention Parliament met. After significant pressure from William, Parliament agreed to a joint monarchy , with William as king and James’s daughter, Mary, as queen.

The two new rulers accepted more restrictions from Parliament than any previous monarchs, causing an unprecedented shift in the distribution of power throughout the British realm.

The king and queen both signed the Declaration of Rights, which became known as the Bill of Rights. This document acknowledged several constitutional principles, including the right for regular Parliaments, free elections and freedom of speech in Parliament. Additionally, it forbade the monarchy from being Catholic.

Many historians believe the Bill of Rights was the first step toward a constitutional monarchy.

Bloodless Revolution

The Glorious Revolution is sometimes dubbed the Bloodless Revolution, although this description isn’t entirely accurate.

While there was little bloodshed and violence in England, the revolution led to significant loss of life in Ireland and Scotland.

Catholic historians typically refer to the Glorious Revolution as the “Revolution of 1688,” while Whig historians prefer the phrase “Bloodless Revolution.” The term “Glorious Revolution” was first coined by John Hampden in 1689.

Legacy of the Glorious Revolution

Many historians believe the Glorious Revolution was one of the most important events leading to Britain’s transformation from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. After this event, the monarchy in England would never hold absolute power again.

With the Bill of Rights, the regent’s power was defined, written down and limited for the first time. Parliament’s function and influence changed dramatically in the years following the revolution.

The event also had an impact on the 13 colonies in North America. The colonists were temporarily freed of strict, anti- Puritan laws after King James was overthrown.

When news of the revolution reached the Americans, several uprisings followed, including the Boston Revolt, Leisler’s Rebellion in New York and the Protestant Revolution in Maryland .

Since the Glorious Revolution, Parliament’s power in Britain has continued to increase, while the monarchy’s influence has waned. There’s no doubt this important event helped set the stage for the United Kingdom’s present-day political system and government.

The Glorious Revolution, BBC . The Glorious Revolution of 1688, Economic History Association . The Glorious Revolution, Parliament.uk . The 1688 Revolution, The History Learning Site . How did the Glorious Revolution in England Affect the Colonies? History of Massachusetts Blog .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

• Accessibility Tools
• Current Students
• The University
• Our Faculties
• Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
• School of Culture and Communication
• History Study Guides for Schools
• The reasons for the Glorious Revolution of 1688
• American Studies
• Classics, Ancient History, Egyptology
• English Language, TESOL, Applied Linguistics
• English Literature, Creative Writing
• Social Worlds of Steel
• History Staff
• 'The effectiveness of attempts at European co-operation in the period 1890-1939’
• The long and short reasons for why Revolution broke out in France in 1789
• What was the impact of fascist rule upon Italy from 1922 to 1945?
• Warfare in Western Europe in the Central Middle Ages
• The impact of the Second World War on the people of Wales and England
• Media, Communications, Journalism and PR
• Modern Languages, Translation and Interpreting
• School of Culture and Communication News
• School of Culture and Communication Rankings
• A Guide to Clearing - Classics, Ancient History and Egyptology
• Film and Visual Culture
• A Guide to Clearing - English Literature and History
• Combined Honours

Study Guide by Swansea University Historians

The story of the Glorious Revolution really begins with the Exclusion Crisis of 1679-83. This was the period of a series of attempts by Whigs—the original Whigs—to prevent James Duke of York from inheriting the throne from his brother, King Charles II, the merry monarch who had perhaps as many as 20 children with his numerous mistresses, but no legitimate children with his wife.  The Duke, who was known to be Catholic and to believe in the divine right of kings and absolute monarchy, was mistrusted by many Englishmen at this time because of these factors. During the seventeenth century (indeed since the Protestant Reformations of the sixteenth century and the creation of the Church of England by Henry VIII), there had existed a national loathing of Catholicism, so much so that there had even been attempts made to exclude James from the throne. These plots had not been successful, however, and following Charles II’s death on 6 February 1685 the Catholic James became King James II. Perhaps because of the fear that England would return to tumult and bloodshed of the Civil Wars (1642-49) and the oppression of Oliver Cromwell’s Protectorate, when James's Parliament met on 19 May, it was overwhelmingly loyalist in composition. This seeming tranquillity was not, however, to last.

Indeed, when the House was recalled after the summer, James asked the Commons for more money for the maintenance of his standing army. It was a move that would have concerned many Englishmen because professional, permanent armies were feared to be the would-be shock troops of an ambitious tyrant. Large standing armies were associated with the autocratic monarchies of France and Spain, while many Englishmen would also have remembered with trepidation the imposition of Oliver Cromwell’s New Model Army and the hated rule of the Major-Generals.

James himself would further antagonise the Commons by asking for the repeal of the Test Acts of 1673. The Test Acts required office holders to prove that they were not Catholics by making a declaration against transubstantiation—the Roman Catholic belief that the change of substance (or essence) by which the bread and wine offered in the sacrifice of the sacrament of the Eucharist during the Mass, become, in reality, the body and blood of Christ. Between 12 and 19 November 1685, Parliament declined to repeal the Acts and refused the King extra money, fearing its misuse. Replying to the King's speech, Parliament made it clear that the King's employment of Catholic officers was ‘of the greatest concern’ to them, and begged him to reconsider his request. Frustrated by the House’s intransigence, on 20 November, James prorogued his Parliament.

Determined to assert his authority, the King pressed on. In April 1686 James won an apparent victory in the Test Act controversy when, following the Godden v Hales case, the judges ruled that James II, in individual cases, could dispense with the Test Acts without the consent of Parliament. Worryingly for many Parliamentarians, the King then began to introduce Roman Catholics and some dissenters into the army, universities, and even posts within the Anglican Church. It seemed that those fears emergent from the earlier Exclusion Crisis concerning James’s high-handedness, authoritarian inclinations and disregard for the rights of Parliament were truly well-founded.

Further controversy came on 15 July when an Ecclesiastical Commission was set up, and to which the King's powers as Governor of the Church of England were delegated. This Commission was permitted to deprive the clergy of their roles and soon used this authority to remove Henry Compton from his position as Bishop of London. Compton had fallen afoul of the Commission because he had refused to suspend a London clergyman who had spoken out against Roman Catholicism. When a papal envoy was cordially received in Whitehall, alarm was further spread among English Protestants. It is therefore unsurprising that, throughout 1686, fears grew that James was plotting to impose his own (very much hated) Catholic religious views on the country. Anger would have been further stoked when James began a campaign to appoint sympathetic electors to create a House of Commons that would support his policies.

To further his goals, on 5 April, 1687 the King published a Declaration of Indulgence (also known as the Declaration for Liberty of Conscience ), which suspended all religious penal laws. At the same time, James provided partial toleration in Scotland, using his dispensing power to grant relief to Catholics and partial relief to Presbyterians. Coined by the King as a way of curbing intolerance on the basis of religious faith, James's seeming ignorance England’s of long-standing fear of a Catholic insurrection, sponsored by hostile powers such as Catholic France and Spain, in addition to his willingness to use the Royal Prerogative without Parliamentary approval, caused great unease in a country already shaken by his previous actions.

Subsequent efforts did little to abate these concerns. As 1687 progressed, the Lord Lieutenants (the monarch's personal representative in each county) were instructed to call together prominent local people and ask them, if they were to be chosen as Members of Parliament, whether they would approve the repeal of the penal laws, and other questions designed of the same kind. The majority of the Lord Lieutenants refused to advance these questions because they objected so strongly to them. Consequently, in August James dismissed nine of them. Tellingly, surviving answers to the King's questions and documented at the time they were given attest to the unpopularity of the King’s policies. Indeed, there was almost wholesale opposition among the prominent and influential local men who had been canvassed by the Lord Lieutenants.

On April 27 1688 James reissued the Declaration of Indulgence . However, by commanding that Anglican clergy to read to their congregations from the pulpit, he had made a grave error. On 18 May the Archbishop of Canterbury and six other bishops refused to read it and petitioned against the King’s order (history books sometimes refer to these men as the Seven Bishops). In this petition, the James was asked to withdraw his demand, citing the argument that the Declaration of Indulgence was illegal. It was claimed that it was based the king’s suspending power—something that went against the will of Parliament

On June 8 the Seven Bishops were arrested and sent to the Tower of London to await trial. Virtually at the same time--in fact, two days later--the Queen (James’s second wife, Mary of Modena) gave birth to a son, James Francis Edward, Prince of Wales. The new heir was baptised a Roman Catholic, causing consternation within much of the nation.

Certainly, before this, James’s rule could, at least to a degree, have been dismissed as a passing aberration (an albeit highly worrying one) by many of his bewildered subjects. However, the birth of a son gave the Catholic James an heir, opening the possibility of a perpetual Catholic succession and a tyrannical dynasty.  This prospect actually gave rise to ugly rumours that the baby was no true prince but a substitute smuggled into the Queen's bed in a warming pan. Perhaps unsurprisingly, when the so-called Seven Bishops were acquitted by a jury (June 30), huge crowds celebrated in the streets, burning effigies of the Pope, and attacking Catholic establishments. It was also on this very same day that a ‘letter of invitation’ was signed by seven prominent politicians (The Earl of Shrewsbury; The Earl of Devonshire; The Earl of Danby; The Viscount Lumley; The Bishop of London (Henry Compton); Edward Russell; Henry Sydney (who wrote the Invitation)) which invited William of Orange, Protestant son-in-law to James, to intervene to save both Church and State.

William, who had himself been watching developments in England with increasing alarm, had actually already made his decision to intervene. The Dutch Republic, of which William was Stadtholder, had an intense rivalry with Louis XIV’s France (the two rulers themselves were bitter enemies) and a possible Anglo-French alliance would have jeopardised the sovereignty and independence of the Dutch Republic—itself a Protestant power. Therefore, on October 1 William issued his manifesto from The Hague, listing at length the allegedly illegal actions of the last three years. He proclaimed that, ‘we have thought fit to go over to England, and to carry with us a force sufficient, by the blessing of God, to defend us from the violence of those evil councillors; and we, being desirous that our intention in this way may be rightly understood, have prepared this Declaration...’

William landed at Torbay in Devon with about 15,000 (largely Dutch) troops on November 5. The timing of this would not have been lost on the contemporary English populous who revered November 5 as the date on which another so-called Catholic insurgent, Guy Fawkes, had been caught in the act of blowing up the House of Lords, along with then-monarch James I. William’s landing was, furthermore, the only successful large-scale landing in England since 1485. That said, James still, in theory at least, had his large standing army and thus remained a threat to William and his mainly Dutch army. However, the enthusiasm with which William was welcomed and the defections from James's army that ensued strengthened William's hand. On December 19 William entered London. Previously, on 11 December, James tried to flee to France, first throwing the Great Seal of the Realm into the River Thames. He was captured in Kent but later was released and placed under a Dutch protective guard. Having no desire to create a martyr out of James, William allowed the soon-to-be former king to make his escape to France on 23 December. Some have also suggested that James was allowed to flee to legitimatise his overthrow—his flight would appear more like an ‘abdication’ rather than the legally complex seizure of a crown by a foreign monarch.

Aftermath and Legacy:

What made in the eyes of many contemporary (and indeed, subsequent) Englishmen the Glorious Revolution just that—a ‘glorious’ or ‘bloodless’ revolution—was the manner in which the situation unfolded after William’s landing and the ‘abdication’ of James II. William did not take the crown on his own authority, like his namesake William the Conqueror had done in 1066.  Instead, Parliament dissolved itself and then reformed itself as a Convention—ostensibly a convention of the people.  It was that convention that offered the crown to William in February 1689, and set the terms on which William would rule.  The Convention also published a Declaration of Rights, later passed by Parliament as the Bill of Rights, that listed the unacceptable misdeeds of James II, and asserted the necessity of free elections, frequent Parliaments, and various other liberties. 

It should be added here that there are limitations on the degree to which we (today) should view the Glorious Revolution as ‘revolutionary’.  Despite the fact that the Convention was supposedly a meeting of the people, it was still the case that very few English people at this time—the late seventeenth century—would have explicitly supported the notion of the sovereignty of the people.  William III certainly did not believe that he owned his authority to the Convention, or to Parliament, and certainly not to the people.  Furthermore, High Tories would continue to believe in the idea of the Divine Right of Kings for another generation. 

For this reason, many feared that too strong an assertion of the idea of popular sovereignty, the sovereignty of the people, might result in a reversion to the civil wars that occurred between 1642 and 1651, in which some 10% of the English population lost their lives.  So it was that moderate Whigs subsequently advanced a rather less revolutionary theory of what happened in 1688-89, one that rested on Parliamentary sovereignty rather than popular sovereignty. According to this view, the Convention and Declaration of Rights did not promote natural rights or a right to revolution, but argued that James’s abuses of the people’s liberties, property, and religion absolved them of a duty of loyalty to him, so that when he ‘abdicated’ and moderately Whigs stressed that he abdicated and was not overthrown - Parliament, not the people, but Parliament, was entitled to restore ancient customs and laws by offering the crown to William. 

In practical terms, what this meant was the creation of the ‘Crown-in-Parliament’; or, as it was more commonly called, the ‘King in Parliament’.  That idea was based upon what was called the ‘Principle of Co-ordination’: the idea and the practice that the king, or at least his Prime Minister, exercised control of Parliament by virtue of controlling a majority of MPs.  And that is how the British constitution still works.  The Prime Minister holds their position by virtue of controlling a majority of MPs.

There were critics of this idea.  One of them was the philosopher John Locke, whose Two Treatises on Government was published in 1691, though written earlier, made the case for popular sovereignty.  Later on, ‘Real’ Whigs or ‘True’ or ‘Country’ Whigs, as they variously called themselves, in opposition to the ‘Court’ Whigs aligned with Prime Minister Robert Walpole from 1721, condemned the use of patronage as a means of achieving ‘co-ordination’ as conspiratorial and corrupt.  Among the most strident critics were John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon, in their pseudonymous Cato’s Letters (1724). 

Nevertheless, most people accepted that some means of achieving governmental stability was essential, or at least acknowledged that the accommodation of crown and Parliament was vastly preferable to the struggles and bloody strife that had afflicted the country throughout most of the seventeenth century, during the reigns of James I and Charles I and of course during the civil wars of 1642 to 1651;  and then, in turn, the Interregnum of 1649-1660, the Restoration of 1660, the Exclusion Crisis of 1679-81, and finally yet another revolution in 1688.   Also, in many people’s minds, the post-1688 constitution not only created stable and effective government, but simultaneously guaranteed the rights and liberties of freeborn Englishmen (from 1707, Britons). 

Study History for a Degree

World History Edu

• Glorious Revolution

The Glorious Revolution: Causes and Outcome

by World History Edu · December 15, 2022

You may have heard of the Glorious Revolution and like many others, have often wondered how a revolution could be described as “glorious.” Usually when we imagine revolutions, we think in terms of massive bloodshed and utter chaos.

Well, England’s 1688 revolution deviated from the “norm.” Also known as the Bloodless Revolution, the Glorious Revolution took place without the gory and chaotic elements that typified most revolutions. Despite that, it achieved its intended purpose: a Catholic king was deposed to effect a much needed political and religious change. This king was James II and the leader of the invasion was his nephew and son-in-law, William of Orange.

The revolution laid the foundation for a series of significant events that changed the political climate in many parts of the world. It transformed Britain from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy and realigned power within the constitution of England.

In the article below, WHE takes an in-depth look at the causes and effects of the Glorious Revolution of 1688.

Political & Religious Background

In order to get a better understanding of the events that led to the Glorious Revolution, the timeline of British history must be retraced in order to recount some events. Chief among these events are the English Civil Wars, Charles I’s execution and the reinstatement of the monarchy.

Charles I of England

Charles I reigned as the king of  England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland after the death of his father, James I, in 1625. Charles ruled ruthlessly  and often had conflicts with Parliament over his extravagant lifestyle and his show of favoritism for Catholicism over Protestantism. He believed in the divine right of kings and attempted to consolidate all political power under his leadership.

Charles’ authoritarian rule eventually culminated in the dissolution of Parliament.  Between 1642 and 1661, the English Civil wars (fought between the Royalists and the Parliamentarians) waged on. Parliaments’ New Model Army  ultimately defeated the Royalists in all 3 civil wars. Charles’ failure to show remorse for his ill-advised choices led to his execution in January 1649 and the subsequent abolishment of the monarchy.

The Restoration

After close to a decade in exile, Charles I’s oldest son, Charles, was invited back to England in 1660 to reclaim the throne. Eventually, the monarchy was restored with the coronation of Charles II on April 23, 1661. The new king reversed a number of policies of the Commonwealth era. In addition to the promotion of policies that sought to bring the two religious factions together, he is credited with the promotion of sports, arts and science.

Since King Charles II had no legitimate heir, his younger brother, James II, became next in line to the throne. There was one problem, however. While Charles II had been a Protestant, James II had converted to Catholicism in 1668. The king was well aware that Parliament and the Scots, particularly, dreaded the prospect of the Roman Catholic James ruling the kingdom. Apart from the fear of Catholicism infiltrating every facet of life in England; marriage, trade and more, there was also the threat of absolute rule, subjugation to France and Rome and slavery.

Charles II died in 1685, leaving the unresolved religious dissensions for his successor, James II, to deal with.

Causes of the Glorious Revolution: James II & Absolutism

King James II incurred the discontent of his people by dismissing the Scottish and English parliaments in 1685 and ruling by personal decree throughout his reign.

In the months leading to his ascension, James made significant contributions to state policy, earning him much admiration from Parliament. James eventually ascended the throne in February, 1685 with no resistance.

The three-year reign of King James II was rife with numerous tensions among the English people and Parliament due to his belief in the divine right of kings. The king came to be seen as a dictator who imposed his pro-Catholic policies on the people. These eventually led to James’ overthrow in 1688 in the Glorious Revolution.

What were some examples of King James II’s pro-Catholic policies? And just how major was their impact?

Below, we take a look at some major reasons for this revolution:

Promotion of Catholicism

James II’s earlier assurances that his Catholic faith would not interfere with his reign all went out of the window after he was crowned. As a practicing Catholic, he knew even before he ascended to the throne that he would be up against a non-Catholic Parliament. James II therefore took advantage of his absolute power and abused laws for the course of Catholicism.

For instance, he used his foreign policy to promote marriages and alliances with other Catholic states. James himself had earlier (in 1673) married a devout Roman Catholic woman in the person of Mary of Modena. Even though Mary did not get involved in politics, it is possible that she might have had some sway on her husband’s decision to put on display his adherence to Catholicism.

His continual violation of the laws (i.e. anti-Catholic) of the country put him at odds with the Whigs who were the main opponents of the establishment of a Catholic Stuart dynasty. As the days turned into months during his reign, the English population, which was largely Protestant, gradually became outraged by James’s show of favoritism toward the Catholic faith.

Revocation of the Test Acts

Another reason for the Glorious Revolution was the suspension of the Tests Acts of 1673 and 1678 which were passed during Charles II’s reign. The Test Acts were penal laws enacted by Parliament to prevent Catholics and political rivals from assuming any civil or political office.

In spite of Parliament’s refusal to cancel the Test Acts, James II violated the dictates of the Acts and encouraged the appointment and promotion of Catholics into top government positions. In the armed forces, for example, Catholics were given preferential treatment and attained higher ranks. James also removed key Anglicans from high governmental positions and replaced them with Catholics.

Dissolution of Parliament

Owing to Parliament’s resistance to the cancellation of the Test Acts, James abolished Parliament (both the English and Scottish Parliaments) and proceeded to use his dispending power to revoke laws that were anti-Catholic in nature. Much to the annoyance of the Whigs, he appointed Roman Catholics as members of his council and royal offices.

The Declaration of Indulgence Act

In early 1687, James II passed the Declaration of Indulgence Act that revoked all laws against the rights of Catholics. The Catholic English monarch extended religious freedoms to Protestant non-conformists. Perhaps, James II had forgotten that absolutism was the very reason why his father had been executed. Even more upsetting for the Parliamentarians was when James reserved the right to make all state decisions. The English people were angry and they responded with a series of aggressive protests.

James II issued a second Declaration of Indulgence in 1688 and instructed it to be read in church. However, seven bishops, led by Archbishop Sancroft, refused to announce the Declaration. They were consequently prosecuted but were later acquitted. Their acquittal was further evidence of the king’s increased unpopularity and dwindling influence in the land.

In 1688, James II put on trial the Seven bishops for treason and seditious libel. In a clear sign that James had lost his power base, the Seven bishops were acquitted

The birth of James Francis Edward Stuart

Originally, James II’s Protestant daughter, Mary II, had been next in line to the English throne. However, when the king’s second marriage to the Catholic princess, Mary of Modena, produced a son (James Francis Edward Stuart) in June 1688, the line of succession changed. The people’s hope of having the Protestant Mary as queen who would rule by Protestant tenets was shattered.

The birth of James Francis Stuart on 10 June 1688 raised fears among the population that a Catholic Stuart dynasty was all but in place. The young prince was catapulted to the first in line to the throne because he was male. Image – James Francis Edward Stuart, circa 1703

The king added more insult to injury when he announced that his son would be raised Catholic. By this time, it had become apparently clear all the three kingdoms that James was bent on cementing a Catholic Stuart dynasty. This got the people thinking of new alternative to the king.

James’s interference in the administration of Cambridge and Oxford Universities

One of James’s decision that his people considered as an attack on Protestantism and the established church came when he fired the Vice Chancellor of the Cambridge University. The king took decision because the head of the university refused to award a degree to a Benedictine monk James had chosen. The king also terminated the appointments of a number of prominent fellows and scholars from the Magdalene College in Oxford for their failure to appoint a Catholic as president.

All of those decisions were seen as acts of tyranny, further adding to the already strained relations between the monarchy and Parliament. A group of Parliamentarians began holding a series of secret meetings to devise a plan to depose James II.

The Dutch ruler William of Orange is invited to invade England

On June 30, 1688, seven noblemen, supported by Parliament and some leading members of the Church of England, sent out an invitation to the Dutch ruler, William of Orange, to invade England. William successfully crossed the English Channel from the Low Countries and seized all three kingdoms without any incident. The Dutch ruler and his wife, Mary, were crowned joint monarchs – William III and Mary II, respectively. Image: The Prince of Orange landing at Torbay, by Dutch painter Jan Hoynck van Papendrecht

At the center of the conspiracy to have James II dethroned was William of Orange. William was the husband of James II’s Protestant daughter, Mary Stuart. He was a Dutchman by birth and a staunch Protestant.

Just 20 days after the birth of Prince James Frances Edward,  a group of seven noblemen (also known as the Immortal Seven) wrote a letter to William inviting him to invade England in order to preserve the Protestant faith and to establish a “free” Parliament. They promised their allegiance to William if he agreed to carry out the invasion. The Dutch king had declined two earlier invitations. On a third occasion, he agreed to help and set about organizing a large force to invade England.

In November of 1688, William arrived at Brixham with his army and continued to march toward London. Meanwhile, James, who had anticipated an invasion, readied his army to defend his throne from his son-in-law/nephew. King James left for London to gather his army to meet the opposing troops. The king soon realized that many of his military men, including John Churchill, and family members had defected to William’s side. Not even his Protestant daughters supported him.

James had about 30,000 forces as against William’s 14,000. It’s been said that the Prince of Orange was enthused about the idea of capturing the English Crown in order to effectively fend off attacks from France.

Who were the seven English noblemen that invited William, Prince of Orange?

Also known as the Immortal Seven, the seven English noblemen that invited William to invade England were:

• Henry Sydney, 1st Earl of Romney
• Charles Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury
• Thomas Osborne, Earl of Danby
• William Cavendish, Earl of Devonshire
• Henry Compton, Bishop of London
• Richard (Lumley), Viscount Lumley
• Edward Russell, 1st Earl of Orford

Tory leaders and Whig politicians were able to put aside their differences in order to fight James II’s attempt to establish a permanent Catholic monarch in England. For example, Compton and Danby were members the Tories, while the remaining five were Whigs.

It is said that the English Whig politician and soldier Henry Sydney was the one who wrote the letter . The invitation letter was delivered to the Dutch ruler, William, in The Hague by Rear Admiral Arthur Herbert. Had the invitation letter not be sent, William would have been perceived as an invader.

Following William’s ascension to the throne, the seven men received handsome rewards from the new king, with many of them elevated to peerage.

Why did James II not face off against the invading army of William of Orange?

Upon the advice of his army commanders, James decided not to engage the invading army of William. Disheartened by his people’s betrayal and distrustful of the rest of his army, James heeded the call to retreat. Worse still, his health was declining.

It must be noted that the embattled king did indeed have a numerical advantage over the invading army of William. James chose not to engage the invading forces perhaps due to all the sheer level of discontent among his people, who were largely Protestants. Perhaps James’s decision not to attack William’s Dutch forces was borne out of his desire to prevent the three kingdoms descending into another civil war just like the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (1639-1653) which not only upended the entire British Isles but also claimed several thousands of lives.

James made a choice to sit with the Parliament and agree to their terms in order to preserve the monarchy. These terms included restoring the Test Acts, bringing back the Parliament and ensuring a balance of power in governance. Despite James’ agreement to the demands, Parliament did not believe he would execute the needed political changes.

Aftermath of the Invasion and coronation of William III and Mary II

Afraid that he would be martyred for the cause of Catholicism, James II tried to escape to France. However, he was captured in Kent but was later released. As neither William nor Parliament did not want to harm the deposed king, James was allowed to flee to France in December 23.

William and his wife, Mary, were given the offer to become joint monarchs of the three kingdoms – England, Scotland and Ireland in 1689. The couple ruled jointly under Britain’s new Bill of Rights , which received royal assent on December 16, 1689. This Bill limited the monarchy’s power and extended constitutional law which put Parliament in charge of finances and the army. The Bill also stated that no Catholic monarch would be allowed to rule England.

These changes represented a massive victory for Parliament which been engaged in an enduring struggle against the monarchy for many years.

Indeed, the revolution had been glorious (at least for the masses in England and their allies) but not completely bloodless as some say. There was some violence and loss of lives in Ireland and Scotland. Nevertheless, it was considered a great success.

Between January 22 and February 12, the English Convention convened and transferred the crowns of England and Ireland from James II to William III and Mary II. The English Parliament claimed that James had vacated his throne by throwing the Great Seal of the Realm into the River Thames and then fleeing to France. In Scotland, a similar Convention took place in March 1689 and confirmed that the throne of Scotland was to be passed to William and Mary. The coronation of William III and Mary II. Painting by Dutch painter Charles Rochussen

Significance of the Glorious Revolution

The Glorious Revolution not only benefitted England but was also of major importance to the continent and the rest of the world. It was viewed by many as a courageous defense of liberty against a dictatorial rule. Below are some of the important outcomes of the revolution:

Absolutism to constitutional monarchy

Primarily, the revolution marked a turning point in England as it led to limitations to the power of the king and esteemed the rights of the people. The 1698 Bill of Rights birthed a constitutional monarchy in which the monarchy assumes the position of head of state within the parameters of the constitution. The monarch is required to rule along with a parliament or an authorized body. This development was the precursor to the modern day system of government in the United Kingdom.

The English Toleration Act of 1689

The revolution led to the English Toleration Act of 1689 which was passed by Parliament to unite “their Majesties Protestant subjects in interest and affection.” The Act was regarded as the most important religious reform in England since its separation from the Catholic church in the early 1500s. It granted religious freedoms to dissenters upon meeting certain requirements.

A foundation for freedom and constitutional law in the West

The revolution helped set the tone for especially democracy, economic progress and territorial expansion. The events that followed the invasion such as the signing of the Bill of Rights and the essays of the English Philosopher John Locke taught America and the rest of the world that a repressive government can be changed for a better one. The revolution also served as precautionary symbol to governments the freedoms and rights of the people must ne respected in order to promote a vibrant society.

Increased unrest in the American Colonies

Not all the effects of the Glorious Revolution were positive. The revolution also brought some negative results to the 13 American colonies, as the rate of dissentions and tensions increased many folds. For example, there were tensions in Boston (i.e. the Boston Revolt), New York (i.e. the Leisler’s Rebellion), and Maryland (i.e. the Protestant Revolt). Image: “Andros a Prisoner in Boston” illustrated by F.O.C. Darley, William L. Shepard or Granville Perkins.

When news of the deposition of James II crossed the Atlantic into the American colonies, a series of fierce revolts broke out. Especially in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, protesters vented their anger against the government officials appointed by James II.

All throughout the reign of James II, many colonies in America were incensed by the king’s replacement of local puritan officials with royally-appointed officials. In Massachusetts for example, the months following the Glorious Revolution witnessed the removal of many of those appointees from office, and a Council of Safety was established to steer the affairs of the colony.

There was no doubt that the revolution brought some negative results to the 13 American colonies, as the rate of dissentions and tensions increased many folds. Some historians believe the tensions created a nurturing environment for the infamous Salem Witch Trial , an event which saw the persecution and execution of people accused of witchcraft in colonial Massachusetts between early and mid-1693. These events are thoroughly discussed in Carla G. Pestana’s book, “Protestant Empire: Religion and the Making of the British Atlantic World.”

The removal of anti-Puritan laws in American Colonies

Following the deposition of James II, 13 colonies in North America were temporarily freed and stringent anti-Puritan laws which had been imposed by James were revoked. The colonies were once again in control of their own legislation. Again, a number of revolts took place in several American colonies as the Glorious Revolution gave the colonists hope of independence. One such revolt was Leisler’s Rebellion in New York which saw the German American militia captain, Jacob Leisler, take over the southern part of the colony for almost 3 years.

Did you know?

• The term “Glorious Revolution” was first coined by English politician John Hampden in 1689. Other names of the revolution include the  Glorieuze Overtocht  or  Glorious Crossing.
• The Bill of Rights of 1689 confirmed the primacy of Parliament over the English Crown. The Test Acts remained in force until 1828. It was not until 2015, that the restrictions on the monarch’s ability to marry a Catholic was lifted. However, the restriction on the monarch still remains.
• William’s army crossed the English Channel and made landing at Torbay in Devon on November 5. Prior to William’s landing, the only foreign monarch that successfully invaded England was William the Conqueror, an event that took place in 1066. About three months after his landing, William, Prince of Orange, and his wife, Mary II, were crowned King and Queen of England.

It is obvious that the Glorious Revolution of 1688 was of tremendous importance to the foundation of constitutional law. Today, many countries around world incorporate the principles and laws that emerged from the Glorious Revolution into their constitutions in order create the needed balance of power.

FACT CHECK : At worldhistoryedu.com, we strive for utmost accuracy and objectivity. But if you come across something that doesn’t look right, don’t hesitate to leave a comment below.

Tags: Immortal Seven James Francis Stuart James II William III and Mary II

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Next story  Top Scholars of the Islamic Golden Age and their Major Achievements
• Previous story  Trygve Halvdan Lie: The First Secretary-General of the United Nations
• Popular Posts
• Recent Posts

What were the Freedom Rides in 1961?

Marilyn Monroe’s “Happy Birthday, Mr. President”

James Watt: Biography, Major Works & Achievements

Prometheus and the Creation of Man from Clay

Most Famous Works By Ancient Greek Tragedian Sophocles

Greatest African Leaders of all Time

Queen Elizabeth II: 10 Major Achievements

Donald Trump’s Educational Background

Donald Trump: 10 Most Significant Achievements

8 Most Important Achievements of John F. Kennedy

Odin in Norse Mythology: Origin Story, Meaning and Symbols

Ragnar Lothbrok – History, Facts & Legendary Achievements

9 Great Achievements of Queen Victoria

Most Ruthless African Dictators of All Time

12 Most Influential Presidents of the United States

Greek God Hermes: Myths, Powers and Early Portrayals

Kamala Harris: 10 Major Achievements

Kwame Nkrumah: History, Major Facts & 10 Memorable Achievements

8 Major Achievements of Rosa Parks

How did Captain James Cook die?

Trail of Tears: Story, Death Count & Facts

5 Great Accomplishments of Ancient Greece

Most Famous Pharaohs of Egypt

The Exact Relationship between Elizabeth II and Elizabeth I

How and when was Morse Code Invented?

• Adolf Hitler Alexander the Great American Civil War Ancient Egyptian gods Ancient Egyptian religion Apollo Athena Athens Black history Carthage China Civil Rights Movement Cold War Constantine the Great Constantinople Egypt England France Hera Horus India Isis John Adams Julius Caesar Loki Medieval History Military Generals Military History Napoleon Bonaparte Nobel Peace Prize Odin Osiris Ottoman Empire Pan-Africanism Queen Elizabeth I Religion Set (Seth) Soviet Union Thor Timeline Turkey Women’s History World War I World War II Zeus

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• What was the Glorious Revolution?
• When did the Glorious Revolution occur?
• Why is the Glorious Revolution significant?

What caused the Glorious Revolution?

The Glorious Revolution (1688–89) in England stemmed from religious and political conflicts. King James II was Catholic . His religion, and his actions rooted in it, put him at odds with the non-Catholic population and others. Many tolerated him, thinking that the throne would eventually pass to his eldest child, Mary , who was Protestant. This view changed with the birth of James’s son in June 1688, as the king now had a Catholic heir. Alarmed, several prominent Englishmen invited Mary’s husband, William of Orange , to invade England. He did so in November. James soon fled England, and William and Mary were crowned joint rulers in April 1689.

Related Questions