A Jacobite is someone who upholds the lawful succession of the senior legitimate descendents of Charles I. The legitimate succession of the senior branch of the House of Stuart ended with the death of Cardinal Henry Benedict Stuart (King Henry IX) in 1807, when it passed to the next most senior line, the descendents of Henrietta Anne, youngest daughter of Charles I, in the royal house of Savoy. The present direct descendent of this house is the head of the royal house of Bavaria, Franz von Wittelsbach, although he advances no active claim to his English, Scottish and Irish titles. Franz von Wittelsbach is the de jure King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland according to Jacobite doctrine.
Jacobites reject the constitutional changes that the British Isles have undergone since 1688 and regard them as illegal. They reject the Acts of Settlement (1700) and Succession (1713) that prevent a Roman Catholic succeeding to the English throne. They reject the Act of Union with Scotland (1707) and regard England and Scotland as separate kingdoms and independent states. They reject the Act of Union with Ireland (1801) and therefore oppose the British occupation of the north of Ireland. Jacobites reject the notion that Parliament has the right to offer the crown to whomever it chooses; they assert the divine right of the House of Stuart and its legitimate descendents to rule, as set out in the political works of James I and VI and Sir Robert Filmer, and they believe in the authority of the Royal Prerogative to overrule Parliament in some circumstances. Jacobites believe in religious toleration and freedom of worship, and have historically come from all religious backgrounds although Catholics and Episcopalians have predominated amongst them.
Various attempts were made by the House of Stuart to regain its rights, mostly in Scotland, with Jacobite risings in 1708, 1715, 1719 and, most famously, 1745. In that year the Prince of Wales, Charles Edward Stuart, was appointed Regent of Scotland and England by his father King James III and successfully liberated southern Scotland and much of northwest England before turning his army back at Derby; he was defeated at Culloden Moor near Inverness on 16th April 1746, the darkest day in Jacobite history. Although he returned to England once more, in 1753, Charles effectively gave up on regaining the throne and ended his life as an alcoholic in Florence.
It is also worthy of note that the Jacobite royal succession represents the legitimate continuation of the House of Wessex that first ruled the unified Kingdom of England in the 10th century. King Edmund Ironside’s grandson Edgar, born in Hungary in 1040, was the last male member of the House of Wessex (if one discounts speculation about his son, Gerald ‘Longstride’); consequently the succession passed to the line of Edgar’s eldest sister, Margaret of Scotland, whose son was David I of Scotland. The Scottish House of Dunkeld was the ancestor of the House of Stuart that took the thrones of England, Scotland and Ireland in 1603. Thus Franz von Wittelsbach is the senior legitimate descendent of both King Alfred the Great and Kenneth McAlpin, the first King of Scotland.
Although the Jacobite succession is no longer a live political issue in England and Scotland, many constitutional matters that were of concern to 18th century Jacobites are still very much alive today. Scottish independence and the constitutional status of the north of Ireland, the role of Scottish and Irish MPs in the Westminster Parliament and the injustice of the Act of Settlement with respect to Catholics (to name but a few) are issues that linger on from the 17th and 18th centuries and are still in the news. In this blog I attempt to comment on both current and historical events from a Jacobite perspective.
You can read more about Jacobitism here.
This is my absolute favorite blog of all time. Only in this day and age of technology could the few scattered, remaining people who have an interest in Jacobitism have a place to come for news and information. Thank you for all of your hard work with this blog.
Very interesting,but lets face it,most of the clansmen who fought at Culloden didnt really want to be there,they were forced to fight by their clan chiefs,the ordinary people of the highlands couldn’t have cared less who was king
a charaidh choir,
With respect, I’m afraid you are quite incorrect on this score. If you examine the primary Gaelic source records from before, during, and after the ’45, and the behaviors of the clansmen themselves, many of whom “went out” in opposition to the wishes of their chiefs, who were Whig or at least trying to stay neutral, such as Norman MacLeod, who had to pass out white cockades and let on that he was raising troops for the Prince, when he was in fact raising them to join Lord Loudon’s regiment. Likewise, the MacLeods of Raasay defied Norman and joined the Jacobites, as did many Grants, such as the Glenmoristons. Then there were the many common clansmen who were overjoyed to see their Prince when he arrived, even though their more pragmatic chiefs were often not, such as MacDonald of Sleat, and even gallant Lochiel. The Kinloch Rannoch MacDonald clansmen and women went mad with excitement, dancing in the lanes, when Charles came to their lands, even though their chief was but luke-warm at first.
Also consider the fact that so many risked liberty, life, and limb for what was a lost cause after Culloden. A number of his supporters literally sacrificed their lives to save their Prince, including one (whose name escapes now) who strongly resembled Charles. When captured, he attempted escape knowing full well it would cost his life, and as he fell, he said “You have killed your Prince!” to throw the British off Charles’ track and delay their search.
There are a great many other examples of the common man or small lairds supporting Charles — and his supporters came from not only Catholic, but Established Church (Anglican variety) and even some Presbyterians.
Despite the modern fashionable opinions of Marxist and other revisionist historians, it becomes quite apparent that many of the clansmen were not only well aware of who their de jure monarch was, but also of the greater political situation in the wider world. These were not the “ignorant savages” they have often been painted as by the English Whig “historians.”
Many Highland and Lowland Scots had traveled on the Continent as soldiers or traders, and some rose to great heights in foreign service, such as the Leslie who was made admiral, and the Buchanan who was a general under Peter the Great. Another example from the ’45 was Neil MacEachern, who ferried Prince Charles at great risk to his own life and limb. His son, born in exile, was Alexander MacDonald, Duc de Tarente, whom Napoleon made Marshal of France.
Many people strongly believed in the de jure right of the Stuart cause. People at any level don’t usually risk their lives, fortunes, and families for naught.
As to whether they were right or not — fate has decided against them, but many still have sentimental attachments to their cause.
As for my own views, I am a life-long student, somewhat of a sentimental and “historical” Jacobite – interested in the people, the times, and the bravery of their supporters — the more so as I have ancestors who were Jacobites (and possibly some who were on the other side as well, but we don’t talk about them!). However, I don’t literally believe in the divine right of the Stuarts or any other monarchy or nobility, or even think monarchy is a good thing, necessarily — frankly, IMO, the nobility, just like democratically elected leaders, are generally no better or worse than the generality of mankind, and subject to greed, corruption, and all the flaws of humanity in general.
Dear Andrew,I am glad to read what you & others say,I have no time for the frozen faced conglomerate living in Buckingham palace & I do wish to see the house of Wittelsbach-Stuart enjoy their own again.I just pray,the sooner the better.
I’m delighted that you find the site so useful, but even more so to discover that there are other Jacobites out there.
Cuius est reddite!
I have just found your blog and am very impressed. I am not the only person who regards the Dutch Protestant invader as a usurper; I am glad to learn this.
Speed, bonnie boat, like a bird on the wing,
Onward, the sailors cry;
Carry the lad that’s born to be king
Over the sea to Skye…
Well, persoannly I would rather have a republic than the current union, or a monarchy under the house fo Windsor – but only as a way of avoiding either of those possibilities.
Personally, as His Majesty has not really expressed much interest in regaining his throne(s), rights, previleges and responsibilities, I wonder if the sensible thing would be to offer the Crown of Scots to either Prince Max or hos daughter Princess Sophia as regent until Hm passed on. A thoroughly (politically) educated monarch with fairly strong powers is infinitely preferable to a left-leaning monarch who believes in alternative medicine and other bogus nonsense (Charles Windsor) and goes round making pronouncements that, while having no political significance serve to weaken the public’s faith in any monarchy.
There are plenty more of us Jacobites out there. Check out the Yahoo group ‘Jacobite’.
Hi there,
This is a very exciting site, and it’s good to know there are still Jacobites out there! A question I’d like to ask other Jacobites; during the Wars of the Roses would you have supported York or Lancaster? I have always been a Yorkist (although admittedly for no good reason), and I was later surprised to learn that Bonnie Prince Charlie’s symbol was the White Rose of York! Also, what would be an authentic “Jacobite” take on the issue of Northern Ireland?
There are two answers to the York v. Lancaster question. One is to say that neither the Plantagenets nor the Tudors had a real right to the throne; James I was the direct descendent of David I of Scotland, the son of St. Margaret of Scotland the sister of Edward the Confessor and the last of the House of Wessex. The House of Dunkeld (and subsequently Stuart) was the inheritor of the House of Wessex. Another, less radical way of answering the question is to say that, generally speaking, more families that were historically Yorkist tended to support the Jacobite cause – but that was because a lot of prominent Yorkist families did not support the Reformation. However, the Jacobite white rose is only tangentially related to the white rose of York. One theory is that it might have arisen during the Exclusion Crisis of the 1670s, when the supporters of the Duke of York adopted it as an emblem.
The imposition of direct rule on Northern Ireland was only possible because of the Act of Union of 1801. This act was clearly contrary to Jacobite principles and at the time it was enacted, Henry IX was still King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland. Ireland is a separate kingdom; Jacobites envisage Ireland as a united island under a single monarch. Consequently, the creation of an Irish Republic in the south is as unsatisfactory as a British province in the north. If I lived in Northern Ireland, the party with whom I would identify would be the SDLP, since they stand for a united Ireland but are not avowedly Republican. In the same way, Fine Gael in the south are not associated with an overtly Republican agenda. Unionism is inherently incompatible with Jacobite beliefs.
What a delightful blog, Jacobite. Congratulations, and thank you for providing a forum for those of us who have not forgotten the last word of Charles I, “Remember.”
To begin to understand the North of Ireland it is necessary to grasp the contrariness of the place. Both current sides of the political divide have republican (small ‘r’) roots; something that both fringe and even some mainstream Unionists seem more prepared to accept. Ironically, the pre-republican Catholic tradition of the eighteenth century was profoundly royalist and legitimist.
For anyone actually wishing to understand Ireland’s Jacobite experience in any detail, please refer to Breandan Ó Buachalla’s excellent and exhaustive book, Aisling Ghear, na Stiobhart agus an taos leinn, 1603-1788. The issues of loyalty developed in seventeenth century Ireland that would bind the secret organizations of the rural poor to the Stuarts until the early years of Victoria’s reign are fully explored. It must be remembered that the party songs of Daniel O’Connell grass roots supporters were Mo Ghile Mear , An Buachaill Ban and St Patrick’s Day in the Morning, to which Lady Nairne set her words for Wake Irishmen. These and many more airs were rich with Jacobite hidden transcripts.
I really would love to come to the north of Ireland to stay there a while.Is there any Jacobite sentiment at all there?
Dear Sir or Madam,
I hope this letter finds you well.
I am researching my family heraldry.
There are both Buckley’s and Bean’s in my family branch.
I have reason to believe, that the Bean’s may have been involved in the Jacobite Rebellions according to online reasearch. Are the Buckley family also affiliated in any way pro or con to these Britanic historical timelines .
I ask you as self acclaimed “Jacobite” in philosphy and presummed “experts” on this issue.
Your feed back would be appreciated.
Sincerely, Eugene A. Buckley
Just a couple of comments re Ireland:
- As you know, at the time of the deposition of the Stuarts, Ireland was still ruled by the old mediaeval Irish Parliament. As a result of Poynings’ Law (which was not repealed until well into Hanoverian times), this body was subordinated to the English parliament at Westminster. So the two kingdoms were joined to that extent.
- It is an interesting fact of Irish history that Sinn Fein started off (under Arthur Griffith, in 1905) as a monarchist party. In the momentous debate on the Treaty in the First Dail, Michael Collins made some comment to the effect that he would have lived with a monarchy if it had meant that Ireland would be free. It would no doubt have been his second choice, however: remember that he was an officer of an institution known as the Irish Republican Army.
Another point about Ireland: you may recall that it was the Fine Gael-led coalition that passed the Republic of Ireland Act 1948, breaking the final Irish links with the British crown. You might, of course, wish to argue that breaking from the Hanoverian dynasty is no bad thing, and that De Valera’s 1937 Constitution had already (either de jure or de facto – this is disputed) made Ireland a republic.
Having said this, it was my impression that Irish nationalists of all persuasions (discounting any Jacobite fringe that may remain on the Emerald Isle) gave their allegiance, at least in principle, to the Irish Republic, as declared in 1916 and ratified by the First Dail in 1919.
From bullen-a-la to tiocfaidh ar la, one might say.
I have just come across this website and with regard to the York v Lancaster question I must confess it had never occurred to me that so far as England is concerned the Yorkist cause, the cause of Mary Queen of Scots, the Royalist cause and the Jacobite cause were not in principle a continuous assertion of indefeasible hereditary right so I am surprised that there is any doubt where a Jacobite would stand.
I really enjoyed reading this, and its good to see some people who share my views about the rightful rule in These isles, i am from Glasgow Scotand and i have always been raised to be agaist britain and the act of union i am also a Roman Catholic and i would class myself as a Jacobite.
After alot of historical study i sided with the rightful king James and i also in my early adulthood became aware of the law in place to stop catholics from rising to a possition of power here, and we are supposed to be an equal rights outfit.
Thanks again for this
Just on the point regarding the Jacobite white rose – this is based on the wild white rose of Scotland and nothing to do with the York rose.
The white rose is the ‘alba maxima’ and is often called the Jacobite rose.
I am also glad that there are more Jacobites out there. I spend much of my teaching time, when appropriate, educating the kids about the true happenings of 1688.
Happy White Rose Day! Long live King Franz.
Up with Restoration, Down with Revolution
I’m one frustrated American. I’m descended from the Irish and Scots. My mother was an O’Dell, her mother was a Gordon, and her paternal grandmother was a Martin. (My father’s ancestors were germanic/deutch.)
Does anyone know if the Martin clan was, for the most part, Jacobite? I read that the Martins were allied with the Campbells(?) on the internet… now, I’m unable to find information on the lesser clans, period.
I very much agree with Andrew MacDonald. Absolutely thee best blog without question truly fabulous.
There are more Jacobites around than I thought and am much happy to be within that number!
Also wish I’m alive when the Bear gate at Traquair is opened once again!
Bravo for this excellent journal enunciating your views with clarity and consummate jacobitism. I especially appreciate the philosophical effort you spend in developping a Jacobite constitutional stance for the current era which has a chance of revitalising monarchism and the commonwealth, rather than just taking Jacobitism as sentimental fantasy and heritage fetishism. In this respect you have a potent case which deserves wider airing. A real movement could be in the offing. From one of the last loyalists to the crown in North America south of Canada, a monarcho-socialist, and an increasingly convinced Jacobite, you have my thanks and prayers.
To the King over the water!
Yes there are many more Jacobite s out there and we just need to bring them together.
My own ancestors were leading members of the south coasts largest and most powerful smuggling organisation known as The Hawkhurst gang. The Hawkhurst gang would openly toast Toast the King over the water and along with other groups would assist the Stuart cause when they were able.
The south coast was in those days was very remote from London and also from the Hanoverian usurpers rule. However during the 45 uprising, troops were sent to the south coast in an attempt to prevent any possible rising by the smuggling gangs in support of Charles Edward Stuart.
Dear Paul,
This sounds very interesting,did the Hawkhurst gang have any connection with Dr.Syn & Romney marsh?because I believe he did exist in some way or other.
I was really pleased to come across your blog – I am a Celt (Irish parents born in Wales), a Catholic and a Jacobite who is very proud of my welsh homeland. Please don’t forget the Welsh Jacobites – most important of whom was David Thomas Morgan of Merthyr Tydfil who served the Jacobite cause, was a councillor to Charles Stuart in the 1745 war and was murdered (executed) by the English in 1746.
Cymru am byth