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.

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.

- 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 As a result of Poynings’ Law (which was not repealed until well into Hanoverian times), this body was subordinated to the English parliament at Westminster.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.

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

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.

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?

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.