----- Original Message -----

From: Anne

To: Jacobite@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 11:32 AM

Subject: [Jacobite] Re: The Jacobite origins of the "Red Poppy of Flanders"

 

This placing Stamps upside down is something I still occasionally do. There was actually a campaign to do so in the early 1970s and it was frankly one of the more ludicrous scemes with which I was involved as a callow youth. My late father pointed out that I was still licking the stamp.
I had always assumed that a stamp was no more than a receipt for a service.....the delivery of mail. And stamps affixed in a hurry can be carelessly affixed at all angles.
A word of caution however.....I saw in a recent TV programme (I think QI on BBC) that affixing the stamp upside down is actually illegal as is defacing currency.
My local post office is very tolerant of this sort of thing.

As most philatelists know, postage stamps are oft used as propaganda and I have often tried to get material thru the mail which would have been amusing in my collection (I ceased to collec in 2000). Comparatively easy I think with automation.
Among the stamps/First Day Covers I got thru the mail was one celebrating the "Royal Divorce" (Charles Windsor/Diana Spencer) postmarked on the day John Major announced it in the Commons. I simply used the Charles Diana stammps and placed a thin but visible scissors cut between the two. I was actually surprised that one got thru.
I also got the "Royal Wedding" of Anne and the Sailor thru. I used the original stamps from her first wedding to Mark Peters.
To my immense delight and surprise the local Post Office actually noticed this one after it had been automatically postmarked and gave it a very clear handstamp.
Again this might be more difficult to do in the English Home Counties.
I should point out that I never collected "British" stamps but had a small stock of stamps for just this kind of contingency. Perhaps in the interest of good taste, I did get to use all of them.

John

--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Noel S. McFerran" <noel.mcferran@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> When it comes to postage stamps, a Jacobite can always place them upside down. I suppose that the ultra-Jacobite could stomp on their coins before using them.
>

This placing Stamps upside down is something I still occasionally do. There was
actually a campaign to do so in the early 1970s and it was frankly one of the
more ludicrous scemes with which I was involved as a callow youth. My late
father pointed out that I was still licking the stamp.
I had always assumed that a stamp was no more than a receipt for a
service.....the delivery of mail. And stamps affixed in a hurry can be
carelessly affixed at all angles.
A word of caution however.....I saw in a recent TV programme (I think QI on BBC)
that affixing the stamp upside down is actually illegal as is defacing currency.
My local post office is very tolerant of this sort of thing.

As most philatelists know, postage stamps are oft used as propaganda and I have
often tried to get material thru the mail which would have been amusing in my
collection (I ceased to collec in 2000). Comparatively easy I think with
automation.
Among the stamps/First Day Covers I got thru the mail was one celebrating the
"Royal Divorce" (Charles Windsor/Diana Spencer) postmarked on the day John Major
announced it in the Commons. I simply used the Charles Diana stammps and placed
a thin but visible scissors cut between the two. I was actually surprised that
one got thru.
I also got the "Royal Wedding" of Anne and the Sailor thru. I used the original
stamps from her first wedding to Mark Peters.
  To my immense delight and surprise the local Post Office actually noticed this
one after it had been automatically postmarked and gave it a very clear
handstamp.
Again this might be more difficult to do in the English Home Counties.
I should point out that I never collected "British" stamps but had a small stock
of stamps for just this kind of contingency. Perhaps in the interest of good
taste, I did get to use all of them.

John



--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Noel S. McFerran" <noel.mcferran@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> When it comes to postage stamps, a Jacobite can always place them upside down.
I suppose that the ultra-Jacobite could stomp on their coins before using them.
>

Steven Robb wrote:

>This thread rears its head over the years on this group.  Although as a
Jacobite whilst at college I did try and refrain (to my friends hilarity) from
using coins with the Usurpers head on them, I would be intrigued to hear how its
is possible to live ones life in the UK without some tacit acceptance of the
reigning house ?  Does one use carrier pigeons rather than the Royal Mail ? 
That paper from the corner shop bought with a Hanoverian note...etc.

I acknowledge the fact that the usurpress and her ministers (mostly the later)
are in control of England and Scotland.  I also consider this fact a dreadful
thing.  My use of money or postage which includes an image of the usurpress (or
occasionally of her father) does not mean that I recognise that she (acting
through her ministers) has any right to rule.  When I travel to other countries,
I do not necessarily recognise everything that the de facto governments of those
places proclaim.  I do not believe, for example, that Muhammed was the prophet
of Almighty God.

When it comes to postage stamps, a Jacobite can always place them upside down. 
I suppose that the ultra-Jacobite could stomp on their coins before using them.

>Are you seriously suggesting the many brave men who fought in WW1 and later
conflicts should have refused to serve on Jacobite principles ?  From the safety
of a computer keyboard in 2010 such stirring sentiments leave me lukewarm... 
The same can be said of the many (especially the English) who did not rise in
the 15 and 45.  History has to judge decisions made at the time with all the
social norms and traditions in place then, not with transplanted contemporary
values.    It is likely refusing to serve for Jacobite reasons may have been
judged as High Treason, leading to execution.  Many were shot for less...

It would have required significant bravery for a Jacobite in 1914 to have
refused to fight in the armed forces of the usurper - perhaps even more bravery
than that shown by those who did fight.  In the Second World War a simple
Austrian farmer, Franz Jägerstätter, married with three daughters, refused to
fight in the Wehrmacht, and was executed on account of his stance; he has since
been beatified by the Catholic Church.

I am not suggesting that one can or should expect such heroicity of virtue from
all.  But when it is practised, it should be recognised as the great thing it
is.


-----
Noel S. McFerran
noel.mcferran@...
"The Jacobite Heritage" <http://www.jacobite.ca/>

--- On Fri, 1/1/10, Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@...> wrote:

> Who solemnised the marriage of the
> Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and Rothesay? Might it have
> been Mgr. Eugenio Pacelli (the Venerable Pope Pius XII)?

Bonifacius Wöhrmüller, Abbot of St. Boniface in Munich (i.e. the same office
which united Princess Alice and Prince Lukas last year, since the monastery of
Andechs has been united with St. Boniface since 1850).  One of Wöhrmüller's
books, "The Royal Law: Little Chapters on Charity" has been translated into
English; I have never read it, but will check it out tomorrow.

As Stelios has pointed out, when Albert and Marita were married, the marriage
was not recognised as dynastic for Bavaria (similar to the marriage of Archduke
Franz Ferdinand to Countess Sophie Chotek).  The difference is that Albert and
Marita's marriage was still something of a "state" occasion.  Admittedly the
wedding was in Berchtesgaden and not in Munich and there was no significant
attendance by members of other royal families.  But all the groom's family
attended including his father King Rupert, step-mother Queen Antonia,
grandmother Duchess Karl Theodor in Bavaria, uncle Prince Franz (with son Prince
Ludwig), great-aunt and step-grandmother the Dowager Grand Duchess of
Luxembourg, aunts Hildegard, Wiltrud, Helmtrud, Gundelinde, as well as Sicilian
and Törring cousins.

--
Noel S. McFerran
noel.mcferran@...

--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, Steven Robb <stevenmrobb@...> wrote:
>
>
> Alas my grandfather didnt live long enough for me to inform him he was in the
Hanoverian / Saxe-Coburg Gotha forces, and he went to France in 1918 with
the Royal Scots. 
> This thread rears its head over the years on this group.  Although as a
Jacobite whilst at college I did try and refrain (to my friends hilarity) from
using coins with the Usurpers head on them, I would be intrigued to hear
how its is possible to live ones life in the UK without some tacit acceptance
of the reigning house ?  Does one use carrier pigeons rather than the Royal
Mail ?  That paper from the corner shop bought with a Hanoverian note...etc.

Every time I send a letter or card by "Royal Mail", particularly when it is
addressed to HIS MAJESTY KING FRANCIS (whose reply has the stamp of the German
Federal Republic), I feel bad - "what the hell ...?". Unlike all my Royalist
friends, I am in favour of the Euro replacing Sterling. That at least puts us on
a par with European Legitimists, who may resent, they also, the loss of their
national unit of currency.


>  
> Are you seriously suggesting the many brave men who fought in WW1 and later
conflicts should have refused to serve on Jacobite principles ?  From the
safety of a computer keyboard in 2010 such stirring sentiments leave me
lukewarm...  The same can be said of the many (especially the English) who did
not rise in the 15 and 45.  History has to judge decisions made at the time
with all the social norms and traditions in place then, not with transplanted
contemporary values.    It is likely refusing to serve for Jacobite reasons
may have been judged as High Treason, leading to execution.  Many were shot for
less...

Yes, I should certainly have been arrested and executed, either shot or hung, if
I had declared my loyalty to QUEEN MARY IV & III in 1914, as a reason for
avoiding conscript service in the forces of the de facto "British Army". To say
nothing of contempt of court for not recognising the legality of the then, and
current, system of justice.

Curiously enough, the ambiguity which had dominated the neo-Jacobite movement
between, say, 1870 and 1914 (e.g. Ashburnham's titles included a "Barony" from
William of Orange and an "Earldom" from the Elector Georg I of Hannover. His
grandfather was a courtier of the usurping family, and was a godson of the then
Elector's daughter. As for the Marquis de Ruvigny, it is well-known that in
1690, the then Marquis de Rivigny was a General of William of Orange, who later
confronted the Marshal Duke of Berwick in Spain, and was awarded with an
"Earldom of Galway". The later Ruvigny lived at Galway Cottage, Chertsey,
Surrey, and had an office in Hanover Buildings, off the Strand), resumed after
1918. Among the pro-Jacobite founders of the Royal Stuart Society in 1926 was
"Captain" Henry "Stuart" Wheatley Crowe and "Major" Francis John Angus Skeat.
Regardless of whether or not the regiments into which there were "commissioned"
had some particular historical distinction, the fashion from the time of Jane
Austen for gentlemen to project their gallantry with the use of military or
naval title, after 1918 held good with a vengeance, although as my English
maternal grandmother used to say, there were many "temporary gentlemen" parading
as "officers".

Of course, at one point, KING RUPERT's engagement to Princess Antonia of
Luxemburg was broken, because sentiment in the Grand Duchy (her elder sister,
the Grand Duchess Marie Adelaide had been too friendly with the German occupiers
and was obliged to abdicate) was still very high against Germany and Germans.

>  
> Like it or not we have to live in the world as it is - not as we would wish it
to be...
>  
> s
>

Of course, you are right, Steven.

Nevertheless, as far as the 1914 War is concerned, what was the point of it all?
Was the honour of the Serbian assassin of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand (of
Austria-Este, whom the Jacobite's KING FRANCIS I, his cousin, had nominated as
the heir of his rights to the Duchy of Modena) at Sarajevo in Bosnia, so
important as to turn Europe into a blood bath. Have I not the right to say, that
I disagree not simply with the exclusion of the Legitimate Stuart Kings by a
series of usurpers, chosen by illegal conventions, mascarading as "parliaments",
with all the political, economic and military options and concomitants, which
resulted from this, but even with developments of this same logic in the context
of the so-called "modern period" of European and British History from 1815 to
1914? We have to realise too, that by the time of the French Revolution, the
Sovereign Monarchies of the Italian peninsula, the House of Savoy, the House of
Austria-Este, the Bourbons of Parma and the Two Sicilies, like the Royal Bourbon
Houses of France and Spain, regarded as their defender against Jacobin
aggression, firstly, and consequently Bonapartist Imperialism, the "Government"
and the military and naval might of the usurping regime of the Elector Georg III
of Hannover. Even the last of Stuarts, the Cardinal KING HENRY IX was beholden
to his usurping distant cousin, although it is entirely erroneous to confuse the
Cardinal King's genuine gratitude with an acceptance of a status quo and a
transfer of loyalties, for which Walter Scott became such a fervent
propagandist. There are very clear and obvious reasons, why the Legitimate
successors of the Stuarts after 1807 did not publicly ever allude to their
rights to the British Thrones. But if they did not publicly advance their
claims, they did not either in any way deny or abdicate from their rights.
>
>
> --- On Wed, 30/12/09, Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@...>
> Subject: [Jacobite] Re: The Jacobite oriigins of the "Red Poppy of Flanders"
> To: Jacobite@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, 30 December, 2009, 16:05
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> The neo-Jacobite revival of the late 19th century dissolved before the dilemma
of guarding allegiance to the Legitimist Jacobite Heir, Prince Rupert, Duke of
Cornwall and Rothesay, a Field Marshal of the German Imperial Army, indeed
leading the attack on the river Somme against the so-called "British", but in
fact Hannoverian/ Saxe-Coburg Gotha, forces. The "British" paid a high price for
a wasted century of fool-hardy Imperialist politics after the defeat of Napoleon
Bonaparte. Jacobites who fail to appreciate the "world-view" aspect of our just
cause, will undoubtedly be shocked and scandalised by my point of view, which is
far more radical than John Mooney could ever imagine.
>
> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "JohnM" <irishknight1952@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > Of course it should remembered that these "Irish" soldiers in WW1 were
actually fighting AGAINST a German Army which included the Jacobite Royal House.
> > Meanwhile the 1916 Irish Republican Proclamation acknowledged "gallant
allies in Europe" (the Germans).
> >
> > Interestingly in the North of Ireland many of the graves are unmarked
prtaicuarly in Catholic areas because of the stigma. A former colleague (an
Orange man) has recently produced a book on a regiment in which his grandfather
served and I was able to help him track down and photograph some graves.
> > Interestingly the Keith Jeffrey referred to in the article is a senior
professor at Queens (!!!!!) University Belfast, where he is currently leading a
MA programme on MI5 (the British Intelligence Service). He has been commissioned
to write the history.
> > Alas Stelios, QUB people get everywhere.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@> wrote:
> > >
> > > http://www.historyt imes.com/ fresh-perspectiv es-in-history/ british-and-
irish-history/ 486-remembering- irish-soldiers- in-world- war-i
> > >
> >
>

Who solemnised the marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and Rothesay?
Might it have been Mgr. Eugenio Pacelli (the Venerable Pope Pius XII)?

--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, Noel McFerran <noel.mcferran@...> wrote:
>
> --- On Wed, 6/10/09, stelios.rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@...> wrote:
>
> > Today, June 10th, White Rose Day,
> > marks the 40th Anniversary of the death, on June 10, 1969,
> > at Wildbad Kreuth of QUEEN MARITA, the first consort of HIS
> > late MAJESTY KING ALBERT and the mother of HIS present
> > MAJESTY KING FRANCIS II.
> > ...
> > Thus, on the day of her
> > marriage (September 3, 1930) at Schloss Berchtesgaden to His
> > Royal Highness Prince Albert, Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay,
> > she had been orphaned from both father and step-father.
> > Which of her uncles gave her away? Possibly her mother's
> > brother, Prince Ferdinand Bonaventura, 3rd Fürst von
> > Montenuovo?
>
> A very belated response:
>
> In the procession to the church the groom, the Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay,
was accompanied by his step-mother Queen Antonia, and by his future
mother-in-law Princess Julia of Oettingen-Wallerstein.  The bride was
accompanied by her future father-in-law King Rupert, and by her uncle the Prince
of Montenuovo (as Stelios suggests).
>
> > (Did HIS MAJESTY receive his second name,
> > Bonaventura, from this uncle?)
>
> I had not considered this before, but think it very likely.
>
> --
> Noel S. McFerran
> noel.mcferran@...
>

--- On Fri, 1/1/10, Noel McFerran <noel.mcferran@...> wrote:

> Two years ago the trustees decided to allow Christie's to
> auction Peter Lely's "Venus and Child", a portrait believed
> to have formerly hung at Whitehall in the apartments of King
> Charles II.  Traditionally it depicts Nell Gwyn, but
> some modern critics suggest it is Barbara Villiers.. 
> Either way, it was a very significant piece in the
> collection  The auction realised a million pound
> windfall for the trustees - but the curator, Nicholas
> Reeves, resigned in disgust.

I ought to have included a link to the sale:
http://tinyurl.com/ChiddingstoneVenus

The copy of the portrait which now hangs at Chiddingstone is really quite
unfortunate.  In former ages there were hundreds of artists trained to produce
near-perfect copies; those days seem to be gone.

--
Noel S. McFerran
noel.mcferran@...

--- On Wed, 12/23/09, Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@...> wrote:

> "Revived from dereliction in 1955 by the gifted antiquary
> Denys Bower, the Castle became a home for his amazing and
> varied collections. ... He was completely entranced by the
> romance of the Jacobite rebellion (sic) and even thought he
> was the reincarnation of Bonny Prince Charlie!"

The current trustees of Chiddingstone Castle are making real efforts to revive
the institution and to bring to the attention of the public the very interesting
collections (Jacobite/Stuart and Japanese, with somewhat less useful Egyptian
antiquities) which it houses.  These changes have not come without a cost
(financial and otherwise).

Two years ago the trustees decided to allow Christie's to auction Peter Lely's
"Venus and Child", a portrait believed to have formerly hung at Whitehall in the
apartments of King Charles II.  Traditionally it depicts Nell Gwyn, but some
modern critics suggest it is Barbara Villiers.  Either way, it was a very
significant piece in the collection  The auction realised a million pound
windfall for the trustees - but the curator, Nicholas Reeves, resigned in
disgust.

The trustees seem to be spending their money well.  There have been significant
improvements for visitors.  I was there last April, and thoroughly enjoyed
myself.
--
Noel S. McFerran
noel.mcferran@...

--- On Wed, 6/10/09, stelios.rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@...> wrote:

> Today, June 10th, White Rose Day,
> marks the 40th Anniversary of the death, on June 10, 1969,
> at Wildbad Kreuth of QUEEN MARITA, the first consort of HIS
> late MAJESTY KING ALBERT and the mother of HIS present
> MAJESTY KING FRANCIS II.
> ...
> Thus, on the day of her
> marriage (September 3, 1930) at Schloss Berchtesgaden to His
> Royal Highness Prince Albert, Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay,
> she had been orphaned from both father and step-father.
> Which of her uncles gave her away? Possibly her mother's
> brother, Prince Ferdinand Bonaventura, 3rd Fürst von
> Montenuovo?

A very belated response:

In the procession to the church the groom, the Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay,
was accompanied by his step-mother Queen Antonia, and by his future
mother-in-law Princess Julia of Oettingen-Wallerstein.  The bride was
accompanied by her future father-in-law King Rupert, and by her uncle the Prince
of Montenuovo (as Stelios suggests).

> (Did HIS MAJESTY receive his second name,
> Bonaventura, from this uncle?)

I had not considered this before, but think it very likely.

--
Noel S. McFerran
noel.mcferran@...

The neo-Jacobite revival of the late 19th century dissolved before the dilemma
of guarding allegiance to the Legitimist Jacobite Heir, Prince Rupert, Duke of
Cornwall and Rothesay, a Field Marshal of the German Imperial Army, indeed
leading the attack on the river Somme against the so-called "British", but in
fact Hannoverian/Saxe-Coburg Gotha, forces. The "British" paid a high price for
a wasted century of fool-hardy Imperialist politics after the defeat of Napoleon
Bonaparte. Jacobites who fail to appreciate the "world-view" aspect of our just
cause, will undoubtedly be shocked and scandalised by my point of view, which is
far more radical than John Mooney could ever imagine.




--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "JohnM" <irishknight1952@...> wrote:
>
> Of course it should remembered that these "Irish" soldiers in WW1 were
actually fighting AGAINST a German Army which included the Jacobite Royal House.
> Meanwhile the 1916 Irish Republican Proclamation acknowledged "gallant allies
in Europe" (the Germans).
>
> Interestingly in the North of Ireland many of the graves are unmarked
prtaicuarly in Catholic areas because of the stigma. A former colleague (an
Orange man) has recently produced a book on a regiment in which his grandfather
served and I was able to help him track down and photograph some graves.
> Interestingly the Keith Jeffrey referred to in the article is a senior
professor at Queens (!!!!!) University Belfast, where he is currently leading a
MA programme on MI5 (the British Intelligence Service). He has been commissioned
to write the history.
> Alas Stelios, QUB people get everywhere.
>
> John
>
>
>
> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos@>
wrote:
> >
> >
http://www.historytimes.com/fresh-perspectives-in-history/british-and-irish-hist\
ory/486-remembering-irish-soldiers-in-world-war-i
> >
>

Today, January 1st, is the 244th anniversary of the death of King James III and
VIII.  Now is perhaps the right time to start planning for the 250th anniversary
(since the 300th anniversaries of James' birth and accession passed by with only
a whimper).

The National Portrait Gallery has a superb collection of likenesses of James III
and VIII:
http://tinyurl.com/jacobus
It might be an appropriate institution to lobby for a special exhibition.

Even if one is not Jacobite, one has to admit that this man had an incredible
influence on English and Scottish affairs for over half a century.

-----
Noel S. McFerran
noel.mcferran@...
"The Jacobite Heritage" <http://www.jacobite.ca/>

--- On Sun, 11/8/09, Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@...> wrote:

> Frances ("Fanny") Jenings, Lady Hamilton and Duchess of Tyrconnel
> was the sister of Sarah
> Churchill (nee Jenings), later "Duchess of Marlborough",
> both daughters and co-heiresses of Richard Jenings of
> Sandridge, Hertford by Frances, daughter and co-heiress of
> Sir Giffard Thornhurst, baronet.
>
> ...
>
> She died aged 82, after falling out of
> bed at Paradise Row or Arbour Hill, Dublin on March 6, 1731
> and was buried on March 9, 1731 at St. Patrick''s
> Cathedral.

There is a monument to Frances, Duchess of Tyrconnel in the chapel of the Scots
College in Paris.  At her death, she left an endowment for the College on
condition of a mass being said daily for the repose of her own soul as well as
the souls of her two husbands.

I had hoped to visit the Scots College last May, but unfortunately it did not
happen.

--
Noel S. McFerran
noel.mcferran@...

Of course it should remembered that these "Irish" soldiers in WW1 were actually
fighting AGAINST a German Army which included the Jacobite Royal House.
Meanwhile the 1916 Irish Republican Proclamation acknowledged "gallant allies in
Europe" (the Germans).

Interestingly in the North of Ireland many of the graves are unmarked
prtaicuarly in Catholic areas because of the stigma. A former colleague (an
Orange man) has recently produced a book on a regiment in which his grandfather
served and I was able to help him track down and photograph some graves.
Interestingly the Keith Jeffrey referred to in the article is a senior professor
at Queens (!!!!!) University Belfast, where he is currently leading a MA
programme on MI5 (the British Intelligence Service). He has been commissioned to
write the history.
Alas Stelios, QUB people get everywhere.

John



--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos@...>
wrote:
>
>
http://www.historytimes.com/fresh-perspectives-in-history/british-and-irish-hist\
ory/486-remembering-irish-soldiers-in-world-war-i
>

It is undoubtedly true that in Scotland, the non-juring Episcopalian Church was
100% Royalist during the Rebellion of the Covenanters and Parliament against
King Charles I and 100% Jacobite from the reign of King James VII & II. There
are many heroes of the Jacobite Movement in Scotland who were characterised by
their total devotion to the Royal House of Stuart and to Episcopacy, while
having reserves about the Papacy and the "Romish" faith. Persons of the stature
of James Graham of Claverhouse, Viscount of Dundee, George Lockhart of Carnwath,
John Erskine, Duke of Mar, William Gordon, Viscount of Kenmure, Robert Dalzell,
Earl of Carnwath, William Murray, Duke of Rannoch (mostly known by the
non-Jacobite titles "Marquess of Tullibardine" and "Duke of Atholl", of which he
was deprived), Lord George Murray, John Maule, Earl of Panmure, Alexander
Forbes, Lord Forbes of Pitsligo, William Livingstone, Viscount of Kilsyth, John
Hay of Cromlix, Earl and Duke of Inverness, James Murray, Earl of Dunbar, Donald
Cameron of Lochiel, Lord Lochiel, Laurence Oliphant of Gask, Lord Oliphant,
David Ogilvy, Earl of Airlie, David Wemyss, Lord Elcho, Macpherson of Cluny,
Arthur Elphinstone, Lord Balmerino, William Drummond, Viscount of Strathallan,
Dr. Archibald Cameron, Andrew Lumsden of Cushnie, Sir James Edgar, Sir John Roy
Stewart, to name but a few, eminent Jacobites were devout and loyal members of
the Episcopalian Church, even when exiled in France or Rome (or the Papal
enclave of Avignon).

English, Welsh and Irish non-Jurors (the Reverend George Kelly, one of the Seven
Men of Moidart, was an Irish non-juring clergyman) had "oratories" dispersed all
over London and the counties, but it must be said that the English non-juring
clergy became less and less interested in the political aspects of Jacobitism
and more and more embroiled in sacramental and liturgical discussions. An
exception was the fervently Jacobite non-juring community at Manchester, active
in the '45. However prominent Anglican Jacobites, such as James Butler, Duke of
Ormonde and Francis Atterbury, Bishop of Rochester, were never strictly
non-Jurors, since between 1688 and 1714, they had been active in the de facto
usurping regime, although after 1715, their position in the Church of England
would have been ambigious. Certainly those who remained active in Tory politics
were conforming Anglicans rather than non-Jurors.

According to recent researches, Prince Charles Edward Stuart embraced
Anglicanism during his brief visit to London in September, 1752, not as
previously supposed at the Chrch of St. Mary-le-Strand, but at a non-Juror
oratory at Holborn. The non-juring Episcopal Church of Scotland did not regard
itself as being in Communion with the Church of England which had acknowledged
the usurpers, but did contribute significantly to the continuation of a separate
non-juring Hierarchy. In 1783, the Reverend Samuel Seabury, a clergyman from
Connecticut, New England, received Episcopal consecration in Aberdeen from the
non-juring Episcopalian Church of Scotland, which commemorated KING CHARLES III,
and thus the Jacobite and non-juror heritage was grafted onto the
post-revolution Protestant Episcopal Church of North America.

--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Jacobite M" <jacobitem@...> wrote:
>
> "Are Jacobites mainly Catholics then? By no means"
>
> Absolutely.
>
> I would like to point out this article online, which explains in some detail
the important role of the non-juring movement, where clerics of the
'established' churches actually moved to uphold a true succession.
>
> http://wapedia.mobi/en/Nonjuring_schism
>
> Personally I find that not nearly enough attention is paid to this particular
aspect of Jacobitism. It is often said [wrongly] that Jacobite support was based
exclusively in Roman Catholic foundations; the truth is very different.
>
> Dean MacKinnon-Thomson
> [jacobitem]
>
>
> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos@>
wrote:
> >
> > He lives a fulfilled celibate life, engaged in his public and private
occupations. As a practising Catholic, he takes very seriously his membership of
the Order of Malta and has his own charitable foundations, which, among other
things, support hospitals and orphanages in the Balkan countries, as well as
immigrant families in some of the poorer suburbs of Munich. He is a doting uncle
and as Head of the family, takes a great interest in the younger generation.
(Have a look at the photos on this site). He is perfectly at ease in female
company, and I have a video, which shows him as an excellent dancer with his
sister-in-law, while his younger brother, Prince Max, plays the clarinet. At the
age of 76, he is unlikely to surprise us by finding a spouse young enough to
produce an heir. However, Prince Max is very happily married to the former
Swedish Countess Elizabeth Douglas (her family, who are descendants of Robert
II, King of Scots (1371-1390), the founder of the Stewart dynasty, emigrated
from Scotland to Sweden in the 17th century) and they have five extremely
charming and vivacious daughters, four of them (until now) married, three of
them (at present) with children. Because, Prince Max is only four years younger
than KING FRANCIS, the future of the "Stuart" line lies rather with the issue of
the eldest daughter of Prince Max and Princess Elizabeth, who is Princess
Sophie, married to the Hereditary Prince Alois of Liechtenstein.  They have
three sons and a daughter.
> >
> > In August, 1714, when the Elector Georg of Hannover, was "invited" to usurp
the British Thrones, simply because he was a Protestant (a Lutheran, not an
Anglican), the rightful King, JAMES III of England and Ireland and VIII of
Scotland, who was then still unmarried, and the next 54 in the Line of
Succession, were excluded because they were Catholics, under the so-called "Act
of Settlement" of 1701. This "act", which is not recognised by Jacobites, has
never been annulled. Thus, the person, known as "Queen Elizabeth II", would be,
if  Catholics had not been "excluded" from the British Thrones (because, again,
Jacobites do not recognise such an entity as the "United Kingdom", but three
separate Sovereign Kingdoms, in a Union of Crowns in the person of the Monarch,
not an "anglocentric" Union of Parliaments at Westminster) possibly something
like the 20,000th in the line of Succession. We have nothing personally against
the lady in question or her children or grandchildren. Simply, as Jacobites, we
could not by any possible measure, consider that she has a right to the Thrones
(plural), which she has "inherited" from her ancestor, the Elector of Hannover,
in order "to defend the Protestant religion"! We are all hostages of the
exclusivity of the Church of England, the creation of King Henry VIII for
reasons known to every schoolchild.
> >
> > http://www.jacobite.ca/essays/1714succession.htm
> >
> > Are Jacobites mainly Catholics then? By no means. Jacobites have always been
of different denominations and even non-Christian confessions and religions,
even agnostics. In Scotland, the Episcopalian Church (from which the
Episcopalian Church of America was linked) became almost synonymous with
Jacobitism. Contemporary British Jews, Muslims and Buddhists find the position
of KING JAMES II & VII, in his "Declaration of Toleration" highly laudable and
ahead of its time. KING FRANCIS, in an intervew with a Bavarian TV station,
quotes with approval the opinion of a Muslim Caliph of Baghdad in the 8th
century, that "the Monarch is the shadow of God".
> >
> > The significance of the Jacobite understanding of the Monarchy lies in the
respect accorded to the person of the reigning hereditary King (or Queen), which
is completely at variance with the predominantly egalitarian view of
contemporary western culture, a culture "refined" by successive revolutions
against authority, in which the Protestant Reformation certainly played a role.
Yes, let's be realistic and not hide behind our finger. If Monarchies are losers
today, then Jacobite Legitimism, as a mainstream ideology. has definitely gone
off the screen. As part of an "alternative World View", it is hardly even
appreciated on this supposedly Jacobite Yahoo! group. Bereft of its proper
monarchical content, "Jacobitism" (in inverted commas) today in Scotland, and to
a much lesser extent in Ireland, has become an anti-authoritarian ideology,
lassooed by neo-Gaelic Nationalists of definitely left-wing tendancies.
Otherwise, far too many "Jacobites" are, shall we say, pro-Francis (under
conditions!) because they are fundamentally anti-"Windsor", as if you could
extract a queen or a jack from a pack of cards and replace it with a new king.
You need a different pack of cards. The game is played with other rules.
> >
> >
> > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I noticed that he never married. Has he taken some vow or could he still
get married and have children?
> > >
> > > --- On Fri, 12/18/09, JohnM <irishknight1952@> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: JohnM <irishknight1952@>
> > > Subject: [Jacobite] Re: Jacobo FitzJames Stuart
> > > To: Jacobite@yahoogroups.com
> > > Date: Friday, December 18, 2009, 6:35 AM
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >       This is actually an excellent reply.
> > >
> > > But I think Stelios might have added that beyond being an art collector (a
good thing of course to know so much about Art), the Duke of Bavaria is actually
a very charitable man, encompassing all the better values of Christianity and
Humanity which make him a thoroughly well rounded and DECENT man. Indeed he
displays a degree of something that many would call "Majesty" in a way that the
English Windsors do not even come near.
> > >
> > > Perhaps his sense of compassion in some way derives from being a prisoner
of the German Nazis and held in a concentration camp during the final year of
WW2.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Hi, Don! Perhaps the answer to your questions is found already in my
reply to your earlier question at the beginning of this thread. Look at the
fourth paragraph.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Briefly, the present Senior Representative of the House of Stuart, HRH
Franz, Duke of Bavaria, who lives in the Nymphenburg Palace in Munich,
acknowledges his rights to the British Thrones and replies courteously to people
who recognise him as the legitimate King of England, Scotland and Ireland.
However, like all his predecessors since 1807, when the last male Stewart/Stuart
in direct line, Henry Benedict Stuart, a Cardinal of the Roman Church, (KING
HENRY IX & I) died, he does not actively, i.e. publicly, promote his claim. If
he wishes restoration, he is extremely discreet about it.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Duke Franz of Bavaria, or KING FRANCIS II, is the "Stuart" claimant for
all the British Thrones. He is the legitimate heir to all the rights of KING
JAMES II & VII, who was usurped, as you read in another post, by William of
Orange in 1688.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > In interviews (naturally in German) with the Bavarian media - because he
is also heir to the Bavarian Throne, displaced by a republic since 1918 - he
indicates that he has a very high regard for the type of monarchy that his
Bavarian ancestors exercised, both as regards the benevolent relations between
King and people, and as regards, for instance, the patronage of the arts. He is
a major collector of fine art and in particular Modern Art and patron of a large
number of cultural and educational organisations, all in Bavaria (unfortunately!
, although he is on the governing board of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New
York. His approach is strictly pragmatic and he does not allow himself to be
drawn into speculative discussions, except to say that Monarchy is perfectly
compatible with parliamentary democracy. When asked by a German interviewer, how
he views his British rights, he replies with a ripple of laughter, saying that
he would be lucky even if
> > >  he were restored in Bavaria. He has no armed forces at his disposal, and
he does not have a major ally or a significant power base in the British Isles,
willing to act on his behalf.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > http://www.jacobite .ca/kings/ francis2. htm
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > This being the case, those of us (I am one of them) who acknowledge his
rights, communicate with him in Munich, in much the same way as, after 1688,
Jacobite supporters of the exiled Stuart Kings used to go their courts in France
and Italy. Right up until 1807, Jacobites of England, Scotland and Ireland - and
even curious Hannoverians, like Prince Augustus, known as the "Duke of Sussex",
who married, in Rome, unlawfully, the daughter of a Jacobite Earl - visited the
rightful Sovereign at his court, wherever that happened to be. The last known
attempt to restore the Stuarts by military means was a French campaign,
organised by the Duc de Choiseul, Foreign Minister of Louis XV, in 1759, as part
of the Seven Years War between Hannoverian- occupied Britain and France. Prince
Charles Edward Stuart was not co-operative, but Choiseul persisted until success
was no longer fesible.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ French_Invasion_ of_Britain_ %281759%29
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > Does the current Stewart line wish restoration? Is there a claimant
for the throne of any of the United Kingdom? If there is somebody what type of
monarchy does he wish to establish?
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos"
<stelios.rigopoulos @> wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > Don Jacobo Hernando Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez is the 12th and present
Duke of Berwick (born November 5, 1947). He is also the 16th Duque de Peñaranda
de Duero and the 13th Conde de Montijo and five times a Grandee of Spain,
besides having several other Spanish titles of nobility. He is unmarried and has
a brother, Don Luis Esteban Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez, 15th Marqués de
Valderrábano (Lord Louis Stephen FitzJames, born December 11, 1950, married
with three daughters) and two married sisters with issue. He is the present
senior male descendant of KING JAMES II and VII, though, of course this line,
being the illegitimate issue of his relationship with Arabella Churchill, have
no rights at all, even in the Jacobite Line of Succession, to the British
Thrones. The English Dukedom of Berwick, together with the subsidiary titles of
Earl of Tinmouth (or Tynemouth) and Baron Bosworth, is not on the current
"official" roll of the Peerage, since 1696,
> > >  although these titles have not been "forfeited" either by attainder, but
since the first Duke of Berwick was outlawed and later became a Spanish and then
a French Duke and Peer, the English titles have been passed to their de jure
successors.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > However, the person of this line, who at present has by far the most
public profile in Spain, is Doña María del Rosario Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart
y Silva, (Lady Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart) the present 18th Duchess (Duquesa) of
Alba, who has also over 50 other titles of nobility. Already twice married, the
second time with a former Jesuit priest, she provoked controversy last year,
when, in spite of strong opposition from her family, she announced that she
intended to marry for a third time. She inherited her titles from her father,
the late Don Jacobo María del Pilar Carlos Manuel Fitz-James Stuart y Falcó,
the 10th Duke of Berwick and 17th Duque de Alba de Torres, etc. (1878-1953).
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > There is also a young Spanish gentleman known as Jacobo Fitz-James
Stuart (and as such he has a Facebook profile), together with his sister
Brianda, also known as Fitz-James Stuart, who are the children of Don Jacobo
Fitz-James Stuart y Martínez de Irujo, Conde de Siruela
> > >
> > > > > (born July 15, 1954) by his first wife, Doña María Eugenia
Fernández de Castro y Fernández-Shaw. Normally, according to Spanish usage
they would bear the surname Martínez de Irujo y Fernández de Castro, but,
being descended through their grandmother, the Duchess of Alba, from the
illustrious family of Fitz-James Stuart, they have adopted this surname in
practice, if not in law.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > As to your question about this list, some certainly are here for
nostalgia, speaking of Jacobitism as an historical phenomenon of the past, which
passed out of currency after the defeat of the Jacobite army under Bonnie Prince
Charlie at Culloden in 1746, while others entertain varying degrees of hope to
see perhaps at some future date a restoration of the present-day descendants of
the Royal House of Stuart (officially extant in the direct male line, with the
death of the Cardinal Henry Benedict Stuart, "known as the Duke of York"" (KING
HENRY IX & I) in Scotland, or perhaps in England and Ireland as well. Some,
myself included, recognise as the rightful King of England, Scotland and Ireland
(and theoretically also of France, although the outcome of the Hundred Years War
hardly permits English pretensions to the Throne of Hugh Capet), Franz Herzog
von Bayern (Duke of Bavaria), under the name of KING FRANCIS II. He is the
current Head of the
> > >  erstwhile Bavarian Royal House of Wittelsbach, and, although he readily
acknowledges discreet declarations of loyalty made by his "subjects" in the
British Isles and the Dominions, he does not actively pursue claims to the
Thrones of either Scotland, England, Ireland (certainly not France), or even his
native Bavaria. Thus plans made in his name for his "restoration" have neither
an official or even unofficial character. This latter attitude is neither
nostalgia, nor romanticism, but strict pragmatism, and at the same time fidelity
to the rules of primogeniture governing the British Monarchy and the succession.
This is a continuation of the practice of most serious Jacobites after 1688,
when the Thrones were usurped by an invader, and the lawful Sovererign, KING
JAMES II & VII, was obliged to seek refuge in France, from where his son and
heir, KING JAMES III & VIII was again by the force of circumstances obliged to
flee to the Papal States and then to
> > >  Rome itself. Here, although no longer officially recognised by the Papacy
as the de jure Sovereigns of England, Scotland and Ireland, the last two Stuart
Monarchs lived and died and are buried in the crypt of the Basilica of St. Peter
in the Vatican. After 1807, the Legitimate Jacobite succession pursued its
course, although the novelist Walter Scott, amongst others, while paying lip
service to the Jacobite cause, became the foremost propagandist for a transfer
of allegiance to the usurping Hannoverian dynasty as the de facto Royal Family.
There are many calling themselves Jacobites, whose interest is confined
exclusively to the period between 1688 and 1746, for whom devotion to a
Legitimate Sovereign, not born in the British Isles, and indeed in Scotland, is
of little or no interest whatsoever. These latter tend to embrace a full-blown
Nationalist agenda, where a constitutional Monarchy could just as easily be
changed for a republic. Some of us do have
> > >  an ideological preference for absolute monarchy, but realise that, as far
as the British Isles are concerned, in contrast to continental Europe, the
dominance of "political Anglicanism" in England and the "presbyterian regime" in
Scotland, effectively put a brake on this, during the 17th century, the classic
Stuart century. Moreover, the English Speaking world has, thanks to its
preferance for Protestantism, an inordinately high esteem for Parliamentary or
Constitutional Democracy, which foresees little more than a ceremonial role for
a type of monarchy, with few prerogatives, and even they might be disposed with,
if the "citizen taxpayer" feels irked that someone else has privileges which he
hasn't got.
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Don" <don32acp@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > I am new to the list. I hope that this question has not been
answered previously. I am curious to the status of the illegitimate line of
James. Specifically the current Jacobo FitzJames Stuart.
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Do Jacobites consider these folks in the running so to speak? What
is the current state of Jacobites in the world. Is this list for nostalgia or do
the members hope to see a restored monarchy. Perhaps a absolutest monarchy?
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

If I am not mistaken, Mr.Mooney, when you and some fellow students at Queen's
(!) University, Belfast, formed a so called "Jacobite Club", you strongly
disparaged, if not specifically barred, individuals , who were interested in a
restoration of the legitimate Heir of the Royal House of Stewart/Stuart, or
simply recognised him as the rightful Sovereign of the three Thrones of the
British Isles. I can well imagine that, having assured that your little sodality
of "Jacobites" had all of them impeccable REPUBLICAN credentials, you could
afford the luxury of mocking me, most particularly, and by name (apparently your
friends refer to Stelios Rigopoulos as Sillyass Ridiculous, eh?), and on the
short-lived Blog (what on earth happened to it?), which you had at the time, you
felt free - without having a Moderator to cope with - to rubbish everything that
I posted on this list, and the more so if it appeared that this was something
sacred for me. So like Judas Iscariot hypocritically criticising St. Mary
Magdalen for wasting valuable ointment on the feet of Jesus, instead of giving
the money to the poor, you, the sworn republican, want to make quite sure that
the rightful King, the "non-claimant" as you call him, is not really interested
in a restoration at all.

I have no authorisation whatsoever to speak on behalf of HIS MAJESTY KING
FRANCIS II, and therefore, it would be the grossest presumption on my part, to
attempt to interpret his mind or to analyse his words, his actions or even his
wonderful "ripple of laughter", in order to understand HOW MUCH he really wants
to be restored to his British Thrones. What is the underlying basic cause of his
"hesitation" to stake his claim to his rightful inheritance? Is it because he
doesn't believe in it? Is it that he is even slightly irked that, besides
Bavaria, he has inherited rights to other, more significant Thrones, which he -
frankly - knows little about (and as some of the "internet Jacobites" of this  -
and other "Jacobite" groups - assume, cares for even less, particularly, for his
Scottish heritage)? Does he perhaps, have an exchange of Christmas cards with
Her Serene Highness Princess Philippos of
Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, but then what does he write inside the
card, and what does write on the envelope? His late father, KING ALBERT,
welcomed her to the Nymphenburg Palace in 1958, and his grandfather, KING
RUPERT, as "our" Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay, represented his (Rupert's)
grandfather, the Prince Regent Luitpold of Bavaria  at her grandfather's
"coronation" in 1911 (and for which courteous gesture, the Regent of Bavaria was
made a "Knight of the Garter", but not by his daughter-in-law...). In 1935, KING
RUPERT is recorded as having lunch with Georg zu Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha (aka
"George V") - but who was the host and who was the guest? The latter's
great-grandson, Karl zu S-H-S-G, alias Charles "Windsor", once had lunch  - or
dinner -at the Nymphenburg Palace with KING FRANCIS II, to whom he mentioned,
quite erroneously, "You have a more senior descent from King Charles I, than I
have" - he is not descended from KING CHARLES I at all.

This is the situation and I/you/we are fully aware of it. To the staff of KING
FRANCIS, we refer to him as "His Royal Highness", to his person, we address him
as "Your Majesty". While we naturally would wish for a restoration, we recognise
full well, that, from a practical point of view, this is unlikely to happen in
the foreseeable future and unless the political circumstance change radically.
Many other active claimants to Thrones have yet to be restored, and even in
Bavaria, there is not an optimistic chance that "Franz Herzog von Bayern" would
one day be restored to the Throne of his great-grandfather King Ludwig III. And
yet, the official state TV Channel of the "Free State of Bavaria" can show a
documentary about him, "The Uncrowned King". In March 2008, I had an exchange of
e-mails with Harry de Quetteville, the Berlin correspondent of the "Daily
Telegraph", pointing out the British connections of the Hereditary Prince and
Princess of Liechtenstein (then in the news, because of the scandalous use of
information by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, stolen from a
Liechtenstein bank by sacked employee). Was it a simple co-incidence that,
within a month, the same journalist published an article, since widely-known,
which opined that in the event of the "Act of Settlement" being abrogated,
nothing could prevent KING FRANCIS II from claiming his rights to the Thrones of
England, Scotland and Ireland.

Discretion being the better part of valour, I would say, that I acknowledge
unreservedly the rights of KING FRANCIS II to succeed to the rights of KING
JAMES II & VII, before his forced departure from his realms exactly 321 years
ago to the day. I would not claim, something that my King does not actively
claim. I pray for his restoration, but I am not going to use force or violence
to bring it about. I realise that for a partisan of Sinn Fein, this seems a
pathetically weak attitude, but therein lies one of the massive differences
between you, Mr. Mooney, and myself. Nothing and nobody can prevent me from
publicly affirming my recognition of HIS MAJESTY KING FRANCIS II. So thank you
very much for your taunts and sneers. They have been duly noted. And discounted.


--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "JohnM" <irishknight1952@...> wrote:
>
> I dont think we can assume any particular motive to the ripple of laughter
when the current non-claimant is asked about a Jacobite restoration.
> To many "Jacobites" this indicates a discrete silence.
> To many others it may indicate that he is amused at the idea.
> There is no concrete basis for thinking either of these things.
> I believe in a third explanation that......the silence indicates a relunctance
to offend anyone including those who ask the question.
>
> I think the absence of a claim......public or private....indicates that nobody
in the "legitimate" succession actually wants restoration. Or at the very least
does not want it "enough"
>
> John
>
>
> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@> wrote:
> >
> > Does the current Stewart line wish restoration? Is there a claimant for the
throne of any of the United Kingdom? If there is somebody what type of monarchy
does he wish to establish?
> >
> > --- On Wed, 12/16/09, Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@> wrote:
> >
> > From: Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@>
> > Subject: [Jacobite] Re: Jacobo FitzJames Stuart
> > To: Jacobite@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Wednesday, December 16, 2009, 10:41 PM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >       In the specific context of Jacobitism, I recognise - in my own case -
an idealism which in fact militates against any - even justifiable -
"self-interest" . I have a moral satisfaction from being consequent to my
ideals, but these also expose me to a barrage of insults and scorn from people
who despise my ideals and consequently my person. At least I have never been
arrested by the usurping forces for my public avowal - and not only on this list
- of Legitimist Jacobite principles. Actually, as with the question of
alleviating starvation on a global level (Making poverty history, or Making
History poverty, as your "Real World" would have it!), the realisation of an
ideal is a matter of faith applied in works, charity accomplished with humility.
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "JohnM" <irishknight1952@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Stelios,
> >
> > > We all have ideals which are unfortunately tempered by self-interest or
"the real world".
> >
> > > That is realpolitik
> >
> > > It would be tiresome to parade our own differing ideals and interests.
> >
> > > So hopefully I can illustrate a non contentious example unrelated to
Jacobitism itself but you might see the connexion in principle.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > As a matter of principle/ideal I would love to see a situation in the
world where no-one starved. As you are as human as I am, you would wish the
same.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > If I believed that World Starvation could be solved by me paying £1
annually, I would happily do it. And £10 and £20 and so on. But there would
come a point where my "ideal" would be compromised by my self-interest and
interest of my family...where I would eventually say "no".
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "JohnM" <irishknight1952@ > wrote:
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Welcome Don.
> >
> > > > > With over 400 members "nominally" on the list and very few actually
contributing, it is impossible to be precise about individual attitudes. To the
immense credit of the Moderator the group is a very broad based band of diverse
people.
> >
> > > > > Some (for example myself) are primarily interested in a fascinating
era of history...particuar ly the military aspect, which ties into some
voluntary work I do in the field of Church history.
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > The "common denominator" so to speak is that the House of Stuart was
usurped by an illegal and immoral coup d'état. People respond to that situation
with their own mixture of ideals and self-interest.
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > John
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Ideals certainly. Self-interest? What does that mean?
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Don" <don32acp@> wrote:
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > > I am new to the list. I hope that this question has not been
answered previously. I am curious to the status of the illegitimate line of
James. Specifically the current Jacobo FitzJames Stuart.
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > > Do Jacobites consider these folks in the running so to speak? What
is the current state of Jacobites in the world. Is this list for nostalgia or do
the members hope to see a restored monarchy. Perhaps a absolutest monarchy?
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
>

"Are Jacobites mainly Catholics then? By no means"

Absolutely.

I would like to point out this article online, which explains in some detail the
important role of the non-juring movement, where clerics of the 'established'
churches actually moved to uphold a true succession.

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Nonjuring_schism

Personally I find that not nearly enough attention is paid to this particular
aspect of Jacobitism. It is often said [wrongly] that Jacobite support was based
exclusively in Roman Catholic foundations; the truth is very different.

Dean MacKinnon-Thomson
[jacobitem]


--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos@...>
wrote:
>
> He lives a fulfilled celibate life, engaged in his public and private
occupations. As a practising Catholic, he takes very seriously his membership of
the Order of Malta and has his own charitable foundations, which, among other
things, support hospitals and orphanages in the Balkan countries, as well as
immigrant families in some of the poorer suburbs of Munich. He is a doting uncle
and as Head of the family, takes a great interest in the younger generation.
(Have a look at the photos on this site). He is perfectly at ease in female
company, and I have a video, which shows him as an excellent dancer with his
sister-in-law, while his younger brother, Prince Max, plays the clarinet. At the
age of 76, he is unlikely to surprise us by finding a spouse young enough to
produce an heir. However, Prince Max is very happily married to the former
Swedish Countess Elizabeth Douglas (her family, who are descendants of Robert
II, King of Scots (1371-1390), the founder of the Stewart dynasty, emigrated
from Scotland to Sweden in the 17th century) and they have five extremely
charming and vivacious daughters, four of them (until now) married, three of
them (at present) with children. Because, Prince Max is only four years younger
than KING FRANCIS, the future of the "Stuart" line lies rather with the issue of
the eldest daughter of Prince Max and Princess Elizabeth, who is Princess
Sophie, married to the Hereditary Prince Alois of Liechtenstein.  They have
three sons and a daughter.
>
> In August, 1714, when the Elector Georg of Hannover, was "invited" to usurp
the British Thrones, simply because he was a Protestant (a Lutheran, not an
Anglican), the rightful King, JAMES III of England and Ireland and VIII of
Scotland, who was then still unmarried, and the next 54 in the Line of
Succession, were excluded because they were Catholics, under the so-called "Act
of Settlement" of 1701. This "act", which is not recognised by Jacobites, has
never been annulled. Thus, the person, known as "Queen Elizabeth II", would be,
if  Catholics had not been "excluded" from the British Thrones (because, again,
Jacobites do not recognise such an entity as the "United Kingdom", but three
separate Sovereign Kingdoms, in a Union of Crowns in the person of the Monarch,
not an "anglocentric" Union of Parliaments at Westminster) possibly something
like the 20,000th in the line of Succession. We have nothing personally against
the lady in question or her children or grandchildren. Simply, as Jacobites, we
could not by any possible measure, consider that she has a right to the Thrones
(plural), which she has "inherited" from her ancestor, the Elector of Hannover,
in order "to defend the Protestant religion"! We are all hostages of the
exclusivity of the Church of England, the creation of King Henry VIII for
reasons known to every schoolchild.
>
> http://www.jacobite.ca/essays/1714succession.htm
>
> Are Jacobites mainly Catholics then? By no means. Jacobites have always been
of different denominations and even non-Christian confessions and religions,
even agnostics. In Scotland, the Episcopalian Church (from which the
Episcopalian Church of America was linked) became almost synonymous with
Jacobitism. Contemporary British Jews, Muslims and Buddhists find the position
of KING JAMES II & VII, in his "Declaration of Toleration" highly laudable and
ahead of its time. KING FRANCIS, in an intervew with a Bavarian TV station,
quotes with approval the opinion of a Muslim Caliph of Baghdad in the 8th
century, that "the Monarch is the shadow of God".
>
> The significance of the Jacobite understanding of the Monarchy lies in the
respect accorded to the person of the reigning hereditary King (or Queen), which
is completely at variance with the predominantly egalitarian view of
contemporary western culture, a culture "refined" by successive revolutions
against authority, in which the Protestant Reformation certainly played a role.
Yes, let's be realistic and not hide behind our finger. If Monarchies are losers
today, then Jacobite Legitimism, as a mainstream ideology. has definitely gone
off the screen. As part of an "alternative World View", it is hardly even
appreciated on this supposedly Jacobite Yahoo! group. Bereft of its proper
monarchical content, "Jacobitism" (in inverted commas) today in Scotland, and to
a much lesser extent in Ireland, has become an anti-authoritarian ideology,
lassooed by neo-Gaelic Nationalists of definitely left-wing tendancies.
Otherwise, far too many "Jacobites" are, shall we say, pro-Francis (under
conditions!) because they are fundamentally anti-"Windsor", as if you could
extract a queen or a jack from a pack of cards and replace it with a new king.
You need a different pack of cards. The game is played with other rules.
>
>
> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@> wrote:
> >
> > I noticed that he never married. Has he taken some vow or could he still get
married and have children?
> >
> > --- On Fri, 12/18/09, JohnM <irishknight1952@> wrote:
> >
> > From: JohnM <irishknight1952@>
> > Subject: [Jacobite] Re: Jacobo FitzJames Stuart
> > To: Jacobite@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Friday, December 18, 2009, 6:35 AM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >       This is actually an excellent reply.
> >
> > But I think Stelios might have added that beyond being an art collector (a
good thing of course to know so much about Art), the Duke of Bavaria is actually
a very charitable man, encompassing all the better values of Christianity and
Humanity which make him a thoroughly well rounded and DECENT man. Indeed he
displays a degree of something that many would call "Majesty" in a way that the
English Windsors do not even come near.
> >
> > Perhaps his sense of compassion in some way derives from being a prisoner of
the German Nazis and held in a concentration camp during the final year of WW2.
> >
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Hi, Don! Perhaps the answer to your questions is found already in my reply
to your earlier question at the beginning of this thread. Look at the fourth
paragraph.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Briefly, the present Senior Representative of the House of Stuart, HRH
Franz, Duke of Bavaria, who lives in the Nymphenburg Palace in Munich,
acknowledges his rights to the British Thrones and replies courteously to people
who recognise him as the legitimate King of England, Scotland and Ireland.
However, like all his predecessors since 1807, when the last male Stewart/Stuart
in direct line, Henry Benedict Stuart, a Cardinal of the Roman Church, (KING
HENRY IX & I) died, he does not actively, i.e. publicly, promote his claim. If
he wishes restoration, he is extremely discreet about it.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Duke Franz of Bavaria, or KING FRANCIS II, is the "Stuart" claimant for
all the British Thrones. He is the legitimate heir to all the rights of KING
JAMES II & VII, who was usurped, as you read in another post, by William of
Orange in 1688.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > In interviews (naturally in German) with the Bavarian media - because he
is also heir to the Bavarian Throne, displaced by a republic since 1918 - he
indicates that he has a very high regard for the type of monarchy that his
Bavarian ancestors exercised, both as regards the benevolent relations between
King and people, and as regards, for instance, the patronage of the arts. He is
a major collector of fine art and in particular Modern Art and patron of a large
number of cultural and educational organisations, all in Bavaria (unfortunately!
, although he is on the governing board of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New
York. His approach is strictly pragmatic and he does not allow himself to be
drawn into speculative discussions, except to say that Monarchy is perfectly
compatible with parliamentary democracy. When asked by a German interviewer, how
he views his British rights, he replies with a ripple of laughter, saying that
he would be lucky even if
> >  he were restored in Bavaria. He has no armed forces at his disposal, and he
does not have a major ally or a significant power base in the British Isles,
willing to act on his behalf.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > http://www.jacobite .ca/kings/ francis2. htm
> >
> > >
> >
> > > This being the case, those of us (I am one of them) who acknowledge his
rights, communicate with him in Munich, in much the same way as, after 1688,
Jacobite supporters of the exiled Stuart Kings used to go their courts in France
and Italy. Right up until 1807, Jacobites of England, Scotland and Ireland - and
even curious Hannoverians, like Prince Augustus, known as the "Duke of Sussex",
who married, in Rome, unlawfully, the daughter of a Jacobite Earl - visited the
rightful Sovereign at his court, wherever that happened to be. The last known
attempt to restore the Stuarts by military means was a French campaign,
organised by the Duc de Choiseul, Foreign Minister of Louis XV, in 1759, as part
of the Seven Years War between Hannoverian- occupied Britain and France. Prince
Charles Edward Stuart was not co-operative, but Choiseul persisted until success
was no longer fesible.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ French_Invasion_ of_Britain_ %281759%29
> >
> > >
> >
> > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Does the current Stewart line wish restoration? Is there a claimant for
the throne of any of the United Kingdom? If there is somebody what type of
monarchy does he wish to establish?
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Don Jacobo Hernando Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez is the 12th and present
Duke of Berwick (born November 5, 1947). He is also the 16th Duque de Peñaranda
de Duero and the 13th Conde de Montijo and five times a Grandee of Spain,
besides having several other Spanish titles of nobility. He is unmarried and has
a brother, Don Luis Esteban Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez, 15th Marqués de
Valderrábano (Lord Louis Stephen FitzJames, born December 11, 1950, married
with three daughters) and two married sisters with issue. He is the present
senior male descendant of KING JAMES II and VII, though, of course this line,
being the illegitimate issue of his relationship with Arabella Churchill, have
no rights at all, even in the Jacobite Line of Succession, to the British
Thrones. The English Dukedom of Berwick, together with the subsidiary titles of
Earl of Tinmouth (or Tynemouth) and Baron Bosworth, is not on the current
"official" roll of the Peerage, since 1696,
> >  although these titles have not been "forfeited" either by attainder, but
since the first Duke of Berwick was outlawed and later became a Spanish and then
a French Duke and Peer, the English titles have been passed to their de jure
successors.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > However, the person of this line, who at present has by far the most
public profile in Spain, is Doña María del Rosario Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart
y Silva, (Lady Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart) the present 18th Duchess (Duquesa) of
Alba, who has also over 50 other titles of nobility. Already twice married, the
second time with a former Jesuit priest, she provoked controversy last year,
when, in spite of strong opposition from her family, she announced that she
intended to marry for a third time. She inherited her titles from her father,
the late Don Jacobo María del Pilar Carlos Manuel Fitz-James Stuart y Falcó,
the 10th Duke of Berwick and 17th Duque de Alba de Torres, etc. (1878-1953).
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > There is also a young Spanish gentleman known as Jacobo Fitz-James
Stuart (and as such he has a Facebook profile), together with his sister
Brianda, also known as Fitz-James Stuart, who are the children of Don Jacobo
Fitz-James Stuart y Martínez de Irujo, Conde de Siruela
> >
> > > > (born July 15, 1954) by his first wife, Doña María Eugenia Fernández
de Castro y Fernández-Shaw. Normally, according to Spanish usage they would
bear the surname Martínez de Irujo y Fernández de Castro, but, being descended
through their grandmother, the Duchess of Alba, from the illustrious family of
Fitz-James Stuart, they have adopted this surname in practice, if not in law.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > As to your question about this list, some certainly are here for
nostalgia, speaking of Jacobitism as an historical phenomenon of the past, which
passed out of currency after the defeat of the Jacobite army under Bonnie Prince
Charlie at Culloden in 1746, while others entertain varying degrees of hope to
see perhaps at some future date a restoration of the present-day descendants of
the Royal House of Stuart (officially extant in the direct male line, with the
death of the Cardinal Henry Benedict Stuart, "known as the Duke of York"" (KING
HENRY IX & I) in Scotland, or perhaps in England and Ireland as well. Some,
myself included, recognise as the rightful King of England, Scotland and Ireland
(and theoretically also of France, although the outcome of the Hundred Years War
hardly permits English pretensions to the Throne of Hugh Capet), Franz Herzog
von Bayern (Duke of Bavaria), under the name of KING FRANCIS II. He is the
current Head of the
> >  erstwhile Bavarian Royal House of Wittelsbach, and, although he readily
acknowledges discreet declarations of loyalty made by his "subjects" in the
British Isles and the Dominions, he does not actively pursue claims to the
Thrones of either Scotland, England, Ireland (certainly not France), or even his
native Bavaria. Thus plans made in his name for his "restoration" have neither
an official or even unofficial character. This latter attitude is neither
nostalgia, nor romanticism, but strict pragmatism, and at the same time fidelity
to the rules of primogeniture governing the British Monarchy and the succession.
This is a continuation of the practice of most serious Jacobites after 1688,
when the Thrones were usurped by an invader, and the lawful Sovererign, KING
JAMES II & VII, was obliged to seek refuge in France, from where his son and
heir, KING JAMES III & VIII was again by the force of circumstances obliged to
flee to the Papal States and then to
> >  Rome itself. Here, although no longer officially recognised by the Papacy
as the de jure Sovereigns of England, Scotland and Ireland, the last two Stuart
Monarchs lived and died and are buried in the crypt of the Basilica of St. Peter
in the Vatican. After 1807, the Legitimate Jacobite succession pursued its
course, although the novelist Walter Scott, amongst others, while paying lip
service to the Jacobite cause, became the foremost propagandist for a transfer
of allegiance to the usurping Hannoverian dynasty as the de facto Royal Family.
There are many calling themselves Jacobites, whose interest is confined
exclusively to the period between 1688 and 1746, for whom devotion to a
Legitimate Sovereign, not born in the British Isles, and indeed in Scotland, is
of little or no interest whatsoever. These latter tend to embrace a full-blown
Nationalist agenda, where a constitutional Monarchy could just as easily be
changed for a republic. Some of us do have
> >  an ideological preference for absolute monarchy, but realise that, as far
as the British Isles are concerned, in contrast to continental Europe, the
dominance of "political Anglicanism" in England and the "presbyterian regime" in
Scotland, effectively put a brake on this, during the 17th century, the classic
Stuart century. Moreover, the English Speaking world has, thanks to its
preferance for Protestantism, an inordinately high esteem for Parliamentary or
Constitutional Democracy, which foresees little more than a ceremonial role for
a type of monarchy, with few prerogatives, and even they might be disposed with,
if the "citizen taxpayer" feels irked that someone else has privileges which he
hasn't got.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Don" <don32acp@> wrote:
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > I am new to the list. I hope that this question has not been answered
previously. I am curious to the status of the illegitimate line of James.
Specifically the current Jacobo FitzJames Stuart.
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Do Jacobites consider these folks in the running so to speak? What is
the current state of Jacobites in the world. Is this list for nostalgia or do
the members hope to see a restored monarchy. Perhaps a absolutest monarchy?
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
>

It is excellent news that Pope Benedict XVI has officially recognised that his
great predecessor, Pope Pius XII (Eugenio Pacelli) is a candidate for
beatification. I am aware that Mgr Pacelli, as Apostolic Nuncio to Bavaria (and
later to Germany) soleminised the marriage of KING ROBERT I & IV and Princess
Antonia of Luxemburg (*), and later performed the baptism of Her Royal Highness
Princess Irmingard.

(*) http://www.jacobite.ca/postcards/images/rupant03.jpg

Did he also solemnise the marriage of KING ALBERT (then Duke of Cornwall and
Rothesay) with Countess Marita Draskovich von Trakostjan?

And this of course is the classic dilemna.
Republicans and Nationalists .....for all their obvious faults....have actually
raised their heads above the parapet and confronted Hannoverianism.......and
produced a system which is (for neo Jacobites) an even worse system than
Hannoverianism.
Meanwhile......Legitimists and Monarchists........for all their obvious
virtues....have steadfastly refused for over 250 years to say or do anything
which is meaningful opposition to the Hannoverianism....to the point where there
are now DE FACTO the greatest supporters of the House of Windsor.

Merry Christmas, Nollaig Shona Daoibh.
John

--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos@...>
wrote:
>
>  "Jacobitism" (in inverted commas) today in Scotland, and to a much lesser
extent in Ireland, has become an anti-authoritarian ideology, lassooed by
neo-Gaelic Nationalists of definitely left-wing tendancies. Otherwise, far too
many "Jacobites" are, shall we say, pro-Francis (under conditions!) because they
are fundamentally anti-"Windsor", as if you could extract a queen or a jack from
a pack of cards and replace it with a new king. You need a different pack of
cards. The game is played with other rules.
>
>
> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@> wrote:
> >
> > I noticed that he never married. Has he taken some vow or could he still get
married and have children?
> >
> > --- On Fri, 12/18/09, JohnM <irishknight1952@> wrote:
> >
> > From: JohnM <irishknight1952@>
> > Subject: [Jacobite] Re: Jacobo FitzJames Stuart
> > To: Jacobite@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Friday, December 18, 2009, 6:35 AM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >       This is actually an excellent reply.
> >
> > But I think Stelios might have added that beyond being an art collector (a
good thing of course to know so much about Art), the Duke of Bavaria is actually
a very charitable man, encompassing all the better values of Christianity and
Humanity which make him a thoroughly well rounded and DECENT man. Indeed he
displays a degree of something that many would call "Majesty" in a way that the
English Windsors do not even come near.
> >
> > Perhaps his sense of compassion in some way derives from being a prisoner of
the German Nazis and held in a concentration camp during the final year of WW2.
> >
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Hi, Don! Perhaps the answer to your questions is found already in my reply
to your earlier question at the beginning of this thread. Look at the fourth
paragraph.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Briefly, the present Senior Representative of the House of Stuart, HRH
Franz, Duke of Bavaria, who lives in the Nymphenburg Palace in Munich,
acknowledges his rights to the British Thrones and replies courteously to people
who recognise him as the legitimate King of England, Scotland and Ireland.
However, like all his predecessors since 1807, when the last male Stewart/Stuart
in direct line, Henry Benedict Stuart, a Cardinal of the Roman Church, (KING
HENRY IX & I) died, he does not actively, i.e. publicly, promote his claim. If
he wishes restoration, he is extremely discreet about it.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Duke Franz of Bavaria, or KING FRANCIS II, is the "Stuart" claimant for
all the British Thrones. He is the legitimate heir to all the rights of KING
JAMES II & VII, who was usurped, as you read in another post, by William of
Orange in 1688.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > In interviews (naturally in German) with the Bavarian media - because he
is also heir to the Bavarian Throne, displaced by a republic since 1918 - he
indicates that he has a very high regard for the type of monarchy that his
Bavarian ancestors exercised, both as regards the benevolent relations between
King and people, and as regards, for instance, the patronage of the arts. He is
a major collector of fine art and in particular Modern Art and patron of a large
number of cultural and educational organisations, all in Bavaria (unfortunately!
, although he is on the governing board of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New
York. His approach is strictly pragmatic and he does not allow himself to be
drawn into speculative discussions, except to say that Monarchy is perfectly
compatible with parliamentary democracy. When asked by a German interviewer, how
he views his British rights, he replies with a ripple of laughter, saying that
he would be lucky even if
> >  he were restored in Bavaria. He has no armed forces at his disposal, and he
does not have a major ally or a significant power base in the British Isles,
willing to act on his behalf.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > http://www.jacobite .ca/kings/ francis2. htm
> >
> > >
> >
> > > This being the case, those of us (I am one of them) who acknowledge his
rights, communicate with him in Munich, in much the same way as, after 1688,
Jacobite supporters of the exiled Stuart Kings used to go their courts in France
and Italy. Right up until 1807, Jacobites of England, Scotland and Ireland - and
even curious Hannoverians, like Prince Augustus, known as the "Duke of Sussex",
who married, in Rome, unlawfully, the daughter of a Jacobite Earl - visited the
rightful Sovereign at his court, wherever that happened to be. The last known
attempt to restore the Stuarts by military means was a French campaign,
organised by the Duc de Choiseul, Foreign Minister of Louis XV, in 1759, as part
of the Seven Years War between Hannoverian- occupied Britain and France. Prince
Charles Edward Stuart was not co-operative, but Choiseul persisted until success
was no longer fesible.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ French_Invasion_ of_Britain_ %281759%29
> >
> > >
> >
> > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Does the current Stewart line wish restoration? Is there a claimant for
the throne of any of the United Kingdom? If there is somebody what type of
monarchy does he wish to establish?
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Don Jacobo Hernando Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez is the 12th and present
Duke of Berwick (born November 5, 1947). He is also the 16th Duque de Peñaranda
de Duero and the 13th Conde de Montijo and five times a Grandee of Spain,
besides having several other Spanish titles of nobility. He is unmarried and has
a brother, Don Luis Esteban Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez, 15th Marqués de
Valderrábano (Lord Louis Stephen FitzJames, born December 11, 1950, married
with three daughters) and two married sisters with issue. He is the present
senior male descendant of KING JAMES II and VII, though, of course this line,
being the illegitimate issue of his relationship with Arabella Churchill, have
no rights at all, even in the Jacobite Line of Succession, to the British
Thrones. The English Dukedom of Berwick, together with the subsidiary titles of
Earl of Tinmouth (or Tynemouth) and Baron Bosworth, is not on the current
"official" roll of the Peerage, since 1696,
> >  although these titles have not been "forfeited" either by attainder, but
since the first Duke of Berwick was outlawed and later became a Spanish and then
a French Duke and Peer, the English titles have been passed to their de jure
successors.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > However, the person of this line, who at present has by far the most
public profile in Spain, is Doña María del Rosario Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart
y Silva, (Lady Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart) the present 18th Duchess (Duquesa) of
Alba, who has also over 50 other titles of nobility. Already twice married, the
second time with a former Jesuit priest, she provoked controversy last year,
when, in spite of strong opposition from her family, she announced that she
intended to marry for a third time. She inherited her titles from her father,
the late Don Jacobo María del Pilar Carlos Manuel Fitz-James Stuart y Falcó,
the 10th Duke of Berwick and 17th Duque de Alba de Torres, etc. (1878-1953).
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > There is also a young Spanish gentleman known as Jacobo Fitz-James
Stuart (and as such he has a Facebook profile), together with his sister
Brianda, also known as Fitz-James Stuart, who are the children of Don Jacobo
Fitz-James Stuart y Martínez de Irujo, Conde de Siruela
> >
> > > > (born July 15, 1954) by his first wife, Doña María Eugenia Fernández
de Castro y Fernández-Shaw. Normally, according to Spanish usage they would
bear the surname Martínez de Irujo y Fernández de Castro, but, being descended
through their grandmother, the Duchess of Alba, from the illustrious family of
Fitz-James Stuart, they have adopted this surname in practice, if not in law.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > As to your question about this list, some certainly are here for
nostalgia, speaking of Jacobitism as an historical phenomenon of the past, which
passed out of currency after the defeat of the Jacobite army under Bonnie Prince
Charlie at Culloden in 1746, while others entertain varying degrees of hope to
see perhaps at some future date a restoration of the present-day descendants of
the Royal House of Stuart (officially extant in the direct male line, with the
death of the Cardinal Henry Benedict Stuart, "known as the Duke of York"" (KING
HENRY IX & I) in Scotland, or perhaps in England and Ireland as well. Some,
myself included, recognise as the rightful King of England, Scotland and Ireland
(and theoretically also of France, although the outcome of the Hundred Years War
hardly permits English pretensions to the Throne of Hugh Capet), Franz Herzog
von Bayern (Duke of Bavaria), under the name of KING FRANCIS II. He is the
current Head of the
> >  erstwhile Bavarian Royal House of Wittelsbach, and, although he readily
acknowledges discreet declarations of loyalty made by his "subjects" in the
British Isles and the Dominions, he does not actively pursue claims to the
Thrones of either Scotland, England, Ireland (certainly not France), or even his
native Bavaria. Thus plans made in his name for his "restoration" have neither
an official or even unofficial character. This latter attitude is neither
nostalgia, nor romanticism, but strict pragmatism, and at the same time fidelity
to the rules of primogeniture governing the British Monarchy and the succession.
This is a continuation of the practice of most serious Jacobites after 1688,
when the Thrones were usurped by an invader, and the lawful Sovererign, KING
JAMES II & VII, was obliged to seek refuge in France, from where his son and
heir, KING JAMES III & VIII was again by the force of circumstances obliged to
flee to the Papal States and then to
> >  Rome itself. Here, although no longer officially recognised by the Papacy
as the de jure Sovereigns of England, Scotland and Ireland, the last two Stuart
Monarchs lived and died and are buried in the crypt of the Basilica of St. Peter
in the Vatican. After 1807, the Legitimate Jacobite succession pursued its
course, although the novelist Walter Scott, amongst others, while paying lip
service to the Jacobite cause, became the foremost propagandist for a transfer
of allegiance to the usurping Hannoverian dynasty as the de facto Royal Family.
There are many calling themselves Jacobites, whose interest is confined
exclusively to the period between 1688 and 1746, for whom devotion to a
Legitimate Sovereign, not born in the British Isles, and indeed in Scotland, is
of little or no interest whatsoever. These latter tend to embrace a full-blown
Nationalist agenda, where a constitutional Monarchy could just as easily be
changed for a republic. Some of us do have
> >  an ideological preference for absolute monarchy, but realise that, as far
as the British Isles are concerned, in contrast to continental Europe, the
dominance of "political Anglicanism" in England and the "presbyterian regime" in
Scotland, effectively put a brake on this, during the 17th century, the classic
Stuart century. Moreover, the English Speaking world has, thanks to its
preferance for Protestantism, an inordinately high esteem for Parliamentary or
Constitutional Democracy, which foresees little more than a ceremonial role for
a type of monarchy, with few prerogatives, and even they might be disposed with,
if the "citizen taxpayer" feels irked that someone else has privileges which he
hasn't got.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Don" <don32acp@> wrote:
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > I am new to the list. I hope that this question has not been answered
previously. I am curious to the status of the illegitimate line of James.
Specifically the current Jacobo FitzJames Stuart.
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Do Jacobites consider these folks in the running so to speak? What is
the current state of Jacobites in the world. Is this list for nostalgia or do
the members hope to see a restored monarchy. Perhaps a absolutest monarchy?
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
>

The National Library of Scotland online magazine "Discover", issue no. 14, has
an illustrated article referring to the original manuscript (presently on
display in the Library) of the Episcopalian clergyman, later Bishop of Ross and
Caithness, the Reverend Robert Forbes, a personal account of the '45 and the
immediate aftermath of the Battle of Culloden, including the flight of the
Prince in the Highlands and the Hebrides.

http://www.nls.uk/about/discover-nls/issues/discover-nls-14.pdf

The NLS has digitised an online edition of the Lyon in Mourning, the first
volume of which is also accessible on the links of this Yahoo! list (thanks to
the Moderator, Noel McFerran).

http://www.nls.uk/print/transcriptions/index.html

http://www.archive.org/details/thelyoninmourning00forbuoft

http://relaxingworldtravel.com/europe/chiddingstone-castle-near-edenbridge-kent-\
opens-its-doors-on-monday-15-february-2010/

"Revived from dereliction in 1955 by the gifted antiquary Denys Bower, the
Castle became a home for his amazing and varied collections. ... He was
completely entranced by the romance of the Jacobite rebellion (sic) and even
thought he was the reincarnation of Bonny Prince Charlie!"

Oh dear, another candidate...!

http://www.historytimes.com/fresh-perspectives-in-history/british-and-irish-hist\
ory/486-remembering-irish-soldiers-in-world-war-i

He lives a fulfilled celibate life, engaged in his public and private
occupations. As a practising Catholic, he takes very seriously his membership of
the Order of Malta and has his own charitable foundations, which, among other
things, support hospitals and orphanages in the Balkan countries, as well as
immigrant families in some of the poorer suburbs of Munich. He is a doting uncle
and as Head of the family, takes a great interest in the younger generation.
(Have a look at the photos on this site). He is perfectly at ease in female
company, and I have a video, which shows him as an excellent dancer with his
sister-in-law, while his younger brother, Prince Max, plays the clarinet. At the
age of 76, he is unlikely to surprise us by finding a spouse young enough to
produce an heir. However, Prince Max is very happily married to the former
Swedish Countess Elizabeth Douglas (her family, who are descendants of Robert
II, King of Scots (1371-1390), the founder of the Stewart dynasty, emigrated
from Scotland to Sweden in the 17th century) and they have five extremely
charming and vivacious daughters, four of them (until now) married, three of
them (at present) with children. Because, Prince Max is only four years younger
than KING FRANCIS, the future of the "Stuart" line lies rather with the issue of
the eldest daughter of Prince Max and Princess Elizabeth, who is Princess
Sophie, married to the Hereditary Prince Alois of Liechtenstein.  They have
three sons and a daughter.

In August, 1714, when the Elector Georg of Hannover, was "invited" to usurp the
British Thrones, simply because he was a Protestant (a Lutheran, not an
Anglican), the rightful King, JAMES III of England and Ireland and VIII of
Scotland, who was then still unmarried, and the next 54 in the Line of
Succession, were excluded because they were Catholics, under the so-called "Act
of Settlement" of 1701. This "act", which is not recognised by Jacobites, has
never been annulled. Thus, the person, known as "Queen Elizabeth II", would be,
if  Catholics had not been "excluded" from the British Thrones (because, again,
Jacobites do not recognise such an entity as the "United Kingdom", but three
separate Sovereign Kingdoms, in a Union of Crowns in the person of the Monarch,
not an "anglocentric" Union of Parliaments at Westminster) possibly something
like the 20,000th in the line of Succession. We have nothing personally against
the lady in question or her children or grandchildren. Simply, as Jacobites, we
could not by any possible measure, consider that she has a right to the Thrones
(plural), which she has "inherited" from her ancestor, the Elector of Hannover,
in order "to defend the Protestant religion"! We are all hostages of the
exclusivity of the Church of England, the creation of King Henry VIII for
reasons known to every schoolchild.

http://www.jacobite.ca/essays/1714succession.htm

Are Jacobites mainly Catholics then? By no means. Jacobites have always been of
different denominations and even non-Christian confessions and religions, even
agnostics. In Scotland, the Episcopalian Church (from which the Episcopalian
Church of America was linked) became almost synonymous with Jacobitism.
Contemporary British Jews, Muslims and Buddhists find the position of KING JAMES
II & VII, in his "Declaration of Toleration" highly laudable and ahead of its
time. KING FRANCIS, in an intervew with a Bavarian TV station, quotes with
approval the opinion of a Muslim Caliph of Baghdad in the 8th century, that "the
Monarch is the shadow of God".

The significance of the Jacobite understanding of the Monarchy lies in the
respect accorded to the person of the reigning hereditary King (or Queen), which
is completely at variance with the predominantly egalitarian view of
contemporary western culture, a culture "refined" by successive revolutions
against authority, in which the Protestant Reformation certainly played a role.
Yes, let's be realistic and not hide behind our finger. If Monarchies are losers
today, then Jacobite Legitimism, as a mainstream ideology. has definitely gone
off the screen. As part of an "alternative World View", it is hardly even
appreciated on this supposedly Jacobite Yahoo! group. Bereft of its proper
monarchical content, "Jacobitism" (in inverted commas) today in Scotland, and to
a much lesser extent in Ireland, has become an anti-authoritarian ideology,
lassooed by neo-Gaelic Nationalists of definitely left-wing tendancies.
Otherwise, far too many "Jacobites" are, shall we say, pro-Francis (under
conditions!) because they are fundamentally anti-"Windsor", as if you could
extract a queen or a jack from a pack of cards and replace it with a new king.
You need a different pack of cards. The game is played with other rules.


--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@...> wrote:
>
> I noticed that he never married. Has he taken some vow or could he still get
married and have children?
>
> --- On Fri, 12/18/09, JohnM <irishknight1952@...> wrote:
>
> From: JohnM <irishknight1952@...>
> Subject: [Jacobite] Re: Jacobo FitzJames Stuart
> To: Jacobite@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, December 18, 2009, 6:35 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>       This is actually an excellent reply.
>
> But I think Stelios might have added that beyond being an art collector (a
good thing of course to know so much about Art), the Duke of Bavaria is actually
a very charitable man, encompassing all the better values of Christianity and
Humanity which make him a thoroughly well rounded and DECENT man. Indeed he
displays a degree of something that many would call "Majesty" in a way that the
English Windsors do not even come near.
>
> Perhaps his sense of compassion in some way derives from being a prisoner of
the German Nazis and held in a concentration camp during the final year of WW2.
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@...> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Hi, Don! Perhaps the answer to your questions is found already in my reply
to your earlier question at the beginning of this thread. Look at the fourth
paragraph.
>
> >
>
> > Briefly, the present Senior Representative of the House of Stuart, HRH
Franz, Duke of Bavaria, who lives in the Nymphenburg Palace in Munich,
acknowledges his rights to the British Thrones and replies courteously to people
who recognise him as the legitimate King of England, Scotland and Ireland.
However, like all his predecessors since 1807, when the last male Stewart/Stuart
in direct line, Henry Benedict Stuart, a Cardinal of the Roman Church, (KING
HENRY IX & I) died, he does not actively, i.e. publicly, promote his claim. If
he wishes restoration, he is extremely discreet about it.
>
> >
>
> > Duke Franz of Bavaria, or KING FRANCIS II, is the "Stuart" claimant for all
the British Thrones. He is the legitimate heir to all the rights of KING JAMES
II & VII, who was usurped, as you read in another post, by William of Orange in
1688.
>
> >
>
> > In interviews (naturally in German) with the Bavarian media - because he is
also heir to the Bavarian Throne, displaced by a republic since 1918 - he
indicates that he has a very high regard for the type of monarchy that his
Bavarian ancestors exercised, both as regards the benevolent relations between
King and people, and as regards, for instance, the patronage of the arts. He is
a major collector of fine art and in particular Modern Art and patron of a large
number of cultural and educational organisations, all in Bavaria (unfortunately!
, although he is on the governing board of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New
York. His approach is strictly pragmatic and he does not allow himself to be
drawn into speculative discussions, except to say that Monarchy is perfectly
compatible with parliamentary democracy. When asked by a German interviewer, how
he views his British rights, he replies with a ripple of laughter, saying that
he would be lucky even if
>  he were restored in Bavaria. He has no armed forces at his disposal, and he
does not have a major ally or a significant power base in the British Isles,
willing to act on his behalf.
>
> >
>
> > http://www.jacobite .ca/kings/ francis2. htm
>
> >
>
> > This being the case, those of us (I am one of them) who acknowledge his
rights, communicate with him in Munich, in much the same way as, after 1688,
Jacobite supporters of the exiled Stuart Kings used to go their courts in France
and Italy. Right up until 1807, Jacobites of England, Scotland and Ireland - and
even curious Hannoverians, like Prince Augustus, known as the "Duke of Sussex",
who married, in Rome, unlawfully, the daughter of a Jacobite Earl - visited the
rightful Sovereign at his court, wherever that happened to be. The last known
attempt to restore the Stuarts by military means was a French campaign,
organised by the Duc de Choiseul, Foreign Minister of Louis XV, in 1759, as part
of the Seven Years War between Hannoverian- occupied Britain and France. Prince
Charles Edward Stuart was not co-operative, but Choiseul persisted until success
was no longer fesible.
>
> >
>
> > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ French_Invasion_ of_Britain_ %281759%29
>
> >
>
> > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@> wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > Does the current Stewart line wish restoration? Is there a claimant for
the throne of any of the United Kingdom? If there is somebody what type of
monarchy does he wish to establish?
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@> wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > Don Jacobo Hernando Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez is the 12th and present
Duke of Berwick (born November 5, 1947). He is also the 16th Duque de Peñaranda
de Duero and the 13th Conde de Montijo and five times a Grandee of Spain,
besides having several other Spanish titles of nobility. He is unmarried and has
a brother, Don Luis Esteban Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez, 15th Marqués de
Valderrábano (Lord Louis Stephen FitzJames, born December 11, 1950, married
with three daughters) and two married sisters with issue. He is the present
senior male descendant of KING JAMES II and VII, though, of course this line,
being the illegitimate issue of his relationship with Arabella Churchill, have
no rights at all, even in the Jacobite Line of Succession, to the British
Thrones. The English Dukedom of Berwick, together with the subsidiary titles of
Earl of Tinmouth (or Tynemouth) and Baron Bosworth, is not on the current
"official" roll of the Peerage, since 1696,
>  although these titles have not been "forfeited" either by attainder, but
since the first Duke of Berwick was outlawed and later became a Spanish and then
a French Duke and Peer, the English titles have been passed to their de jure
successors.
>
> > >
>
> > > However, the person of this line, who at present has by far the most
public profile in Spain, is Doña María del Rosario Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart
y Silva, (Lady Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart) the present 18th Duchess (Duquesa) of
Alba, who has also over 50 other titles of nobility. Already twice married, the
second time with a former Jesuit priest, she provoked controversy last year,
when, in spite of strong opposition from her family, she announced that she
intended to marry for a third time. She inherited her titles from her father,
the late Don Jacobo María del Pilar Carlos Manuel Fitz-James Stuart y Falcó,
the 10th Duke of Berwick and 17th Duque de Alba de Torres, etc. (1878-1953).
>
> > >
>
> > > There is also a young Spanish gentleman known as Jacobo Fitz-James Stuart
(and as such he has a Facebook profile), together with his sister Brianda, also
known as Fitz-James Stuart, who are the children of Don Jacobo Fitz-James Stuart
y Martínez de Irujo, Conde de Siruela
>
> > > (born July 15, 1954) by his first wife, Doña María Eugenia Fernández de
Castro y Fernández-Shaw. Normally, according to Spanish usage they would bear
the surname Martínez de Irujo y Fernández de Castro, but, being descended
through their grandmother, the Duchess of Alba, from the illustrious family of
Fitz-James Stuart, they have adopted this surname in practice, if not in law.
>
> > >
>
> > > As to your question about this list, some certainly are here for
nostalgia, speaking of Jacobitism as an historical phenomenon of the past, which
passed out of currency after the defeat of the Jacobite army under Bonnie Prince
Charlie at Culloden in 1746, while others entertain varying degrees of hope to
see perhaps at some future date a restoration of the present-day descendants of
the Royal House of Stuart (officially extant in the direct male line, with the
death of the Cardinal Henry Benedict Stuart, "known as the Duke of York"" (KING
HENRY IX & I) in Scotland, or perhaps in England and Ireland as well. Some,
myself included, recognise as the rightful King of England, Scotland and Ireland
(and theoretically also of France, although the outcome of the Hundred Years War
hardly permits English pretensions to the Throne of Hugh Capet), Franz Herzog
von Bayern (Duke of Bavaria), under the name of KING FRANCIS II. He is the
current Head of the
>  erstwhile Bavarian Royal House of Wittelsbach, and, although he readily
acknowledges discreet declarations of loyalty made by his "subjects" in the
British Isles and the Dominions, he does not actively pursue claims to the
Thrones of either Scotland, England, Ireland (certainly not France), or even his
native Bavaria. Thus plans made in his name for his "restoration" have neither
an official or even unofficial character. This latter attitude is neither
nostalgia, nor romanticism, but strict pragmatism, and at the same time fidelity
to the rules of primogeniture governing the British Monarchy and the succession.
This is a continuation of the practice of most serious Jacobites after 1688,
when the Thrones were usurped by an invader, and the lawful Sovererign, KING
JAMES II & VII, was obliged to seek refuge in France, from where his son and
heir, KING JAMES III & VIII was again by the force of circumstances obliged to
flee to the Papal States and then to
>  Rome itself. Here, although no longer officially recognised by the Papacy as
the de jure Sovereigns of England, Scotland and Ireland, the last two Stuart
Monarchs lived and died and are buried in the crypt of the Basilica of St. Peter
in the Vatican. After 1807, the Legitimate Jacobite succession pursued its
course, although the novelist Walter Scott, amongst others, while paying lip
service to the Jacobite cause, became the foremost propagandist for a transfer
of allegiance to the usurping Hannoverian dynasty as the de facto Royal Family.
There are many calling themselves Jacobites, whose interest is confined
exclusively to the period between 1688 and 1746, for whom devotion to a
Legitimate Sovereign, not born in the British Isles, and indeed in Scotland, is
of little or no interest whatsoever. These latter tend to embrace a full-blown
Nationalist agenda, where a constitutional Monarchy could just as easily be
changed for a republic. Some of us do have
>  an ideological preference for absolute monarchy, but realise that, as far as
the British Isles are concerned, in contrast to continental Europe, the
dominance of "political Anglicanism" in England and the "presbyterian regime" in
Scotland, effectively put a brake on this, during the 17th century, the classic
Stuart century. Moreover, the English Speaking world has, thanks to its
preferance for Protestantism, an inordinately high esteem for Parliamentary or
Constitutional Democracy, which foresees little more than a ceremonial role for
a type of monarchy, with few prerogatives, and even they might be disposed with,
if the "citizen taxpayer" feels irked that someone else has privileges which he
hasn't got.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Don" <don32acp@> wrote:
>
> > > >
>
> > > > I am new to the list. I hope that this question has not been answered
previously. I am curious to the status of the illegitimate line of James.
Specifically the current Jacobo FitzJames Stuart.
>
> > > >
>
> > > > Do Jacobites consider these folks in the running so to speak? What is
the current state of Jacobites in the world. Is this list for nostalgia or do
the members hope to see a restored monarchy. Perhaps a absolutest monarchy?
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> >
>

I dont think we can assume any particular motive to the ripple of laughter when
the current non-claimant is asked about a Jacobite restoration.
To many "Jacobites" this indicates a discrete silence.
To many others it may indicate that he is amused at the idea.
There is no concrete basis for thinking either of these things.
I believe in a third explanation that......the silence indicates a relunctance
to offend anyone including those who ask the question.

I think the absence of a claim......public or private....indicates that nobody
in the "legitimate" succession actually wants restoration. Or at the very least
does not want it "enough"

John


--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, Don Hoban <don32acp@...> wrote:
>
> Does the current Stewart line wish restoration? Is there a claimant for the
throne of any of the United Kingdom? If there is somebody what type of monarchy
does he wish to establish?
>
> --- On Wed, 12/16/09, Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@...> wrote:
>
> From: Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@...>
> Subject: [Jacobite] Re: Jacobo FitzJames Stuart
> To: Jacobite@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, December 16, 2009, 10:41 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>       In the specific context of Jacobitism, I recognise - in my own case - an
idealism which in fact militates against any - even justifiable -
"self-interest" . I have a moral satisfaction from being consequent to my
ideals, but these also expose me to a barrage of insults and scorn from people
who despise my ideals and consequently my person. At least I have never been
arrested by the usurping forces for my public avowal - and not only on this list
- of Legitimist Jacobite principles. Actually, as with the question of
alleviating starvation on a global level (Making poverty history, or Making
History poverty, as your "Real World" would have it!), the realisation of an
ideal is a matter of faith applied in works, charity accomplished with humility.
>
>
>
> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "JohnM" <irishknight1952@ ...> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Stelios,
>
> > We all have ideals which are unfortunately tempered by self-interest or "the
real world".
>
> > That is realpolitik
>
> > It would be tiresome to parade our own differing ideals and interests.
>
> > So hopefully I can illustrate a non contentious example unrelated to
Jacobitism itself but you might see the connexion in principle.
>
> >
>
> > As a matter of principle/ideal I would love to see a situation in the world
where no-one starved. As you are as human as I am, you would wish the same.
>
> >
>
> > If I believed that World Starvation could be solved by me paying £1
annually, I would happily do it. And £10 and £20 and so on. But there would
come a point where my "ideal" would be compromised by my self-interest and
interest of my family...where I would eventually say "no".
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@> wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "JohnM" <irishknight1952@ > wrote:
>
> > > >
>
> > > > Welcome Don.
>
> > > > With over 400 members "nominally" on the list and very few actually
contributing, it is impossible to be precise about individual attitudes. To the
immense credit of the Moderator the group is a very broad based band of diverse
people.
>
> > > > Some (for example myself) are primarily interested in a fascinating era
of history...particuar ly the military aspect, which ties into some voluntary
work I do in the field of Church history.
>
> > > >
>
> > > > The "common denominator" so to speak is that the House of Stuart was
usurped by an illegal and immoral coup d'état. People respond to that situation
with their own mixture of ideals and self-interest.
>
> > > >
>
> > > > John
>
> > > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > Ideals certainly. Self-interest? What does that mean?
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > > >
>
> > > >
>
> > > >
>
> > > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Don" <don32acp@> wrote:
>
> > > > >
>
> > > > > I am new to the list. I hope that this question has not been answered
previously. I am curious to the status of the illegitimate line of James.
Specifically the current Jacobo FitzJames Stuart.
>
> > > > >
>
> > > > > Do Jacobites consider these folks in the running so to speak? What is
the current state of Jacobites in the world. Is this list for nostalgia or do
the members hope to see a restored monarchy. Perhaps a absolutest monarchy?
>
> > > > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> >
>

Is this a prophecy or your own political agenda?



--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, HAMISH McDONALD <clancheif20glencoe@...> wrote:
>
> Hi DOM:
>
>
>                     You are the first person to ASK the
biggest question going.  that i can give you a hint to,  there is such a line
to be claimed on. and as for the establishment they are using a double sided
coin as the English did and always will do but there again that's not getting
your to your point. is it. he will b backed by Scotland on his quest to have the
4 crowns of Scotland alone
>
> crown no (1) the crown of the isles:
>
> crown no (2) the crown of strathclyde:
>
> crown no (3) the crown of Mann:
>
> CROWN NO (4) THE CROWN OF SCOTLAND:
>
> And the first thing that comes out of his mouth as soon as the crown is placed
on his head is FREEDOM.  put that on at the bookies and you will receive a
packet from them. mark my word, right about him: he will be a very fare person
any pedas in Scotland will be jailed for there rest of there miserable life and
they do not get post or visits and when they did they are buried at sea. he will
build a prison on a island in Scotland  oh by the way he sacks the Scottish
Government there and then and all of his Ministers of all the Parties of
Scotland. and HE will recall all his army from the Illegal wars that is going on
at the time of his CROWNING  of his KINGDOM OF SCOTLAND.
>
>             
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Don Hoban <don32acp@...>
> To: Jacobite@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thu, 17 December, 2009 14:57:48
> Subject: Re: [Jacobite] Re: Jacobo FitzJames Stuart
>
>  
> Does the current Stewart line wish restoration? Is there a claimant for the
throne of any of the United Kingdom? If there is somebody what type of monarchy
does he wish to establish?
>
> --- On Wed, 12/16/09, Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@ yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>
> >From: Stelios Rigopoulos <stelios.rigopoulos@ yahoo.com>
> >Subject: [Jacobite] Re: Jacobo FitzJames Stuart
> >To: Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com
> >Date: Wednesday, December 16, 2009, 10:41 PM
> >
> >
> > 
> >In the specific context of Jacobitism, I recognise - in my own case - an
idealism which in fact militates against any - even justifiable -
"self-interest" . I have a moral satisfaction from being consequent to my
ideals, but these also expose me to a barrage of insults and scorn from people
who despise my ideals and consequently my person. At least I have never been
arrested by the usurping forces for my public avowal - and not only on this list
- of Legitimist Jacobite principles. Actually, as with the question of
alleviating starvation on a global level (Making poverty history, or Making
History poverty, as your "Real World" would have it!), the realisation of an
ideal is a matter of faith applied in works, charity accomplished with humility.
> >
> >--- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "JohnM" <irishknight1952@ ...> wrote:
> >>
> >> Stelios,
> >> We all have ideals which are unfortunately tempered by self-interest or
"the real world".
> >> That is realpolitik
> >> It would be tiresome to parade our own differing ideals and interests.
> >> So hopefully I can illustrate a non contentious example unrelated to
Jacobitism itself but you might see the connexion in principle.
> >>
> >> As a matter of principle/ideal I would love to see a situation in the world
where no-one starved. As you are as human as I am, you would wish the same.
> >>
> >> If I believed that World Starvation could be solved by me paying £1
annually, I would happily do it. And £10 and £20 and so on. But there would
come a point where my "ideal" would be compromised by my self-interest and
interest of my family...where I would eventually say "no".
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos
@> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "JohnM" <irishknight1952@ > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Welcome Don.
> >> > > With over 400 members "nominally" on the list and very few actually
contributing, it is impossible to be precise about individual attitudes. To the
immense credit of the Moderator the group is a very broad based band of diverse
people.
> >> > > Some (for example myself) are primarily interested in a fascinating era
of history...particuar ly the military aspect, which ties into some voluntary
work I do in the field of Church history.
> >> > >
> >> > > The "common denominator" so to speak is that the House of Stuart was
usurped by an illegal and immoral coup d'état. People respond to that situation
with their own mixture of ideals and self-interest.
> >> > >
> >> > > John
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Ideals certainly. Self-interest? What does that mean?
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > --- In Jacobite@yahoogroup s.com, "Don" <don32acp@> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I am new to the list. I hope that this question has not been answered
previously. I am curious to the status of the illegitimate line of James.
Specifically the current Jacobo FitzJames Stuart.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Do Jacobites consider these folks in the running so to speak? What is
the current state of Jacobites in the world. Is this list for nostalgia or do
the members hope to see a restored monarchy. Perhaps a absolutest monarchy?
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

--- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Stelios Rigopoulos" <stelios.rigopoulos@...>
wrote:
>
> Don Jacobo Hernando Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez is the 12th and present Duke of
Berwick (born November 5, 1947). He is also the 16th Duque de Peñaranda de Duero
and the 13th Conde de Montijo and five times a Grandee of Spain, besides having
several other Spanish titles of nobility. He is unmarried and has a brother, Don
Luis Esteban Fitz-James Stuart y Gómez, 15th Marqués de Valderrábano (Lord Louis
Stephen FitzJames, born December 11, 1950, married with three daughters) and two
married sisters with issue. He is the present senior male descendant of KING
JAMES II and VII, though, of course this line, being the illegitimate issue of
his relationship with Arabella Churchill, have no rights at all, even in the
Jacobite Line of Succession, to the British Thrones. The English Dukedom of
Berwick, together with the subsidiary titles of Earl of Tinmouth (or Tynemouth)
and Baron Bosworth, is not on the current "official" roll of the Peerage, since
1696, although these titles have not been "forfeited" either by attainder, but
since the first Duke of Berwick was outlawed and later became a Spanish and then
a French Duke and Peer, the English titles have been passed to their de jure
successors.
>
> However, the person of this line, who at present has by far the most public
profile in Spain, is Doña María del Rosario Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart y Silva,
(Lady Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart) the present 18th Duchess (Duquesa) of Alba,
who has also over 50 other titles of nobility. Already twice married, the second
time with a former Jesuit priest, she provoked controversy last year, when, in
spite of strong opposition from her family, she announced that she intended to
marry for a third time. She inherited her titles from her father, the late Don
Jacobo María del Pilar Carlos Manuel Fitz-James Stuart y Falcó, the 10th Duke of
Berwick and 17th Duque de Alba de Torres, etc. (1878-1953).
>
The 10th Duke of Berwick (and 17th Duque de Alba de Torres) was first the
political agent and then (after 1940) the Ambassador of Generalissimo Francisco
Franco, the "Caudillo" of Spain in London. He was, although immensely wealthy,
of liberal leanings and a noted Anglophile, being "decorated" by the usurper as
a "Knight Grand Cross of the Order of Saint Michael and Saint George". His
daughter, the present Duchess of Alba, has for perhaps all her life pre-occupied
the gossip columnists of the international media, with her inherited wealth and
her libertarian lifestyle. Yet, curiously enough, they are as a family
inordinately proud of their descent as much from KING JAMES II & VII, as the
Spanish Duques of Alba.


> There is also a young Spanish gentleman known as Jacobo Fitz-James Stuart (and
as such he has a Facebook profile), together with his sister Brianda, also known
as Fitz-James Stuart, who are the children of Don Jacobo Fitz-James Stuart y
Martínez de Irujo, Conde de Siruela
> (born July 15, 1954) by his first wife, Doña María Eugenia Fernández de Castro
y Fernández-Shaw. Normally, according to Spanish usage they would bear the
surname Martínez de Irujo y Fernández de Castro, but, being descended through
their grandmother, the Duchess of Alba, from the illustrious family of
Fitz-James Stuart, they have adopted this surname in practice, if not in law.
>
> As to your question about this list, some certainly are here for nostalgia,
speaking of Jacobitism as an historical phenomenon of the past, which passed out
of currency after the defeat of the Jacobite army under Bonnie Prince Charlie at
Culloden in 1746, while others entertain varying degrees of hope to see perhaps
at some future date a restoration of the present-day descendants of the Royal
House of Stuart (officially extant in the direct male line, with the death of
the Cardinal Henry Benedict Stuart, "known as the Duke of York"" (KING HENRY IX
& I) in Scotland, or perhaps in England and Ireland as well. Some, myself
included, recognise as the rightful King of England, Scotland and Ireland (and
theoretically also of France, although the outcome of the Hundred Years War
hardly permits English pretensions to the Throne of Hugh Capet), Franz Herzog
von Bayern (Duke of Bavaria), under the name of KING FRANCIS II. He is the
current Head of the erstwhile Bavarian Royal House of Wittelsbach, and, although
he readily acknowledges discreet declarations of loyalty made by his "subjects"
in the British Isles and the Dominions, he does not actively pursue claims to
the Thrones of either Scotland, England, Ireland (certainly not France), or even
his native Bavaria. Thus plans made in his name for his "restoration" have
neither an official or even unofficial character. This latter attitude is
neither nostalgia, nor romanticism, but strict pragmatism, and at the same time
fidelity to the rules of primogeniture governing the British Monarchy and the
succession. This is a continuation of the practice of most serious Jacobites
after 1688, when the Thrones were usurped by an invader, and the lawful
Sovererign, KING JAMES II & VII, was obliged to seek refuge in France, from
where his son and heir, KING JAMES III & VIII was again by the force of
circumstances obliged to flee to the Papal States and then to Rome itself. Here,
although no longer officially recognised by the Papacy as the de jure Sovereigns
of England, Scotland and Ireland, the last two Stuart Monarchs lived and died
and are buried in the crypt of the Basilica of St. Peter in the Vatican. After
1807, the Legitimate Jacobite succession pursued its course, although the
novelist Walter Scott, amongst others, while paying lip service to the Jacobite
cause, became the foremost propagandist for a transfer of allegiance to the
usurping Hannoverian dynasty as the de facto Royal Family. There are many
calling themselves Jacobites, whose interest is confined exclusively to the
period between 1688 and 1746, for whom devotion to a Legitimate Sovereign, not
born in the British Isles, and indeed in Scotland, is of little or no interest
whatsoever. These latter tend to embrace a full-blown Nationalist agenda, where
a constitutional Monarchy could just as easily be changed for a republic. Some
of us do have an ideological preference for absolute monarchy, but realise that,
as far as the British Isles are concerned, in contrast to continental Europe,
the dominance of "political Anglicanism" in England and the "presbyterian
regime" in Scotland, effectively put a brake on this, during the 17th century,
the classic Stuart century. Moreover, the English Speaking world has, thanks to
its preferance for Protestantism, an inordinately high esteem for Parliamentary
or Constitutional Democracy, which foresees little more than a ceremonial role
for a type of monarchy, with few prerogatives, and even they might be disposed
with, if the "citizen taxpayer" feels irked that someone else has privileges
which he hasn't got.
>
>
> --- In Jacobite@yahoogroups.com, "Don" <don32acp@> wrote:
> >
> > I am new to the list. I hope that this question has not been answered
previously. I am curious to the status of the illegitimate line of James.
Specifically the current Jacobo FitzJames Stuart.
> >
> > Do Jacobites consider these folks in the running so to speak? What is the
current state of Jacobites in the world. Is this list for nostalgia or do the
members hope to see a restored monarchy. Perhaps a absolutest monarchy?
> >
>