Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 3      Prev   1   2   3
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,534
Reply with quote  #31 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatthewJTaylor
Surely as monarchists we are not looking to implement the will of the majority though but to implement legitimate royal government?

Oh, I wouldn't say that at all. No monarchy can stand without the consent of the people it reigns over. A monarchy thrust down a people's throats by force will never stand for any prolonged period. Fortunately, all the current European monarchies do enjoy the consent and approbation of their peoples; some more than others, but still all are supported by a majority. The hope is that a few at least of the former monarchies will at some future time choose to restore their lost thrones. I don't think it is being too negative to suggest that Ireland is perhaps not very high on that list. In fact, it probably doesn't figure on it at all. Just to mention it, on the first page Azadi is all in favour of Ireland becoming a Commonwealth Realm. On the second page, he suddenly becomes all against it, with no reason given for the transition. Not that I'm asking for one, mind.
MatthewJTaylor

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 277
Reply with quote  #32 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi

No political party in Southern Ireland support closer relations between Great Britain and Ireland, but the Reform Group is a Southern Irish organization, which supports Southern Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth. As far as I know, southern unionists usually vote for Fine Gael, because it supported the Free State during the Irish Civil War.
Southern Ireland ought to remain an independent state, but I would like Southern Ireland to become a Commonwealth realm. The current constitution of the Republic of Ireland actually makes it possible for Southern Ireland to be a Commonwealth realm, because it allows the monarch of Great Britain to represent Southern Ireland in foreign affairs, while the President of Ireland performs the domestic duties of a head of state.
I would like Ireland to be unified as a Commonwealth realm.

Why have you changed your mind on this Azadi?

__________________
ceterum censeo caetum europaeum delendum esse
The Scottish Tory - https://sites.google.com/view/scottishtory
Scots for a French Royal Restoration - https://sites.google.com/view/sfrr
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #33 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatthewJTaylor

Why have you changed your mind on this Azadi?

I have changed my mind, because I have realized that I will be a hypocrite, if I support Ireland becoming a Commonwealth realm, while being strongly opposed to a Hashemite restoration in Kurdistan. A Hashemite restoration in Kurdistan is unacceptable to me, because the Hashemite kings of Iraq oppressed the Kurds, and Ireland becoming a Commonwealth realm is unacceptable to the Irish nationalists, because Britain has oppressed the Irishmen. 
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,534
Reply with quote  #34 
Perhaps you can now see why I didn't ask, Matthew.
Windemere

Registered:
Posts: 459
Reply with quote  #35 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatthewJTaylor

Therefore Elizabeth II is in Ireland:

i) Rightful heir to the British Irish crown as Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
ii) Practical High Queen of Ireland
iii) Dynastic heir to the last High King of Ireland

I think that's quite a conclusive case.

In my view, the only real alternative to HM in a monarchist Ireland would be to restore the provincial monarchs and have an elective High Kingship amongst them.



Thanks for the previous informative posts.

If the provincial kingdoms were restored, Ulster would likely go to the Northern O'Neills (Ui Neill). Connacht would go to the O'Connors (Ui Conchobhair). Munster would go to the Eoganachta, which was a grouping of related clans, among whom the most prominent were the McCarthys and the O'Sullivans. Leinster would go to the McMurrough-Kavanaughs.

The clan that most often held the high-kingship were the Southern O'Neills (Ui Neill) who had their capital at Tara in the district of Mide, in what's now northern Leinster. The Northern O'Neills also occasionally held it, as did the O'Briens of the district kingdom of Thomond, within Munster. The Eoganachta of Munster never held it, nor did they ever apparently seek any primacy outside of Munster.  The last Irish High King was Rory O'Connor (Ruaidri Ua Conchobhair), who submitted to King Henry II.

Brian Boru is probably the most famous Irish  High King (Ard Ri). He was something of an upstart, displacing his predecessor Malachy Mor (Mael Sechnaill) of the Southern O'Neills. He probably owed his position as High King to his ability and charisma more than to any hereditary qualifications, as he originated from the Ui Briain, the district kings of Thomond, who were subordinate to the Eoganachta of Munster.    His fame derives from his great victory at the Battle of Clontarf, which ensured that Ireland would remain Celtic, and not Viking, although there were both Celts and Vikings fighting on both sides,  and  the Viking contingents who supported Brian had been settled in Ireland for generations. There were also Celtic military forces fighting against Brian, and Sitric Silkbeard, the Norse king of Dublin, one of Brian's opponents, had been born in Ireland, and had a Celtic Irish mother. After Brian's death at Clontarf, Malachy Mor resumed the high-kingship. But several of Brian's descendants did accede to the high-kingship later on.






__________________
Dis Aliter Visum "Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Windemere

Registered:
Posts: 459
Reply with quote  #36 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi

Do you support the claim of the House of Liechtenstein to the Irish throne?


Thanks for your thoughts on implementing a Jacobite restoration in Ireland.

But the overriding  problem with the Liechtensteins is that, if Irish reunification were ever to be achieved, the Protestants of Northern Ireland would never willingly transfer their allegiance from the Windsors to the Liechtensteins, for multiple reasons, including tradition and religion. It's true the Liechtensteins have the senior genealogical descent from the Stuarts, from King James I through his daughter Elizabeth, Electress Palatine, through her son Karl I, Elector Palatine. But now, as then, their religious preference would surely render them unsuitable for the throne, and in Ireland now, as it did in Britain then. 

A more reasonable choice might be one of the junior Windsors of Cambridge or Sussex. They have the Stuart descent from King James I through Elizabeth, Electress Palatine, through her daughter Sophia, Electress of Hanover, as codified by the 1701 Act of Settlement. And they likely have a higher quantum of Stuart blood than the Liechtensteins, seeing as they also possess descents (albeit illegitimate) from Charles II and James II. 

If it were to smooth the way for Irish reunification, the Catholics of Eire, and the Nationalists of Ulster, would in all likelihood  tolerate one of the junior Windsors. And Irish reunification would be more palatable to the Northern Irish Protestants if it included the continuation of their old allegiance to the Windsors. In all probability, a junior Cambridge or a Sussex potential Irish monarch  would be a Church of Ireland Anglican, which would solve the religious problem.  The Catholics would be fine with this, as long as he or she weren't a black Presbyterian, and the Protestants would be fine with it, as long as he or she weren't a papist.

__________________
Dis Aliter Visum "Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,534
Reply with quote  #37 
The senior genealogical descent is not through James I and VI's daughter Elizabeth at all, it is through his son Charles I and Charles's own daughter Henrietta. But I know you know that perfectly well, you just had a momentary mental aberration. Happens, certainly including to me now and then!
Windemere

Registered:
Posts: 459
Reply with quote  #38 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
The senior genealogical descent is not through James I and VI's daughter Elizabeth at all, it is through his son Charles I and Charles's own daughter Henrietta. But I know you know that perfectly well, you just had a momentary mental aberration. Happens, certainly including to me now and then!


Thank you for that correction, Peter. I was so preoccupied with the descent from Elizabeth that I'd forgotten about Henrietta. If I'd taken the time to properly review my posts before submitting them, I'd have realized that, but these days I'm lucky to manage anything at all. Thanks for your help.

__________________
Dis Aliter Visum "Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.