Order of the Crown of Stuart

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

It's clear from the site that they are a Jacobite order.

I think "legitimist" would be a more accurate description of the membership, as neither group advocates a restoration of the Stuart line.

[McClef]

It would be difficult to establish a legitimate Stuart line nowadays in any case given the number of legitimate male descendants drying up even if religion had not been an issue.

Having exhausted the male line descending from James I and VI the principle of male preference primogeniture would then have had to go through the female line from James in any case. We would have missed out on George I and George II (perhaps not overall a bad thing ) but otherwise would have pretty much ended up with what we have now (with a certain amount of regnal renumbering).

[gilmore]

It would be difficult to establish a legitimate Stuart line nowadays in any case given the number of legitimate male descendants drying up even if religion had not been an issue.

Having exhausted the male line descending from James I and VI the principle of male preference primogeniture would then have had to go through the female line from James in any case. We would have missed out on George I and George II (perhaps not overall a bad thing ) but otherwise would have pretty much ended up with what we have now (with a certain amount of regnal renumbering).

Not at all.

The present monarch of the UK, since 1996, would be Francis II, who now rejoices in the title Duke of Bavaria. See http://www.jacobite.ca/kings/index.htm for the ten Jacobite monarchs between James II and VI and King Francis, passing through the houses of Savoy and Hapsburg to the Wittelsbachs.

His heir is his brother, Prince Max of Bavaria, Duke in Bavaria, whose heiress would be his eldest daughter, Princess Sophie, wife of the Hereditary Prince of Liechtenstein. She would in time be succeeded by her eldest son, Prince Joseph Wenzel of Liechtenstein, born 1995 (or failing him, his younger brother, Prince Georg), thus uniting the thrones of the United Kingdom and Liechtentstein.

"Joseph Wenzel Maximilian Maria von und zu Liechtenstein was born May 24, 1995 at Portland Hospital in London. He is the son of Alois, Hereditary Prince of Liechtenstein and of his wife, Duchess Sophie in Bavaria....Joseph Wenzel is the first [Jacobite] heir presumptive to the [British] throne to be born in England since King James III and VIII in 1688."

For a genealogical chart showing the Jacobite monarchs, see http://www.jacobite.ca/gentree.htm

BTW March 21 is the birthday of King and Cardinal Henry IX and I, born 1725 and died 1807, last of the male line of the royal Stuarts, younger brother of Bonnie Prince Charlie.

[McClef]

Thanks for the info Gilmore.

I was thinking of those claims made about descendants of Charles Edward Stuart which still have their supporters.

The problem still remains that this line of descent was invalidated in British Law by the Act of Settlement as Henrietta ("Minette") became a Catholic upon her marriage to Phillipe, Duc D'Orleans and brother to Louis XIV.

By the time of the death of Cardinal York (Henry IX) the Hanoverian regime was too firmly entrenched to be seriously shifted and was producing British born progeny. Opposition to them came in Republican and Revolutionary form that challenged Monarchy itself rather than a harking back to past claims to Sovereignty.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Thanks for the info Gilmore.

I was thinking of those claims made about descendants of Charles Edward Stuart which still have their supporters.

The problem still remains that this line of descent was invalidated in British Law by the Act of Settlement as Henrietta ("Minette") became a Catholic upon her marriage to Phillipe, Duc D'Orleans and brother to Louis XIV.

The major problem with the English Act of Settlement in 1701 (aside from the fact that Scotland had its own Parliament until 1707) was that it was a nullity outside of England. No foreign power recognized it, and Scotland was divided on the issue. I'm not sure if my family was "out" in the 1709 Rising, but I do know we were out in both the '15 and the '45-- the issue being (for us, at least) the imposition of a foreign king on Scotland.

But, if you think the Royal Stuart Society, et al, have got it wrong... drop 'em an email!

[McClef]

The major problem with the English Act of Settlement in 1701 (aside from the fact that Scotland had its own Parliament until 1707) was that it was a nullity outside of England. No foreign power recognized it, and Scotland was divided on the issue. I'm not sure if my family was "out" in the 1709 Rising, but I do know we were out in both the '15 and the '45-- the issue being (for us, at least) the imposition of a foreign king on Scotland.

But, if you think the Royal Stuart Society, et al, have got it wrong... drop 'em an email!

The provisions were duly incorporated with the union of the parliaments with the proviso that the Monarch would also defend the Church of Scotland as the established Church in Scotland.

The Crown of Stuart do not talk of the line through Henriette and their genealogy in their portrait gallery ends with Cardinal York (Henry IX). So I would only take issue with their omission of the female Stuart monarchs Mary and Anne.

The Jacobite site lists differences of opinion as to whom they should recognise for the legitimate descent but such things are common when it comes to vanished thrones also - who should be the legitimate heir to the French throne (Bourbon or Bonaparte)for example.

As to the "no foreign power recognised it" - I think you will find that the Protestant powers did and also the Catholic powers played both sides with their often lukewarm support for the Stuart cause no doubt due to seeing the difference between actual power and claimed power

I am sure that the English were not keen on foreign kings at the time, especially the first two Georges, especially the first one who not only did not bother to learn English but, having imprisoned his wife for adultery, openly sported his two mistresses whom he brought over with him. Hardly the most auspicious of starts you might say.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Do any of you Lads/Lassies have any info on The Order of The Crown of Stuart. What it is or who its members are? Thanks John

John, this is an interesting group of folks who, by and large, are interested in the history of the Royal Stuart Family and all of there descendants. It has been around for ages, and the membership is comprised of some highly erudite (and entertaining, if not eccentric) people. It is not an order of chivalry, but rather more like a club for people who are interested in "what might have happened" had the Stuarts remained on the throne of the United Kingdoms.

[English Bloke]

Here's a nice lyric... It's all about the Queen, as in the real one! There's another version which relates to Kings but again, only the real ones.

Here's a health unto her Majesty
With a fa la la la la la la
Confusion to her enemies
With a fa la la la la la la
And he who would not drink her health
We wish him neither wit nor wealth
Nor yet a rope to hang himself

With a fa la la la la la la la la laaaaaaa
(Hold last note while a member of the assembled downs a drink)
With a fa la la la la la la

May she live in mirth and jollity
With a fa la la la la la la
And pass time with good company
With a fa la la la la la la
And he who would not join in glee
Must Puritan or Papist be
And him we curse with misery

With a fa la la la la la la la la laaaaaaa
With a fa la la la la la la

Let the Queen's good health go round and round
With a fa la la la la la la
And let her praises loud resound
With a fa la la la la la la
And he who would not have it so
May he be cursed with a gouty toe
And days of wrath and nights of woe

With a fa la la la la la la la la laaaaaaa
With a fa la la la la la la

Our goodly Queen is fair of face
With a fa la la la la la la
Endowed with every female grace
With a fa la la la la la la
And every woman in this shire
Who doth not to the like aspire
May her breast be dun and her hair be wire

With a fa la la la la la la la la laaaaaaa
With a fa la la la la la la

So now we've raised our tankards high
With a fa la la la la la la
We've raised them full and lowered them dry
With a fa la la la la la la
Elizabeth, long may she reign
God save the Queen
May all here join in this refrain
And fill our tankards up again

[gilmore]

John, this is an interesting group of folks who, by and large, are interested in the history of the Royal Stuart Family and all of there descendants. It has been around for ages, and the membership is comprised of some highly erudite (and entertaining, if not eccentric) people. It is not an order of chivalry, but rather more like a club for people who are interested in "what might have happened" had the Stuarts remained on the throne of the United Kingdoms.

That premise does raise some interesting questions.

Would there be a United States of Amerca? Probably not. France would have likely been allied with a Stuart-ruled Britain, or at least not antagonistic toward it, and thus not supportive of the rebellious colonies.

Would there be a British Canada? Probably not. What is now western Canada might well be French, or French-speaking now.

Would Louisiana be French or Spanish?

[sathor]

recognize Mary II and Anne as de facto monarchs but not as de jure sovereigns, hence their exclusion from the line of succession in the gallery on their website.

Wow, I wonder just how many people beyond us even know the difference between those two things. (de facto and de jure) Its not something that comes up that often.