View Full Version : Republic or Royalty?
North Rhins
16-Jan-07, 00:12
If Scotland were to gain her independence from the rest of the UK, which avenue do you think we as a nation should take, would it be Republic or Royalty?
If it we were to become a Republic, then who would we have as head of state/president.
If it were to be Royalty then should it be offered to to a descendant of Charles Edward Stuart.
Views and nominations please.
NB Sean Connery is disqualified 'cos he lives in spain!
If Scotland were to gain her independence from the rest of the UK, which avenue do you think we as a nation should take, would it be Republic or Royalty?
If it we were to become a Republic, then who would we have as head of state/president.
If it were to be Royalty then should it be offered to to a descendant of Charles Edward Stuart.
Views and nominations please.
NB Sean Connery is disqualified 'cos he lives in spain!
I think we should become a Republic, and the president or whatever should be whoever the Scots vote for.................but I guess, at least in the short term, we'll keep the current Royal Family, and become part of the Commonwealth, like Australia, Canada et al.
Jeemag_USA
16-Jan-07, 00:29
In this day and age, who in their right mind would install a monarchy in modern country?
In this day and age, who in their right mind would install a monarchy in modern country?
Nobody, imo.....but we'd not be installing it...........any more than Australia and Canada did...we'd just not be uninstalling it.............and I think that independence would be a big enough step for the Scots without dickering with the monarchy at the same time.
North Rhins
16-Jan-07, 00:41
Nobody, imo.....but we'd not be installing it...........any more than Australia and Canada did...we'd just not be uninstalling it.............and I think that independence would be a big enough step for the Scots without dickering with the monarchy at the same time.
But Canada and Australia did not have a rightful King or Queen to reinstate, whereas Scotland just might have.
ok who is the air to the scottish thonre and would we use the org to find them:)
In this day and age, who in their right mind would install a monarchy in modern country?
Jeemag, our Scandinavian neighbours Norway, Sweden and Denmark all have Royal Families as do our nearest European neighbours Holland and Belgium, and IMO they seem to have a modern outlook in all the above mentioned countries.
I would not like Scotland to become a republic such as your adopted country.
hmm just out of curiosity who is the scottish royal family??
lassieinfife
16-Jan-07, 14:22
Do we really need a Royal Family? Just another burden to the tax payers........ fine if they are going to pay their own way but not on if its going to cost us as much as the lot we already have
I think we definatley need Royalty. I am sure we can get a volanteer from the British Royal family who would be willing to be King of Scotland. In fact the British royal family are decended from Scottish Royalty.
We don't want to become a Bolshy republic.
But Canada and Australia did not have a rightful King or Queen to reinstate, whereas Scotland just might have.
Don't know that there are any descendents of Jamie Saxt's forebears who would have a better title than the current crop.
Though we could just go back to the days when we had a King of Scots.......rather than a King of Scotland..........and pick the one we think would be best for the job from a list of contenders.
Then those that like royalty can call them that..but they'd have been elected like a president.
I almost dont care until i get a wee flash of president Blair, or President Cameron and then yeuch - give me the queen any day of the week.
Royalty for me, and no way would it be Bonnie Prince Charlies Jacobite nonces either;)
percy toboggan
16-Jan-07, 20:54
I think we definatley need Royalty. I am sure we can get a volanteer from the British Royal family who would be willing to be King of Scotland. .
Ne'er mind that lot.:eek:
I'll do it for very little money.I have a Scottish great granny too, nee links with Germany and I'm not ugly (he claimed).;)
North Rhins
17-Jan-07, 17:38
Below is a link to a book entitled ‘The Stuart’s Last Secret.’ I’ve read the book and I must admit that it’s heavy going at times. The evidence is tenuous but at the same time compelling. Wouldn’t it be ironic if Scotland gained her independence that a true ‘King of the Scots’ be placed upon the throne.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stuarts-Last-Secret-Peter-Pininski/dp/186232199X/sr=8-1/qid=1169051509/ref=sr_1_1/202-6036165-3155812?ie=UTF8&s=books
weeboyagee
17-Jan-07, 23:49
I once did a programme on Grampian with the New Pretender - the rightful heir to the throne of Scotland - his name - Charles Stewart.
I'm afraid as much as my head tells me we should be a republic I agree with golach - we should have a modern Royalty, and the New Pretender was as modern as they come. They are a great source of invisible income to the economy of a country and we definitely have the history to base the whole idea on.
WBG :cool:
North Rhins
18-Jan-07, 00:02
I’m not adverse to a royal family, so long as it restricted to ‘immediate’ family members. The problem arises when Lady Posonby – Crunchbuttock – Smythe, third cousin. twice removed. is included in the hangers on.
Jeemag_USA
18-Jan-07, 00:11
If Scotland gains its independence and I had a chance to decide what kind of governement it had I know what I would want, a government without a primeminister. A government that is set up kind of like the House of Representatives in the USA, each member has a say on any issue or decision based on the information he has gathered from his constituents and how they feel, decisions are made for the people by the people. There doesn't always have to be a leader, I always believe a country should be led by its people. The theory of Democracy is not upheld by most nations that believe they are one, because at the end of the day, the people only have a say once every four years, and a lot can happen in that time. Why is that in political circles, its always left to one man to make the final decisions on what to ask for or what direction to go in, it leaves things open to stubborn mindedness, because at the end of the day a President or Prime Minister can go ahead with what his head says if he chooses to disagree with his colleagues. So I am all for setting up the Scottish House of Representatives, who vote together on major national decisions. I also think there shoudl be a political system without parties, no one member belongs to a named party, I always thought that was a stupid thing, its like choosing football teams, I really believe a country can have a government without party politics.
j4bberw0ck
18-Jan-07, 00:47
I am sure we can get a volanteer from the British Royal family who would be willing to be King of Scotland. In fact the British royal family are decended from Scottish Royalty.
Heavens! You mean all the Scottish royalty moved to Germany and changed its name to Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, before changing it to Windsor during WW1 to avoid the embarrassment of Germans machine-gunning British troops and yet His Maj having a German name?
I'd never have thought it....... perhaps they were really MacSaxe-Coburg-Gotha-Jimmy? :lol::lol:
I really believe a country can have a government without party politics.
Heck, we can't even have a council without "party politics" even when that council is technically "independent"....as is the "independent" council in the area I came here from..............tories all..............but with more sense than to stand under that banner.
There would be no difference in a Parliament...........people who thought the same would all vote together anyway....and probably get together to discuss the way they should vote...........but at an election nobody would know what their totality of policies were.......because of the propensity to say what people want to hear in order to get elected, and to forget it once they are there.
Heavens! You mean all the Scottish royalty moved to Germany and changed its name to Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, before changing it to Windsor during WW1 to avoid the embarrassment of Germans machine-gunning British troops and yet His Maj having a German name?
I'd never have thought it....... perhaps they were really MacSaxe-Coburg-Gotha-Jimmy? :lol:
No, but the descent is still from Jamie Saxt..............though over the centuries the Scottishelement has been well reduced by foreign marriages.
In fact, the present Queen has more Scottish blood than has been in the Royal Family since Charles I because of her mother...........though the Stewart part of it is miniscule........but it is still there.
But then.........that is genealogy for you....the further you get from the original source the more dilute the connection! :Razz
The dates in the chart refer to reign years, and the dates in the early part of the chart are all approximate. Scots rulers are shown in bold capitals, kings of other countries are also in capitals.
?Ercc
___________|_____________
| |
FERGUS MOR Loarn
c500-501 |
| V
DOMANGART I
c501-507
____________|_____________
| |
COMGALL GABRÁN
c507-538 c538-558
| |
CONALL I ÁEDÁN
c558-574 c574-606
|
EOCHAID I
606-629
________________________________|_______
| | |
Conne DOMNALL BREAC CONALL II
| 629-642 642-c659
| | _____|_________
| | | |
FERCHAR DOMANGART II DOMNALL II MAEL DUIN
c642-649 c659-673 c689-696 c673-689
|
EOCHAID II
c696-697
|
EOCHAID III
c721-733
|_______________________
| |
ÁED FIND FERGUS
748-778 778-781
|
Eochaid IV = ?a Pictish princess
|
AILPÍN = ?a Pictish princess
c837-840 |
_________________|________________________
| |
KENNETH I mac Alpin DONALD I
834-859 859-863
______|_____________________________ |
| | | |
daughter CONSTANTINE I AEDH GIRIC I
| 863-877 877-878 878-889
| | |
EOCHAID DONALD II CONSTANTINE II
878-889 889-900 900-942
| |
MALCOLM I INDULF
942-954 954-962
________________________| |
| | |
DUBH KENNETH II CUILEAN
962-967 971-995 967-971
| | |
KENNETH III MALCOLM II CONSTANTINE III
997-1005 1005-1034 995-997
____|_______ |
| | |
GIRIC II Boedhe Bethoc = Crinan of Dunkeld
997-1005 |____ |______
| |
Gillacomgain = Gruoch = MACBETH DUNCAN I
| 1040-1057 1034-1040
_____| ___________|_____________________
| | |
LULACH 1 = MALCOLM III = St Margaret DONALD III Ban
1057-1058 | 1058-1093 | 1093-94,1094-97
______________| _____________|______________________
| | | | |
DUNCAN II EDGAR ALEXANDER I DAVID I Matilda = HENRY I
1094 1097-1107 1107-1124 1124-1153 of England
|
Henry, Earl of Huntingdon
______________________________|______
| | |
MALCOLM IV WILLIAM I David, Earl of Huntingdon
1153-1165 1165-1214 |
_________________| __________________|_____
| | |
ALEXANDER II Margaret = Alan of Isabella = Robert
1214-1249 ________| Galloway | Bruce
| | |
ALEXANDER III Devorguilla = John Robert Bruce
1249-1286 ______| Balliol |
| | |
ERIC II = Margaret JOHN BALLIOL Robert Bruce
of Norway | 1292-1296 |
| | |
MARGARET, Maid EDWARD BALLIOL Isobel = ROBERT I = Elizabeth
of Norway 1332-1341 | BRUCE |
1286-1290 | 1306-1329 |
| |
Walter the Steward = Marjorie DAVID II
| 1329-32,1341-71
|
ROBERT II Stewart
1371-1390
|
Annabella Drummond = ROBERT III
| 1390-1406
|
JAMES I
1406-1437
|
JAMES II
1437-1460
|
HENRY VII JAMES III
of England 1460-1488
| |
Archibald (2) = Margaret = (1) JAMES IV
Douglas | Tudor | 1488-1513
_________| |
| |
Matthew = Margaret Mary of = JAMES V ~ Margaret Erskine
Stuart | Guise | 1513-1547 :
| | :
Henry Stuart, = MARY James Stewart, James Stewart,
Lord Darnley | 1542-1567 1st Earl of Moray Lord of Doune
| | |
JAMES VI Elizabeth = James Stewart,
1567-1625 | 2nd Earl of Moray
_______________| |
| | James Stewart, 3rd Earl of Moray
Elizabeth CHARLES I
| 1625-1649
| _____|_______________________________
| | | |
Sophia CHARLES II Mary Anne Hyde = JAMES VII = Mary of Modena
= Ernest 1649-1685 | | 1685-1689 |
of Hanover | ____|________ |________
| | | | |
GEORGE I WILLIAM II/III = MARY II ANNE James Edward,
1714-1727 1689-1702 1689-1694 1702-1714 'Old Pretender'
| _________________|
| | |
GEORGE II Charles Edward, Henry, Cardinal
1727-1760 'Young Pretender' York
|__________________________
| |
Frederick, Prince William, Duke
of Wales of Cumberland
|
GEORGE III
1760-1820
________|______________________________
| | |
GEORGE IV WILLIAM IV Edward, Duke
1820-1830 1830-1837 of Kent
|
VICTORIA
1837-1901
|
EDWARD VII
1901-1910
|
GEORGE V
1910-1936
_____________|______
| |
EDWARD VIII GEORGE VI
1936 1936-1952
|
ELIZABETH II
1952-
Taken from the web site http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/4038/gene/scotking.htm
j4bberw0ck
18-Jan-07, 09:20
But then.........that is genealogy for you....the further you get from the original source the more dilute the connection!
I suppose that'd be like homeopathy..... the more dilute, the more (theoretically) effective? :lol:
The dates in the chart refer to reign years, and the dates in the early part of the chart are all approximate. Scots rulers are shown in bold capitals, kings of other countries are also in capitals.
Wizzbang, just for a moment there I thought I'd wandered into a chapter of something by Tolkein and was looking for a poem in Elvish, but I take my hat off to you and apologise for my sense of humour, and ignorance of our (can I say "our"?) Royal Family's ancestors :cool: .
Tom Cornwall
19-Jan-07, 01:17
personally, I think it would be disasterous if Scotland went down the road of full independence. Even Alex Salmond was short of words when it was put to him that the oil revenue, the Scot Nats always rely on, may not be there to shore up the Scottish economy.
On the point of Royalty, was Bonnie Prince Charlie eve Scottish???
j4bberw0ck
19-Jan-07, 01:37
ignorance of our (can I say "our"?) Royal Family's ancestors :cool: .
..... but wizzbang, now I've had a look at the original reference I'd have to say there's some very gratuitous use of emboldened text in there. Basically, it's saying that anyone who was a descendant of anyone who might have been Scottish, is, de facto, Scottish. Still and all, if it makes anyone feel better I suppose it's OK...........
Unless of course it's the same route taken by that hugely famous Scottish patriot, Melgibson of Brayfart. or that well known latter day Scottish patriot, Sean "The Spaniard" Connery. A man who is tirelessly in love with the land of his birth to the extent that he lives elsewhere.
Jeemag_USA
19-Jan-07, 01:51
..... but wizzbang, now I've had a look at the original reference I'd have to say there's some very gratuitous use of emboldened text in there. Basically, it's saying that anyone who was a descendant of anyone who might have been Scottish, is, de facto, Scottish. Still and all, if it makes anyone feel better I suppose it's OK...........
Unless of course it's the same route taken by that hugely famous Scottish patriot, Melgibson of Brayfart. or that well known latter day Scottish patriot, Sean "The Spaniard" Connery. A man who is tirelessly in love with the land of his birth to the extent that he lives elsewhere.
Oh no you did not just insult "The Connery" how dare you :lol:
If I had his money I'd have hooses everywhere, Sean is the MAN!!! If someone told me they were making him King of Scotland, its probably the only way the would convince me to vote for a monarchy in Scotland :cool:
Oh no you did not just insult "The Connery" how dare you :lol:
If I had his money I'd have hooses everywhere, Sean is the MAN!!! If someone told me they were making him King of Scotland, its probably the only way the would convince me to vote for a monarchy in Scotland :cool:
Yep, Sean Connery is THE MAN, alright! I think he'd make a fine figure of a king - he'd definitely get my vote!! :-)
..... but wizzbang, now I've had a look at the original reference I'd have to say there's some very gratuitous use of emboldened text in there. Basically, it's saying that anyone who was a descendant of anyone who might have been Scottish, is, de facto, Scottish. Still and all, if it makes anyone feel better I suppose it's OK...........
But isn't that just the same as all those Americans, Australians et al. of Scottish, English and any other 'ish descent.
You try telling the genealogist that they can't claim to be of the blood of their ancestors.
j4bberw0ck
19-Jan-07, 09:18
But isn't that just the same as all those Americans, Australians et al. of Scottish, English and any other 'ish descent
Of course! And just as pointless.
For the record if, as "an English" - though one who's been here a while - I get a vote in whether an independent Scotland should be a monarchy or a republic (and leaving aside the SNP's dodgy economics for a second), I'd vote for a republic.
In fact, it it came to voting for monarchy or republic on a UK-wide basis I'd be for a republic.
[quote=j4bberw0ck;183055
or that well known latter day Scottish patriot, Sean "The Spaniard" Connery. A man who is tirelessly in love with the land of his birth to the extent that he lives elsewhere.[/quote]
Sorry j4bber, this IMO is an insult to a Freeman of my adopted city Edinburgh. "Oor Big Tam" Connery has donated millions to scholarships to the kids of Scotland, and if I had his monies I would be living in the sun like him. That does not make him less of a Scot, as living in Auld Reekie does not make me less of a Kaitnessian.
j4bberw0ck
19-Jan-07, 12:13
Fair enough - I didn't have insult or upset in mind when I made the comment; just irony. Sorry, golach.
Of course Sean was already the Man who would be King, and look what happened to him then!! A damn fine film though.
To deny our monarchy is to deny our past.
this IMO is an insult to a Freeman of my adopted city Edinburgh. "Oor Big Tam" Connery has donated millions to scholarships to the kids of Scotland.
Surely you meant inshult?:roll: :D
I'd vote for a republic.
In fact, it it came to voting for monarchy or republic on a UK-wide basis I'd be for a republic.
Moi, aussi! ;)
j4bberw0ck
19-Jan-07, 19:31
To deny our monarchy is to deny our past.
So is to deny coal-fired and nuclear power stations, but you seem all for that...............:lol::lol:
North Rhins
19-Jan-07, 19:49
Come on folks let’s have some suggestions who do we want for president? We want someone local to keep relocation costs down. We can’t have Shawn Canary because it’ too far for him to commute. So who’s it going to be?
Come on folks let’s have some suggestions who do we want for president? We want someone local to keep relocation costs down. We can’t have Shawn Canary because it’ too far for him to commute. So who’s it going to be?
Me? ;) ....................:lol:
..... or that well known latter day Scottish patriot, Sean "The Spaniard" Connery. A man who is tirelessly in love with the land of his birth to the extent that he lives elsewhere.
Sorry j4bber, this IMO is an insult to a Freeman of my adopted city Edinburgh. "Oor Big Tam" Connery has donated millions to scholarships to the kids of Scotland, and if I had his monies I would be living in the sun like him. That does not make him less of a Scot, as living in Auld Reekie does not make me less of a Kaitnessian.
Well said, golach! I'm with you on that!
Come on folks let’s have some suggestions who do we want for president? We want someone local to keep relocation costs down. We can’t have Shawn Canary because it’ too far for him to commute. So who’s it going to be?
Howz about our very own JOHN THURSO? I've heard lots of good things about him, and he looks great in a kilt! :cool:
If we had to have a President I would vote for Donald Findlay QC.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.