|
Post by cato on Oct 6, 2021 18:56:07 GMT
for the reasons documented in my last post, I think if Ireland is to ever restore it's native monarchy, Autochthonous Nomenclature, is actually not only the ideal solution, but also the most practical one Might Gaelic terminology be a better phrase? On occasion I like to invent an original phrase for something but I find that unless other people copy me or use it too then it's rather pointless and I end up talking to myself.
|
|
|
Post by connacht4096 on Oct 6, 2021 18:59:46 GMT
Might Gaelic terminology be a better phrase? On occasion I like to invent an original phrase for something but I find that unless other people copy me or use it too then it's rather pointless and I end up talking to myself. the reason i came up with this term is that it is a concept i can find no concise word for otherwise
|
|
|
Post by connacht4096 on Oct 8, 2021 14:24:52 GMT
another proposal is that instead of the more typical "the throne", a restored native monarchy in Ireland should use the term "an ríchathaoir"
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 8, 2021 16:10:11 GMT
As someone who believes this whole enterprise is nuts can I ask what people make of the only actual historical occasion I know of when this topic was discussed by serious people , and even then it was slightly surreal.
Patrick Pearse during the bombardment of the GPO in 1916 discussed the potential future head of state in a new Ireland should the rising succeed. If memory serves me right he suggested a king would not be an impossibility and suggested a spare son from the Bavarian Royal House and not some descendent of one of the Irish noble branches. I think this episode is mentioned in Ruth Dudley Edwards biography of Pearse.
|
|
|
Post by connacht4096 on Oct 9, 2021 15:22:45 GMT
others may consider it unreaslistic, but my ideas of Gaelic Terminology/Autochthonous Nomenclature for a restored native monarchy, believe it or not, are intended to make it more realistic. there are several reasons for this. for one, this custom is a powerfull symbol of legitimacy, and what government on the planet will survive if one of its first acts is to reduce its own perceived legitimacy. second, I can confirm that there are people in Ireland who are republicans because of Gaelic Terminology (I personally know several, and at one point in the past I was one myself); and it seems like a Gaelic monarchy keeping this tendency would help secure their acceptance. it also makes it feel different then the British monarchy, which is good if you want Irish nationalist support. I also think a Gaelic monarchy could have a practical use for this custom, as it may reintroduce some native concepts with no established English word. I will admit I love that convention out of principle, but I think it also has practical benefits.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 9, 2021 18:28:19 GMT
others may consider it unreaslistic, but my ideas of Gaelic Terminology/Autochthonous Nomenclature for a restored native monarchy, believe it or not, are intended to make it more realistic. there are several reasons for this. for one, this custom is a powerfull symbol of legitimacy, and what government on the planet will survive if one of its first acts is to reduce its own perceived legitimacy. second, I can confirm that there are people in Ireland who are republicans because of Gaelic Terminology (I personally know several, and at one point in the past I was one myself); and it seems like a Gaelic monarchy keeping this tendency would help secure their acceptance. it also makes it feel different then the British monarchy, which is good if you want Irish nationalist support. I also think a Gaelic monarchy could have a practical use for this custom, as it may reintroduce some native concepts with no established English word. I will admit I love that convention out of principle, but I think it also has practical benefits. So why not just do want most European states did and adopt a suitable neighbouring junior member of a Royal dynasty and using them? Pearse suggested the Bavarians. I am sure there are lots of heirs without kingdoms floating about.
|
|
|
Post by connacht4096 on Oct 9, 2021 19:44:35 GMT
others may consider it unreaslistic, but my ideas of Gaelic Terminology/Autochthonous Nomenclature for a restored native monarchy, believe it or not, are intended to make it more realistic. there are several reasons for this. for one, this custom is a powerfull symbol of legitimacy, and what government on the planet will survive if one of its first acts is to reduce its own perceived legitimacy. second, I can confirm that there are people in Ireland who are republicans because of Gaelic Terminology (I personally know several, and at one point in the past I was one myself); and it seems like a Gaelic monarchy keeping this tendency would help secure their acceptance. it also makes it feel different then the British monarchy, which is good if you want Irish nationalist support. I also think a Gaelic monarchy could have a practical use for this custom, as it may reintroduce some native concepts with no established English word. I will admit I love that convention out of principle, but I think it also has practical benefits. because I am an Irish nationalist, and so I beleive in the right of all nations to be ruled by for and in the interists of their own nationals. i should add that if the Irishness of monarchy is ever to be re-established, using the first monarch's personal Irisihness as a crutch is a good idea; that especially will not work if someone with no prior connection to Ireland is chosen So why not just do want most European states did and adopt a suitable neighbouring junior member of a Royal dynasty and using them? Pearse suggested the Bavarians. I am sure there are lots of heirs without kingdoms floating about.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 9, 2021 21:36:43 GMT
So who is the heir apparent ? Or where is this new Irish royal house? 🤔
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Oct 9, 2021 22:16:48 GMT
I have to admit, I take quite a benign view of this kind of castle-in-the-air building. Perhaps for reasons expressed in Patrick Pearse's poem The Fool.
I don't like utopianism when it takes a dog in the manger attitude. For instance, the kind of Catholic integrist who opposes anything short of a confessional state and no usury in the banks etc. But Connacht's ideas wouldn't seem to get in the way of more limited, pragmatic goals.
|
|
|
Post by connacht4096 on Oct 9, 2021 22:49:57 GMT
that's the least definite of the various proposals
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on Oct 19, 2021 2:47:35 GMT
Can we discuss the benefits and difficulties of restoring an Irish monarchy? Maybe we could talk about the different types of monarchy that would be possible and what type of government would form as a result. I came across a relevant model of a non-monarch monarch from the classical era, hypothetical as it might be (no mention of whether there's a vote,or how the appointment was otherwise made): "The position of 'crown-wearer' was unique to the province of Asia [Turkey] and certain nearby islands. To hold the position required wealth,since it involved performing both explicitly municipal duties and priestly sacrifices on behalf of the community. Although only one crown-wearer served at a time,one could be reappointed or occupy other important civic positions simultaneously. The position 'was open to women,a certain Koskonia Myrtos held it in Symrna in 83AD; another woman,Korre,at some time in the Roman period. Herakleides,the eminent sophist,was Crown-Wearer about the end of the second century AD'" (cf The Seven Cities of the Apocalypse&Greco-Asian Culture,Roland Worth,quote from Smyrna,Cadoux). (could MacAleese be imagined 'offering sacrifice' somehow? One's vote might might be more likely to rest on Mr Campher at present?) (Poland seems to have had a more official monarchy,but of a similar revolving type, before a political annihilation by empire builders,with a large aristocracy eligible for the office)
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Oct 19, 2021 8:20:58 GMT
I often think the most practical approach to restoring monarchy in Ireland is to do it on a small and voluntary scale.
A local group could declare somebody monarch of their area and simply treat him/her that way. I'm sure it would generate media interest.
I prefer the idea of small kingdoms to a national kingdom anyway.
Of course I am talking about a ceremonial monarch. Reading the actual blood-stained and oppressive history of monarchs who held power, it seems to me we are well out of that period of history. As far as I can see most monarchs saw the common people as a good source of income to generate money for their wars and other projects. Of course there were exceptions.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 19, 2021 14:01:38 GMT
Tory island off Donegal with a population of around 150 has a king normally. The Irish speaking islands last monarch Patsy Dan Rodgers died two or three years ago and hasn't been replaced yet. He also produced a dual language auto biography which is worth a read.
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on Oct 21, 2021 2:26:11 GMT
I often think the most practical approach to restoring monarchy in Ireland is to do it on a small and voluntary scale. A local group could declare somebody monarch of their area and simply treat him/her that way. I'm sure it would generate media interest. I prefer the idea of small kingdoms to a national kingdom anyway. Of course I am talking about a ceremonial monarch. Reading the actual blood-stained and oppressive history of monarchs who held power, it seems to me we are well out of that period of history. As far as I can see most monarchs saw the common people as a good source of income to generate money for their wars and other projects. Of course there were exceptions. Historically there was the Claddagh tribe also. The US could easily recognise the descendants of the royal families of Hawaii in some way but they seem too focused on finding scandals about the British monarchy to give a thought about their own. A 92 year old died recently in Perth might, strangely,make a relevant study on the subject: "The ownership of the Cocos Keeling Islands situated in the Indian Ocean between Indonesia and Australia was granted to the forebears of the Clunies-Ross family in perpetuity by Queen Victoria in 1827...." Until 1970s Prime Minister Whitlam persuaded the UN otherwise shortly before nemesis BjelkePeterson appointed a Queensland National to the senate, eventually causing the Whitlam government to fall (still don't know how that worked). So now we have Cocos Islands, territory of Australia Your point about absolute rulers varying: "(John Clunies-Ross) regarded himself as the leader of the Cocos Malay workforce and head of the family rather than as the king of the Cocos as he was portrayed by the press....Many consider that John was a benevolent ruler. He provided housing, electricity,water and schooling without charge to the Home Island inhabitants, together with a retirement plan at age 60..." (cf obituary) I can also recall Belloc remarking that absolutism wasn't always a feature of monarchy- in mediaeval Europe the fullness of authority could often lie with lesser aristocracy,with a king or queen as overhead largely in name only- I suppose we see remnants of this with the prince- or duke-monarchs of Liechtenstein, Luxembourg and Monaco?, or parallels in the countries that have state and federal laws for various areas- think federal Democrats unable to touch abortion laws in conservative Texas. May John Clunies-Ross rest in peace anyway,his kin are still topcats in other ways there,but the demise in demand for copra in the 60s/70s destroyed him in the end more than any political moves.
|
|
eala
Full Member
Posts: 173
|
Post by eala on Mar 13, 2023 15:37:45 GMT
I have sometimes wondered if it would be possible to have an unofficial monarch. Presumably there is no law against it. In time, it might become official. Marty Morrisey?
|
|