Who were the Jacobites fighting for in Outlander?

by

Who were the Jacobites fighting for in Outlander?

As a history enthusiast who has spent countless hours poring over dusty tomes and delving into the intricacies of Scotland’s rich past, I must say that the Jacobite cause is one that truly captivates my heart. The tale of the Stuart dynasty, their struggles, and their unwavering quest for the throne is a story that transcends time and continues to resonate with us today.

As a dedicated Outlander fan, I’ve journeyed through the first two captivating seasons and found myself rooting for the Jacobites‘ quest to install a new monarch on the British throne. The one they yearn for is none other than Bonnie Prince Charlie himself, their claimant to the British crown.

The books accurately portray the historical context of their times, as the Battle of Culloden indeed took place, with the British emerging victorious. Yet, it’s worth noting that the actual man whom the Jacobites aimed to install as king didn’t participate in any battles during the ’45 uprising.

Bonnie Prince Charlie wasn’t the intended King in Outlander

It’s understandable to assume that the Jacobites aimed to install Bonnie Prince Charlie as king, but leading men wasn’t exactly Charles Stuart’s strong suit. His knowledge of Britain was limited, and he had a shallow understanding of Scottish customs and traditions.

Instead of pursuing the crown for personal gain, he declared in the style of “Outlander” that he was battling to uphold his father’s claim to the British throne. Since the start, he consistently advocated for his father to be the rightful King of Britain.

Who were the Jacobites fighting for in Outlander?

Who was Bonnie Prince Charlie’s father?

Charles Stuart’s dad was James Francis Edward Stuart. He was the sole child born to James II of England and Mary of Modena, preceded by two sisters, Mary and Anne.

In essence, you’re asking if it should have been James who reigned as King of England and Scotland given certain circumstances. To answer your question, yes, in a sense he would have been the rightful monarch by birthright. However, there was a complication: James II and his wife, Mary of Modena, were Roman Catholics. By this time, both England and Scotland had become predominantly Protestant countries. Raising James in the Catholic faith would have been problematic for many people in these lands, which ultimately hindered his claim to the throne.

During James’s birth, numerous tales were circulated by the Protestants. Prior to this event, his mother had endured nine pregnancies that sadly ended in miscarriages, stillbirths, and a baby who lived only a few days. The Protestants speculated that the newborn James might have actually perished and a different child was secretly substituted. Given that Catholics were present at the birth, they found this belief plausible.

Subsequently, a tale circulated suggesting James II wasn’t the biological father. If true, this would render the new prince as illegitimate.

Efforts were made to suppress the rumors, yet nothing managed to extinguish the rampant flames of dissent. It didn’t make things easier that the British Protestants were discontented with a Catholic monarch ruling, but the prospect of Mary, who was brought up as a Protestant, ascending the throne eased their concerns somewhat.

Eventually, I found myself at the helm of the momentous Glorious Revolution, boasting support from both the English and Scottish peoples. Unfortunately, James II and his kin were compelled to seek refuge elsewhere, except for Mary and Anne who were received warmly by the Protestant community. In due course, I entered into a union with Mary, and together we reigned. Regrettably, we didn’t produce any offspring, so the crown was passed on to Anne.

Who were the Jacobites fighting for in Outlander?

The Catholic Scots viewed James Francis Edward Stuart as the rightful heir

Instead, there was an issue concerning the Catholics, primarily the Scots but also some Irish and English, who desired a Catholic monarch to regain the throne. They endorsed James Francis Edward Stuart’s claim, which earned him the titles of James III of England and James VIII of Scotland. Among the Protestants, he was commonly referred to as “The Old Pretender.

The Jacobite uprisings commenced after Anne’s demise, however. If he had converted to Protestantism, he might have peacefully claimed the crown, but he chose not to. He was of the opinion that others should align with his beliefs instead. As a result, Protestant England opted for another ruler.

The Hanoverian dynasty secured the monarchy, which sparked discontent among many and ignited Jacobite uprisings. James made an appearance during the initial rebellion in 1715, but seeing it was futile, he returned to France. This action created a divide among Scots; some harbored resentment towards him, while others maintained that the Stuart line should have retained the throne. These latter factions waged battles aiming to place James back on the throne.

In another phrase, we can say: James did not reappear for the second try. If the Jacobites had been victorious, Bonnie Prince Charlie would have been James’s successor to the throne. However, following the Battle of Culloden, James strained his relationship with his son. To prevent any further Stuart attempts on the throne, James made Charles’s brother a Cardinal, which effectively ended such endeavors. Notably, since Charles didn’t have any legitimate offspring at that moment, this move significantly hindered the prospect of the Stuarts regaining power.

Indeed, the struggle for the Jacobite cause finally ceased following the demise of Charles. Since Henry was a Cardinal – which implies abstinence from marriage – there were no more descendants of James left who could contest for the throne.

Read More

2024-09-09 13:37