Jacobitism and Anti‐Jacobitism in the British Atlantic World, 1688–1727 . By

Many years ago, J. H. Overton drew a fine line between Non-Jurors on the one hand and Jacobites on the other. The former, according to Overton, were ‘in no active sense of the term Jacobites’ because they were ‘content to live peacefully and quietly without a thought of disturbing the present government’. Overton was correct in the sense that relatively few Non-Jurors actively participated in Jacobite conspiracies and revolts. (1) In today’s Western society, we place relatively little emphasis on oath-swearing. It is therefore easy to underestimate the feelings and emotions which surrounded a person’s status as a Non-Juror during the 18th century. A refusal to swear the oaths of allegiance was tantamount to saying that the individual occupying the English, Scottish or, ultimately, British throne had no right to be there. As Paul Monod argues convincingly, the Non-Jurors were ‘Jacobites by definition’. Moreover, their ‘political statement’ was a ‘very strong’ one.(2) Thus, it is unsurprising that Non-Jurors faced much opposition during the 18th century. Of course, a willingness to take the required oaths did not always mean that one was freed from suspicions of Jacobitism. Throughout the 1710s and 1720s, there was considerable overlap between the political and religious agendas of Jacobites and conforming Tories. Thus, to many Whig politicians and clergymen, conforming Tories were simply Jacobites in disguise (an accusation which sometimes proved to be true).(3)