Loyalism has been left leaderless, chaotic and confused and there is no obvious successor to David Ervine, writes Dan Keenan, Northern News Editor
The sudden death of Progressive Unionist leader David Ervine will have a political impact in addition to the personal tragedy it represents for his family.
In public life his sizeable personality, colourful turn of phrase, ready availability and wit endeared him to many, providing a welcome and bright focal point against the often grey backdrop of Stormont.
Comparisons can be drawn between the loyalist leadership and Sinn Féin, and the efforts both have made to establish secure ceasefires and to commit their movements to political paths. However, while both David Ervine and Gerry Adams were both central to the paramilitary ceasefires announced in 1994, the comparison should end there as their fortunes diverge sharply.
Despite the collapse of the IRA cessation in February 1996, with the Canary Wharf bombing in London and its later reinstatement, Gerry Adams has witnessed the rise and rise of Sinn Féin to the point where it is the lead nationalist party.
David Ervine saw his party peak with two seats in the Stormont Assembly in 1998, subsequently reduced to one in 2003 and just two local councillors.
His death brings a welter of acclaim for his personal integrity, genuine character and ability to appeal to others well outside the loyalist confines of his native working class Belfast.
Described as the Republic's favoured unionist, he was highly regarded for his role in the talks which led to the Belfast Agreement in 1998 by talks chairman Senator George Mitchell.
His distinctive voice, and plain upfront style, was undoubtedly welcome in both Government Buildings and Downing Street where both governments greeted any sane, political alternative to the nihilism in which the various loyalist paramilitaries had sunk.
Sinn Féin has witnessed the IRA follow its ceasefire with a series of politically-crafted initiatives including decommissioning and the 2005 statement that it was standing down.
Mr Ervine's efforts to wean the UVF down a political path were punctuated by the collapse of the Combined Loyalist Military Command, an umbrella organisation which provided singular leadership and delivered the 1994 ceasefire, sporadic feuding with rival loyalist organisations and a continuing failure to decommission weapons.
While his personal story is one of a former paramilitary and prisoner turned influential constitutional politician at a key moment in recent Northern history, it has not (yet) been replicated by a new generation across the broad front of Ulster loyalism.
His radicalism did not provoke an organised loyalist political drive despite his clear marking out of distinctive territory between the established parties, the DUP and the Ulster Unionists.
He denounced both, the former as "Big Mouth" unionism and the latter as "Big House" unionism.
But this did not prevent his announcement last May that he would join the Ulster Unionist Assembly grouping in a tactical manoeuvre to deny Sinn Féin an Executive seat under the complex d'Hondt share-out of ministries.
Although subsequently ruled out of order, it underlined the Ervine capacity for what he himself called "a good political move" even if it meant dealing with opponents.
He worked to advance a constitutional alternative for loyalism despite the many obvious barriers in his path - the disparate nature of various conflicting paramilitaries and the alienation from the political process on Protestant working class streets.
The feuds among loyalist factions have fostered divisions and deep suspicion at ground level. These have increased just as efforts to co-ordinate loyalist political direction, especially in areas associated with the UDA, seem more disjointed than ever.
Yesterday's plaudits from the political establishments in both Dublin and London no doubt reflect genuine gratitude for his efforts.
However, David Ervine himself often wished they would heed him more. In his last interview with this newspaper he expressed exasperation at their pigeon-holing of him as a former terrorist rather than an elected representative.
He complained, following the emerging domination of the DUP and Sinn Féin at the 2003 Assembly elections, that other parties and particularly his own were more marginalised than ever.
Despite his status as his party's sole Assembly member, his departure from the political scene leaves an immense void across wider loyalism which is arguably more in need of constitutional leadership than ever.
If loyalism is to dedicate itself solely to politics it is unclear who will lead such a move - and difficult even to identify a group of individuals who might conceivably provide a figure of David Ervine's status.
His positive and significant contribution to the political process will be cited, but his failure could consist of the particular inability to pass on the torch he had so bravely lit.