The will of Lord John Grimaldi of Monaco (1454)

[Louis14]

Originally Posted by Grimaldi.org, the official site of the House of Grimaldi.

In the 15th century, John Grimaldi, lord of Monaco, formally established in his will (1454) the Rules of Succession. It was an important step since Monaco had been a condominium until then.

The rule can be summarized as follows: First in line of succession is the male issue, whether legitimate or not, by primogeniture. In the absence of a male heir enters the female issue, whether legitimate or not, by primogeniture, provided that the candidate marries a man legitimately born of the Grimaldi lineage — "unum hominem seu virum natum legitime de progenie seu albergo Grimaldorum."

Otherwise, the succession passes to the most closely related member of the Grimaldi albergo. In case there would be two or more Grimaldi cousins alive at equal degrees, the eldest would be chosen.

http://www.grimaldi.org/en/history/monaco.asp


According to this Fundamental Law, Alexandre, the eldest son of Prince Albert II of Monaco, is the apparent heir of the Monegasque throne.

In Monaco, the natural children were never excluded from the inheritance order. Prince's Rainier III mother, Princess Charlotte, the princely origin of all current Grimaldi, was herself a natural child.

Prince Rainier III, was not authorized to modify this Fundamental Law, as he did in 2002.

[Grace]

Originally Posted by Louis14

Prince Rainier III, was not authorized to modify this Fundamental Law, as he did in 2002.

Why couldn't P. Rainier modify a constitutional law?

[acid_rain3075]

Originally Posted by Louis14

Prince Rainier III, was not authorized to modify this Fundamental Law, as he did in 2002.

Well, if he was authorized or not, he did it! You have to remember that no law is set in stone! And I'm sure Prince Rainier knew what he was doing, and if he didn't then someone would have told him! Law or no law Alexandre isn't the heir to the throne (and I don't think he would have been even if Albert said that he was his child from the start!).

[paca]

That law is over 600 years old. Times and facts have changed since then in MC and elsewhere. At that time MC did not have a formal constitution and the ruling house decided itself the matters of succession. 100 years ago MC received its first draft of a constitution which has been modified several times since then (like it has been in many other countries as well). The last modification has been made by Rainier and according to this Alex will not inherit the throne unless there will be another change which is unlikely to happen. I find it unnecessary to discuss those old laws unless for historic curiosity. But they are no longer valid and no judgement will ever be passed on those grounds. No one would want that (otherwise I suppose we would still have heads rolling and hands chopped off in a lot of European countries if judges suddenly decide to have a look back on those old laws ). The last changes were legitimit and legal ad I believe that Alex's rights to succession have been amply discussed in other threads. Besides, if you would start there, then other branches of the family would pop up with their claims, which would be just as legitimate as his. SO until another change will be made, one should just accept the fact, that he is not an heir to throne.

[Suonymona]

The only change I foresee happening within Albert's reign is that if he marries and his first legitimate child is female, he might ask for a change allowing for the oldest child, male or female, to be the heir apparent, not just the presumptive.

To make like Norway did with Victoria. Once her younger brother was born, her father changed the law so that she, as the oldest child, became the heir, not her brother, the second child but first male.

Rainier took a great first step in allowing for females--if no male was available--to be eligible. However true equality would allow females automatically at birth to be heirs, rather than behind their brothers (no matter their birth order).

I think Albert would do that should he have two daughters and no sons.

Ann

[acid_rain3075]

Originally Posted by Suonymona

The only change I foresee happening within Albert's reign is that if he marries and his first legitimate child is female, he might ask for a change allowing for the oldest child, male or female, to be the heir apparent, not just the presumptive.

To make like Norway did with Victoria. Once her younger brother was born, her father changed the law so that she, as the oldest child, became the heir, not her brother, the second child but first male.

Rainier took a great first step in allowing for females--if no male was available--to be eligible. However true equality would allow females automatically at birth to be heirs, rather than behind their brothers (no matter their birth order).

I think Albert would do that should he have two daughters and no sons.

Ann

Well, I think you mean Sweden. And it wasn't her father that changed the law so that she could become the heir apparent, it was the government officials whom decided that she should be heir. In-fact King Gustaf never wanted to change the law, to this day I think he still wants it to be the same as it was before CP Victoria was born (which is kinda sad). But you are right when it comes to taking a first step towards a "full linear" line of secession! Hopefully P. Albert will take the next step to allow women to be heir if he ends up having kids or not.

[leahteresa]

I personnally think it's important for a legitimate child to take over from PA if at all possible. A child born in this setting would have more stability and be in a better position to learn the family business from his father. It is quite clear that PA was given no say in Alexandre's conception. It would be great if Monoco allowed PA first child, even if a girl, to take over. She would have more reproductive control....

[Louis14]

Most of us tend to take our desires for reality.

A rule of succession on the throne, which is over than 550 years and which did not exclude the female descendants, do not have to be changed only for personal suitability reasons, as Prince Rainier did on 2002.

The originality of the princely family of Monaco, since 700 years, is to never exclude the natural children from the inheritance order. It's according to this originality that Prince Rainier, whose mother was a natural child, rose on the throne of Monaco.

The exclusion of the eldest son of the current Prince of Monaco would be unprecedented historic and could result in a very grave dynastic quarrel.

Alexandre has the same legitimacy as his back grandmother, the Hereditary Princess Charlotte. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THIS.

[acid_rain3075]

Originally Posted by Louis14

Most of us tend to take our desires for reality.

A rule of succession on the throne, which is over than 550 years and which did not exclude the female descendants, do not have to be changed only for personal suitability reasons, as Prince Rainier did on 2002.

The originality of the princely family of Monaco, since 700 years, is to never exclude the natural children from the inheritance order. It's according to this originality that Prince Rainier, whose mother was a natural child, rose on the throne of Monaco.

The exclusion of the eldest son of the current Prince of Monaco would be unprecedented historic and could result in a very grave dynastic quarrel.

Alexandre has the same legitimacy as his back grandmother, the Hereditary Princess Charlotte. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THIS.

Yes that maybe so but Princess Charlotte herself became ruler of Monaco as a last resort! There was no other heir to the throne at the time (I might be wrong I think). With the new law, there are, well, a lot of heirs to fill in Albert place when he's gone! Oh, hey, wasn't Princess Charlotte always thought of as a bastard?

[Louis14]

Alexandre is the only direct descendant of the Reigning Prince of Monaco. His status is unique.

[acid_rain3075]

Originally Posted by Louis14

Alexandre is the only direct descendant of the Reigning Prince of Monaco. His status is unique.

Yes it is but that still doesn't make him the heir to the throne! Despite this law from 1454 or whatever he will never be considered legit! And unlike Princess Charlotte's situation, Alexandre is not the last resort! Therefore, no Prince Alexandre!

[MyAdia]

Originally Posted by Louis14

Most of us tend to take our desires for reality.

A rule of succession on the throne, which is over than 550 years and which did not exclude the female descendants, do not have to be changed only for personal suitability reasons, as Prince Rainier did on 2002.

The originality of the princely family of Monaco, since 700 years, is to never exclude the natural children from the inheritance order. It's according to this originality that Prince Rainier, whose mother was a natural child, rose on the throne of Monaco.

The exclusion of the eldest son of the current Prince of Monaco would be unprecedented historic and could result in a very grave dynastic quarrel.

Alexandre has the same legitimacy as his back grandmother, the Hereditary Princess Charlotte. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THIS.

Are you serious? Give this up. How many times and how many ways does Prince Albert have to say that Alexandre will NOT inherit the throne for you to actually believe him. How many times and how many ways do people have to mention the change in the constitution that does not allow an illegitimate (I hate that name) child - one where the parents do not enter into a marriage - to inherit the throne?

It will not happen by you keep quoting a 550-year-old law or you wishing it so. Why is it so important for you to see Alexandre inherit the throne? Is it just because he is black?


You seem to have a need to compare Alexandre and Princess Charlotte (whom you label both as black). Ranier's mother was Algerian. Race is more of a social construct than biological one, especially when you speak of North Africans. North Africans, such as Algerians and Moroccans, are neither completely Negroid nor completely Caucasian. Do Algerians consider themselves black? Things have changed since Charlotte was legitimized. Then, there was no immediate family member to succeed to the throne (besides a German first cousin), now there is a clear line of succession that starts with Caroline and her children.


Instead of advocating that Alexandre succeed to the throne, why not first advocate that Prince Albert spends quality time with his son. I hope he does now (although during the Larry King interview he said he hadn't seen him since he publicly acknowledged him). I believe with all his money, influence, and lawyers, he can spend some quality time with his son without the delusional mother and regardless of the mother's attitude towards him.

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by [COLOR=black

Why is it so important for you to see Alexandre inherit the throne? Is it just because he is black?[/color]

You seem to have a need to compare Alexandre and Princess Charlotte (whom you label both as black). Ranier's mother was Algerian. Race is more of a social construct than biological one, especially when you speak of North Africans. North Africans, such as Algerians and Moroccans, are neither completely Negroid nor completely Caucasian.

It appears that there is genetic differences between groups of humans, whether we like to admit it or not, or whether various watchgroups prefer we not accept the results or not. Below is from a study done through the AAAS in 2005 taken off the internet and written by Alan Boyle, MSN. If one continues to google more information on the subject, there are two schools of thought on the subject--one there is racial differences (in which medicines being created along racial lines) and the other--there is no difference (which they bring up the primates having 99% of DNA of the human and dismissing any racial challenge from the other group. IMO, I guess the drastic difference of 1% wasn't enough to consider there were markers in the genetic code that created differences along specie differentiation.)


WASHINGTON - The first effort to map variations in the human DNA code reveals patterns in three ancestral populations — European, African and Chinese — that go back thousands of years, scientists reported Thursday. They said the trend could lead to medical treatments tailored for your specific genetic background, but they also worried that it could spawn a 21st-century style of racial discrimination.

The work was unveiled here at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and published in Friday's issue of Science, the AAAS' weekly journal. Science's editor-in-chief, Donald Kennedy, said the data "will provide an invaluable resource for genetic research to improve human health."

Once researchers put the database to use, it shouldn't take long to find out whether the dream of personalized genetic medicine can become a reality, said David Cox, chief scientific officer at California-based Perlegen Sciences and a principal author of the study.

Geneticists have found that some patterns of SNPs can be linked to particular traits, including predisposition to diseases ranging from cancer to obesity. Thus, identifying a particular pattern of SNP variations could suggest a particular treatment to ward off illness.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6975009/



However, the markers are there and as a student of genetics, I side with the geneticists that indicate there are genetic differences along racial lines, but are not allowed to pursue that course due to medical and social restrictions.

As this is not a forum on genetic variation and biological racial differences, I leave it at that. For those interested in another intellectual discussion, you can go here: http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/race.htm.

However, there are many pro- and con- articles out there. It is always best to be able to argue the other side before being pinned down for what you have to say. Sorry didn't mean to get lecturey and don't mean to sound like a professor. But, I love the subject matter and had to comment trying to copy something that isn't hard to understand.

[Suonymona]

Charlotte was adopted and made legitimate. That option is no longer available after the 2002 change. Neither is automatic heir status by a 'natural' child. They must be legitimate by their parents having married.

Camille is not an heir because her mother never married her father. Pauline and Louis are in line and legitimate because Stephanie married Daniel (although after their birth and they later divorced).

Albert knows he will not marry Nicole, therefore Eric (his name is not officially Alexandre, the papers regarding NC's legal case refer to him as Eric Alexandre Coste) remains illegitimate and out of line to the throne.

Yes, Eric is currently the only direct offspring of Albert. However, the next legitimate heir to the throne is Caroline, following by Andrea, Pierre, Charlotte, Alexandra, Stephanie, Louis and finally Pauline.


And on Albert spending time with Eric. He has a full schedule of commitments. Nicole can make things difficult for him to see Eric on what few days he has available no matter the custody arrangement. True, she gets a generous montly stipend, a home, a nanny and security staff, but there will always be 'something' she can arrange to keep Albert from his son.

I truly think Albert would spend as much time as he could with Eric if Nicole would let him. But then how would she be able to run to the press and claim neglect?

Ann

[Danielane]

Originally Posted by Suonymona

Charlotte was adopted and made legitimate. That option is no longer available after the 2002 change. Neither is automatic heir status by a 'natural' child. They must be legitimate by their parents having married.

Camille is not an heir because her mother never married her father. Pauline and Louis are in line and legitimate because Stephanie married Daniel (although after their birth and they later divorced).

Albert knows he will not marry Nicole, therefore Eric (his name is not officially Alexandre, the papers regarding NC's legal case refer to him as Eric Alexandre Coste) remains illegitimate and out of line to the throne.

Yes, Eric is currently the only direct offspring of Albert. However, the next legitimate heir to the throne is Caroline, following by Andrea, Pierre, Charlotte, Alexandra, Stephanie, Louis and finally Pauline.


And on Albert spending time with Eric. He has a full schedule of commitments. Nicole can make things difficult for him to see Eric on what few days he has available no matter the custody arrangement. True, she gets a generous montly stipend, a home, a nanny and security staff, but there will always be 'something' she can arrange to keep Albert from his son.

I truly think Albert would spend as much time as he could with Eric if Nicole would let him. But then how would she be able to run to the press and claim neglect?

Ann

Why do you call him Eric? His name is Alexandre, he has it in his official names, so he can pic it for official name. If his mother calls him Alexandre, please don't call him Eric.

[LadyLove]

Yes, Eric is currently the only direct offspring of Albert. However, the next legitimate heir to the throne is Caroline, following by Andrea, Pierre, Charlotte, Alexandra, Stephanie, Louis and finally Pauline.


OK I have a question. Is Alexandra a legitimate heir? From what I heard she is being raised as a protestant in order so that she can be considered in line for the British throne. Wouldn't she have to be a catholic to be able to inherit the throne? Or is that fine as long as she would later convert? Or is that not even relevant?

[acid_rain3075]

wait I'm sorry did she really go to the press and say that P. Albert was neglecting Alexandre?

[Suonymona]

Part of her original PM article was that Albert was ashamed of Eric and neglecting him by only seeing him "as his schedule permitted".

Ann

[Louis14]

Why so much people are they so afraid of Alexandre Eric Stéphane, less than three years old?

The private life of Alexandre's parents does not interest me at all. If Prince Albert wishes to spend good time with his son, free to him to do so. NC must accept it.

The comparison made between Alexandre and his back paternal grandmother Charlotte does not have anything racial. Both are Grimaldi, it does not matter their origins.

I just want to say that Alexandre is, like Princess Charlotte, a natural child and that the current Grimaldi, all descendants of Charlotte, do not have any right to exclude him from the inheritance order.

For a lot of Monegasques and French legitimists, the eldest son of the Reigning Prince of Monaco is the heir of the throne of Monaco. They will not give this up.

Louis-le-14ème

[Danielane]

Originally Posted by Louis14

For a lot of Monegasques and French legitimists, the eldest son of the Reigning Prince of Monaco is the heir of the throne of Monaco. They will not give this up.

I'm curious to know how many people "the lot of Monegasques and French legitimists" is relating to