The will of Lord John Grimaldi of Monaco (1454)

[Louis14]

Originally Posted by Warren

Nothing to do with being American (or Australian for that matter). The Monaco succession law is relevant to the citizens of Monaco, but I don't see what "French Legitimists" have to do with it! Maybe they could get their own act together before attempting to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries? Failing that, they could campaign for the deposing of both Juan Carlos and Elizabeth II, to be replaced by Luis Alfonso and the Duke of Bavaria. For legitimist consistency, of course.

Please, do not forget that the Princes Grimaldi were of use for a long time to the Court of France. They owe their prince's title to Kings of France.


Louis-le-14ème

[Danielane]

Originally Posted by Louis14

For the French Legitimists, *Monseigneur Louis de Bourbon*, the Head of House of Bourbon-Anjou-Espagne, must be the King of Spain.


Louis-le-14ème

As I don't want to be harsh, I won't say what I think about the french legitimists...

[Laviollette]

Originally Posted by Louis14

Please, do not forget that the Princes Grimaldi were of use for a long time to the Court of France. They owe their prince's title to Kings of France.


Louis-le-14ème

I believe the point Warren was trying to make is that every other Euro monarchy does not recognize illegitimate children in the line of succession so why is Monaco singled out to put its illegitimates on the throne? This also assumes that Albert has only one son out-of-wedlock and that there is not an older one than Alexandre out there. Regarding equality between the sexes in line of succession, Monaco is only one of several royal families that are based on male preference; Denmark, Great Britain, Luxembourg, Liechenstein, Japan and Spain are just a few monarchies who still practice this. It's not just Monaco. And I certainly agree that France should get its own act together before meddling in other countries' affairs.

[Danielane]

Originally Posted by Laviollette

I believe the point Warren was trying to make is that every other Euro monarchy does not recognize illegitimate children in the line of succession so why is Monaco singled out to put its illegitimates on the throne? This also assumes that Albert has only one son out-of-wedlock and that there is not an older one than Alexandre out there. Regarding equality between the sexes in line of succession, Monaco is only one of several royal families that are based on male preference; Denmark, Great Britain, Luxembourg, Liechenstein, Japan and Spain are just a few monarchies who still practice this. It's not just Monaco. And I certainly agree that France should get its own act together before meddling in other countries' affairs.

France is not at all meddling in this affair. Some pseudo-legitimists are thinking they can have a part in it, but that's not the case. The french legitimist are not many.

[Lisele]

Forgive me, I don't understand all the brouhaha about Alexandre. He's Prince Albert's illegitimate natural child and the Prince acknowledged him. For years illegitimate children of royalty (regardless of tier) were kept in the background and never acknowledged and didn't have any rights to royal perquisites unless granted to them. Why the push to make Alexandre to be treated as a legitimate member of the royal family? Am I missing something?

[Suonymona]

Only the stone throwers trying not to slit their wrists on the broken glass Lisele.

Ann

[Louis14]

Originally Posted by Lisele

Forgive me, I don't understand all the brouhaha about Alexandre. He's Prince Albert's illegitimate natural child and the Prince acknowledged him. For years illegitimate children of royalty (regardless of tier) were kept in the background and never acknowledged and didn't have any rights to royal perquisites unless granted to them. Why the push to make Alexandre to be treated as a legitimate member of the royal family? Am I missing something?

None in the historic House of Grimaldi disputes this rule of succession of Lord John Grimaldi, even not Prince Albert himself.

This is an extract of the last interview of Prince Albert on CNN:

Larry King (CNN) : If God forbid something happened to you is he Prince?

Prince Albert : Well, then we will have to...we will have to review this.

Larry King : But you're going to get close to him, I mean you want to be close to him?

Prince Albert : I've already seen him and I will see him when the time is right and when I've been able to work out ways to see him in a private way.



This question interests all journalists. Why the fact of talking about it on this forum does it seems to hurt so many people?

It's normal that all the monarchic opinions express themselves.
Legitimists guarantee monarchic rules. Without them, there would be no more monarchy in the world and we would not be on this forum talking about monarchy.

Long life to the Sovereign Prince of Monaco.


Louis-le-14ème

[MyAdia]

Originally Posted by Louis14

None in the historic House of Grimaldi disputes this rule of succession of Lord John Grimaldi, even not Prince Albert himself.

This is an extract of the last interview of Prince Albert on CNN:

Larry King (CNN) : If God forbid something happened to you is he Prince?

Prince Albert : Well, then we will have to...we will have to review this.

Larry King : But you're going to get close to him, I mean you want to be close to him?

Prince Albert : I've already seen him and I will see him when the time is right and when I've been able to work out ways to see him in a private way.


Louis-le-14ème

Yes, he did say what you quoted above, but you cunningly omitted the sentences immediately prior to your above quote that sets a more definitive view of Alexandre's non-right to the throne.

**********************************************
KING: Does he ascend to the throne?

ALBERT: No, he's not because the law says that it's a direct descendant of a legitimate union, so a marriage, so whatever siblings come out of that marriage will be in line for the throne.

KING: All right, so he's an heir to the money. I mean he has money coming to him. What happens if you never marry?

ALBERT: I haven't envisaged that concept.

KING: If God forbid something happened to you is he prince?

ALBERT: Well, then we will have to -- we will have to review this.

KING: But you're going to get close to him, I mean you want to be close to him?

ALBERT: I've already seen him and I will see him when the time is right and when I've been able to work out ways to see him in a private way.
**********************************************

It's also good to repeat albert's quote again about Nicole:

KING: Was this blackmail of any sort? Did she say to you unless you do something with this financially I'm going to go to the press?

ALBERT: I had already taken care and pledged support and had already started supporting but I think the lure of recognition and of, you know, being in the public eye was a great -- was very appealing to her.

[Louis14]

We believe that Prince Albert is a good guy. Nobody says he does not take care of his son.

Legitimists are not interested by Alexandre's parents private life.
It's above all the monarchic aspect of this question which interests us. Any intellectual contradiction is the welcomed. WE RESPECT ALL OPINIONS.

The purpose of the coronation mass is to make sacred the Ruling Prince. The sacred person of the Sovereign is necessarily legitimat and everything which ensues from it, that means his descendants.

Legitimists guarantee monarchic rules. Without them, there would be no more monarchy in the world and we would not be on this forum talking about monarchy.

Louis-le-14ème

[Louis14]

Originally Posted by Lisele

Forgive me, I don't understand all the brouhaha about Alexandre. He's Prince Albert's illegitimate natural child and the Prince acknowledged him. For years illegitimate children of royalty (regardless of tier) were kept in the background and never acknowledged and didn't have any rights to royal perquisites unless granted to them. Why the push to make Alexandre to be treated as a legitimate member of the royal family? Am I missing something?

I do not agree with you.

The Sun King, Louis XIV The Great, the most powerful monarch of his time, acknowledged all his natural children and ennobled them.

The Grimaldi, whom ancestors were of use for a long time to the Court of France, should remember this.

Louis-le-14ème

[Grace]

Did the Sun King natural children succed him on the throne? Or did they just have a pampered life in the Court?
With all due respect, I think you are underestimating how much Countries, laws and monarchies have changed through the centuries: the roles of the monarch is, thank God for us who are simple subjects, changed in many ways, and his power has been reduced; you can't demand the routine application of old rules pretending nothing has changed, and can't disregard the Moneguasque laws just to prove a moral point...JMO,

Kisses

[Louis14]

Originally Posted by MyAdia

Yes, he did say what you quoted above, but you cunningly omitted the sentences immediately prior to your above quote that sets a more definitive view of Alexandre's non-right to the throne.

**********************************************
KING: Does he ascend to the throne?

ALBERT: No, he's not because the law says that it's a direct descendant of a legitimate union, so a marriage, so whatever siblings come out of that marriage will be in line for the throne.

KING: All right, so he's an heir to the money. I mean he has money coming to him. What happens if you never marry?

ALBERT: I haven't envisaged that concept.

KING: If God forbid something happened to you is he prince?

ALBERT: Well, then we will have to -- we will have to review this.

KING: But you're going to get close to him, I mean you want to be close to him?

ALBERT: I've already seen him and I will see him when the time is right and when I've been able to work out ways to see him in a private way.

I rather think that Prince Albert is going to modify this law to allow his son to be dynaste.

Otherwise, I do not see why he would have said to Larry King that "he will have to review this".

Louis-le-14ème

[acid_rain3075]

Originally Posted by Louis14

I rather think that Prince Albert is going to modify this law to allow his son to be dynaste.

Otherwise, I do not see why he would have said to Larry King that "he will have to review this".

Louis-le-14ème

yet i doubt that will happen! Prince Albert has said before that ALEXANDRE WILL NOT BE PRINCE OF MONACO

[auroraDaniel]

Originally Posted by acid_rain3075

yet i doubt that will happen! Prince Albert has said before that ALEXANDRE WILL NOT BE PRINCE OF MONACO

yea..i read that somewhere too..

[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.

[acid_rain3075]

Very interesting HRH Kimetha! Thanks for the find!

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by acid_rain3075

yet i doubt that will happen! Prince Albert has said before that ALEXANDRE WILL NOT BE PRINCE OF MONACO

I agree with acid_rain3075, because that would be the day Prince Rainier crawls out of his tomb and takes the Principality back.

If Albert wanted Alexandre to succeed him, or if he had shown any inclination to do so, the first thing is to take it away from the hands of the mother and raise him himself. After all, there is a country with a ton of money involved. It would be very similar to the custody case of Cristina Onassis' daugther Athina and the fight between her father raising her and the Onassis' financial empire trying to take her away to be raised 100% Greek. By the way, she Athina, changed her name to Onassis. Parenthood versus financial empire. In the end, the Onassis Empire reclaimed it's young queen.

So, if Alexandre is to be the next prince, first step is to be raised like one. Sorry, but we don't see that being done so far. And, does anyone think Caroline would let that happen? It's her legacy too since she is currently the unproclaimed Crown Princess of Monaco, Albert's heir.

[acid_rain3075]

Originally Posted by Toledo

And, does anyone think Caroline would let that happen? It's her legacy too since she is currently the unproclaimed Crown Princess of Monaco, Albert's heir.

A very good point! But it's not just Caroline's legacy, it's also her son's! In the end, I think it will be Caroline's linage that will transcend through time!