The will of Lord John Grimaldi of Monaco (1454)

[Louis14]

Originally Posted by Louis14

.

Yes but males have precedence over females: Caroline is older than Albert and last time I checked Albert was on the throne...



Yes, and I understand (more or less) that. But in Monaco the reforme was made by a legitimate sovereign, so why don't you accept it? In your eyes a reform made by a legitimete sovereign Prince should have much more value than any French, European or international law, yet to support your thesis you invoke French Republican laws versus a law that Prince Rainier promoted and approved.
Plus, you haven't answered about Princess Charlotte: if natural children always were in line of succession, why did her father adopt her?

Kisses

According to the Fundamental Rule of 1454, Princess Charlotte was dynaste and did not need to be legitimated by her father. Please, read it again on http://www.grimaldi.org, the official site of the House of Grimaldi.

Legitimists support all monarchs who respect the Fundamental Rules of their Sovereign House and who do not change them for personal reasons.

As regards rules of succession it's necessary to pay a great attention in order to avoid the constitution of rival Reigning Houses within the same princely branch.

Nobody would have dared disputed a Rule of succession of six centuries old.

Louis-le-14ème.

[acid_rain3075]

Nonsense! Things like change anytime and by anyone!

[Grace]

[quote=Louis14]

Originally Posted by Grace

According to the Fundamental Rule of 1454, Princess Charlotte was dynaste and did not need to be legitimated by her father. Please, read it again on http://www.grimaldi.org, the official site of the House of Grimaldi.

Legitimists support all monarchs who respect the Fundamental Rules of their Sovereign House and who do not change them for personal reasons.

As regards rules of succession it's necessary to pay a great attention in order to avoid the constitution of rival Reigning Houses within the same princely branch.

Nobody would have dared disputed a Rule of succession of six centuries old.

Louis-le-14ème.

I'm sorry, maybe I'm dumb but I stil don't get it. So you are against any possible change of every possible rule even if made by the legitimate sovereign? And why is the will of Lord John Grimaldi better than let's say the rules they had in the family until that date? After all the Grimaldis were in Monaco since 1297.
Anyway, an advice: come to term with the facts that we live in the 21st cen and absolute monarchies are the past; nowadays it's the will or at least the opinion of the people that counts, and that keeps the crowns on the heads, not the religious power or the tradition.

Kisses

[Louis14]

Originally Posted by Warren

Let me get this straight... A French Royal Legitimist is advocating French Republican laws to overturn a Ruling Prince's Constitution in regard to succession to the throne so that a clause in a medieval will made 550 years ago forms the basis of succession rights in 2006. Have I got that right?

The fact is that this child was born in a Republican France. It's surely not the fault of Legitimists.

The most important is that Grimaldi had imagined a similar law with the current french law, 550 years ago.

Louis-le-14ème.

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by Warren

Let me get this straight... A French Royal Legitimist is advocating French Republican laws to overturn a Ruling Prince's Constitution in regard to succession to the throne so that a clause in a medieval will made 550 years ago forms the basis of succession rights in 2006. Have I got that right?

Dead simple, really. Surprised you even had to ask...

[Louis14]

[quote=Grace]

Originally Posted by Louis14

Anyway, an advice: come to term with the facts that we live in the 21st cen and absolute monarchies are the past; nowadays it's the will or at least the opinion of the people that counts, and that keeps the crowns on the heads, not the religious power or the tradition.

Kisses

There cannot be monarchy without religion, nor traditions.

Please, can you quote me only one monarchy which does not refer to the religion or the traditions of its country?

Louis-le-14ème.

[acid_rain3075]

Originally Posted by Louis14

There cannot be monarchy without religion, nor traditions.

Please, can you quote me only one monarchy which does not refer to the religion or the traditions of its country?

Louis-le-14ème.

I think what your referring to sounds more like a theocracy then a monarchy

[Grace]

Originally Posted by Louis14

There cannot be monarchy without religion, nor traditions.

Please, can you quote me only one monarchy which does not refer to the religion or the traditions of its country?

Louis-le-14ème.

They do refer to religion and traditions, of course (well, nowadays more traditions than religion), but we all know that what really keeps them on the throne is the will of the people, not the will of God; religion and traditions are mostly part of folklore. If their populations decide they are no longer useful, royals will be unemployed in no time, and they know this very well. Times have changed, monarchs have accepted it, and maybe you should as well as I see no way (and frankly I really hope) that things will ever go back to prior democracy, constitution, mass society etc. etc.

Kisses

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by Warren

Let me get this straight... A French Royal Legitimist is advocating French Republican laws to overturn a Ruling Prince's Constitution in regard to succession to the throne so that a clause in a medieval will made 550 years ago forms the basis of succession rights in 2006. Have I got that right?

If if we wish to argue full equality of the sexes in regard to succession, and make it retrospective (as a true Legitimist would), then Princess Antoinette is the rightful Reigning Princess of Monaco as she was born (1920) before Prince Rainier (1923). In this scenario the argument over Alexandre is irrelevant because the true Hereditary Princess of Monaco is (Baroness) Elizabeth de Massy.

Albert and Hanovers, Casiraghis and Costas: usurpers out!

Thanks for the short consise version of this tale of contradictions! :)
You forgot to add the King of Spain would have been a Queen, his older sister.

[Elspeth]

A person can't be his own older sister, Toledo. That's science fiction.

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

A person can't be his own older sister, Toledo. That's science fiction.

I meant Juan Carlos' older...oh...you know :p

Actually, I recall that most of the Borbones have taken the throne from the hands of their older sisters, so Juan Carlos today would have been a very distantly related cousin of whoever would be the actual king or queen.

[Louis14]

Originally Posted by Toledo

I meant Juan Carlos' older...oh...you know :p

Actually, I recall that most of the Borbones have taken the throne from the hands of their older sisters, so Juan Carlos today would have been a very distantly related cousin of whoever would be the actual king or queen.

King Juan Carlos of Spain forgot that his cousin, Prince Alphonse de Bourbon, the elder of all the descendance of their grandfather, King Alphonse XIII, was excludes from the inheritance order of Spain because of a Rule which excluded any heir of the throne who had married a woman non resulting from a Sovereign House.

What happen today of this Rule which allowed the advent of Juan Carlos on the throne of Spain in 1975? Does the Prince's of Asturies wife come from a Sovereign House?

If this Rule of succession was not respected by King Juan Carlos, then Legitimists of Spain and France will consider that Prince Louis de Bourbon, the son of Prince Alphonse de Bourbon, the elder of all Capetians and all the descendance of King Alphonse XIII, should be the future King of Spain.

Louis-le-14ème.

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by Louis14

What happen today of this Rule which allowed the advent of Juan Carlos on the throne of Spain in 1975? Does the Prince's of Asturies wife come from a Sovereign House?

If this Rule of succession was not respected by King Juan Carlos, then Legitimists of Spain and France will consider that Prince Louis de Bourbon, the son of Prince Alphonse de Bourbon, the elder of all Capetians and all the descendance of King Alphonse XIII, should be the future King of Spain.

Louis-le-14ème.

Things are fine in Spain the way they are now, Juan Carlos and Sofia survived all the drama and conspiracies against them in the 1960's, Felipe married out of love and Leonor will be queen one day.

But this Bourbon/Borbon talk should be for another thread, let's stick with the Glamorous Grimaldis

Hmm, the Glamorous Grimaldis, sounds like a good name for a new fashion thread? Anyone feel free to take it, my donation will be just the title! :)

[Louis14]

Originally Posted by acid_rain3075

I think what your referring to sounds more like a theocracy then a monarchy

The currency of Monaco, "Deo Juvante", refers to God clearly. Are they Legitimists who invented that?

The English anthem "God Save The Queen", refers to God clearly. Are they Legitimists who invented that?

Many people on this forum think that monarchy means beautiful dresses and beautiful jewels! Excuse me, but monarchy has nothing to do with all this.

Louis-le-14ème.

[Grace]

Excuse me, but nowadays, monarchies have mainly to do with glamour and image. Monarchs have very little power, Monaco being a notable exception, on governing their Countries. I'm sorry, but that's the truth, and I consider it a very important improvement.

Kisses

[Juliet]

Originally Posted by paca

I think the law was voted 2 years ago, but I wouldn't swear on it. It was definetely initiated by PR as put into action while he was still alive. But there is still a lot of work to be done. BTW children who were born before, have now the right to claim their citizenship and have the same benefits (which are tremendous when you live in MC) as those born to a Monegasque father.

Thanks for the info, I hadn't realised the law had changed. Which benefits do you mean?

[acid_rain3075]

Originally Posted by Louis14

The currency of Monaco, "Deo Juvante", refers to God clearly. Are they Legitimists who invented that?

The English anthem "God Save The Queen", refers to God clearly. Are they Legitimists who invented that?

Many people on this forum think that monarchy means beautiful dresses and beautiful jewels! Excuse me, but monarchy has nothing to do with all this.

I do not think that royalty or monarchy in general have everything (or anything) to do with cloths and jewelry! I may be young but do not mistake me for ignorant! Yes, religion may at one point been a major issue of monarchies from around the world! But you are forgetting that in the western world there is a consistent effort for separation of church and state! Religion no longer plays a major role in everyday life! We as a society have moved on since the the medieval era! With of course the exception of Her Majesty the Queen of England, the monarch no longer plays a central role in a country's religious identity (and I doubt even she has the clout for that nowadays). But of course, Monarchs from around the world have lost their power so I can not say that their cloths and jewelry haven't come to the forefront. Anyways, what does this have to do with the topic at hand?

[Tosca]