Author:
teltalheart/moderator
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 16:42:03 11/13/10 Sat
Author Host/IP: 98-159-200-219.scottsboro.org/98.159.200.219
Post 249 A: Bought to the manor via paper.
Am I a Royal Prince or King, or a Noble of any kind, type or grade? Are the descendants of the Ancient Royal House of Judaea and Israel through the bloodline of King David (c.1040-970 B.C.) and King Saul, now considered Uradel (old nobiliy) as opposed to Briefadel (nobility by patent who owe their origin to documentary grants that began being issued as early as the fourteenth century) to be considered nobility? Briefadel families received patents for money, goods or services rendered. Ergo, bought to the manor via a paper patent.
Are those of more ancient nobility as noble or more noble than those of more recent nobility? Requiring a patent from those of the Uradel class (old nobility) is like requiring the Wright Brothers to have a pilots license before their first flight. It does not make good sense and just is not done. In the age of the Vikings (Norsemen) all that was required to be eligible to be a king was that one be a descendant of a king.
Organizations such The International Commission on Nobility and Royalty seems to wish only to recognize members of more recent Briefadel families. Perhaps this is because their lines are more recent and thereby easier to trace. or there could be political reasons. But does the sparkle, spangle and shine of the new (nouveau riche) make one noble, or just a flash in the pan; the happening thing at the time? I contend that rich does not equal Royal or Noble. The ancient Royalty and Nobility bore their titles because as they themselves said the were "descended from the gods," the Nephilim.
One need only look at the conspiratorial treachery with which Pepin d'Heristal engineered the death of king Dagobert II and the takeover of his kingdom of Austrasia. This was done with the help and support of the Church of Rome because Dagobert had the gall to have been "scorning the churches of God together with their bishops" due to his taxing them. Thus the Carolingians replaced the True Blood Royal of the Merovingians.
The following is from The International Commission on Nobility and Royalty:
...'"de jure" as well as reigning constitutional kings and princes still bear the full, complete and absolute sovereign privileges of their ancient forebears in full power, whether that sovereinty is dormate because they are non-reigning or because a constitution has permitted.
...In recognition of this important truth, an international court of arbitration in Italy (also the Italian Supreme Court of Appeal) on May 9, 2003, decided that "for an unlimited period" ..."the sovereign prerogatives known as jus majestatis and jus honorum, with the ability to confer nobility titles, with or withoutpredicates, noble arms, honorific titles and chivaloric distinctions relating to their hereditary dynastic Orders."
...This implication of this are extremely important and far-reaching. Legally making a pretender to an ancient throne that no longer exists comparable to a current, reigning, royal head of state is extraordinary and amazing, but it fits perfectly with the law and the eternal and unending nature of hereditary rights, especially as they related to sovereignty.
Professor Stephen Kerr - "Under the rules of the Congress of Vienna heads of former ruling houses are considered equal to heads of state."
...Sovereignty, according to international law, could be and was, indeed, bought and sold. If these conveyances were a transfer of property or territory only, and not the full right of sovereignty, then Alaska would still be under the authority and power of Russia. And much of the United States would be ruled by France and Mexico.
...These practices were so prevalent and common place that in order to protect the country as a whole, in the 13th century, it became a fundamental law in France, as powerful as Salic law, that the kings of France could not, under any circumstances, alienate, sell or dismember the kingdom. It was to remain permanently intact and not follow the pattern of bartering sovereignty for money or favors.'-
- The International Commission on Nobility and Royality.
I contend that Salic law was a transplant of Judiac law and traition. I further contend the ancient Royal House and Families of Judaea and Israel never abdicated their lands or their titles.
Salic Law - Tilte 45, "De Migrantibus" - see the book 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail', page 389.
End post 249 A: www.voy.com/40560/ teltalheart=Michael D. Barnes, Knight Templar of the York Rite.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
|
Feedback: 
Post 249 A: Bought to the manor and title via paper.