The International Commission on Nobility and Royalty
(See Additional Articles below)
TITLE OF NOBILITY SCAMS
All the major legal principles that promote genuine and authentic nobility, royalty and chivalry are contained in the following new two volume book. Note what is says in the first paragraph of the Foreword:
The whole field of nobility and royalty is in disarray and confusion. It is rife with falsehoods, misguided experts, phony princes, and counterfeit chivalric orders. Besides the numerous scams and charlatans that exist, there is a widespread misunderstanding of the international and natural laws that govern dynastic rights. This is a field that is truly divided. This sad state of affairs need not continue. If international law is honored, revered and respected, then everything can be set in its proper order. The grand key to this needed unity is the rule of the just, time-honored laws that already exist.
The author is Dr. Stephen Baca y Kerr, JD, LLM, MAT, former special counsel to the Imperial and Royal House of Habsburg, Professor and Dean of the Law School at the International College of Interdisciplinary Studies. His book is The Entitlement to Rule: Legal, Non-Territorial Sovereignty in International Law and it is a masterpiece. Note excerpts of what people have said about it:
"It is written in a clear and compelling manner. It is hoped that more and more people will become familiar with the laws of justice contained in this book."
(Thubten Samphel, director of the Tibet Policy Institute of the Central Tibetan Administration and author of the book Falling Through the Roof,
"It is magnificently done and of great worth." (Adalberto J. Urbina Briceno, Sc.D., Professor Head of the Public International Law Chair of the Catholic University Andres Bello- Caracas)
"It is a goldmine of references and is a valuable account of a [thought provoking] . . . and poorly understood area of law." (Rev'd Professor Noel Cox, LLM, MA, MTheol, Ph.D., LTh, FRHists, Barrister, Aberystwyth University, New Zealand)
"Dr. Kerr has put together a book that is a "one of a kind" providing what is needed to perpetuate the rights of deposed sovereignty. For all those interested in the legal future of nobility and royalty, this is a very important, scholarly and insightful book to read." (LaWanna Blount, Ph.D., F.Coll.T, vice president and professor at the American College of Interdisciplinary Sciences, Como, Mississippi, USA)
"Dr. Kerr's book . . . is one of those . . . path breaking works that throws new light on a field of study . . . on the complex legal and philosophical sinews that keep alive [deposed] monarchies. . . . This type of writing fills a huge gap within the royal studies field. . . ." (Dr. Diana Mandache, historian and author, Budapest, Romania)
"The author obviously has a deep understanding of international law and how it relates to deposed monarchies and exiled governments. The content is well structured and well written. I accept this book as conforming to the highest academic standards expected of a master scholar and practitioner." (Alexander Arapov, Sc.D., Professor of the Department of Philosophy and Sociology of the All-Russian State Distance-Learning Institute of Finance and Economics, a branch of the Financial University of the Russian Federation)
"This has been the most interesting and helpful book I have read in the field of nobiliary law as well as international law . . . . It exemplifies the highest level of scholarly content, clarity and depth of inquiry yet presented on this profound and important subject." (Prof. Dr. Mirjana Radovic-Markovic, Academician, Institute of Economic Sciences and Faculty of Business Economics and Entrepreneurship, Belgrade, Serbia)
This unique book is being offered for free because of its singular importance to the field of nobility and royalty. Go to the website: www.the-entitlement-to-rule.com.
Pope St. Felix III declared an important truth. He said: "Not to oppose error is to approve it, and not to defend the truth is to suppress it."
We do not want to be guilty of implied consent to any falsehood or charlatan in the field we hold near and dear to us. All the impersonators whether self-deceived or involved in fraud and deception detract from what is real, genuine and true.
Questionable Claims or Practices
We, as a Commission, are not here to hurt the true royals or nobles of any nation or kingdom on earth. We are here to protect and support them. We will be glad to honor and respect what is true and authentic. The problem is, we live in a time of falsehoods and imposters. Please do not allow yourself to be duped. Consider the following myths and the real truth.
The first thing to remember is that what they present on the internet may be completely and totally false. Deception is prevails. They do not tell you how unlikely their claim is. This is hidden behind an impressive front. They may present well, but underneath, there is nothing solid or authentic. Hence, they are built on a myth.
We have noted a number of dubious claims through the years. You don't need to read them all, just note that the world is full of scammers. In fact, there are more false claims on the earth now than at any other time in history:
(a) a man claiming to be a prince who could not prove his genealogy, and his claim supposedly came through a female line 10 generations ago in a salic land. In other words, no right to title existed. Did this deter him? No, he went ahead and made the claim anyway.
(b) a man who fabricated his genealogy, and deceived a lot of people with his lies. Finally he was discovered and discredited, but hurt a lot of people in the interim.
(c) a man whose ancestors totally lost all their royal rights, through non-use, but still claimed royalty in spite of it.
(d) a man who fabricated everything and started successfully selling titles and made up several for himself to use, but eventual was exposed and is now in hiding. He robbed people of more than $2,000,000.00.
(e) several men who claimed principalities that belonged to them, but these principalities were the royal patrimony of either the Imperial and Royal House of Prussia or Austria. They still sell their falsehoods to this day.
(f) several men who claimed royal rights they don't have, because those rights were legally ceded away or permanently forfeited and lost many years ago --- one in 1955 and another on September 11, 1962. Yet in spite of having lost all, they make the false claim anyway and one sells knighthoods and titles that have no validity.
(g) a man who bought his title from a phony Emperor and then started selling made up titles himself.
(h) a man who bought a non-sovereign title from a non-existent Patriarch --- from a man who never lived, and then set up knighthoods and freely sells his falsehoods to make a living on his lies and deceptions.
(i) another man and a separate woman, both who claimed descent from a royal house, but their family names are not to be found anywhere in the royal genealogy, because the claims were fabricated. These facts however, do not deter them. They continued to misrepresent themselves, even though they were exposed.
(k) a man who claims royalty and an imperial title from an elective house that did not have a hereditary right to pass those titles or honors down to their posterity. In other words, there were no rights to claim, because the honors were elective, not hereditary. You can't get water from an empty well.
(l) a man who claims honors from a self-styled government in exile from a government that never had sovereignty. You can't create sovereignty out of nothing.
(j) a man who legally changed his name to a royal one with title and then began to impersonate or mimic royalty that neither he nor his family ever had.
(k) a man, who without proof, but only a family legend that turned out to be merely a family fairy tale, began to consider and introduce himself to be a royal prince, which of course is to lie to others and misrepresent reality.
(l) a man who found out he descended from royalty from a line hundreds of years ago, so he wrongly assumed that he must be a royal prince and started styling himself as such.
(m) a man whose cousins had a higher hereditary right. He usurped their claims. This of course is an act of theft. It is ethically and morally wrong. Justice demands that, ". . . all men are to restore what they are possessed of, if another is proved to be the rightful owner.
" (Hugo Grotius, On the Law of War and Peace
, Book II, Chapter 10:1: www.constitution.org/gro/djbp_210.htm
(o) despite the fact that there is only one truth, one justice and consequently only one rightful sovereignty, on man set himself up in contradiction to the rightful prince, and continues to put the true royal line down by fabricating history.
The list of abuses and wrongs could go on and on and then on some more --- full of questionable, shady practices that have very little likelihood of being authentic and genuine. Most are not only questionable, but downright dishonest and deceitful reflecting little or no ethical truth or reality.
The most important thing to do when contemplating any claim is to be skeptical. This is not a time to be gullible or easy prey. The shady nature of their claims are kept hidden. They do not want you to find out or discover their secrets. They do not want to be exposed.
We have observed that most, if not all, of these royal or princely claimants on the internet, are false. A number of them claim ancient territories that belong to other royal houses or to be members of old royal houses that are extinct, died out hundreds of years ago, and no longer exist. Obviously, many claims are sheer nonsense --- not only improbable, but impossible. Buyer please beware!
The most important thing to do when contemplating any claim is to be skeptical. This is not a time to be gullible or easy prey. The shady nature of many claims are kept hidden and disguised. They are not transparent. They do not want you to discover their secrets.
The following false principles or myths are believed and propagated by many fake organizations that falsely claim to be valid:
(1) Myth number one:
A monarch, whether reigning or deposed can create a law for other countries or entities outside of his territorial authority.
A valid monarch is restricted to his or her own jurisdiction and does not have authority outside of that boundary. He or she can legally establish rules only in his or her own lawful land or dominion but does not have authority or right to change anything in another nation's territorial possession. That is, a monarch in the Congo cannot change the legal situation for a claimant in Western Asia or in the Americas, nor can he or she, or anyone for that matter, have the right to change a falsehood into a legal right or make a lie true outside of his or her own restricted jurisdiction.
(2) Myth number two:
. . . a sovereign recognizes a claim, whatever the antecedence of that claim, such a claim has ceased to be 'false' by virtue of the act of its sovereign recognition."
Does a sovereign have the legal right to make the world flat, make the Sun revolve around the earth or give Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck sovereignty? Not only does this statement defy common sense and good reason, but it is utter nonsense, which any reasonable person can see very plainly.
(3) Myth number three:
Recognition by a valid sovereign entity, ". . . negates any debate over our [questionable] origins."
That is patently absurd.
(4) Myth number four:
Recognition by a true and authentic king or sovereign prince can give an order of chivalry independent sovereignty.
". . . Sovereignty is neither created by recognition nor destroyed by nonrecognition. (The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, edition 15, part 3, vol 17, 1981, p. 312) Sovereigns cannot make other people or organizations independently sovereign without losing their own right to rule, because they would have to transfer the supreme right to that group and by doing so would lose or forfeit forever what they gave away.
Some fake Orders of Chivalry claim that this or that ancient sovereign in history made them independently sovereign. The problem is that is a legal impossibility.
If legitimate sovereigns had this power in international law, questionable sovereigns, instead of selling noble titles or knighthoods, would be creating thousands of new sovereign monarchs, who would have no territories and no real rights. This would be crazy. Anyone could hold the supreme power over nothing. Sovereignty is not created in this manner.
(5) Myth number five:
The claim that ecclesiastical's have sovereignty.
Sovereignty is a secular right, not a religious one. The Savior made this clear when he declared, "My kingdom is not of this world. . . ." (John 18:36) He also recognized this distinction when he said, "Render . . . unto Caesar, the things which are Caesar's [that is, honor his right to rule] and [render] to God the things that are God's [the importance of living a good life]." (Matthew 22:21)
Some bring up the Pope, and say he is a religious leader, who has sovereignty, but they fail to understand that, besides being a spiritual leader, he is also the elected prince or ruler of an internationally recognized sovereign territory the Vatican, and still holds the deposed or de jure rights to the former Italian Papal territories once ruled over by the Popes.
Religious leaders, with the exception of the Pope, have no secular rights. They can only rightfully and morally give out private religious awards.
The International Commission on Chivalry (ICOC) declare that, "We invite these [religious] Authorities to use more proper terms for any future creations of [chivalric] awards.
" The reason being that ". . . none of [them] . . . possess any type of direct Sovereignty. . . .
(6) Myth number six:
Micro-nations have the right to bestow knighthoods.
No micronation has any real, genuine or authentic right to bestow true titles of nobility or bestow knighthoods. They are fantasy countries --"These nations usually exist only on paper, on the Internet, or in the minds of their creators.
They are make-believe with no actual sovereign authority.
(7) Myth number seven:
Governments in exile still hold the supreme right.
If a government in exile was legitimate, it would have de jure internal sovereignty and therefore authority to do many things. However, the problem is, anyone can make the false claim on the internet. Fabrications abound and counterfeit claims sadly appear to be on the increase.
Just because some organization claims to be a government in exile, does not make it so. Claims need to be researched and verified by reliable sources.
Also, read "Orders of Chivalry
" at http://www.nobility-royalty.com/id60.htm.
Orders of merit are not genuine knighthoods -- they are secular honors that mimic or impersonate. They are not orders of chivalry. They are imitations of what is real. True knighthood is inseparably connected to Royalty, not to tribal or republican government. Only if a government in exile is a legally valid entity will they hold the right to rule. All others have no fons honorum, which is an exclusive entitlement that belongs to the supreme right to govern.
But how can you tell if a so-called exiled government is legitimate?
A monarchy, retains all the rights of sovereignty, if illegally deposed the head of the royal house being the personification and embodiment of the nation, is automatically the government in exile or that nation. If a republic is deposed by an illegal government, some high ranking responsible individuals in the executive and/or legislative branches are the only ones who can rightfully establish a lawful government-in-exile. (See Doctrines of International Law recognizing the Right to De jure Existence of Governments-in-Exile and Deposed Royal Houses
and Constitutional Power of Governments-in-Exile under International Law
in the book The Entitlement to Rule: Legal, Non-Territorial Sovereignty in International Law
(8) Myth number eight:
Non-existent or abandoned deposed royal houses or once famous ancient orders of chivalry can be restored to full dignity and power of a de jure sovereignty and therefore can create knighthoods, etc.
Such houses and orders that are extinct, no longer have any sovereignty. They no longer exist, because all their rights have been extinguished forever by international law. They cannot be re-established, restored or renewed. Those rights are lost for all eternity that is the law. That is the way it works. You simply can't restore something you do not own and have no legal or lawful right to. The once great power to do so is null and void after they are forfeited by the law of nations and the law of nature.
(9) Myth number nine:
A person with royal ancestors -- descended from a royal line, can claim ancient de jure sovereignty on that basis alone.
As much as 90 percent of the original common stock of Europe are descendants of Charlemagne. Nearly 80% of the English high middle class are descendants of King Edward III of England. Does that make all (about 6,000 of them royals? Are 90% of the people of Europe kings because they can trace their ancestral line back to Charlemagne? Obviously not.
(10) Myth number ten:
One is still an authentic noble or knight, even if the original authority that created the noble title or conferred the knighthood no longer exists.
"The Nobility [and knighthood], in fact, constitute a temporary corporation or guild, authorized [and ultimately owned] by the [king or sovereign prince of the land]. . . ." (Immanuel Kant, The Philosophy of Law: An Exposition of the Fundamental Principles of Jurisprudence as the Science of Right, William Hastie, ed., no. 8(c), 1887) If there is no living breathing sovereign alive who has jurisdiction and authority over the reigning or deposed kingdom or principality, then all titles and orders created by this royal house cease to be public titles. Only the supreme right of sovereignty can maintain and perpetuate public international honors. If that original authority dies out, then all titles created by them and all knighthoods or orders immediately become private, and no longer hold the status of a public honor or right.
(11) Myth number eleven:
Popularity and general acceptance create a sure sign of authenticity. This is the only criteria one needs to know if a royal claim is the true.
Francis Barrymore Smith wrote, ". . . The vote of the whole world can not make wrong right, falsehood truth, robbery honest, or usurpation other than usurpation." (Radical Artisan, William James Linton, 1812-97, 1973, p. 220) Concerning the liar, he wrote, "If the whole world believe his lie, would that alter the nature of falsehood?" (Ibid.) No, what is false is false. Popularity and general acceptance does not assure validity. There are many well accepted royals and nobles who are sadly total frauds.
(12) Myth number twelve:
I dont need to prove anything, I can just make my assertion of rights.
According to international sovereignty law, if one cannot prove one's claim, then it is nothing more than wishful thinking, fantasy or, at worst, a willful falsehood or act of fraud.
One of the fathers of international law, Emerich de Vattel declared that, ". . . People are not obliged to respect that title [the title of a claimant to a throne or a noble title] any farther than he shows its validity." (The Law of Nations, Book 2, chapter 18, no. 337) In fact, rights are forfeited where ". . . original validity . . . is impossible to prove. . . ." (D. H. N. Johnson, "Acquisitive Prescription in International Law," British Yearbook of International Law, vol. 27, 1950, p. 332) To maintain rights, a deposed royal house or exiled government must be able to ". . . establish its own legitimate rights by conclusive proof." (Pasquale Fiore, International Law Codified and its Legal Sanction: or, The Legal Sanction, 1919, p. 429.)
If one has a noble title, one must be able to prove that the authority that gave the title or knighthood still exists and that that royal house has maintained their legal right of sovereignty. (See Myth number ten) Otherwise, their title is reduced to a private title or knighthood and is no longer a valid public right. Private titles or knighthood are not to be used publicly. (See Public and Private Titles and Knighthoods
(13) Myth number thirteen:
Court decrees provide absolute assurances of validity.
Unfortunately, this is one of the major tricks or cons used to cheat people out of their money. For instance, one group advertised "the Marquisate of Belfronte which was given by Royal Decree in 1817 to Don Calcedonio Navanteri Da Siracusa (Syracuse) by Ferdinand I, King of the Two Sicilies." The title is probably real historically, but then they revealed themselves and their scheme, "The title is vacant and ready for assignation through decision of a court of justice." That is the scam. They take an extinct title and will sell it to you and have a justice declare, by some contrived means, that it is your title somehow by magic.
Even if a Court of Law did declare it, it does not make it genuine or real. We have not been able to determine if these swindlers give you a fabricated court decree or bribe a judge or what, but the point is, a judge cannot legitimately confer a title of nobility on another person. The only title they can give you is that of "felon."
Guy Stair Sainty, a well-known expert on nobility and royalty, declared, ". . . the Italian Courts have been persuaded to consider numerous claims to titles of nobility without actually applying nobiliary law, leading to some bizarre decisions.
One swindler we have dealt with even bragged how he got a Republic of San Marino court long ago to rule the he was the rightful count of something or other when it was a big fat lie and he knew it, but he was delighted with what he got away with. The Republic no longer allows this kind of thing, but it was once widely used by counterfeiters to lie and deceive others into thinking they were legit. Court decrees are not to be trusted or relied upon when they use "preponderance of evidence
" rules, (51% assurance) which means their decisions have almost as much likelihood of being wrong as they have of being right depending on what evidence is presented and what evidence is hidden, disguised or never introduced, so as to trick or manipulate the court into making a certain decision. (See Why Courts Findings are Unreliable and Invalid Sources for Determining the Authenticity of Deposed Claims
in volume 2 chapter 5 of The Entitlement to Rule: Legal, Non-Territorial Sovereignty in International Law
If you any questions on any of the above principles, please feel welcome to inquire. We would be glad to respond. Best wishes always.
(13) How can I tell the difference between a true order of chivalry and a self-styled or self-assumed one?
They long ago were suppressed by the Holy See, protector of mediaeval Western military religious orders in the Holy Land or on the Iberian Peninsula.
[Official Statement of the Holy See on Self-Styled Orders: www.heraldica.org/topics/orders/popebg.htm
They claim to be under the high protection of or to be headed by Episcopi
They are linked closely to bearers of false titles of nobility.
A true order will have an authentic, living "fons honorum,
" which means "fountain of honor
" held by either a reigning or deposed and authentic sovereign. An order of chivalry must be from a true reigning or true "de jure
" sovereign and not be a club or fraternity. Otherwise, the order has no foundation in truth as an genuine order of chivalry.
The question whether an order is a legitimate Chivalric order or a self-styled [self-proclaimed or phony] order coincides with the fons honorum. A legitimate fount of honour is a person who held sovereignty either at or before the moment when the order was established. (Holding sovereignty before the founding of an order is considered effective in creation of a genuine chivalric order only if the former sovereign had not abdicated his sovereignty before the foundation of the order but, instead, had been deposed or had otherwise lost power.)
Conclusion: It is tricky business trying to tell what is true from what is false, but very important. Validity and authenticity are not always easy to discern. The shady salesmen wants your money and are very willing, eager and happy to lie to you to get it. You must be very careful. Never depart with or give any money away unless, you have incontrovertible proof that their claims are valid. In fact, if they get angry or stop communicating with you, if you question them, that is a good sign that they are hiding something.
What to Do if you have been Conned
Everyone makes a mistake once in awhile. this is not a time to feel embarrassed. Scammers are good at what they do. They take advantage of innocent, unsuspecting people. this is a time to help protect others. Edmund Burke once said, "All that is needed for the forces of evil to win is for good men to do nothing."
If you do not feel you can sue those who cheated you, there is still the important option of reporting them:
(1) File a police report where the alleged scammer is located.
(2) Go to the following website and click on the appropriate country to get information on who you should make a report to, whether it is in England or Germany or the United States:
Remember, as Edmund Burke once declared, "All that is needed for the forces of evil to win is for good men to do nothing.
We encourage you to read and enjoy the articles that follow, which are informative and can deepen one's understanding of the whys and wherefores as well as the true and permanent rights of royalty, nobility and chivalry. The following articles are considered to be especially important and valuable:
" to join the Commission as a contributor or apply for certification for titles, knighthood, status or ancestry. Our goals and mission are to protect the public from counterfeit titles, phony knighthoods and fake genealogies. We certify the true and the genuine as well as promote chivalry, royalty and nobility. There is so much that needs to be done. We invite you to contribute and join with us.
Contact or donate through the following:
© Copyright 2005/2009 -- International Commission on Nobility and Royalty. All Rights Reserved.