The Ancient Kingdom of Neustria

Flag old Kingdom of Neustria color.jpg

The modern Kingdom of Neustria has legally recovered, re-established and restored its original Grand Prince to full and official legitimacy, by direct succession from Merovingians and Carolingians lines, and also by “recognition” from the legalized King Pépin le Bref line of its founding Royal Patronage.

 

According to pacific international jurisprudence, the “Fons Honorum” or “fountains of honor” are the persons and/or entities that hold the exclusive prerogative of bestowing titles of nobility and honors legally as subjects of international law. These persons by origin, or ministry, must possess the attributes that constitute the sovereignty.

 

They are:

– Heads of State (both monarchists or republican – although the republicans cannot confer “nobility titles”, only meritorious awards),

– Heads of Dynasties (deposed monarchies) since it’s internationally accepted that they preserve the “Jus Conferendi” even being dispossessed of their thrones,

– Heads of Traditional Christian Churches (both Roman Catholic and Orthodox) following authentic apostolic succession. In other words, the Head of the church should prove direct lineage of ordination from one of the original apostles.

 

It’s widely known that there are no limitations to a Sovereign (reigning or deposed) in conferring titles and honors. They’re allowed to create and restore Orders of Merit and Chivalry, create and restore titles of Nobility, bestow and revoke as it pleases them. The deposed sovereigns fully govern their Houses and Dynasties, and so, there’s no political pressure or interference with the Dynastic prerogatives.

 

As previously said, when a Monarch is dispossessed, he or she remains Sovereign, and hence, never loses the Royal prerogatives of: “Jus Majestatis” which is the right of being called and respected by the titles and the “Jus Honorum“, the right to bestow titles and honors.

 

Ceasing territorial power, the monarch loses effective control of (“Jus Imperii” – the right to govern a State and people and “Jus Gladii” the right to command an army), retaining, however, the dynastic prerogatives (“Jus Majestatis” and “Jus Honorum”), which, as already stated, are intrinsic to his/her person. Assuming, then, the title of ‘Chief of the Name and Arms of the Royal House’ of his country. While this condition is recognized by the international tradition, like “pretender” to the vacant throne of his country, and among his dynastic power, are to judge the claims around titles of nobility in his jurisdiction, recognize them, validate them, as well as create and bestow new titles in his sole discretion

 

 

“A “Chief of Name and Arms“, a title attributed to a Claimant, being by juris sanguinis (law of blood) “heir apparent” of a defunct throne, as long as he has not formalized a voluntary act of resignation and acquiescence [formalized, not assumed or presumed] to the new political order of the state, according to the classic expression “subito la debellatio”, retains, in all its fullness, the sovereign prerogatives of Fons Honorum (Fountain of Honors) and Jus Majestatis (right to majestic dignity). It is a fortiori, the source of nobility and honor, and may, without restrictions create nobles and arm knights.”

 

 

The issue is that of innate nobility – “Jure Sanguinis” (right of blood) – which looks into the prerogatives known as “Jus Majestatis” and “Jus Honorum” and which argues that the holder of such prerogatives is a subject of international law with all the logical consequences of that situation. That is to say, a deposed sovereign may legitimately confer titles of nobility, with or without predicates, and the honorifics which pertain to his heraldic patrimony as head of his dynasty. The qualities which render a deposed Sovereign a subject of international law are undeniable and in fact constitute an absolute personal right of which the subject may never divest himself and which needs no ratification or recognition on the part of any other authority whatsoever. A reigning Sovereign or Head of State may use the term recognition in order to demonstrate the existence of such a right, but the term would be a mere declaration and not a constitutive act.” (Furno, op.cit.).

 

Dynastic orders are the exclusive domain of a sovereign, remain as such even if the monarch goes into exile, and are thus transmissible to the legitimate successor and head of the family. Generally, even if a sovereign abdicates of his/her own free will, unless he/she does so explicitly, he/she does not renounce the grand mastership of those dynastic orders belonging to his/her family. If the sovereign should renounce his/her status as Fons Honorum, this cannot involve any of his/her heirs that hold the right of inheritance, unless the renunciation took place prior to the sovereign’s marriage, and thus the birth of any heirs. A sovereign (or head of a royal house) in exile, and his/her legitimate successor, continue to enjoy the ius collationis, or “the right to confer honours,” and therefore may bestow honours in full legitimacy. No authority can deprive them of the right to confer honours, since this prerogative belongs to them as a lawful personal property iure sanguinis (by right of blood)

merovingian-dynasty-5601209d-cb57-4b61-b
family tree of the merovingian.jpg
BOOK FAMILY TREE.jpg

The Sovereign Grand Prince

 

  1. 1.    The full title of the sovereign Head of State of the Order is the “Grand Prince”. The Head of State is a “Prince” under protocols of royalty and nobility by blood right Succession from a royal line of Carolingian, Merovingian, Ottonian, Yngling, Capetian, Anjou, Plantagenet, Burgundy, Rurik, Hohenstaufen, Munsöätten, Cometopuli, Wessex, Visigoths, Astur-Leonese, Uí Néill, Alpínid and Iñiguez under canonical protocols by Ecclesiastical Succession, and also by princely status inherent in the sovereignty of the Order as a Kingdom of statehood. The Head of State is also a “Grand Master” under protocols of chivalry as the highest position within the Order. The alternatives of “Sovereign Grand Master” or “Sovereign Head of State” may also be used. The traditional short form, embodying all of these titles, is otherwise simply “Grand Master”. The proper courtesy style of address, exclusive to the Grand Master, is the title “Most Eminent Highness” (“M.E.H.”).

  • a)    Full rights of fons honorum, which meant according to the law ancient nobility, Grand Prince of Kingdom has the power to nobilitate, to grant and confirm coats of arms and to award predicates, taken from places in which his ancestors in fact had exercised sovereign powers, not to mention his right to constitute, resuscitate, reform and exercise the ‘Grand Magistry’ of the chivalric Orders of the dynasty, which are passed from father to son as an insupprimable heredity of birth.

  • b)    Legitimate power to grant honours,Fons honorum of the Grand Prince, legitimate possessor of this faculty, which according to the blood right royal, expression of the honorific power of his house, which had been conserved by family tradition and had not suffered ‘debellatio’, the forced surrender of power. He has therefore entitled to grant the honours given by him, because the ancient bulgaria church and by the tradition of royal blood consider that he has the legitimate power to grant these honours and titles royals.

  • c)    The fons honorum for issuing titles, honours and decorations of royals houses and religious organizations is protected by the religious freedom and the liberty to manifest this freedom by symbols. In addition, the freedom of association ensures that every individual is free to organise and to form and participate in (religious) groups, either formally or informally. Both freedoms are embedded in national and international law. They include the freedom to grant titles and awards, issued in the context of religious customs, symbols and honorifics.

 

  • d)    Religious ceremonies where titles and awards are issued have meaning and sacred value for the believers if they have been conducted by religious authorities empowered for that purpose in compliance with pre-specified rules. The personality of the religious leaders is undoubtedly of importance to every member of the community. Participation in the life of the community is thus a particular manifestation of one’s religion, which is in itself protected by Article 9 of the Convention (Hasan and Chaush v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 30985/96, and Perry v. Latvia, no. 30273/03, § 55, 8 November 2007).

 

  1. 2.    The Grand Prince holds Fons Honorum and Jus Honorum authority which constitutes the right to grant dynastic, sovereign and ecclesiastical Titles of Nobility, Chivalry, Office or Government of the Order, and to establish and grant Orders of Honour. This right is protected as a rule under historical and customary international law.

 

  1. 3.    The Grand Prince possesses the right to give Magistral Assent to all official actions, the right to make Magistral Proclamations compelling any official actions, and the right of veto power over any official decisions. In the sphere of sovereign jurisprudence, those rights include the powers of pardon and clemency. In the sphere of diplomacy, they include the right to personally ratify all treaties with other nations.

 

  1. 4.    The Grand Prince possesses the inalienable right to general governance over all sovereign, geopolitical, political, juridical and civil affairs of the Kingdom and its Subjects.

 

  1. 5.    The Grand Prince has only one obligation, to conduct all Magistral acts and courses of general governance upon the advice and consultation of the Grand Mastery.

 

  1. 6.    Election of the Grand Master – The position of Grand Master is held for life.  Upon a vacancy of the Grand Master position, the Grand Commander shall immediately stand in to exercise full authority of that role, serving as Acting Grand Master until such time as election of the successor can be arranged. The Grand Mastery consisting of all Grand Officers shall serve as the council of electors. The Grand Master shall be the qualified Candidate who has the most votes, and whose election is finally ratified by the simple majority (more than 50%) of the Grand Officers.

 

  1. 7.    Candidates for Grand Master – Candidates for election as successor to the Grand Master shall be nominated by the Grand Officers. Candidates must be a professed Knight or Dame of the Order, who has taken the Vow of Chivalry and sworn to live by the Old Temple Rule and the Templar Code. Candidates must be qualified by a strong character fearless of adversity, a determination to uphold and preserve traditional principles, a passion for Justice, an unshakeable spiritual Faith, and academic skills to effectively navigate and apply historical and legal facts and theological doctrines.

 

8. Priority of Candidates – Priority of favourable consideration shall be given to qualified Candidates, in order of precedence, as follows: (a) any person nominated by the former Grand Master in a written instrument previously delivered to the Grand Mastery; (b) one who has served as a Grand Officer of the Order; (c) one who has sufficient seniority and demonstrated achievement as a Knight or Dame and Crown Officer of the Order; (d) one who has active leadership experience in a legitimate historical Order of Chivalry or Royal House.

 

  1. 8.    Deferred Succession – In the event that a nominated Candidate is preferred by the majority of votes, but is not yet sufficiently available to fully assume the responsibilities of Grand Master, and such Candidate wishes to postpone but not decline succession, then the election may be completed, while active succession may be deferred. In such event, the Grand Commander shall serve as Acting Grand Master, in co-regency together with the elected Grand Master, until such time as succession may be completed.

  2. 9.    According to pacific international jurisprudence, the “Fons Honorum” or “fountains of honor” are the persons and/or entities that hold the exclusive prerogative of bestowing titles of nobility and honors legally as subjects of international law. These persons by origin, or ministry, must possess the attributes that constitute the sovereignty. They are:

  • a)    Heads of State (both monarchists or republican – although the republicans cannot confer “nobility titles”, only meritorious awards);

  • b)    Heads of Dynasties (deposed monarchies) since it’s internationally accepted that they preserve the “Jus Conferendi” even being dispossessed of their thrones;

  • c)    Heads of Traditional Christian Churches (both Roman Catholic and Orthodox) following authentic apostolic succession. In other words, the Head of the church should prove direct lineage of ordination from one of the original apostles.

  • d)    It’s widely known that there are no limitations to a Sovereign (reigning or deposed) in conferring titles and honors. They’re allowed to create and restore Orders of Merit and Chivalry, create and restore titles of Nobility, bestow and revoke as it pleases them. The deposed sovereigns fully govern their Houses and Dynasties, and so, there’s no political pressure or interference with the Dynastic prerogatives.

  • e)    As previously said, when a Monarch is dispossessed, he or she remains Sovereign, and hence, never loses the Royal prerogatives of: “Jus Majestatis” which is the right of being called and respected by the titles and the “Jus Honorum“, the right to bestow titles and honors.

  • f)    Ceasing territorial power, the monarch loses effective control of (“Jus Imperii” – the right to govern a State and people and “Jus Gladii” the right to command an army), retaining, however, the dynastic prerogatives (“Jus Majestatis” and “Jus Honorum”), which, as already stated, are intrinsic to his/her person. Assuming, then, the title of ‘Chief of the Name and Arms of the Royal House’ of his country. While this condition is recognized by the international tradition, like “pretender” to the vacant throne of his country, and among his dynastic power, are to judge the claims around titles of nobility in his jurisdiction, recognize them, validate them, as well as create and bestow new titles in his sole discretion

  • g)    Chief of Name and Arms“, a title attributed to a Claimant, being by juris sanguinis (law of blood) “heir apparent” of a defunct throne, as long as he has not formalized a voluntary act of resignation and acquiescence [formalized, not assumed or presumed] to the new political order of the state, according to the classic expression “subito la debellatio”, retains, in all its fullness, the sovereign prerogatives of Fons Honorum (Fountain of Honors) and Jus Majestatis (right to majestic dignity). It is a fortiori, the source of nobility and honor, and may, without restrictions create nobles and arm knights.

  • h)    The issue is that of innate nobility – “Jure Sanguinis” (right of blood) – which looks into the prerogatives known as “Jus Majestatis” and “Jus Honorum” and which argues that the holder of such prerogatives is a subject of international law with all the logical consequences of that situation. That is to say, a deposed sovereign may legitimately confer titles of nobility, with or without predicates, and the honorifics which pertain to his heraldic patrimony as head of his dynasty. The qualities which render a deposed Sovereign a subject of international law are undeniable and in fact constitute an absolute personal right of which the subject may never divest himself and which needs no ratification or recognition on the part of any other authority whatsoever. A reigning Sovereign or Head of State may use the term recognition in order to demonstrate the existence of such a right, but the term would be a mere declaration and not a constitutive act.” (Furno, op.cit.)

  • i)    Dynastic orders are the exclusive domain of a sovereign, remain as such even if the monarch goes into exile, and are thus transmissible to the legitimate successor and head of the family. Generally, even if a sovereign abdicates of his/her own free will, unless he/she does so explicitly, he/she does not renounce the grand mastership of those dynastic orders belonging to his/her family. If the sovereign should renounce his/her status as Fons Honorum, this cannot involve any of his/her heirs that hold the right of inheritance, unless the renunciation took place prior to the sovereign’s marriage, and thus the birth of any heirs. A sovereign (or head of a royal house) in exile, and his/her legitimate successor, continue to enjoy the ius collationis, or “the right to confer honours,” and therefore may bestow honours in full legitimacy. No authority can deprive them of the right to confer honours, since this prerogative belongs to them as a lawful personal property iure sanguinis (by right of blood).

map old kingdom neustria.jpg

Historic Territory of Neustria

 

The predecessor to Neustria was the Roman rump state of the Kingdom of Soissons. In 486 its ruler Syagrius lost the Battle of Soissons to the Frankish king Clovis I and the domain was thereafter under the control of the Franks. Constant re-divisions of territories by Clovis's descendants resulted in many rivalries that, for more than two hundred years, kept Neustria in almost constant warfare with Austrasia, the eastern portion of the Frankish Kingdom.

 

Despite the wars, Neustria and Austrasia re-united briefly on several occasions, the first time under Clotaire I during his reign from 558 to 562. The struggle for power continued with Queen Fredegund of Neustria (the widow of King Chilperic I (reigned 566–584) and the mother of the new king Clotaire II (reigned 584–628) unleashing a bitter war.

 

After his mother's death and burial in Saint Denis Basilica near Paris (597), Clotaire II continued the struggle against Queen Brunhilda, and finally triumphed in 613 when Brunhilda's followers betrayed the old queen into his hands. Clotaire had Brunhilda put to the rack and stretched for three days, then chained between four horses and eventually ripped limb from limb. Clotaire now ruled a united realm, but only for a short time as he made his son Dagobert I king of Austrasia. Dagobert's accession in Neustria resulted in another temporary unification.

 

In Austrasia under the Arnulfing mayor Grimoald the Elder attempted a coup against his liege, Clovis II had him removed and again reunited the kingdom from Neustria, but again temporarily. During or soon after the reign of Clovis's son Chlothar III, the dynasty of Neustria, like that of Austrasia before it, ceded authority to its own mayor of the palace.

 

In 678, Neustria, under Mayor Ebroin, subdued the Austrasians for the last time. Ebroin was murdered in 680. In 687, Pippin of Herstal, mayor of the palace of the King of Austrasia, defeated the Neustrians at Tertry. Neustria's mayor Berchar was assassinated shortly afterwards and following a marriage alliance between Pippin's son Drogo and Berthal's widow, Pippin became mayor of the Neustrian palace.

 

Pippin's descendants, the Carolingians, continued to rule the two realms as mayors. With Pope Stephen II's blessing, after 751 the Carolingian Pippin the Short, formally deposed the Merovingians and took control of the empire, he and his descendants ruling as kings.

 

Neustria, Austrasia, and Burgundy then became united under one authority and, although it would split once again into various eastern and western divisions, the names "Neustria" and "Austrasia" gradually disappeared. The Order has the honour of being the former sovereign ruler of the historic Kingdom of Neustria. It therefore holds the legal status of a non-sovereign depository sovereign of the Kingdom of Neustria, regardless of the territory. The modern Kingdom of Neustria has legally recovered, re-established and restored its original Grand Prince to full and official legitimacy, by direct succession from Merovingians and Carolingians lines, and also by “recognition” from the legalized King Pépin le Bref line of its founding Royal Patronage.

 

 

  1. 3.    Nationality of Cultural Kingdom Neustria – The Order serves as the governmental entity providing state infrastructure and representing the cultural traditions embodied in medieval and modern internationally. It thereby holds enhanced status as a Nation-State subject of international law, advancing the interests of the Nationality of cultural. It therefore holds juridical status of an historical institution representing its own distinctive socio-cultural Nationality, irrespective of and without need for territory.

 

  1. 4.    Independent of Geographic Territory – The sovereign statehood of the Order, and its legitimacy under international law as a modern non-territorial Kingdom of Neustria, as a deposed non-ruling sovereignty of a historical Kingdom, and also as a Nation-State representing a cultural Nationality, does not require nor depend upon control or possession of any particular geographic territory.

 

  1. 5.    No Claim to Territory of old Kingdom of Neustria – The Order does not make any claim to the former territory of the Kingdom of Neustria, as it is satisfied to possess perpetual Fons Honourum authority as a deposed non-ruling sovereign from that historical connection.

 

  1. 6.    No Claim to Territory of Jerusalem – The Order does not make any claim to the former territory of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, nor to the territory of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, as it is satisfied to permanently possess the substance and heritage of Templarism which it preserved from its archaeological excavation of the historical Temple of Solomon during its formative years.

 

  1. 7.    Sovereign Land of the Kingdom of Neustria – All land, buildings or other real estate property in any host country which are owned by the Order, which are either (1) owned through a foundation or trustees on its behalf, or (2) owned by members of the Government, are legal Territories of the Order, subject to its Constitution and laws, in addition to the laws of the host country. Any real estate property directly owned by the Order as a Kingdom as sovereign property, or used as diplomatic residence, Consular or Embassy premises of diplomatic missions of the Order, and any ships officially bearing the flag of the Order in international waters, are legally its sovereign Territories, which are governed solely and exclusively by the full legal force and effect of its Constitution and laws.

 

  1. 8.    The royal station of Grand Master of the Royal Order Knights of Neustria shall be subject to revocation by reason of Treason against the Order, or Hostilities against Peace against any foreign nation, or on other grounds established by the Laws of the Order.

arms mero.jpg

Ancient book cataloging the coat of arms of the kingdom of Neustria

 

coat of arms prince of neustria.jpg

Coat of arms of the Grand Prince of Neustria