Monarchy Forum
Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
Royalistdefender

Registered:
Posts: 849
Reply with quote  #1 
I would like to know if she is really a descendant of Royalty? http://www.youtube.com/user/hrhsusanavonradic 

     She is on myspace and youtube (the link you see above)

How can I tell between a person who is really legitimate and a person who is false??
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #2 
She isn't. A good way to tell is if a person's, as it were, résumé of their royalty seems barking mad. Not too much debate about that in her case. Also, no one calls themselves a Prince or Princess of Croatia. It is I suppose possibly a subsidiary title of Habsburg-Lorraines, albeit not used, but none of them is surnamed von Radic.

I am quite sure that there was no event in Croatia in 1969 where this lady's mother was raised to the Croatian throne; I think I would know if it had happened. Apart from overall insanity, a good sign of a false claim is when someone seems unsure what their style is, as with this lady switching from Imperial and Royal Highness to just Royal Highness in the space of a paragraph or so. There, that should be enough tips to be going on with.
Royalistdefender

Registered:
Posts: 849
Reply with quote  #3 
I asked the International Commission on Royalty and Nobility and this is what they said in the email:

    Thank you for your interest in constitutional monarchy, nobility, royalty and
chivalry. Those countries that have constitutional monarchs according to
political science studies generally have the best economies, wealth,
prosperity, freedom and stability on the earth.

She looks fake for several important reasons:

(1) the last time Croatia had a king or queen was in the 12th century. It is
doubtful that her ancestors used their titles as required by international law
or the law of nations for them to legitimately keep their royal claim or "de
jure" sovereignty intact. In other words, if they fail to make the required
diplomatic protest in every generation, they become commoners and lose all
their right and claims. There is no evidence or claim on her website that her
ancestors obeyed the law which keeps sovereign rights alive. Once lost, they
cannot be retrieved or rehabilitated, but are forfeited forever. (See the
article" "Sovereignty & The Future of Nobility and Royalty" and "Dynastic Law"
on our website http://www.nobility-royalty.com)
(2) she was invested with a fake knighthood as shown on her website. All
Byzantine "de jure" rights became extinct in the 15th Century because the law
specified above was not obeyed. Hence, all sovereignty reverts to the people or
to the subsequent government and the royal family ceases to be royal. The point
is, people who have royal blood are not royal unless they have current reigning
or "de jure" sovereignty.
(3) she uses the prenominal title of "Her Imperial and Royal Highness," which
Croatia could not bestow upon her. This is presumptuous. A true royal would not
do this.
(4) From her own words, her relatives and ancestors did not use their titles,
or rights to honor --- again, the major sign that all validity was lost.
(5) her family history claims vague descendancy, not a line of princes or "de
jure" or nonreigning kings, which again makes it eminently clear that all
legitimacy was whitingly or unwitingly reliquished, renounced or abandoned. It
is important to remember that royal, imperial or noble ancestry means very
little. It is estimated that over 80% of native European stock are descendented
from royalty. What really matters is if rights were authentic in the first
place and if they were kept alive. Otherwise, they are dead and dead forever.

There appears to be too many red flags or signs involved in this situation to
believe she is the real thing. There is good evidence to believe that this
person is imitating royalty --- that she is an imposter. However, she may be
self-deceived and not know dynastic law, or some of the Byzantine con artists
may have gotten a hold of her. I don't know, but there are a lot of warning
signs of that her claims are bogus.

Hopefully this helps.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #4 
A fuller and less frivolous reply than mine, but with the same conclusion. It is not correct, though, that Croatia did not have a King or Queen since the 12th century. The Kings of Hungary, which later itself passed into the line of Habsburg Emperors, were Kings of Croatia also, and the last person to use the title was Bl. Karl I of Austria. It was one of many titles, but it was there. What should have been said is that Croatia last had a native, separate King in the 12th century.

I could not be bothered to read further into this lady's rather demented screed to see what actual basis she claimed Croatia on. I personally rather doubt that there is any known descent at all from the native Kings, which would be the only basis I could think of. However, the Commission is generally correct that a claim must be at least asserted in each generation to continue in validity.

And that royal blood in itself is far from rare, even if most that have it don't know it. However, there is another sign of a false claim, listing wildly improbable ancestries. Sure enough, she claims descent from Roman Emperors, which no one can trace at all unless they are the Holy or Byzantine varieties, and Romulus and Remus. Enough said.
CaesarII

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 585
Reply with quote  #5 
Peter is quite right. Descent, let alone direct succession, from the native kings of Croatia would be nearly impossible to trace. Her occaisional use of the style "Imperial and Royal Highness" suggests a claim to succeed the Habsburg kings of Croatia, but as we all know the only legitimate successor to Croatia's last king from this line could be Archduke Otto.

Quick research on the name Radic renders Stjepan Radic (1871-1928), the founder of the Croatian Peasant Party, which advocated Croatian autonomy from Habsburg rule.

She is undoubtedly a fraud.

Quote:

And that royal blood in itself is far from rare, even if most that have it don't know it. However, there is another sign of a false claim, listing wildly improbable ancestries. Sure enough, she claims descent from Roman Emperors, which no one can trace at all unless they are the Holy or Byzantine varieties, and Romulus and Remus. Enough said.



Off-topic, but I was reminded today (I forget in what context this came up) that the Colonnas traditionally claimed descent from Julius Caesar (who himself claimed descent from Aeneas, Romulus and the goddess Venus) through their succession from the Counts of Tusculum. If my memory serves me correctly, the current head of the Colonna family is Don Marcantonio Colonna, Duke of Paliano and Prince-Attendant to the Papal Throne.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #6 
I don't mind very old claims like that. I don't believe in a chain of descent so long, but the claim is at least rooted in family tradition, as opposed to a spurious modern invention. It's probably a spurious ancient invention, though...

There wasn't any continuing descent from Caesar, his daughter the wife of Pompey's child didn't survive infancy and his son by Cleopatra was murdered by Augustus. I believe the claim is for descent from the gens Julia, rather than from Caesar himself. In fact the Colonna descent from the Counts of Tusculum is slightly speculative; they possibly are but the chain is not clear, and not all genealogists agree. They were themselves a very important Roman family in any case.
CaesarII

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 585
Reply with quote  #7 
The topic came up, I now recall, in correspondance I maintain with a man who belongs to both a minor branch of the Colonna and is closely related to the Counts of Mastai-Ferretti (who produced Pius IX). You are right, he did not say the Colonna claimed descent from Julius Caesar himself, but the Julii in general. Descent though, not direct succession. Descent itself is quite possible- half of Europe can count Charlemagne amongst their ancestors after all.

But as you say, in any case the Colonna were of great importance in Rome from the mediaeval period through to the fall of Papal Rome in 1870. Interestingly, in Italy the republic abolished the use of noble titles in 1946, but must continue to recognize the papal "black" aristocracy and patriciate as stipulated in the Lateran Accords.
Ethiomonarchist

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 5,102
Reply with quote  #8 
As CeasarII states, the Italian republic abolished the Kingdom of Italy and the "White" nobility which allied itself with the House of Savoy.  The "Black" nobility was associated with the Papacy and the pre-Savoy regime in the Papal states, and as such was not subject to the the nation state of Italy.  However, even the "White" nobility continue to be accorded their titles as a matter of courtesy generally speaking. 

As to this claimed "Princess", well she isn't the first and won't be the last who claims to be something she clearly isn't.

__________________
The Lion of Judah hath prevailed.

Ethiopia stretches her hands unto God (Quote from Psalm 68 which served as the Imperial Motto of the Ethiopian Empire)

"God and history shall remember your judgment." (Quote from Emperor Haile Selassie I's speech to the League of Nations to plead for assistance against the Italian Invasion, 1936.)
KYMonarchist

Registered:
Posts: 4,853
Reply with quote  #9 
http://www.youtube.com/user/aboutadonis


Here's another fraudulent royal on Youtube. Somewhat, at least.

__________________
"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana
WriterBoy

Registered:
Posts: 1
Reply with quote  #10 
I'm trying to confirm that her claim is fraudulent.  Does anyone know of a University Professor, for example, who is an expert in Croatian royal lineage, or the royal lineages of Balkan countries?
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,968
Reply with quote  #11 
A title is like any other property - you have to prove you posses it.  It isn't you're presumed 'hier' until proven 'imposter'.  Claimants have to demonstrate the cause of the claim, the rest of us don't have to show them baseless....

__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
CondeDeLara

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #12 
   The false claimant to the Croatian throne, Susana, is an obvious fraudulent peasant; her written repertoire is very "cheesy" and outlandish. 

   She makes claims to several things and stories that just seem quite impossible and fallible such as her tracing her genealogy through a book called "Papal Genealogy" that would never specifically reach her family and that she is supposedly consorted with a Bourbon royal. She also states that her mother was momentarily Queen of Croatia in 1969 when no such thing had ever happened-further, even if such an event had happened, they would have found the closest male heir instead of female. 
   
   Other things are circumstantial and do not need to be elaborated on such as the flee to California; though I can at least say they would have more likely fled to a neighboring, liberal, and safe country like France or Italy. 

   I hope my little thesis was quite helpful for you and any others that needed light on the topic.

In best, sincere, and humble regards,
 el Conde de Lara  

__________________
"We do not come from kings for, in reality, kings come from us."

"My empire is the empire that never rests."

"Pure science is the doctrine and logic of fools, but pure religion and faith is the logic and doctrine of wise men."
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #13 
I have that book, at least I assume it is the same one: Papal Genealogy, the Families and Descendants of the Popes, by George L. Williams. It is not exactly easy reading but still fascinating for someone of my interests. So she didn't make that up, only just about everything else.
CondeDeLara

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #14 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I have that book, at least I assume it is the same one: Papal Genealogy, the Families and Descendants of the Popes, by George L. Williams. It is not exactly easy reading but still fascinating for someone of my interests. So she didn't make that up, only just about everything else.

But, the book would have never specifically recorded up to her family unless she had an already set genealogical record, which she does not prove or state. 

In best, sincere, and humble regards,
   el Conde de Lara 

__________________
"We do not come from kings for, in reality, kings come from us."

"My empire is the empire that never rests."

"Pure science is the doctrine and logic of fools, but pure religion and faith is the logic and doctrine of wise men."
stipanovics

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #15 
Dear
Please here is the answer,  svp voici la reponse. princess Susana von Radic (Randic i think)
arhiv Stipanovic-susacka rejrevija

Very beste regards
Istvan Stipanovics in (hungary)
Ivan Stipanovic in(croatia)

p.s
i claim nothing
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.