Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
ReinoTion

Registered:
Posts: 41
Reply with quote  #1 
A couple days ago, I came across a website written by a Brazilian man who claims to be the current pretender to the Ghassanid Dynasty and the kingdoms and principalities it once ruled over from the time of the Eastern Roman Empire to as late as 1747 when it was only a small sheikdom in modern-day Lebanon. The title he claims is H.I.R.H Prince Gharios of Ghassan, Al-Nu'man VIII.

The royal house's website: http://www.royalhouseofghassan.org/

His genealogy: http://www.royalhouseofghassan.org/gene/

The prince's personal website: http://www.princegharios.com/


What do you guys think? Is his claim as a royal prince legitimate or is he just another crackpot trying to gain respect by making phony assertion to having direct royal descent from 300 years ago?
IsItLegit

Registered:
Posts: 1
Reply with quote  #2 
Reads legit:

Prince Gharios' rights and titles were also recognized by the International Arbitration Award number 0413/2011 that, according to the Brazilian Federal Law number 9307/96 has the very same legal value as a Federal Court Verdict and according to the the "1958 NY Convention on Arbitration" is a legal binding court decision in 148 nations in the world. Even being already "res judicata" (matter already judged not subject to appeal) by Brazilian Law, the International Award was recognized and enforced by the Los Angeles Superior Court in February 2012.  In 2013, Brazilian jurists (one Chief judge and two presiding judges) signed affidavits recognizing the legality of the international arbitration award and Prince Gharios' rights and titles.

http://www.royalghassan.org/royal-family.html
norenxaq

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 53
Reply with quote  #3 
his online genealogy is incomplete. therefor, I consider it untrustworthy.

this is independent of whether anyone recognises his claim as he might be presenting a more complete one to them. 

if so, this should be on his site instead of the one there
todd1983

Registered:
Posts: 3
Reply with quote  #4 

At first glance the claim to descend from a dynasty that ruled from 230-638 (or thereabouts) is quite a stretch. It might also be a stretch to think that there is any meaningful connection between the Sheikhs Chemor and the Ghassanids. I would like to see a document that during the Ottoman Empire the Sheikhs Chemor were recognized as ROYAL. There were many people addressed as 'sheikh' in colloquial usage and this did not imply such exalted status.

I am also skeptical that: "The family's history was kept and validated for centuries by the Maronite Church." In other sections of the website it explains the tumultuous history of the region and the lack of complete documents. The lack of a consistent voice on the website is worrying. Looking at the dispute among various Romanov family members, it is no surprise there is a dispute about the Ghassanid heir.
There is an interesting presentation on a linked website here: https://royalblog.org/2017/11/19/understanding-the-royal-ghassanid-family-tree/


It seems that many of the meetings that the individual had were based on him representing a religiously defined community. His name would naturally be the name that he prefers, which is Prince Gharios (adding or subtracting various honorifics). I do not think any correspondence can be taken to be official recognition (it is certainly not official recognition as Head of State). A good example is QE II addressing a letter to the Principality of Hutt River (http://www.principality-hutt-river.com/gov/PHR_46th_Anniversary_Celebration_Weekend_files/Greetings%20from%20HM%20QEII%202016.pdf).

For such conclusion, the said person seems to be no more than a "intelligent and well learnt" social climber who filled the gap in order to be recognised for status and power. 

norenxaq

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 53
Reply with quote  #5 
another concern: recently I revisited his site while doing other research and discovered his genealogy to be missing. that he removed it is further cause for suspicion...
todd1983

Registered:
Posts: 3
Reply with quote  #6 
The issue is that there is no way to verify him as a descendant let alone a member of a "ruling family" from the Ghassanid tribe. The Ghassanids are not recorded after the early medieval period. In addition. they were more than likely Orthodox Chalcedonians, or perhaps even Miaphysites. But there is no record of them becoming Eastern Rite Catholics, e.g. Maronites. This mixes up the history of the Ghassanids with the Maronites, whose history is murky as well.
Another very interesting point, according to the German news article on Cicero, he is a 3rd class actor in Brazil and transformed himself into a "prince". Surely enough, the creative methods that legal documents can be acquired in Brazil we can all certainly suspect. 
todd1983

Registered:
Posts: 3
Reply with quote  #7 
IMG_5710.jpg the
This faker has posted this to continuously claim he is legit, now let's read what the historian answers to all his defense ..
1. Our original family name is El Chemor, (it has many transliterations: Shoummar, Shemer, Shamir, Chmr, etc.) and it comes from King Chemor Jablah of the Ghassanid Kingdom in the Levant. Some of the King’s sons sought refuge in today’s Lebanon and were known as Bani Chemor (or the children of King Chemor) THIS IS AN INTERESTING HYPOTHESIS, AND MIGHT BE TRUE, BUT DOCUMENTARY PROOF IS NEEDED. WHEN THE KING'S SON'S SOUGHT REFUGE, DID THEY PERHAPS ALSO GIVE UP THEIR CLAIM TO RULE (WAS THEIR CLAIM BASED ON TRIBAL AFFILIATION OR ON LAND OR ON GENEALOGY?). THE WEBSITE SUGGESTS THAT THE RULER OF THE FAMILY WAS SELECTED BY A COUNCIL. DID ANY COUNCIL MAKE A DECISION ABOUT THE MODERN CLAIMANT?
 
 
2. The family ruled in the Levant from 220 CE until 636 CE and several other realms ruling the Akoura region in Northern Lebanon from 1211 CE until 1633 CE and the region of Zgharta-Zawie from 1641 CE until 1747 CE but kept the titles until today. WAS THE TITLE OF SHEIKH USED, OR WAS IT PRINCE? 
 
 
3. After the family was deposed, they were hunted and killed by the sheikhs from the Daher family who was placed by the ottomans in our place with all the land and properties. That’s the reason why many members of the family changed their last names after the deposition and many later migrated to the north and South America. Notably the Gharios family and the Hobeika family. WHY THEN IS THE CURRENT CLAIMANT IN A BETTER POSITION TO CLAIM HEADSHIP OF THE FAMILY RATHER THAN THESE OTHER BRANCHES? SINCE THE FAMILY WAS DEPOSED DID THEY NOT GIVE UP THEIR TITLES? 
 
 
4. About 100 years ago, many members of the Gharios family, knowing that they belonged to the El Chemor family, started to publicly use the El Chemor last name again. POINT 2 STATES THE FAMILY (APPARENTLY ALL BRANCHES) KEPT THEIR TITLES, BUT POINT 4 STATES THAT THE GHARIOS FAMILY STARTED TO USE THEIR TRUE LAST NAME ABOUT A HUNDRED YEARS AGO. SUPPOSEDLY THE GHARIOS FAMILY DID NOT USE ANY TITLE DURING THIS TIME. 
 
 
5. Technically, there are two types of titles: Royal and Noble. Royal titles are the sovereign or semi-sovereign ones and noble are bestowed by a higher (sovereign or semi-sovereign) authority. DOCUMENTARY SOURCES ARE NEEDED TO DETERMINE THE NATURE OF CLAIMED TITLES. 
 
6. In Lebanon, the majority of the sheikh titles are noble, not royal, since they were bestowed by princes after the Ottoman invasion of 1517 CE IT SEEMS QUITE POSSIBLE THAT THE OTTOMANS COULD AWARD TITLES TO FAMILIES THAT CAN CLAIM NOBLE OR EVEN ROYAL ANCESTRY. THE FACT THAT SOMEONE CLAIMS A TITLE BORNE BY THE FAMILY IN THE LAST SEVERAL CENTURIES MIGHT NOT HAVE A BEARING ON THE VALIDITY OF A TITLE FROM MANY CENTURIES BEFORE THAT. 
 
7. The El Chemor titles are royal like the Arab counterparts in the gulf, for example, since weren’t bestowed by any higher authority and they came from the acknowledgment of the Royal decent from King Chemor Jablah. Other undeniable evidence is the fact that it’s documented that the family ruled, at least, from 1211 CE meaning, 306 years before the Ottoman invasion! THE UAE IS MADE UP OF SEVEN EMIRATES WHICH ARE RULED BY A SUPREME COUNCIL. WHILE THE RULER OF AN EMIRATE IS ROYAL, THEY ALSO EXERCISE THEIR FUNCTIONS IN AN INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED LEGAL FRAMEWORK. I HAVE SEEN NOTHING ON THE WEBSITE TO SUGGEST THAT ANY OF THE EMIRATES HAS RECOGNIZED THE EL CHEMOR TITLES AS ROYAL. THE FAMILY DOES NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL BASIS FOR EXERCISING ANY ROYAL PREROGATIVES IN LEBANON EITHER. 
 
8. The El Chemor Sheikhdom survived to 3 different invasions: the establishment of the County of Tripoli, vassals of the kingdom of Jerusalem (until 1289 CE), the Mameluk Sultanate (1289 CE until 1517 CE) and the Ottoman Empire from 1517 CE until the deposition in 1747 CE. IF IT SURVIVED IT WOULD HAVE SURVIVED ALL THOSE EVENTS. 
 
9. The El Chemor titles were NOT bestowed by any of those invading powers being therefore sovereign and ROYAL. The Royal Ghassanid titles are part of the family patrimony as children of King Chemor Jablah. Also important to mention, the family NEVER stopped using the titles until the present day. IS THERE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOR CONTINUAL USE?

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.