Home Lifestyle Wales Could Have A King Meet Llywelyn Rex Britannorum

Wales Could Have A King Meet Llywelyn Rex Britannorum

-

Historian John Davies stated that Gruffydd was “the only Welsh King ever to rule over the entire territory of Wales… Thus, from about 1057 until his death in 1063, the whole of Wales recognised the kingship of Gruffudd ap Llywelyn

Now, after all these years a man has come forward who has said he has the right to be the King of Wales. Meet the 33 years old California man who has said he has inextricable evidence that he is indeed the descendant of the king of Wales.

The young man has changed his name to Llywelyn Rex Britannorum (Latin: King of Britons), but likes to be known as Llywelyn. He explained, England and Great Britain have never had a King of Britons, and now he wants to claim his crown.

The Welsh Government have not tried to stop the 33 year old claim that he should be King of Wales, and the Government in England has also not tried to stop him, which begs the question, does he have a legal claim?

If he does succeed in claiming the title to be King of Wales, how will that affect history, and how will it affect the succession to the United Kingdom throne?

We wanted to find out more about the man who believes he should be King, and why he wants to be King of Wales.

wales royal familyYou issued a formal statement about Wales, can you please explain more about your proclamation?
Wales, the word itself requires some explanation. It is not our own native word for ourselves. Our word is “Cymru”. Welsh is an Anglo-Saxon (English) word meaning “foreigner” or “stranger”, despite the people who are today called the Welsh being the direct descendants of the native Britons, and also despite legal experts and academics stating that only the Welsh and the Cornish are truly Britons[i]. Propaganda by design is easy for all parties to understand. Unfortunately, the truth does not enjoy such luxury and must often be defended and validated.

The document that we have sent to the United Kingdom, and posted publicly, is called an Actio Rescissoria. Essentially, we are telling the UK that we do not recognise their claim to the native British sovereignty as a result of numerous frauds. It was recently proven that the “Anglo-Saxon Conquest of Britain” never occurred. For centuries, England and later “Great Britain” and the “UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland” claimed that the Anglo-Saxons had conquered the native Britons resulting in “Britain being changed to England”[ii]. Our Bards say, “Y Gwir Yn Erbyn Y Byd” or “the truth against the world”. For centuries we have been mislabelled as liars and thieves and our history has wrongly been called false or pseudo-history. Now it appears that our native version of the history of Britain is the only version supported in archaeology and forensic evidence by the academics. Modern academics have the tools to see through the academic bias of the past. The fraud is exposed now.

A legitimate conquest is separate from fraud and regicide. Our people have consistently displayed protest against England, Great Britain, and the UK.

You were born Lawrence Jones Jr. Why did you change your name?
Yes, I was born Lawrence Jones. I have never tried to hide that, because I feel that it is nothing to be ashamed of. My name was changed to add a title of pretension to it in order to demonstrate my legal status[iii]. Royal titles are part of a person’s legal name, as a title is a name one is known by[iv]. It was also to inform the United States that my legal status had changed, and I was now a subject of the public international law rather than a private person. I have since had to register with the DOJ under the FARA requirements, despite being born in the States, and native-American on my Mother’s side.

I chose “Llywelyn” as my regnal name in honour of Llywelyn ap Gruffydd, a native monarch of the Britons that was killed in the unhonourable act of regicide under the guise of a diplomatic gathering. There is a monument stone dedicated to him in Cilmeri, Cymru. I took my name and the spelling of it from there. Lawrence Jones was brave enough to become Llywelyn, despite knowing well that I would undoubtedly face ridicule and speculation by people unaware of the true story of Britain; simply because they became fixated on a royal title, rather than the true claim to sovereignty.

As Lawrence Jones, I was working my dream job, making a handsome salary, and I was willing to throw it all away for the chance to show people the truth, and realise the dream of Brythonic and Celtic peoples. Rhyddid (freedom).

You believe you are the King of the Britons, why do you believe that?
I know for fact that I am the de jure King of the Britons (Latin: Rex Britannorum), for several reasons. First, the United Kingdom is unable to prove that I am not. That should tell you something. Look at our correspondences with UK on our website[v]. It’s clear they don’t deny that under the native British laws (Cyfraith Hywel) and the international law, I am the legitimate sovereign in exile. King of the Britons (Rex Britannorum) is a title that has never been enjoyed by the monarchs of England, or Scotland. As a result, the UK has no jurisdiction over the title King of Britons, nor do they have the de jure British sovereignty.

The UK Government Legal Department examined my claim and directed me to the UK Cabinet Office, citing the issue as “a devolution matter”.

For years they have known about me and for years I have been rallying supporters internationally. If I was wrong the UK would have surely brought an injunction against me by now. The UK has been unable to bring any legal action against me, as they do not have the same legal standing that we do. There is no other party in the world that can produce a valid, true, and lawful title to the native British sovereignty; because the English and the Scottish are not British, either genetically, or in accordance with the native British laws (Cyfraith Hywel). They will tell you that the parliaments of England and Scotland changed the laws and made themselves Britons in 1707, but this was ultra vires (beyond the powers) of anyone except for a de jure Brythonic head of state[vi]. If a proper King of Britons has never granted ascent to the mass naturalisation of the English and Scottish people, then it remains invalid.

There is a video of me on YouTube traveling into Cymru on my own passport[vii]. Under customary international law, de jure sovereigns in exile have the power to perform all normal acts of state; to include issuing passports and agreeing to treaties[viii]. The UK was unable to charge me with any crimes because they know that I can prove who I am. Again, the UK has no jurisdiction over the title “King of Britons”, as none of the monarchs of the UK or England were ever known as Rex Britannorum.

Many people are fascinated with royal titles. But royal titles only exist if there is a valid claim to sovereignty. Without sovereignty there is no royalty, and no royal titles. Thus, it is far more important and valuable for a state to have de jure sovereignty, rather than the appearance of sovereignty (de facto).

Since I came forward years ago, descendants of the native Britons have rallied with me and recognise me as the true King of Britons. Some have stated that they were forced against their will into assimilation with the UK, in violation of their human rights and the international laws of occupation.

the man who wants to be king of walesBut you are from California? So how is it that you can claim to be the King of Britons?
Ydw, dwi’n dod o Galiffornia. There are over 1.5 million Welsh-Americans in the United States, second to only Cymru itself. Under our native laws and customs we are free to travel, and we retained our citizenship in the tribal nation for several generations. Under the native succession laws, if there was no heir apparent to lead the nation, any male descendant of the native Britons could claim to be the legitimate heir, and claim the office of leadership[ix]. Even if our native laws weren’t codified this way, the public international law provides that a State may take the necessary steps to preserve itself in times of emergency, to include changing the succession[x]. My claim precludes all others on the principles of: private international law, public international law, laches, non-belligerent occupation, State succession, international prescriptive law, proprietary estoppel, equitable estoppel, non-violent and peaceful conquest, international prescriptive laws. The UK knows that these legal principles are all conclusive and final. There have been plenty of monarchs in the world that were not born in their respective territories. It does not harm the validity of the succession, because the laws allow it.

But how can you use these old laws to claim a title now that it has been so long?
Laws sometimes sleep, but they never die[xi]. If the sovereignty has been preserved then the State still exists. A State has two parts; a head and a heart embodied in the people. The diaspora of the native Britons preserved the native sovereignty in their hearts[xii]. A male Briton needed to claim the headship of the State to exercise the powers available to us.

I think you are also trying to describe what is called “prescription” where a party loses their rights after a number of years, generally accepted as 100 years. Whilst I do not deny that prescription exists in the international law, what I have put forward is that there are several defences to a claim of prescription on the part of the UK[xiii].

It is obvious that there was no valid conquest of Britain, and the Britons have held true to the belief that we would be returned to our proper place in the world. That belief is well documented by the Poets and Bards; namely in the “Armes Prydein” (the Prophesy of Britain), and Y Mab Darogan (the Son of the Prophesy).

The fact that we still fly our own colours, namely Y Draig Goch (the red Dragon) and Y Draig Aur (the golden dragon), separate from the flag of England, or the UK flag, and we still display our own native coats of arms demonstrates that we are still a nation[xiv]. The fact that the UK cannot produce a valid, true, and sovereign title proves we are still a nation. The fact that we celebrate holidays that are not recognised by the UK shows that we are still a nation. Os ydym yn dal i siarad yn Gymraeg, yna rydym yma o hyd! (If we still speak in Welsh, then we are still here!

What response have you received by claiming the throne of the Britons?
It has been mixed, but mostly positive; though I have received some rape/death threats on social media. They are eclipsed by the supportive messages of people thanking me for being brave enough to make this stand for our people.

Do you really expect the people to accept you as their King?
As I stated, many already have. I’ve had people in the pubs of Cymru tell me that they have been waiting for this their whole lives. My work has given people hope, whereas the propaganda would have you believe that all hope is lost. Currently we have more citizens than signers of the American declaration of independence, and more citizens than signatories to the Declaration of Arbroath.

Have you approached the Welsh government about your entitlement?
The Welsh Government is a sub-branch of the unlawful de facto UK government. All of the politicians are forced to take an oath of allegiance to the UK monarch, rather than the people that they are duty bound to defend.

Still, two years ago I reached out to Carwyn Jones. At the time he was the First Minister of Wales. I presented him with the same information that I had sent to the UK. I let him know that we had a valid legal right to sovereignty and independence. We received a response from Melodie Streeter, of the Constitutional Affairs and Inter Governmental Relations Office. In her letter she stated, ‘the First Minister is a keen supporter of the union and has consistently stated that the four nations of the UK are stronger together than apart’. That should tell you something as well. They don’t deny who I am. They want me to bend to England, and I’m not willing to do it. If I do, we will forever forfeit our claim to sovereignty in Britain[xv].

How about Boris Johnson, have you asked for a meeting with him to talk about your right?
I don’t believe that Boris Johnson respects my people. I think that he sees us like he sees his dog “Dilyn” (Welsh: “follow“), as followers. Yet we are not the descendants of followers. Our ancestors repelled the Romans, and our nation was once the envy of the world before invaders flooded our shores being driven from their own lands, and stole our identity. Fire and song flow in our blood. We do not ask permission from the ones that steal from us and would see us become extinct.

35% of people live in poverty in Wales, if you were recognised as royalty, what steps would you take to try and solve this?
Shocking isn’t it? Over 1/3 of our people are living in poverty. It isn’t by accident I imagine. We are being washed over intentionally. It is a long-running slow-burning genocide, with the end goal being the debellatio of the native Britons. They wish to either discredit our history, or to claim it for themselves. They could never truly conquer us, so they have had to resort to deception and fraud.

The remedy is obvious, if you aren’t standing too close to the problem to see it. When we are independent we will finally be paid the billions we are owed for the water and power we send back to England. When we are independent we will seek out the reparations we are entitled to under the international laws of occupation. When we are independent we will be free to control our own affairs, and not have to seek the permission of any other nation.
I have gone over the numbers with supporters, and it is clear that as an independent nation we would be a prosperous one.

You are fighting for your right to the throne, while Prince Harry has given up his right to be a royal, what is your opinion on that?
I am fighting for the restoration of my people. The most ancient and noble first inhabitants of Britain. The same people that built Stonehenge long before the incorporation of England. Is that what happened to Harry? I had thought that matters had played out somewhat differently than that. The highroad is unfortunately a lonely one.

As someone who led a normal life and now is working as royal, what advice would you give to Prince Harry who now wants to move away from royal life and lead a normal life?
I was an experimental test and evaluation flight engineer on the V-22 Osprey in the U.S. Marines. I was raised as a Master Mason and York Rite Mason. My life has been anything but normal. Harry seems to be making all the right moves. He doesn’t need my advice.

Meghan Markle is from Canoga Park, Los Angeles, California, United States, and you are from California, she has been accused of destroying the British royal family, as a fellow Californian, do you think you have really chosen the right time to claim your royal rights?
“The British Royal family”? I believe that I have demonstrated with the international law that there is no royalty without sovereignty. The native Britons will always have the best claim to sovereignty in Britain.[xvi] The UK is not a successor to our sovereignty, or our royal titles. They are only an administering authority based on a war measure[xvii].

My DNA is traced back to the ancient Britons. Their DNA is mostly German. How can they have a “British royal family” if they do not have British blood, and never truly succeeded to British titles in the first place? They may be a royal family, with royal German (Saxon) blood, but they are not the native British Royal Family. Their last name, before it was changed to Windsor, was Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Under the native Brythonic laws, anyone who was not British on a direct male line was exempt from becoming a British monarch.
But to answer your question; Yes, now is always the time to end genocide and jus cogens (violations of international law no nation may ignore). Now is always the time to stand up for the unjustly oppressed. Mae’r amser nawr.

The Welsh and English people have already seen what happens when an American becomes a royal, so why do you think Welsh and English people would open their arms to you?
You would have to ask my supporters for themselves why they have accepted me, and why they encourage me to keep pressing on for them. Some of my best supporters at first hated the idea of me, and then they either read my research or spoke to me about it; and now they are my greatest advocates. When people have been fed lies and propaganda their whole lives they often attack the person that first challenges their beliefs.

Several Americans over the years have held royal and noble titles. The right to such is enshrined in the American Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8). I believe that Grace Kelly Princess consort of Monaco and Lida Princess of Thurn and Taxis would tell you that Americans are just as capable as anyone else. To hint that someone is lacking the quality of others, exclusively based on the location of their birth is on par with the doctrines of the Third Reich.

If you manage to gain your right to be a royal, are you demanding the right to be paid as a royal and property?
I’ve already established my right, as I am the de jure sovereign. However, I am a servant leader. I’ve never demanded anything from my people. I have only made sacrifices in my own life, for the chance to benefit them. Money seems to be a topic that comes up often. When people think of royals they often think of posh lifestyles and extravagant palaces. In reality, the experience for royals is often oppression and isolation.
I have consistently stated that I will convey full reparations directly to the proper government of my people. It’s blood money, and I don’t want it on my hands.

You are 36 years of age, so what age did you know that you had royal history?
It was a story in my family, likely not uncommon amongst the descendant of the native Britons. Statistically, everyone alive today is a descendant of one royal family or another[xviii]. But that does not simply mean that every person alive is royal, as a royal title is a title of the state, showing placement in the succession to the sovereignty.

Do you think you will eventually be recognised by the government in Wales and the UK as a royal?
I have already extracted declaratory recognition from the UK and from the Welsh Assembly. However, our sovereignty is not dependent on UK recognition. Their claim to sovereignty is based on fraud and usurpation. Ours is based on the true laws and customs of Britain.

If the government refuse to work with you, what legal steps do you plan to take?
Disputes on succession to sovereignty are matters of the public international law. If the UK wishes to continue their fraud then we will submit to the jurisdiction of the ICJ, and bring action against them for their violations of the international law.

If you do become King, or you are accepted, what steps will you take to help people living and working in Wales?
Every true servant leader knows that the best course of action is to empower the subject matter experts in their organisation. We are primed to be successful with the local leadership that is already in place. The problem is that Westminster ties the hands of everyone outside of England. My vision is for independent an sovereign Brythonic and Celtic nations to prosper. Under international law, all sovereign nations are equals, regardless of size. I would see that vision become our reality.

Would you like to see Wales separated from the UK and have control over their future instead of being under control from Boris Johnson?
I seriously question the intentions of anyone that doesn’t. My vision is the same that our people have held onto since the poems of Taliesin. An independent and sovereign Cymru, Kernow, Alba, and a united Éire.

[i] ‘The title ‘Briton’ is to-day borne by many peoples in many lands, few of whom, probably realise that, strictly speaking, it is the Welshman alone who is entitled to that name’.

“Wales; Her Origins, Struggles and Later History, Institutions and Manners” (1915), Gilbert Stone, London) Gilbert Stone was a barrister and later a judge. He was also a Liberal Party politician.

[ii] Britain was changed to England“ page XV, chapters 91-100
“Chronicles of England” printed by Gerard Leew of Antwerp (1493), edited by Friedrich W. D. Brie, PH.D.

[iii] Professor Dr. W. Baroni Santos, Doctor D’état (post-doctorate/ habilitation) “Treaty of Heraldry and Nobility Law” Volume II page 52: “Neither the elapsed time, even for centuries, or non-use of the acts of Sovereignty exercised by the Prince Pretender, Head of Name and Arms of his house, may be derogated, prescribed or canceled. He/she retains rights until the end of times ‘ad perpetuam rei tenendam’ which are inserted in the person of Prince Pretender”.

[iv] TITLE. “The radical meaning of this word appears to be that of a mark, style, or designation; a distinctive appellation; the name by which anything is known. Thus, in the law of persons, a title is an appellation of dignity or distinction, a name denoting the social rank of the person bearing it; as “duke” or “count.”
Black’s Law Dictionary 3rd Edition-

[v] https://kingdomofwales.wales/correspondence/

[vi] Deus solus haeredem facere potest non homo Definition:

Latin: God alone, not man, can make an heir.

[vii] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad-aOKnfXI0&t=18s

[viii] “There is still deeper significance to this anomalous condition of sovereignty in exile. There is no automatic extinction of nations. Military occupation may seem final and permanent, and yet prove to be only an interregnum, though a prolonged nightmare for the inhabitants. A nation is much more than an outward form of territory and government. It consists of the men and women in whom sovereignty resides. So long as they cherish sovereignty in their hearts their nation is not dead. It may be prostrate and helpless and yet revive. It is not to be denied the symbols or forms of sovereignty on foreign soil or diplomatic relations with other nations”.
Phillip Marshall Brown, “Sovereignty in Exile”, published in the “American Journal of International Law”

[ix] Thomas Peter Ellis, Welsh Tribal Laws and Customs in the Middle Ages, Vol I, Part I, III, Kingship in the Welsh Law, Section 6 Succession to the Kingship, §4:
               The primary rule, in theory, in determining who within the royal ‘Cenedl’ (Nation) was to succeed, was fitness for the position. The Edling (Heir), we are told, must be free from the three blemishes, that is he must be perfect as to his limbs, and must not be deaf or dumb or insane. If the eldest son did not fulfil those conditions, the next son was to be Edling. If there were no competent son, the King’s brother was to be Edling; if there were no such competent person, any man coequal in dignity, that is one of the royal ‘ Cenedl ‘, could be Edling.’There is, however, no definite proof that the theoretical rule was ever enforced in practice.

[x] Emer de Vattel, The Law of Nations, Or, Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns, with Three Early Essays on the Origin and Nature of Natural Law and on Luxury, edited and with an Introduction by Béla Kapossy and Richard Whitmore (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2008). 7/25/2019.
§61. A nation may change the order of the succession.
“It thus remains an undeniable truth, that in all cases the succession is established or received only with a view to the public welfare and the general safety. If it happened then that the order established in this respect became destructive to the state, the nation would certainly have a right to change it by a new law. [25] Salus populi suprema lex,—the safety of the people is the supreme law; and this law is agreeable to the strictest justice,—the people having united in society only with a view to their safety and greater advantage.”

[xi] “Dormiunt leges aliquando, nunquam moriuntur” (The laws sometimes sleep, but they never die)
“Guide to Latin in International Law” Aaron X. Fellmeth and Maurice Horwitz, Oxford University Press, (2011)

[xii] “For the sovereignty which resides in the king as the head, resides in the people likewise as the body of which he is the head; and therefore in an elective government, if the king or the royal family should become extinct, the rights of sovereignty, as it has been already shewn, would revert to the people.”
Hugo Grotius, The Rights of War and Peace, including the Law of Nature and of Nations, translated from the Original Latin of Grotius, with Notes and Illustrations from Political and Legal Writers, by A.C. Campbell, A.M. with an Introduction by David J. Hill (New York: M. Walter Dunne, 1901). 2/24/2020.

[xiii]It is also very evident that we cannot plead prescription in opposition to a proprietor who, being for the present unable to prosecute his right, confines himself to a notification, by any token whatever, sufficient to shew that it is not his intention to abandon it. Protests answer this purpose. With sovereigns it is usual to retain the title and arms of a sovereignty or a province, as an evidence that they do not relinquish their claims to it.”

  • 145. Proprietor Sufficiently shewing that he does not mean to abandon his right.

“Law of Nations”, Emer de Vattel

[xiv]Upon the fall, dispossession, or usurpation of a monarchy, the de jure legal rights to the succession of that monarchy may be kept alive indefinitely through the legal vehicle of making diplomatic protests against the usurpation”.
Emer de Vattel, Le Droit des gens, Book II, Chapter II, Nos. 145-146

[xv]Such de jure possession of sovereignty continues so long as the de jure ruler or government does not surrender his sovereignty to the usurper
Johann Wolfgang Textor, Synopsis Juris Gentium, Chapter 10, Nos. 9-11

[xvi] Qui Prior Est Tempore, Potior Est Jure Definition:

Latin: He who is earlier in time, is stronger in law.

[xvii] “Belligerent occupation does not affect the sovereignty of the occupied state. The occupying Power is not successor to the lawful sovereign in the occupied territory but is a government based on force exercised as a war measure.”
(Oppenheim, “Governments and Authorities in Exile, ”The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 36, No. 4 (Oct., 1942), p. 571)

[xviii] JOSEPH T. CHANG, Yale University, “RECENT COMMON ANCESTORS OF ALL PRESENT-DAY

INDIVIDUALS”

Please visit here for more information, https://kingdomofwales.wales/2020/03/02/actio-rescissoria-prydain/

RECENT POSTS

EDITOR's PICK