England, Netherlands, Belgium, Spain are a few.
Depends, most monarchys today are democratic monarchys in which the ruler is just for show and has little power. But dictatorships have one supreme leader
Middle East and Arab states which are Absolute Monarchys .
monarchys are bad because only one ruler it´s like a dictatorship
i honestly have no idea. sorry i couldnt help. im looking for the same thing (: haha
There wasn't any prime minsister, only in constitutional monarchys can a prime minister exist, the first American president was George Washington.
because no one ever formed a democratic government the beleived in monarchys and some had dictatorships so they had no need to vote because they didnt need to vote for anything
monarchys and thair economic control is of course that people basicle have free market and free enter prize and that is the anser to the queistion , THANKS EVERY ONE HOPE I CAN BE A BIG HEP TO YOU IN YOUR SHOOL
The invasions of the western part of the Roman Empire led to its weakening and sparked the process which led to its fall in during this century. The eastern part of the Roman Empire was not affected by these invasions and continued to eixst for 1,000 years
The natural number whose predecessor does not exist is 1. In the set of natural numbers, 1 is the smallest number, and it has no natural number that comes before it. All other natural numbers, such as 2, 3, and so on, have a predecessor.
Yes i believe she is as i am related to Tsar Nicholas of Russia and his family linked by marriage through King George V of United Kingdom.....through to Queen Victoria ...I am therefore related to both Monarchys....
They were fed up with the monarchys social conservatism, at the time, the churches religious intolerance and the population growth that caused poverty. America sounded like paradise in comparison, especially with all the dig-gold-get-rich-fast rumors.
Stalin argued that governments loyal to the Soviet Union were essential for maintaining security and stability in Eastern Europe, as they would serve as a buffer against potential Western aggression. He believed that these governments would help spread socialism and protect the gains of the revolution. Additionally, Stalin contended that the presence of friendly regimes would ensure the economic and political influence of the USSR in the region, fostering a collective defense against capitalist encroachment.