Monarchy

Oh, dude, in a constitutional monarchy, the monarch's powers are limited by a constitution, so technically they don't have much say in how the country is run. It's more like they're there for show, like a fancy ornament on a cake. So yeah, people in a constitutional monarchy have some say, but the real power lies with the elected government.

In an absolute monarchy, only the monarch has power, so everyone other than the monarch has no power. The extent to which the subjects' views are taken into account is the degree to which the monarch cares about his people and the degree to which he fears that a revolt may occur.

In a constitutional monarchy, who is deprived of power depends entirely on the constitution in question. A constitution that gives minimal voice to the people, such as those of Morocco and Jordan, allows people to have a voice by electing about half of the parliamentary seats. This has minimal actual effect. A constitution that give maximal voice to the people, such as those of Britain and Spain, the people's voice is represented by the legislature that has almost complete (if not total control) of the government.

James I of England had been James VI of Scotland ever since his mother, Mary Queen of Scots' abdication in 1567. He became King of England as well on March 24, 1603, being the first King with this name to rule over England - and the first King to rule both England and Scotland.

To be honest, I was tryna look up the female equivalent of a Squire.

Before I joined Answer, I came up with two names of a female Squire: "Squirette" and "Squirina", but, come to think of it, I think "Squirette" sounds better than "Squirina".

What do y'all think?

he was a mean person who lived with mean people in a mean castle on a mean hill in a mean country in a mean continent in a mean world in a mean solar system in a mean galaxy in a mean universe in a mean dimension

Well, honey, King Richard tried to end the Siege of Acre by negotiating with Saladin, the Sultan of Egypt and Syria. He wanted to secure the release of Christian prisoners and regain control of the city. But let's be real, negotiations fell through, and Richard had to resort to good ol' military force to finally break the siege.

The "best buy" date is on the front of the bottle at the bottom. It is not very clear but if you look for it. Unopened it seems to have at least a year or more of utility. How long under refrigeration will it last is still an open question. I have a "best buy" date of December 2013. It is now May of 2104. The mix has been refrigerated and it still has a pretty good taste.

My counter question, do I risk any health hazzard besides just a bad tasting drink, if I use "old" mix. It seems if I put enough Vodka in the mix, the Vodka would kill all "bad things" I would appreciate an answer to whether or not I am risking my health by drinking "old stuff"

Her reign certainly included several incidents that appear to be personal acts of the misuse of power that ended in violent deaths. Yes, fully deserved! During Mary's five-year reign (1553-1558) 350 people were burnt at the stake for heresy - that is, for not being Roman Catholics. The whole campaign was evil. For example, just as a heavily pregnant woman was about to be burnt, she began to give birth. The execution was postponed till the baby was born; then the woman was taken back to the stake and fire was lit. 'Who will look after the baby?' asked someone. The sherriff picked up the newly born baby and threw it on to the fire. In answer to the first question, it can be argued both ways, she certainly persecuted a great number of Protestants, but also the large majority 800, she had exiled. also the Propaganda of the Protestants is the real reason she has achieved this name: for instance Foxes book of Martyrs is the second most published book after the Bible. The actual number of persecutions for the time was fairly low for instance in Spain 2000 people at least were burnt at the stake for Heresy.

Dr. Edward H. Seed, who recently passed away, originally hailed from the United States. He was a prominent figure in the field of medicine, known for his contributions to research and patient care. His work has left a lasting impact on the medical community.

George Washington and King George III were both leaders during the American Revolutionary War, with Washington leading the American forces and King George III leading the British forces. Both men held positions of power and authority within their respective governments. Additionally, both were seen as symbols of their nations during this tumultuous period in history.

About 1.1 million.

See the Related Link.

Oh, what a lovely question! A King Charles Spaniel is a delightful little friend who enjoys daily walks and playtime to stay happy and healthy. Aim for around 30 minutes to an hour of exercise each day to keep your furry companion content and in good shape. Remember, every pup is unique, so adjust the exercise based on your King Charles's energy level and preferences.

Absolute monarchs disliked Parliament because they viewed it as a challenge to their authority and power. They believed that their divine right to rule should not be questioned or constrained by a legislative body. Parliaments often sought to limit the monarch's powers, demand accountability, and represent the interests of the nobility and common people, which conflicted with the absolute rule that monarchs aimed to maintain. This tension often led to conflicts and power struggles between the monarchy and parliamentary institutions.

Oh, dude, that's an easy one! King Henry I defined the English measure of a yard as the distance from his nose to his thumb. I mean, who needs a ruler when you've got a king with a big schnoz, am I right? Like, way to set the standard, Henry!

The king's Privy Council was a group of advisors appointed by the monarch in England during the colonial period. In the House of Burgesses, which was the legislative assembly in colonial Virginia, the Privy Council played a significant role in overseeing the colony's governance. It had the authority to review and approve laws passed by the House of Burgesses, ensuring they aligned with the interests of the English Crown. The Privy Council also had the power to veto any legislation deemed contrary to royal policies.

A few things: "octarchy" is not a proper word, it blends a latin number with a greek word. Might I suggest "Octumvirate" instead?
Anyways, I doubt there would be any real advantage, in foreign policy or elsewhere.

Ah, creating a national monarchy is like painting a beautiful landscape. It requires careful planning, thoughtful consideration, and a vision for the future. Just like how we add layers of colors to create depth and harmony in a painting, establishing a national monarchy involves building a system that brings unity and stability to a country. Remember, every brushstroke counts, and with patience and creativity, you can create a masterpiece that will stand the test of time.

The Tudors came into power at the battle of Bosworth Field, (the biggest and most memorable of the battles in the Wars Of the Roses), where Richard III of the Yorkists and the current King, fell on his sword. Henry Tudor quite literally found the crown, hanging on a bush, and placed it upon his head, naming himself King. He then became Henry VII of England, and was the founder of the Tudor dynasty.

The first Tudor king began his rule in 1485.

A monarchy is a form of government where a single ruler, typically a king or queen, holds supreme authority and power. Countries that practice monarchy include the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Sweden, and Thailand. Monarchies can be absolute, where the monarch has complete control, or constitutional, where the monarch's powers are limited by a constitution or laws.

Pros: everything can be done in a uniform matter and things can get done quicker

Cons: having too much power and getting overly paranoid about it

Prince Charles

The next in line will be Prince William and Princess Catherine(Kate)

Type your answer here... monarchy