When and how did the British monarchy start losing its power? How did the British monarch become the powerless figure head of the present day?
If memory serves from my schooldays in the UK during the 1970s, the monarchy's loss of power can be simplified (oversimplified?) into 5 events:Magna Carta 1215The monarchy basically started losing material power with King John of England signing the Magna Carta [1215], which led to the rule of constitutional law in England. Translation: the beginning of the end of absolutism in royal rule in England. This was just 149 years after the Norman Conquest under William I.English Civil War 1642-51Commonwealth of England/The Protectorate 1651-60The monarchy continued to lose power by turns in the years since Magna Carta, culminating in the English Civil War. The Commonwealth of England (later, the Protectorate for the whole of England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland) replaced the monarchy under Charles I of England, Scotland and Ireland. (We can safely generalise Charles I was a British monarch, even though history books conventionally identify him as "of England.")The Restoration 1660With the end of the Commonwealth/Protectorate in 1658-60, the monarchy was restored under King Charles II of England, Scotland and Ireland. However, Parliament limited Charles II's royal prerogative powers on constitutional grounds that he had no right to arbitrarily suspend laws enacted by Parliament. Translation: further loss of royal power.The Glorious Revolution 1688King James II of England and Ireland (and as James VII of Scotland) was overthrown by Parliamentary forces in a joint operation with Dutch forces under William of Orange, who then became "King Billy": William III of England, Scotland and Ireland (in addition to being Stadtholder of various areas in the Dutch Republic). But during William III's reign (jointly with Mary II), there was resistance to his/their validity to the throne (which is too involved to explain here).United Kingdom 1707-1800 / 1801-1927 / 1921-todayThe most prominent political feature of the UK that diluted the power of the monarchy was the Reform Act 1832 refashioned the British electoral system and extended the franchise. Translation: more power to the people and parliament.There are other important events in between those above, of course, but those are the ones most UK-educated people tend to remember at any given moment.
Is the Earl of Harewood considered a member of the British Royal Family?
The term "royal family" does not have a legal definition. He is not "royal" which has a specific legal definition. He is not royal because he descends from a female line. However most people would say he is a member of the "royal family" since he has so much royal blood, and he is a famous Earl and master of one of he grander houses in Britain. The Lascelles family have almost all been involved heavily in music, theater and the arts. They have numerous children outside of marriages that are acknowledged by the fathers. While the affair and baby were scandalous in the 1960's, it is hardly that way anymore. He married the mother of the child, and has lived a quiet domestic life. His ex-wife is also remarried. All of the illegitimate children and their children are not in the line of succession. You can get married while the woman is pregnant, but once the child is born subsequent marriage makes no difference. In Monaco if you marry the children are re-entered into the line of succession. Princess Stephanie of Monaco married the father of her two children, and then divorced him after little more than a year when he was photographed with semi-naked women. Her children are back in the line of succession (but pretty low). Britain does not permit "legitimation by marriage" as far as the line of succession is concerned.
Does the British monarchy have less power today than it had 1776?
Presumably you are talking about political power? In that case today it is quite a bit less, just as the aristocracy in general has less. When Queen Victoria came to the throne she had far more say than she had at the turn of the century. Blame the death of Albert. This upset the Queen so much that she became a virtual recluse, not just from the public but from her government. She took so little part in government that many thought there would be a revolution and the monarchy abolished. During this time the House Of Commons took more and more power without any objections so that by Edward VII's coronation the constitutional monarchy was recognisably similar to what we have now. It was not just the monarchy that had its power eroded but the House of Lords. A Quick check of Prime Ministers on Wikipedia will show how the majority of PMs in the 19th century came from the Upper House whereas now it would almost be impossible to have a PM from anything other than the Commons.As others have said though this lack of political power does not lessen the amount of influence the Royals can bring to bear on the government and establishment.
Write a paragraph about george washington which you consider a hero?
My hero is George Washington. Unfortunately, Washington's name has become so familiar that we forget what a great person he was. He commanded a ragtag army of volunteers against what was then the mightiest force in the world: the British empire. He did so not from the comfort of a Manhattan townhouse, but from shared quarters in the frozen fields of Valley Forge. After leading his men to victory against all odds, Washington retired to Mt. Vernon rather than following the 18th-century custom of crowning himself "emperor." Several years later, his peers elected him Chairman of the Constitutional Convention, the most illustrious gathering in America's 200 year history. Washington presided over three months of torpid heat and even hotter debate to secure a document that elevated the rule of law over selfish ambition and laid the foundations for the world's most enduring democracy. And, finally, he was chosen as the first elected leader of that nation, a post from which he voluntarily stepped down to once again become a private citizen. A man of true intellectual and moral leadership, our first president deserves a place in your hall of heroes. (i hope this is good...maybe you'll find better!!)