When did the English monarchy lose their political power?
It happened during the reign of George I, when Walpole became the first Prime Minister. King George needed a Prime Minister because he could not speak English! All is explained on this URL:
Does the British Royal Family still have power to rule, or is it all a show?
It’ll take a long time to lay out all the residual royal prerogatives that allow The Queen for direct rule — but they do exist. The residual powers are also difficult to explain in a few paragraphs — or else it gives a completely wrong impression.So I’ll just summarise things in this way as an English lawyer:—Yes, The Queen (rather than the Royal Family) has remaining powers to engage in direct rule of the UK.I don’t want to rock the boat or make waves, but The Queen’s remaining powers aren’t removed but legally (and legalistically) put in dormant mode by the government (in the guise of “The Crown”) through various historic events and legislation like the Magna Carta [1215–97], the English Civil War (1642–51), the Glorious Revolution (1668), the Acts of Union of 1707 and 1801, you name it.For the last 300 years or so, the monarch in his/her wisdom chose not to exercise direct rule — mainly because Parliament has been doing a good enough job of running the show AND keeping the monarchy running effortlessly and cost-effectively for three centuries without a major rebellion from the populace.Name me one country that has done that, and I’ll lick your boots.So in the final analysis, it’s perfectly sound to say the Royal Family is “all show and no blow” — just as well as saying “it’s all show but can blow” if it wants to. It depends how we want to view the matter. Either way is true.For my money, I’d say the Royal Family has been exercising tremendously good judgment for the last 300 years to put itself above vulgar politics and everyday government.
What kind of power do the British royals have, and where do they get their wealth?
I'm a clueless American who is baffled by the fact that there are modern societies that still have some sort or rulers based on blood line. I'm assuming political power belongs entirely to the Prime Minister and his crew (when and how did that invade the monarchy?) and that taxes are collected for that government. What's the point of the royals today (other than tabloid news) and where do they get their wealth?
Is there any chance the current British royal family could be overthrown?
Very unlikely. "The system works", the vast majority of us Brits love our Queen and the monarchy, and you have a point in that the fact that the political power of the British monarchy has dwindled over time to almost zero makes it a totally irrelevant issue except for the minority who just don't like the idea of monarchy. We got close to the overthrow of the monarchy in the 17th century thanks to kings who couldn't resist interfering with Parliament (look up the English Civil War, the execution of Charles I, and the Glorious Revolution of 1688 to find out more about that). But somehow we never quite did. There would be two ways of doing it... a violent revolution would be one, and that would make almost anything else irrelevant, including the fact that it is illegal under the Treason Act 1351 (and punishable by death until the UK finally abolished the death penalty in 1998). But there is not the strength of feeling for anyone to muster up the forces to want to. (Random quite interesting fact - the Treason Act 1351 is the second oldest statute law in force in the UK today after the Statute of Marlborough 1267 and needs translation as it is written in Norman French, the language in which England was governed at the time. Why French? Because of the Norman Conquest in 1066 which led to England being governed by a French king and French nobles, and hence Norman French being the "court language" for the next three centuries or so. It had a huge effect on the evolution of the English language and explains the major differences between English and the German it originally was... the vast majority of English words are either French or German in origin... but I digress.) The other way would be for Parliament to pass an Act declaring the UK to be a republic and setting out a new constitution. As with any other Act this would require the Queen's Royal Assent, but she wouldn't refuse it even though it puts her out of a job. She has always agreed when other Commonwealth countries have wanted to become republics on independence (most of them have), and it is known she wouldn't refuse again if that's what the people want. Of her remaining 16 realms, Australia is the most likely to want to become a republic - they've had a referendum on it and there is a strong republican movement there - and I know the Queen would be perfectly happy to let them go if they want to.
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.
Does the British Crown have any power? If so, what?
Although its power has been whittled down to practically nothing and its prerogatives are largely ceremonial, Britain's thousand year old monarchy nevertheless fulfills an important function in British politics:It provides a living symbol of the continuity of the country's history, people, and institutions. In recent decades the British royal family has suffered a number of widely publicized indignities and tragedies such as marital troubles of the queen's sons, Charles and Andrew, the death of Diana, Princess of Wales in a tragic auto accident in Paris shortly after her divorce from Prince Charles. Queen Elizabeth herself has been subjected to criticism for her aloofness from the general public.Nevertheless both the Queen herself and the monarchy as an institution continue to enjoy wide popularity in Britain. Approximately 70 percent of Britons favored retaining monarchy. However, mounting criticism of the royal family's lavish lifestyle has led to reductions in the amount of public revenue devoted to its upkeep, and in 1992 the queen agreed to pay income taxes.The distinction between the monarch's formal legal powers and her actual decision making powers remains fuzzy in a number of areas.Constitutionally, the monarch is part of Parliament. She retains the formal legal authority to designate the prime minister, dissolve parliament, and call parliamentary elections. No act of parliament may take effect as law until the monarch signs the document of Royal Assent. The monarch is the nominal commander-in-chief of the armed forces and the head of the British Commonwealth.In actual practice, however, the monarch is not a voting member of the House of Commons and Lords. Her right to designate the prime minister is limited by the majority party's right to command its preferred designee. Her right to dissolve parliament and call elections are formalities that are superseded by the prime minister's prerogatives. She cannot refuse her Royal Assent without creating a grave constitutional crisis. Not since 1707 has a British monarch refused to assent to an act of Parliament. In actuality it is the government that directs the armed forces in war and peace and sets policy on the Commonwealth.