They are held in high regards. They still (for the most part) still use British currency (with the Queen on the money) and even use the same system of Justice (as WE IN AMERICA DO!). Of course over the centuries ours has progressed at a much more rapid pace.
Britain got its system of Justice from Rome and we got ours from Britain!
2007-02-16 14:02:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by AdamKadmon 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
British money is used in Britain and few Commonwealth countries, most have their own currency. The Queen is Head of the Commonwealth and Head of State in those countries that have not yet become a republic like Australia and Canada. Although she is Head of State, she has no power, it is purely ceremonial. As for the rest of the royal parasites, if they visit a Commonwealth country as a representative of the Queen, they are accorded all courtesies due to the position. The Queen's immediate family, the royals, are provided with security and are usually asked to open something. The rest of the dukes, earls, lords and ladies are no different from any other tourist.
2007-02-16 17:45:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by tentofield 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The questioner asked about noblity and most people hav answered about royalty. lf by nobles you mean peers, they have no special status in any Commonwealth countries. There is a single-member Canadian aristocracy (an old French title, Baron de Longeuil, which was recognisd by Queen Victoria) but holders of peerages have no special privileges in any country othr than Britain, where they can continue to choose representatives to sit in the House of Lords. Canada stopped recommending its citizens for titles in 1919 and all the others have followed suit.
If you DO mean royalty, then again the have no special role in most countries aside from the Queen who is Head of the Commonwealth and head of state of only about 12 of the 60-some member countries. She attends the CHOGM meetings and can sometimes be a useful behind the scenes negotiator but has no role in their domestic affairs.
2007-02-17 03:53:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by Dunrobin 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
About the same as Sir Anthony Hopkins, Sir Bob Geldof, Sir Sean Connery, except if they all came at once to visit with the Queen, then the aforementioned would be more highly praised. Queen doesn't do a thing for Australia except look up at us from the back of a coin.
The way Australia is sucking up to the States you'd think Bush was King! Royalty is novelty, much like Celebracy!
Different people choose different idols- way of the world.
2007-02-17 00:09:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by canguroargentino 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. Your answer is actually part of your question - if George VI was the first Head, and Elizabeth II, his daughter, was the second Head of the Commonwealth, then yes, it does pass to the next monarch. In short, yes, barring an Act of Parliament to the contrary.
2016-05-24 07:45:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
They are about 5 steps below entertainment celebrities and athletes. I'd say right above Mayors of large cities, but below right local Industrialist millionaires (not billionaires)
2007-02-18 16:14:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by Dethruhate 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Each country is differant, but I have been to a fair few, and they're not really a big factor.
2007-02-16 23:49:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
That depend of the countries. Each country is free to recognize it or not.
2007-02-16 11:07:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by Norm V 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
They are considered no better than retards.
2007-02-16 09:44:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
whatever...............
2007-02-16 10:51:03
·
answer #10
·
answered by 09'Ready 3
·
0⤊
0⤋