No description available.

"27 October 1998" / Thesis (PhD)--Macquarie University, School of Law, 1999. / Bibliography: p. 509-550. / Thesis -- Appendices. / 'The Crown' has been described as a 'term of art' in constitutional law. This is more than misleading, obscuring the pivotal legal position of the king, which in modern times has been conveniently ignored by lawyers and politicians alike. -- This work examines the legal processes by which a king is made, tracing those processes from the earliest times to the present day. It concludes that the king is made by the selection and recognition by the people, his taking of the Oath of Governance, and his subsequent anointing. (The religious aspects of the making of the king, though of considerable legal significance, are not examined herein, because of space constraints.) -- The Oath of Governance is conventionally called the 'Coronation Oath'-which terminology, while correctly categorising the Oath by reference to the occasion on which it is usually taken, has led by subliminal implication to an erroneous conclusion by many modern commentators that the Oath is merely ceremonial. -- This work highlights the legal implications of the king's Oath of Governance throughout history, particularly in times of political unrest, and concludes that the Oath legally :- conveys power from the people to the person about to become king (the willingness of the people so to confer the power having been evidenced in their collective recognition of that person); - bestows all the prerogatives of the office of king upon that person; - enshrines the manner in which those prerogatives are to be exercised by the king in his people(s)' governance; and that therefore the Oath of Governance is the foundation of the British Constitution. -- All power and prerogative lie with the king, who as a result of his Oath of Governance is sworn to maintain the peace and protection of his people(s), and the king can not, in conscience or law, either do, or allow, anything that is in opposition to the terms of that Oath. / Mode of access: World Wide Web. / xxvii, 818 p

Diss. / Includes bibliographical references and index.

La monarchia britannica – soprattutto quando viene considerata nella sua evo-luzione istituzionale contemporanea – rappresenta un oggetto di studio poco affermato sia in Italia sia, sorprendentemente, nei paesi di stampo anglosassone;il presente studio si pone l'obiettivo di analizzare la figura di Elizabeth II dal punto di vista dello svolgimento dell’attività di rappresentanza all’estero e nei paesi membri del Commonwealth durante il primo ventennio del suo lunghissimo regno. L’attività pubblica della Regina – i viaggi e le visite che compie e riceve ogni anno all’estero su suggerimento del Governo e con l’aiuto organizzativo del Foreign Office e nei paesi del Commonwealth su invito dei paesi stessi – rappresenta, infatti, una lente di ingrandimento particolarmente significativa e mai utilizzata prima per l’analisi della Monarchia. / This research project wants to give a meaningful account of the role of the Queen in the foreign policy from the beginning of Her Majesty's reign in 1952 to 1972 (date of the United Kingdom's entry in the European Community). The shape of the Monarchy has often been outlined describing Her Majesty's biographical events, but in this way a research following an institutional point of view has always been left out. Instead, this type of research could enable to understand with more clarity the real contribution of the Crown in the British constitutional system. The necessity to investigate the role of the Queen does not come only from the absence of adequate and comprehensive studies about it, but derives from the belief that Elizabeth II — despite her full respect of the constitutional practices — had effectively guided Her realms through those difficult years which have seen the dismantlement of the Empire, the birth of the New Commonwealth, the tortuous path towards the European integration and the terrible and dangerous tensions caused by the Cold War. The role of Her Majesty as Head of State and as Head of the Commonwealth, as well the tenacious practice of the three fundamental rights enunciated by Bagehot — the right to be consulted, the right to encourage, the right to warn —, make this research more than motivated. Moreover, the particular attention dedicated to the trips and the visits of the Queen shows that these moments have more than a symbolical value in the international relations. As the nature of this project is purely innovative, this research has been carried out using mainly archives sources.

This thesis is an examination of Charles I of England’s projection of kingship through Sir Anthony van Dyck portraits during his personal rule. These portraits provide important insight into Charles’ vision of kingship because they were commissioned by the king and displayed at court, revealing that his kingship rested on complementary ideals of traditional kingship in addition to divine right. In this thesis, Charles’ van Dyck portraits are studied in the context of seventeenth-century ideals of paterfamilias, knight, and gentleman. These ideals provide important cultural narratives which were seen to be reflective of legitimacy, power, and masculinity, which in turn gave legitimacy to Charles’ kingship. The system of values and ideals represented in Charles’ portraits reveal that his vision of kingship was complex and nuanced, demonstrating that divine right was just one aspect of many, upon which his kingship was premised. / viii, 164 leaves : [18] leaves of color plates ; 29 cm

No description available.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Centered around the accounts of two women—Mary Aubry, a French Catholic midwife living in London, who was burned at the stake for murdering her abusive husband, and Queen Mary of Modena, the Italian Catholic wife of James II, who allegedly tried to pass off an imposter child as her legitimate heir in the so-called “warming pan scandal,” this is a study of murder, deceit, betrayal, paranoia, and repression in seventeenth-century England. The stories of the two Marys are both stories of palpable anxiety. Though the two women bear little resemblance at first glance, they were rumored to have conspired to guarantee a male heir for James II by any means necessary. According to the London gossips, these women were willing to betray, and even kill their husbands in the case of Mary Aubry, to protect their secret plot to perpetuate a line of Catholic princes in England. Though there was little evidence to substantiate this rumor and it quickly disappeared in media accounts, these two women continued to inspire vitriolic attacks from the London press that reveal strikingly similar public concerns. Their stories struck chords of fear within audiences in late seventeenth century England that knew their entire world was threatened. Endangered by a king, James II—who appeared determined to reinstitute Catholicism in England, who showed a penchant for absolutist policies, and who seemed to have fallen into the orbit of the domineering Louis XIV—the public’s apprehension and fear was only heightened by these stories. Just as unnerving as the fears about absolutism, Catholicism and foreign domination was the specter of internal collusion that endangered not simply the political and religious spheres of English Protestant society, but also social and familial hierarchies as well. To much of late seventeenth century English society, the two Marys represented all that was wrong with the world. They were traitors to their families, traitors to the nation, and traitors to the divine. / indefinitely