Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions and the detailed answers.
If I may impose on you a bit more please..
1. You said "From 1701 Britain was on the way to constitutional monarchy". So the sovereign did not have absolute control but shared power with parliament ? How much power did they really have vs QEII today ? I would imagine much less right..
The English monarchs ceased weren't autocrats from 1215 when they were forced to sign Magna Carta as that put some limits on their powers although later monarchs were able to push back a bit at the limits. The first parliament was called in 1399 and from then on they had to have parliaments approval for many decisions. Any pretence at being an autocrat ended on the 30th January, 1649 when Parliament executed the King.
When Charles II was re-instated it was at the invitation of the parliament. Parliament took complete control of the money situation for instance although the monarch still had some powers. Further restrictions were obvious when Parliament forced James II off the throne and again when they decided, by legislation, who would succeed Queen Anne.
The monarch's powers were increasingly limited to those articulated by Bagshot in the 1800s - to consult, to warn and to be advised ... but the degree to which they each exercised those rights changed. The early George's were quite active in those roles and often actively supported one political party over the other and so when one King was on the throne it was harder for the 'opposition' to form the government and then the throne would move to the son and the government would often change sides again between the Whigs and Tories but it must also be remembered that these groupings weren't as tight as modern political parties with many politicians moving from one side to the other on individual issues.
The last monarch who political views were clearly knows was Queen Victoria who took action to stop Lord Melbourne from being replaced as PM by Robert Peel in the Bedchamber Affair. Once she married Albert she became far more the modern constitutional monarch we see today with her successors rarely interfering in party politics.
2. I am not exactly sure what being "peer of the realm" means. I went and googled it and landed in Wikipedia.
It was confusing and clear as mud. Can you please give a brief explanation please.
Peers of the realm are men or women who hold substantive or real titles. They used to be the people who automatically had seats in the House of Lords, before the reforms of 1999. They are the head of the aristocratic families. In the UK only the title holder is regarded as a 'peer of the realm'. Back in the middle ages these were the advisers to the Kings.
Currently in the British Royal family the following are peers: Philip, Charles, William, Andrew, Edward, Richard and the other Edward.
James will become a peer of the realm when his father dies and he inherits his father's titles.
Other notable peers are: The Duke of Norfolk (Earl Marshal of England - who plans coronations and funerals etc - an hereditary position held by the Dukes of Norfolk since the middle ages), the Duke of Wellington - whose famous ancestor was given all five levels of the peerage - Duke, Marquis, Earl, Viscount and Baron - as a result of his actions against Napoleon. The Dukes of Marlborough gained their peerage through the efforts of the first duke at the battle of Blenheim. Others have been promoted to the peerage more recently include Margaret Thatcher's husband who was given a peerage instead of his wife so she could continue to sit in the House of Commons.
In the future it is anticipated that only senior royals will be given hereditary peerages - so one more in the next 20+ years - Harry and then we will have to wait for George's marriage and maybe the second child, if a boy. More recently peerage titles have been life peerages only - so when the title holder dies so does the title.
[quote[3. speaking of peer of the realm, Harry is not one ?
. Royal Prince Harry, grandson of a Queen, son, brother and uncle of future kings is not a peer of a realm whatever that means ?
How ? [/quote]
Harry is only a prince. He is a commoner but ... he will probably be promoted to a peerage when he gets married and gets a title he can pass on such as Duke of Sussex.
Being royal does not make a person a noble or a peer of the realm. Most male royals are either peers in their own right or in line to become a peer but until given a substantive title he is a commoner with the style of HRH Prince and not a title.
The Peers hold titles such as Dukes of Edinburgh, Cornwall and Rothesay, Cambridge, York, Gloucester and Kent.
There are three Princes who aren't peers of the realm - George, Harry and Michael. Both George and Harry will probably become peers at some point in the future - George when he is the heir apparent will do so automatically when he becomes Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay - assuming he hasn't been given some other title in his own right earlier than that. Harry, again when he marries. Michael - a grandson of a King and cousin to the Queen will, in all likelihood never be a peer of the realm as his older brother, The Duke of Kent, has sons and grandsons ahead of him in the line of succession to that Dukedom.
I hope that helps.