Yes, that's true, but... -- FCS Discussion Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: Yes, that's true, but...

Author:
Ed Harris (Venezia)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 23:53:38 11/28/04 Sun
In reply to: Paddy (Scotland) 's message, "Two years after the passing of the Indian republic would be more accurate" on 22:23:15 11/28/04 Sun

1947 abolished the emperorship. 1949 (or was it fifty?) saw the coming of the Republic (Bharat Ganarajya). So, even if our Liz had come to the throne in 1948, she would have been Queen but NOT empress. Isn't that right? Or am I getting confused!

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Don't know but the coinage continued to use the form 'Ind Imp' until 1950.
Author: Nick (UK) [ Edit \| View ]	Date Posted: 13:55:09 11/29/04 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Actually, you are right, Ed, the Indian Empire was transformed into a constitutional monarchy in '47 and then India was declared a republic in '50
Author: Paddy (Scotland) [ Edit \| View ]	Date Posted: 15:25:14 11/29/04 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Although...

Author:
Paddy (Scotland)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 15:34:56 11/29/04 Mon

My point was more about her missing out on being Head of state of India by two years rather than five...

Either way, Elisabeth was never the Empress or Queen of "India", although she was the head of state of other territories of the former Indian Empire - Pakistan until 1956 and Ceylon until 1972. In that respect she was an "Indian" ruler for a while.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]