April 11, 2000
Web posted at: 3:00 p.m. EDT

(CNN) – Broadcasting from London, CNNI's Q&A discussed the role of Europe's royal families, including Britain's House of Windsor, in the everyday lives of their subjects. The program asked whether monarchy, as an institution, is necessary or even wanted in the 21st century. Ben Pimlott, biographer for the Queen of England, was a featured guest.

Previously a Professor of Politics and Contemporary History at Birkbeck College, Ben Pimlott became the Warden or head of Goldsmiths College at the University of London in 1998. He is the author of "The Queen: A Biography." Pimlott is also a columnist, political commentator and broadcaster. He was elected a Fellow of the British Academy in 1996.

Pimlott joined the Q&A chat by telephone from London. CNN provided a typist for him. The following is an edited transcript of the chat.

Chat Moderator: Thank you for joining us today, Ben Pimlott, and welcome.

Ben Pimlott: Hello everybody!

Chat Moderator: Please tell us a little bit about your background.

Ben Pimlott: I am an academic. I am a professor of politics and history. I am now in a job running a university of 6,000 or 7,000 people which includes perhaps the most famous art school in Europe. I have written a number of books including three biographies. My previous one was about Prime Minister Harold Wilson, published by Harper Collins.

This one is titled "The Queen: A Biography of Elizabeth II" published by John Wiley in the U.S. and, in the U.K., published by Harper Collins. It is a biography that is both personal and historical, looking at the Queen's life over the last 73 years. It looks at her childhood, her upbringing and the role of her family during the Second World War, her romance with Prince Phillip, the coronation in 1953 and her life since, including her relationship with her children and Princess Diana.

	RESOURCES
CNN Chat Calendar How to Connect Message Boards Time Zone Converter Discussion Standards

Question from cheshirec: Mr. Pimlott, do you think that the British monarchy has brought much wealth into the U.K.?

Ben Pimlott: I doubt whether the monarchy in Britain has brought any wealth to the U.K. I think the evidence on that is very strong. The symbolic head of state does not deal with wealth gathering. But the monarch contributes to the stability of the state and this contributes to the wealth of the state and, in an indirect way, causes people to invest in it.

Question from Caleb_USA: It appears that Australia and New Zealand will eventually become republics. Will this increase pressure on the U.K. to go the same way?

Ben Pimlott: I think it is a very interesting question. It is not yet certain that Australia and New Zealand will be republics. I think it is a very interesting question. It is not yet certain that Australia and New Zealand will be republics. But it could have happened. A few months ago, Australia had a referendum to become a republic, but decided to remain a monarchy. This would quite possibly have had a domino effect. It might have influenced New Zealand in that direction. It might have influenced Canada in that direction and some of the remaining Caribbean countries that still have the Queen as head of State. It certainly would have fired fuel in the U.K. on the republican issue. That may well happen.

However, the monarchy remains much more popular in the U.K. than it has been in Australia since it is a British institution. One of the arguments in Australia is that it is a foreign institution.

Question from Klaus_GER: What are the main differences between the monarchies in Europe and in Asia and Africa?

Ben Pimlott: Well, I think the main difference is that some of the monarchies in Asia and Africa retain real political power. They either have the power to appoint and dismiss governments or, in some cases, they are despotic. They function as dictatorships. There is a great difference in how they have evolved in Europe and some other places. In Europe, it has little or no physical power and that is the great difference.

It is impossible to justify the monarchy in countries where it has significant political power. In countries that regard themselves as democracies, the only justifiable type of monarchies are the ones that are closely controlled by democratic institutions. That is the condition in all European monarchies at this time. They are subservient to democratic institutions.

Question from Ana-Romania: Is wealth damaging the image of the British monarchy?

Ben Pimlott: An interesting question, and a complicated one. I suppose one might say a completely impoverished monarchy could lose even the small element of independence that monarchies tend to preserve from the political class. Although it is important they have no political power, they should have political independence. So they should have some independent wealth.

On the other hand, if they are seen as rich, this could be damaging. The impression that the British monarchy was the wealthiest in the world was used against the Queen in the 1990's. The stories of the Queen's wealth were exaggerated during the 90's. Some of the stories included estimates of wealth which she could not dispose of such as castles, etc.

Question from Klaus_GER: What is the prognosis for the future? Will there be a renaissance of monarchies or will they be gone in a few decades?

Ben Pimlott: There is no particular sign of a renaissance at the moment although there may be some interest in Eastern Europe. Although the surviving monarchies seem to be resilient, they were in decline at the beginning of the 20th century, not at the end of it. The First World War disposed of the Hapsburgs, the Hohenzollern (German) monarchy and the Romanovs -- in other words, all of the major families of the big countries, apart from Britain.

The Second World War disposed of some of the smaller monarchies like the Italian one. Since the Second World War, the only monarchy to end is the Greek one. In fact, there is a new one in Spain.

At the beginning of the 21st Century, there are several monarchies still surviving with no sign of change. Although it is difficult to predict far ahead, it is difficult to see any change in these monarchies coming within the next 10 years.

Chat Moderator: Do you have any final thoughts to share with us?

Ben Pimlott: The only final thought is why do the subscribers here -- in the chat room -- think there is so much interest in royal families? Why should they arouse such intense interest? Any one who can answer that will answer one of the strangest mysteries at this beginning of the third millennium.

Chat Moderator: Thank you for joining us today.