"Emperor of India" vs. "King of India"
- From: frederick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 7 Jun 2006 11:05:53 -0700
George VI abandoned the use of the title "Emperor of India" in 1948,
presumably because it took a year from the passing of the Indian
Independence Act before anyone realised that he hadn't previously done
so. But was he known by this title in India during those twelve or so
And on a related point, would I be correct in thinking that his being
referred to as "King of India" is in fact just a convenient (and
perhaps anachronistic) description of his constitutional position,
rather than a title that was ever established by Indian law or
otherwise used in an official capacity?