Take another quiz >
thumb

Monarchies of the World

Name the countries of the world that are monarchies.
  • Includes constitutional monarchies
  • Does not include countries that honor a different country's monarch
  • Quiz by Quizmaster - May 27, 2017
Give Up?
Enter country here:
0 / 29 guessed
The quiz is paused. You have remaining.
Scoring
You scored /29 = %.
This beats or equals % of test takers
The average score is
Your high score is
Your best time is remaining
Points
You have earned / 5 points for this quiz
This quiz is not eligible for points
Next Level
/
Keep scrolling down for answers and more stats ...
×
Help

Enter answers in the area marked "Enter country here".

You can enter any answer, at any time - they don't have to be in order

Punctuation and capitalization don't matter on JetPunk.

Title
Monarch
Country
Co-Princes
Emmanuel & Joan
King
Hamad
King
Philippe
King
Khesar
Sultan
Hassanal
King
Sihamoni
Queen
Margrethe
Emperor
Akihito
King
Abdullah
Emir
Sabah
King
Letsie
Prince
Hans-Adam
Grand Duke
Henri
Yang di-Pertuan
Agong
Muhammad
Prince
Albert
Title
Monarch
Country
King
Mohammed
King
Willem-Alexander
King
Harald
Sultan
Qaboos
Emir
Hamad
King
Salman
King
Felipe
King
Mswati
King
Carl Gustaf
King
Vajiralongkorn
King
Tupou
Emir
Multiple (7)
Queen
Elizabeth
Pope
Francis
Answer Stats
Title
Monarch
Country
% Correct
Your %
(20)
24/29 - not bad for someone who doesn't really pay much attention to these sorts of things
reply
delete
Aug 25, 2011
(29)
Missed Lesotho and Tonga... I was sure Nepal was a monarchy though...
reply
delete
Nov 27, 2011
Nepal's monarchy was abolished in 2008.
reply
delete
Nov 27, 2011
(66)
In a most dramatic way, starting with crown Prince gunning down most of the royal family ...
delete
Dec 1, 2016
(29)
Aww I'm stupid I missed Thailand... But i'm suprised that Tonga is monarchy! lol
reply
delete
Feb 19, 2013
(29)
I knew maybe 5 of these. I guessed the other 15.
reply
delete
Dec 4, 2011
(15)
So there's only 29 monarchies out of 196 (I think) countries? I guess that shows how stupid it is. (No offence, I live in one of them myself.)
reply
delete
Dec 28, 2011
(51)
Depends on what your monarchies does. Ceremonial monarchies aren't too bad at all tbh
reply
delete
Jun 15, 2013
(66)
They're still a waste of money, but that's not even the worse. How can you accept to be forever the inferior of somehow who has no other merit than being born into the right family? This is so completely alien to my world-view...
delete
Nov 21, 2014
(52)
Not sure what this has to do with accepting 'being inferior' as you put it - I certainly don't consider it being that.
delete
Dec 7, 2014
(40)
Absolute monarchies are frankly no better than dictators but I have to say that constitutional monarchies can work well. I like a system where politicians run the country but are not the head of state, it stops the power going to their heads (admittedly not always!). As long as the monarch is the head of state but has little or no political influence (and compared to many large corporations and individuals that noone voted for, she doesn't) then I have no problem with that. I'd far rather have the queen as my head of state than almost any politician I can think of. No system is perfect but constitutional monarchies on the whole seem to be a better way of keeping the egos in check. Power corrupts, etc...
delete
Jan 13, 2015
(66)
Not the egos of the monarchs, for sure. If you feel comfortable having someone above your head who enjoys special privileges and reverence for nothing else than being born into a family of arrogant inbred vestiges of the Middle Ages, go ahead!
delete
Aug 31, 2015
(71)
They're good for tourism, I suppose.
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(34)
or how stupid the majority are, I live in a republic and it is the absolute worst idea every come up with by mankind. the republic is a government of the politician, for the politician, and by the politician. where the politicians pit citizens against each other simply for power over the unwashed masses. trust me, you have it better by living in a monarchy.
reply
delete
Apr 19, 2014
(72)
Says one guy. I'll take my republic any day of the week, thank you very much. I guess I'm part of the "stupid majority."
delete
Jul 17, 2014
(66)
Monarchy is the exact same thing, except there's some other guy you can't even vote against. How is that better?
delete
Nov 21, 2014
(22)
If you look at the countries with the highest levels of human development and, generally, democratic rights, they are more often than not monarchies.
reply
delete
Aug 25, 2014
(66)
That works for like four countries in Northern Europe, and maybe Japan. It doesn't work for Germany, France, the US, Italy and so on and so forth. On the other hand, you have quite a few monarchies near the very bottom of that list: how are the democratic rights in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, Brunei, Bhutan, Lesotho...?
delete
Nov 21, 2014
(45)
og how democratic it is. the most peaceful countries in EUrope are the monarchies
reply
delete
Jan 14, 2017
(45)
or maby you are ignorant
reply
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(32)
Good question, these aren these all the monarchies in the world? Also, it would be interesting to make a difference between symbolic monarchies and absolute monarchies.
reply
delete
Jan 30, 2012
(10)
29 of the best nations in their region. Africa's monarchies are pretty nice, Europe's have much higher qualities of life in general than their neighbours, Asia's too... in fact all of the best countries by quality of life have a monarch as their head of state apart from Switzerland and Austria.
reply
delete
Feb 24, 2012
(44)
usa, canada, australia, france, italy, south korea, taiwan...... some of the highest quality of life with no monarch.
reply
delete
Jul 1, 2012
(41)
Point taken...but to be fair, Canada and Australia are part of the British Commonwealth and thus have Queen Elizabeth as their monarch.
delete
Jul 16, 2012
(22)
Canada and Australia have Queen Elizabeth. Better not try the commonwealth quiz here ;)
delete
Aug 25, 2014
(71)
Not all countries in the Commonwealth (it's not referred to as the British Commonwealth anymore) recognise QE2 as their head. In fact some, like Brunei, have their own monarch as head of state.
delete
Jan 13, 2015
(59)
In Europe, if a country's a monarchy, it probably has a better quality of life. Elsewhere...not so sure. Cambodia and Bhutan are very poor. Lesotho and Swaziland are not as poor as many nearby countries, but easily overshadowed in GDP per capita (and probably other quality of life measures) by South Africa. And the converse is definitely not true. In addition to the countries listed above, Germany, Finland, Austria, Brazil, Portugal, Israel, and Singapore all have pretty high qualities of life and are not monarchies. I suspect that the reason the pattern holds some truth in Europe is that European states that held onto their monarchies tended to be outside the Soviet (or otherwise communist) sphere of influence. Still having a monarchy might just be a sign that a country has been doing well enough for long enough to remain somewhat politically stable.
reply
delete
Jan 17, 2013
(69)
You'd call 18th-19th century Europe politically stable? Granted, most of the the European monarchies have enjoyed relative stability for the past 25-50 years, but if you look back much farther than that a very different picture emerges. I think your first assertion, that those outside of the Stalinist sphere of influence had a greater chance of both economic prosperity and retaining a monarchy and thus the two things are correlated (without necessarily any causality), is probably more accurate.
delete
Jan 26, 2013
(59)
No, not really. Should have made it clearer that I was speaking in relative rather than absolute terms. It was just an idle thought that perhaps the more political/military upheavals a country has had (at least since the Enlightenment when monarchies with actual power started falling out of favor), the greater the probability that they'd cease to be a monarchy. I certainly wasn't suggesting that monarchies haven't had their share of upheavals just like everyone else (the European ones obviously have), just that there may be a statistical bias. I added it as an afterthought, but didn't expand on it because I thought it'd be digressing too much. For Europe in particular, I'd agree that the main proximate reason for the apparent standard of living advantage to monarchies is probably the Soviet/Stalinist influence (or lack thereof).
delete
Feb 21, 2013
(66)
Again, even in Europe, that's not true. You cited Germany, but what about France, Austrian, Italy? What about Switzerland?
delete
Aug 31, 2015
(56)
Interesting quiz. :) But technically the Vatican city is a theocracy, not a monarchy, just like Iran. :/
reply
delete
Nov 10, 2012
(69)
Yes, true. If we're not going to trifle about actual titles, then many dictatorships around the world function just like monarchies with absolute monarchs and hereditary rule. North Korea, for instance, is closer to being a monarchy in practice than Great Britain. The only thing that makes many of these countries monarchies is that they have some twat living in a castle who calls himself king. But the twat at the Vatican calls himself Pope and claims to speak directly to God, rather than simply getting his authority from Him. So, there's a difference.
reply
delete
Jan 13, 2013
(56)
Well yeah. But the position of pope is not hereditary, which sets it apart from the other monarchies.
delete
Oct 17, 2014
(66)
The Pope's official title regarding the Vatican is "Sovereign of the State of Vatican City". Also, many monarchies have historically been elective rather than hereditary (France's used to be elective, the Holy Roman Empire...).
reply
delete
Nov 21, 2014
(43)
Pope has changed.
reply
delete
Mar 15, 2013
(57)
Can you swap "United Kingdom" for "Commonwealth Realms", or else have all of the 16 Commonwealth realms listed separately.
reply
delete
Mar 18, 2013
(34)
You should change the leader in Vatican. There's now a new Pope
reply
delete
Mar 19, 2013
(69)
Ah... the countries in the world where it's still mandated by law to worship some inbred rich family. Keeping Up With the Kardashians may be a bit of a cultural embarrassment but at least it's not written in to the constitution that we have to keep it on the air. I guess that's progress?

Been a few months since I last took this quiz. Somehow managed to miss the Vatican despite the conversation we were having last time about the appropriateness of its inclusion on the list. Guess I should have remembered it was on here even if that's a bit odd. Only other ones I missed were Japan and the two land-locked South African countries.
reply
delete
Jun 11, 2013
(64)
It's not required in all countries that have them to "worship" the royal family, or even to respect them. There are plenty of republicans in the UK for example, such as myself, and plenty of people are pretty vocal about their dislike of monarchies. I wouldn't recommend trying the same thing in Saudi Arabia or Thailand though.
reply
delete
Jun 11, 2013
(45)
What are you talking about? They're there just for symbollic reasons. They have little to no influence in the government whatsoever. At least in Europe that is. Keeping Up With the Kardashians is made for entertainment. Why would you feel embarassed by a TV show? It's not a representation of a whole country, just of a stupid family (which is kinda foreign BTW).
reply
delete
Jun 12, 2013
(69)
Even in the countries you could name where the monarchies are figureheads, they still have access to enormous piles of money that they didn't earn and are often protected by certain laws from at least some forms of criticism or disrespect. The media are often limited in what they can show or say about them.

The embarrassing thing about the Kardashians or other reality TV shows is not that all Americans are like them, but that enough Americans are interested in watching television shows about them that they are still on the air. They do nothing of value and serve no useful purpose but enough people are still fascinated by them that they get to keep their prominent place in society. That last sentence could apply to any of the families previously mentioned.
reply
delete
Jun 13, 2013
(71)
ALL forms of government can be criticised from one or more angles. In the USA, for example, you can't become president without having access to huge pots of money and currying favour with lobby groups who have huge pots of money. Are you saying that Dubya was elected (twice!) because he was the best person out of 350 million citizens to lead the USA? Of course he wasn't; he had access to huge pots of money (which he didn't earn). As an Australian I'm a republican, but as a Brit I'm happy with the monarchy as it is. It brings in huge amounts of tourists, particularly from the USA and I quite enjoy the traditions that go along with having a monarch.
delete
Oct 12, 2013
(34)
in the so called "great" republic of the united states our president spends more on just his inauguration then the UK spends on HM the Queen and the ENTIRE royal family....the republics are where all the money is because you can spend the money on voting in a person that will scratch your back. the republic is the most disgusting corrupt and greedy form of government ever conceived by man kind.
delete
Apr 19, 2014
(72)
"the most disgusting corrupt and greedy form of government ever conceived by man kind"?

Well, we're full of hyperbole aren't we? There's no doubting that there is greed and corruption in America's capitalist system, but you make it sound like anything would be better than what we have now, and that's ridiculous.
delete
Jul 17, 2014
(66)
/// the republic is the most disgusting corrupt and greedy form of government ever conceived by man kind./// Do you have even the slightest evidence for that huge load of crap?
delete
Nov 21, 2014
(66)
Of course the US system should be made better, but at least it's not written in the Constitution that the guy with the most money wins the election. That may be, in some election years, an effect of the system, although it's far from being always true. In the UK there is absolutely no legal viable pathway for anyone apart some entitled prick who did nothing else but work his way through the right birth canal to become king. I don't want to be king, but it would piss me off that I wouldn't even have the chance, from the moment I was born.
delete
Nov 21, 2014
(71)
But in the US, the president runs the country. In most monarchies, at least those in Europe, the monarch has no significant role in the running of the country. It's not written in the Constitution that the richest bloke gets the job, but that's still what happens because it takes vast sums of money to win an election. A cap on the amount of cash any party is allowed to spend on electioneering, as exists in many other countries, would go some way to levelling the playing field. After all, the idea is to get the best person for the job, not the person from the richest family.
delete
Jan 13, 2015
(71)
Our most recent US presidential election proves that the one who spends the most money doesn't always win the race.
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(58)
Inbred? There are several members of the royal families in Europe who have married people outside them. Honestly, I'm not a supporter of monarchy, but if the people like it, then that's totally OK with me.
reply
delete
Aug 22, 2015
(36)
How could I forget Brunei and Bhutan.
reply
delete
Jun 11, 2013
(46)
That is an absolute disgrace.
reply
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(20)
The title of the ruler of the Vatican is the king, but they are awarded to the same person. The title should be king.
reply
delete
Jun 12, 2013
(69)
So the Pope is also the king of Vatican City? hm.. to Wikipedia!...
reply
delete
Jun 13, 2013
(24)
there's a CGPGrey video on YouTube about it
delete
Jun 16, 2013
(41)
Belgium should be updated, King Albert abdicated in July 2013. King Phillipe is the monarch now.
reply
delete
Jan 19, 2014
Updated
reply
delete
Jan 20, 2014
(1)
i have 62%...
reply
delete
Apr 3, 2014
(18)
Maybe we should add North Korea? :P
reply
delete
Apr 15, 2014
(41)
Vatican is not a monarchy because the pope is elected by the cardinals
reply
delete
May 2, 2014
(45)
Like was the Polish monarchy, the king was elected by the nobles. It doesn't mean it's not a monarchy (or something close to).
reply
delete
May 4, 2014
(43)
Great idea for a quiz ... educational as well as interesting. The King of Spain needs updating, however.
reply
delete
Jul 17, 2014
Updated!
reply
delete
Jul 18, 2014
(58)
Malaysia is sultanates federation, but it has king.
Tuanku Abdul Halim is sultan in Kedah state,
but he is king (Yang di-Pertuan Agong) of Malaysia.
reply
delete
Aug 19, 2014
(7)
100%. Almost missed King Sihamoni
reply
delete
Sep 27, 2014
(24)
good quiz although i do think you should include the countries of Jamaica, Australia etc, or change the Queen Elizabeth answer to Commonwealth, as the queen of the UK is NOT the same as the queen of Australia etc, she rules each country Separately, not as one
reply
delete
Oct 6, 2014
(43)
title is misleading... countries that have monarchs would be better very few of these have true monarchy governments
reply
delete
Nov 8, 2014
(59)
didn't king abdullah die or
reply
delete
Jan 4, 2015
(24)
The Queen of Australia or New Zealand is different to the queen of the UK, they just happen to be the same person, so surely the answer to this would be for queen Elizabeth either she is the queen of the Commonwealth or you should list all the nations for which she is queen?
reply
delete
Jan 13, 2015
(71)
She's queen of the Commonwealth Realms, but not of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth has for some time allowed members who were not ruled by Britain at any time (such as Rwanda), and also those that have their own monarchy (such as Brunei). I like the quiz as it is.
reply
delete
Aug 25, 2015
(34)
Should the Ayatollah be on here for Iran?
reply
delete
May 22, 2015
(51)
It would be nice to remove the word "still" from the title of the quiz, as it implies a lot of things including a personal opinion.
reply
delete
Jun 11, 2015
(66)
No, it implies that that was the case in the past, and that it is the case now.
reply
delete
Aug 31, 2015
(74)
Like the new look, QM!
reply
delete
Aug 22, 2015
(58)
I like most things updated with the new look, but why add a "Start quiz" button?
reply
delete
Aug 22, 2015
(70)
I LIKE the "Start quiz" button very much!
reply
delete
Aug 22, 2015
(58)
What's the point of the button, I'd like to know.
delete
Aug 23, 2015
(70)
I can't speak for anyone else but I like having an opportunity to read the instructions without losing valuable time on the clock. Wasted seconds are points lost!
delete
Aug 23, 2015
(71)
But it also gives time to think about (or even look up) the answers before starting the quiz which is not a good thing IMO.
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(58)
26/29. I can live with that. I really should have gotten Norway and Cambodia, though.
reply
delete
Aug 22, 2015
(61)
Looking at this list now, the most amazing thing to me is the surprising lack of monarchies left in Africa. Just Morocco and the tiny kingdoms of Lesotho, Swaziland and Tonga.
reply
delete
Aug 22, 2015
(58)
Tonga is in Oceania. That reduces the number of monarchies in Africa to 3. I'm not surprised though, because most African countries are relatively new, being formed after 1950 for the first time.
reply
delete
Aug 23, 2015
(36)
LIving down under is good. We are a constitutional monarchy with the Queen as Sovereign. She has a "substitute" of sorts, they being the Governor-General. The Queen's Royal style and title in Australia is Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God Queen of Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth. Taken from: http://www.royal.gov.uk/monarchandcommonwealth/australia/australia.aspx
reply
delete
Aug 22, 2015
(55)
As soon as I realized that a lot of these countries were tiny, I was on a roll.
reply
delete
Aug 23, 2015
(51)
All I did was guess...still got Swaziland, Lesotho and Lichtenstein
reply
delete
Sep 25, 2015
(45)
LOL Fran├žois, co-prince of Andorra XD
reply
delete
Dec 5, 2015
(25)
Emmanuel now :)
reply
delete
Jun 23, 2017
(56)
What about Samoa? Tuiatua Tupua Tamasese Efi is their constitutional monarch...
reply
delete
Jan 26, 2016
Not a monarchy according to Wikipedia.
reply
delete
May 27, 2017
(66)
No, he was duly elected. He's aparently head of a "royal" family (quote marks according to Wikipedia), but it has not much to do with his political function.
reply
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(67)
"Does not include countries that honor a different country's monarch." - This does not exclude Australia or New Zealand or Canada or so many others, as Elizabeth rules as Queen of Australia, Queen of New Zealand, Queen of Canada. There is an ongoing and passionately contested debate in my country (Australia) about abolishing our monarchy. It would be a tad daft to have this debate if we didn't have one.
reply
delete
May 9, 2016
(54)
I know I typed in Brunei.. but I guess not. lol. Did a ton better than I thought, it's not so bad.
reply
delete
Aug 5, 2016
(60)
King Bhumibol has died. May he rest in peace.
reply
delete
Oct 13, 2016
(46)
Agree with Findlay. Those countries other than the UK who have Elizabeth as their queen are NOT 'honouring' another country's monarch. The way this quiz has been set out means that the UK shouldn't be on here either - the UK 'honours' Antigua's monarch to the same extent that Antigua 'honours' the UK's. They are all quite separate monarchies who share the same head of state (like Andorra). The premise of this quiz as set out is wrong wrong wrong.
reply
delete
Mar 25, 2017
(14)
"Does not include countries that honor a different country's monarch" Then why is the UK included? They honor the monarchs of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and others.
reply
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(59)
Neat quiz! You clearly did a lot of research. I pretty much just guessed the countries.
reply
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(69)
Wait, Nigeria's not a monarchy? Then why do I keep getting e-mails from a Nigerian prince that wants to give me lots of money?
reply
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(66)
There are plenty of princes in abolished monarchies (Serbia, Greece, Germany, ...)
reply
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(62)
I made a quiz on restored monarchies that you might want to check out. http://www.jetpunk.com/user-quizzes/120795/restored-monarchies
reply
delete
Jun 17, 2017
(44)
I forgot the pope......
reply
delete
Jun 17, 2017
(25)
four minutes?? seriously? how about like six or seven minutes. need more time.
reply
delete
Jun 23, 2017
(25)
Funny that Prince Emmanuel of Andorra is actually Emmanuel Macron, the French President.
reply
delete
Jun 23, 2017
×
Congrats!
You have reached a new level
To save this level, you'll have to
create an account
×
Congrats!
You have earned a new badge
To save this badge, you'll have to
create an account