What is the difference between Emperor and King? The Different Ranks of Monarchs
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 лип 2024
- My Patreon: / kobean_history
My Twitter: / kobean_history
My Discord Server: / discord (discord.gg/Twp4JQP)
00:00 Introduction
00:18 List of Monarch Ranks
00:39 What is an Emperor/Empress
01:34 Origins of the Position of Emperor
02:13 The Holy Roman Emperor
02:46 European Empires
03:28 The Japanese Emperor
03:42 What is a King/Queen
04:25 Current Kings and Queens
04:35 What is an Archduke/Archduchess
05:54 What is a Grand Duke/Grand Duchess
06:28 Grand Prince/Grand Princess
06:42 The Grand Duchy of Luxemburg
06:54 What is a Prince/Princess
07:37 Current Principalities
08:10 What is a Duke/Duchess
08:50 What is a Sovereign Prince (Fürst/Fürstin)
09:20 The Principality of Liechtenstein
09:35 Outro
We will go over the different tiers and ranks of a monarch. From the most powerful emperor to the small holdings of the German principalities.
We will go over the differences between Emperor / Empress , King / Queen , Archduke / Archduchess , Grand duke / Grand duchess , Prince / Princess , Duke / Duchess , Sovereign prince / Sovereign princess , Fürst / Fürstin. And explains the difference between an empire, kingdom, archduchy, grand duchy, principality, duchy and sovereign principality.
This video answers questions like: What is the difference between an emperor and a king? What is the difference between an empire and a kingdom? What was the Holy Roman Empire? How was medieval Europe divided? Who ruled in medieval Europe?
Music by Vindsvept (Lake of Light)
/ vindsvept
CC BY 4.0 License: creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Fun fact, the word "Caesar" was pronounced "Kaiser" in Latin. That is probably why they adopted that form of saying Emperor.
The word Tsar as well
@@cjoutright9255 what?
@@niceguy1891 the word Tsar, meaning emperor in Russian, is also from the title Caesar
@@cjoutright9255 yes, its already mentioned in the video. Also the bulgars and some other slaves had a tsar.
@@cjoutright9255 Not related but similar is the Persian Shah.
The Caesar thing is more complicated. The emperors in the early empire held the official title “Princeps” (meaning first citizen). Their regal names included Caesar because one would be proclaimed the designated heir or a usurper would claim the title as a part of declaring themselves to being the ruling emperor. But after the crisis of the 3rd century, Diocletian instituted the tetrarchy and the junior emperors were called Caesar and they were specifically heirs to the senior emperors, who were called Augustus. After the fall of the Western Empire, in the Eastern Empire the title eventually stopped denoting emperors because heirs were elevated to co-emperors instead of just being proclaimed as a Caesar. The title became more of an honorific given to second- and third-born children so that they’d hold an imperial office with a role that kept them working in the imperial system without being a ruler.
Actually, duke comes from the Latin Dux, which was a military position created by Diocletian and they were in charge of the military for any given province.
Augustus Jones. Hands down best emporer the Roman Empire ever had.
Caesar was a Roman family name, only after Julius Ceasar became emperor his nephew became also emperor and called himself Caesar under the name Augustus Caesar. The Duke of Burgund was the most powerful rule in Europe taking the king of France prisoner, also the Swiss defeated emperor Maximillian in the Swiss wars and made his wife Marie de Bourgogne a landless orphan. The Swiss became the king slayers of Europe, they could make or destroy kings and dukes such as they made Ludovico Sforza beign duke of Milan.
@@mattb8754 Emperor* 😉 🦅
🦁 ☀️ 🐝 ⚡ 🦅 ⚡ 🐝 ☀️ 🦁
Yes please do a video that carefully explains the roles of counts, barons and other titled Europeans. Thank you
It would be nice to explain the lower tier nobility as well nice thought @John Scanlan
John, not sure if you’ve already came across the video you were requesting here but there is one exactly explaining what you’re asking for. The channel is called “The Generalist Papers” and the video is called “Ranks of Nobility, Explained”. Check it out. It introduced me to other ranks I didn’t even know existed!!
@@adecadeofpoetry4831 thank you so much!
There's also the title of viceroy/vicereine (vice-king), for someone who represents a king outside his regular territory, like the governors-general of the British Empire's dominions.
The King of Portugal also became Emperor of Brazil.
BTW, Belgium's royal house, the House of Saxe-Coburg before World War I, was renamed the House of the Belgians because of anti-German feeling. (Like the British branch becoming the House of Windsor.) And the term Holy Roman Empire only appeared a few centuries after Charlemagne, who was simply called Roman Emperor.
King George III almost became Emperor of Great Britain and Ireland in 1802, but he declined this promotion put forth by Parliament
It's thought he did so because he was already a Prince-Elector of the HRE, as well as having at least two seats in the Reichstag. Having the emperor of one country deciding the fate of another empire would have been awkward
Ooh Roma-2
Didn't Victoria, Edward VII, George V, Edward VIII and George VI use the title King-Emperor or Queen-Empress in Victoria's case due to India?
@@chrismc410 Kinda, but they weren't emperors of britain, just india, which is kinda weird cause a higher ranking title was subservient to a lesser one, but oh well, feudalism
@@imaginehavingpfp5779 I mean the emperor of India thing was so that the British monarch didn’t want to look weaker than the holy roman emperor and the tsar.
@@chrismc410 the title “emperor of India” was created so vicky wouldn’t be outranked by her granddaughter, the soon to be German empress. By then there wouldn’t be a “holy Roman Empire” for the British monarchs to participate in
Byzantium was also an empire or at least held the rank until the fall of Constantinople in 1453.
that is the Roamen Empire.
Byzantium was an insignificant town/village close to where Constantinople was founded. Constantinople was the capitol of the (Eastern) Roman Empire until its fall.
@@romaliop We all know what he is referring to. Don't need to be a smart ass.
The Byzantine Empire can also be called the New Roman Empire, considering that Constantinople almost got named New Rome. (Personally, I like to call it the Greek Empire because the Greek language held it together after 600 or so...)
It essentially ceased to be an empire with the Crusader conquest of 1204: the Palaeologus Dynasty just ruled a kingdom, and in its second and last century a city-state.
@@Blaqjaqshellaq it wasnt almsot called new rome it was called new rome. It just became known as constantinople and it changed names but it was founded as nova roma.
Technically given the definition of an Emperor or Empress ruling over multiple states the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland could be styled Empress as she if the head of state (monarch) of unified kingdoms of England, Northern Ireland and Scotland plus the Principality of Wales. British monarchs were actually once styled Emperors or Empresses of India (ie maharaja or mahameina) which was actually a confederation of various Principalities ruled by rajas. Also in classical Latin as spoken by the Romans Caesar was pronounced Kaesar not Seasar.
Henry the VIII clarified that the British monarchs had the same rights and honour as emperors but were not, because there can only be one emperor in the west, and that was the HRE, same thing with France and Spain.
If the kingdoms were seperated she woild be but shes the queen of unified kingdom. So one kingdom = queen.
IIRC only the Pope(or the Patriarch in the east) can pronounce an emperor, and as the Pope pronounced the HRE rulers emperors other European nations which are usually called Empires such as France, Spain or England were not ruled by Emperors. Ofc Napoleon pronounced himself Emperor, but this is a special case.
The "ruling over multiple states" thing is not really the true historical definition of an emperor. Originally, "emperor" was specifically reserved for someone who ruled a state which could be considered a continuation of the Roman Empire.
Maharaja as suzerain over less powerful princes known as Raja is a bit of a stretch. The title grew out of the original Rajan, thence Raja. Maharaja was 'title-creep', an inflation of the original title, and applied to three positions:
1. A sovereign ruler, large or small, but in most cases NOT an emperor or equivalent; in or around Bengal, an example would be the Maharaja of Cooch Behar;
2. A land-owner, technically, a title-holder under the British Empire NOT entitled to a gun salute - only those rulers with a gun-salute, ranging from 3 to 21 (within India, 9 to 21; the 3 gun states were among the Arabian Gulf states, and they had a 21 gun state as well, the Sultanate of Oman). The largest Indian states, J&K and Hyderabad, were as large as Great Britain (the island with the countries of Wales, Scotland and England); in Bengal, an example would be the Maharaja of Burdwan;
3. An honorific either formally bestowed, or acquired by popular fame, by an eminent figure in an Indian princely state. The famous polo player, himself a Rathore from the Jodhpur royal house, Prem Singh, was known far and wide as Maharaj, with no claims to sovereignty or anything more than descent from a feudatory of the reigning Maharaja; thus, Maharaj Prem Singh
An Emperor, rendered in the more commonly encountered Indian languages, would be Samrat or Chakravarty (confusing, as a Chakravarty can also be the name of a Brahmin of very proper descent, for instance, Chakravarty Rajagopalachariar, second Governor General of the Dominion of India, and the successor to Louis, Lord Mountbatten, who was the last Viceroy of the British Crown Colony of India, and representative of the King-Emperor to the sovereign Indian princes, then after 15th August, the first Governor-General of the Dominion of India).
You made a very interesting video. Thank you for uploading.
I love this video, very informative.
Great content
just binged all of these, I love this series a ton!! :D
I really like your videos, allthough I haven't seen many because I only recently came over from the Westeroscraft Channel (I love your work there). I like that you mentioned the german Word Kaiser originating from Ceasar, but I think you misspelled it Kaisar which is not the modern form. Nonetheless very informativ and well done video :)
Thanks :) yea after looking back on it, it appears I did misspell Kaiser
Ceasar was not a title, it was a family name which was used by all Roman emperors to achieve a kind of justification to be the successor of Julius Ceasar and Octavianus Ceasar ("Augustus"). The name Ceasar was for some time used by all members of the family of the emperor, later only by the emperor and his heir, not only by the emperor. The title actually representing the power was Augustus, a title (not a name!) representing a kind of lower divine status and as well imperator. Emperors used both titles, Augustus representing merely the religious role (which was directly connected with any position in the Roman state), imperator the military role (used as well by non-emperors in that role).
Love it
kool ill make use of this info in my dnd game
The title Caesar was actually given to the junior emperor. The senior emperor was Augustus.
The Prince Electors elected the German King who then was crowned Roman Emperor by the Pope.
2:13 Byzantine/Eastern Roman Empire: Am I a joke to you?
intresting, you mentioned the UK and france,,,, the monarch often only used the title in official ceremonies and and by colonies, king emperor= india (the raj) and in west africa ( king emperor of france used both by napoleon and the earlier kings of france in new france (ontario)...
the holy roman emperor often used the titles in personal =political union
ke of austria, king of the romans germans, hungary,bohemia,croatia etc
An emperor must love sports
Yknow, since he's High King
hehe
😂
Lolol
Liechtenstein's ruler famously had a palace on the outskirts of Vienna. This leads me to suggest the topic of lands owned by a titleholder but elsewhere from the formal estate that bears that name. This arose a lot in Britain where gambling stakes often included land titles but not the formal title.
Czech word "císař" also comes from Caesar, and Czech word for king "král" comes from the name of Karel, or in English Charles.
Ok, a Grand Duke/Grand Prince were roughly equal to the Archdukes of Austria until they essentially became the hereditary Holy Roman Emperors.
I would argue that the Grand Dukes of Lithuania were equal to a King, as they ruled over a far greater land area than the majority of the German Kingdoms of the German Empire, with the exception of Prussia, and it was far bigger than at least half of the Kingdoms and Sultanates in the word today.
Also the Duchy of Nassau was by far larger in area than the Grand Duchies of Mecklenburg Strelitz, Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, and possibly equal or slightly smaller than the Grand Duchy Oldenburg.
Odd question what would Pharoh be like an emperor or king? Like Pharoh of ancient Egypt or Nubia
Don't forget Sultans Shahs Rajahs and Maharajahs. I like the Holy Roman Empire, which some wag once said was neither holy, roman, nor an empire :)
If you furriners are going to be pushy about it, throw in Nizam and Nawab, and let's muddy the waters totally.
An emperor is an accountancy and a king is daft.
👆🏼This video is genuinely excellent!
...I added it to my playlists dedicated to research and reference for my writing endeavors (( predominantly in fantasy, but also sci-fi genres ))
BTW:: I feel that channel NEEDS more exposure...
Thanks :) Glad my video was helpful
The title Ceazar is actually a family name, which became a title as time goes by.For example, Julius Caesar, Augustus Caesar.If you notice Ceazar is after the name
*hears voice* Huh he kinda sounds like the host from Westeroscraft Walks.
"Kobean histories"
WAAAAAIT A MINUTE
Yeah the title Caesar became known as emperor because it was family name of Julius Caesar. Few Caesars after him were from Caesar family so they adopted it and later it stuck with all emperors of Rome whether they were of Caesar family or not. Title of Emperor came from latin word Imperator which basically means Supreme cmmander(its a military position). So royals in europe who claim to be rightful heir to Rome adopted title of Emperor or Caesar i.e. HRE, Byzantine, Russia, Napoleon France etc. This concept does not translate directly to other cultures outside of Europe but other cultures had their word for King of Kings, Supreme Ruler, and Golden Thearchy. When they got translated to english, they just used the word Emperor to describe them.
oh you are that guy from westeros craft
When the Imperial dynasty of Europe, the Loth(a)ringen, descendants of Lothar(ius), eldest son of Louis the Pious, thus grandson of Charlemagne, bestowed their worldly goods/imperial rights upon the Church, it was under certain relatively minor conditions.
One of these conditions was, that *the title of Emperor* was not part of the immense gift.
Therefore the (chosen) highest vassal of the HRE is called the 'primus inter pares" = first amongst equals (vassals).
So every European micro-states were the lasts of their own title, except The Italian micro-states (The Vatican and San Marino)
Luxembourg - last Grand Duchy
Monaco and Andorra - last Principalities
Liechtenstein - last Sovereign Principality
Also, Liechtenstein was Europe's last absolute monarchy. Now, out of all monarchies, Liechtenstein is giving more power to the monarch than any of the others.
1:54 Nothing you *said* there was incorrect, but you showed a picture of Julius Caesar, when the Roman Empire was founded not by him, but by his (adopted) son Augustus Caesar
One of those muddy, slightly misleading historical things. Augustus *founded* the imperial system "on paper", but Julius was so close to an Emperor as makes little practical difference.
At least, that's what his murderers would have told you in their own defense. o _o
There is also the fact that the title of the Roman Emperor was Augustus not Caesar, Caesar was the title for the Co-emperor/future Augustus, the tetrarchy was the system where the East and West were split and each had an Augustus and a Caesar each.
When it comes to sovereigns, 'more powerful' and 'less powerful' are very subjective. The Archduke, Grand Duke and Grand Prince are equals, and more often than not, also equals to a King as a sovereign ruler.
A lot of confusion might have been caused by linguistics, eg. the Grand Duke of Lithuania, when translated directly, means something along the lines of a 'great ruler', which is also a common translation for the root of the word 'King'. The Grand Prince may have been initially differentiated from the Grand Duke due to linguistics as well, however when inspecting the root words, they are in many cases the same.
Thus, my recommendation for ranking the monarchs would be:
1. Emperor
2. King / Archduke / Grand Duke
3. Duke / Prince
I've been wondering something recently. When a last name begins with "Fitz" like Fitzpatrick, of course it implies some type of British descent with Norman origins, just like the same similarly goes for "Mc" in Ireland and "Mac" in Scotland. So obviously Fitz, Mc, and Mac would mean "son of". In England, when the King would have an illegitimate son, his last name would be "Fitzroy". Fitz meaning "son of" and Roy (I literally just realized that word is probably the root word of ROYal) meaning "King", altogether Fitzroy meaning "Son of the King".
What I'm wondering is what if a British king had stylized himself as an Emperor and had an illegitimate son? We know the word for Emperor in latin it was Caesar, the root word. In German it's "Kaiser", in Russian it's "Tsar", but in French it's "Empereur". The problem is Norman French is French with a Germanic twist, and later Celtic influenced. What would the last name be for the illegitimate son of a British Emperor? Like would we add a Norman touch to the word Kaiser? Perhaps Kaysar? So would that make the last name of the illegitimate son of a British Emperor then "Fitzkayser"? I just feel like "Fitzemperor" would be silly.
Fitzkayser feels easier on the tongue, so probably that one?
it's from french, fils du roi, son of the king
@@xXxSkyViperxXx Oh, I'm aware of it's origin. Je peux parler en Français, même si Je suis Américain. L'un de rares. That's why when I originally posted this comment I thought if an Anglo-Norman Emperor had an illegitimate child their last name would be Fitzemperor or Fitzempereur. Unfortunately there aren't really any good English to Norman or even French to Norman translators for me to figure out what the Norman word for Caesar would've been. That's why I speculated that "Kayser" could be the Norman word for Caesar.
Dear @augustuscaesar8287, wrt to your first paragraph, I am sure that you will be even more delighted to learn that the root-word Roy is a lot older than English. You will encounter it in Sanskrit, and by borrowing in very many modern Indian languages, as 'rajan' or 'raja', and by descent in Romani, originally a dialect of Sauraseni Prakrit spoken within India, as Rai, as in 'chief of the tribe'.
you ignore the byzantine emperor Basilus
There is also the principality of sealand, although whether it's a real country or not is up for debate...
This is very interesting, I thought Princes/Princesses were under Kings/Queens and above Archdukes and Grand Dukes. Do an Asian version of this.
Har-di-har har.
There would be blood on the floor. Asian is a trifle broad.
Kaiser was misspelled in the video.
Great video. Very informative. However, I see one mistake. You mention only two Sovereign Principalities: Andorra and Monaco.
But there are definitely 3 sovereign principalities. The obvious and definite 3rd being the Principality of Liechtenstein which you forgot.
Watch until the end of the video, I mention Liechtenstein separately
Possibly, the Vatican too.
I'm pretty sure that the pope is also a sovereign prince.
@@hazchemel The pope is another different title, normally placed above emperors, but its kinda weird cause the emperor didn't kneel to him, but also kinda did
Where is the narrator from? I cant get the accent. Cool video
Thanks! Im originally from Flanders, Belgium
Well, in the case of the HRE emperor really wasn't any different than king. Afterall the were elected as kings of Germany and as such ruled with the same authority within the HRE as they would after getting crowned emperor.
The title of emperor however was still very important for them in a theological sense and also boosted their prestige. But technically it wasn't important.
The Emperor in the HRE was seen as the Supreme authority over the kings. This can be seen when Conrad the second removed a powerful vassal from his ducal titles even when his son (king of Germany) was against it.
The video says that British monarchs didn't take on the the title "emperor/empress" except for their reign over India. How does this jibe with monarchs before King George VI referring to themselves as "Rex Imperator/Regina Imperatrix" (king emperor/queen empress)? Does the "imperator/imperatrix" specifically refer to the dominion over the Empire of India?
Yes thats correct, the Rex/Regina referred to their rule over the UK and Imperator/imperatrix to their rule over India
@@KobeanHistory All the way from Victoria RI, through Edward VII RI, George V RI and George VI RI.
There is no legal definition anyway, because British Empire (the largest empire by total area in history) still ruled by King/Queen.
While some "Empires" are so small like "Empire of Trebizond" and "Empire of Nicaea", only as big as city state yet, it ruled by an Emperor.
actually there would be some legality there, as in look at how the empires of Nicaea and Trebizond were set up. size did not matter, but in the structure of their government and the amount of relative power yielded by the ruler. the English expanded to great size, but their structure was still roughly the same as before colonialism, and thanks to various reforms, were rather limited in what they could do. the Nicaeans and Trebizuntines were basically despotates, wielding almost absolute power.
There is a legal definition. Empires and Emperors are associated with theoretical successor states to the Roman Empire. Other uses of "Empire" are either against the definition (British, Napoleon) or an attempt to translate a foreign title into a European title.
@@Jim-Tuner Yh it's all because Charlemagne got titled Emperor of the Romans by the pope, due to the (Eastern) Roman Empire being ruled by a woman at the time, well at least one of the excuses given.
I still dont get what the difference between the prince of monaco and the prince of liechtenstein may be?
Did the Holy Roman Emperor actually have any power over the various archdukes, dukes and princes within the HRE? Or was it just an honorary title?
depending on the time you look at. In early (medival) HRE they definitively held power(as any monarch in that given time so to say), later (post medival) not so much.
What title baron?
The Baron ranks in the lower nobility so they rule over a relatively small amount of land, they serve monarchs or higher ranks of the nobility but are not monarchs themselves. I will make a video about the different Nobility ranks as well sometime in the future where I will explain the nobility ranks in more detail
@@KobeanHistory thank you . I'm history old year
what is the music?
It's Lake of Light by Vinsvept
@@KobeanHistory thanks
My relatives of Keaster.
Fürst princes are they styled serene highness and also do all their children get the title of prince under German law at the time
can a duchy be independent?
great video by the way.
Thanks! Yes they can be independent but there are none left today, there is still Luxembourg which is a Grand Duchy
@@KobeanHistory ok thank you for the information.
Hmmm I'm an EMPEROR THAT'S NICE TO KNOW
i have king & emperor coin 1907 vII.
i want sell this
you forgot the Highest of all titles, THE GOD EMPEROR, FATHER OF MANKIND, UNIFIER OF TERRA
When talking about holy roman empire we can forget that for almost whole of medieval the real roman empire still existed, commonly now as Byzantine empire,yes they were speaking greek but they're still romans, true romans term byzantium was made up by some german historian named Hieronymus wolff in 16th century to legitimize hre as true rome, which hre wasn't
how about kahns
Why wouldn't it be a monarchy just because the king is elected? It's still one person ruling. It's an elective monarchy as opposed to a hereditary one (as were most European monarchies in the beginning)
Yes, you're right, the Holy Roman Emperors were still monarchs. I messed up there, I should have said: They weren't technically a hereditary monarchy, even though in later ages it did function as such with the successive elections of the Habsburgs.
@@KobeanHistory There was a de facto hereditary system during the Ottonian and Salian dynasty as well. The emperors designated their heirs and the princes merely approved it. The only times there were formal elections where when one ruler died without leaving a viable heir.
@@KobeanHistory ...and Luxembourg, and Lorraine. and Wittelsbach. All of them featured, though not as long as the main Habsburgs.
It's misleading to call the territories of the HRE "smaller nations". What makes you say that? They were fiefs of the empire.
They were smaller nations within a bigger nation. The difference with the HRE compared to other nations was that the smaller nations within the HRE often went to war with each other, Showing a certain degree of autonomy. While still being unified in wars against nations outside of the HRE.
@@KobeanHistory That's the nature of a feudal structure and not unique to the HRE. The unique thing about it was the the smaller states (still uncomfortable with the expression of "nation") gained more and more autonomy after the late middle ages while other kingdoms managed to establish centralized governments.
@@Siegbert85 Because technically it was an elective monarchy, which is much different than a fully hereditary one. It was more of a the currently most connected dynasty within the Empire rules system rather than a monarch giving lands to families in exchange services. Neither are centralised but the difference was still there and even for feudal system it was extremely decentralised.
Simply put it looks more like an alliance system ruled by the currently more influential partner than the typical kingdom of the time which is based on one dynasty, doesn't mean other kingdoms didn't get rebellious autonomous vassals (ie: france and its myriads of wars versus its duchies who were as strong as kingdoms) but still different.
Why did you ignore the Spanish Empire?
لنا اشكرك على دمج اللغه العربيه
Lightenstein is pronounced as Likhtnshtayn.
What about Sultan?
You can find it in this video:
ua-cam.com/video/rbJUiTRQZWw/v-deo.html
What is the actual rank of present days sultans and emirs in the hierarchy?
If I remember correctly they are both on the level of Kings but Sultan could also be Emperor in some cases.
Even if the Sultan of Turkey was an emperor, I think that present day sultans are equivalent to kings or slightly less than them in the protocol. The Pope is a king. In 1961, the Moroccan monarch upgraded his status from sultan to king. There are two sultanates left, Oman and Brunei. I think that the emirs are equivalent to princes, like the ones of Monaco and Liechtenstein. The emirate of Kuwait was sometimes defined in the past as a principalty. The title of an emir is "His Highness" not "His Majesty". I am sure of this. I don't know for the sultans. An emir is definitely not a king. In 1999 the emir of tiny Bahrein upgraded his status from emir to king. It would be also interesting to take a look at the titles of the 9 monarchs of the federal kingdom of Malaysia. It could help us to have a better insight. Maybe in the future you can make a video about sultans and emirs. Please tell me what you think. Write soon.
@@gmicg yea at some point im planning on looking into it more and making a video on it, probably sometime next year
Queen Elizabeth II should be an Empress.
She can't
@@navibangtan4551 She can. She just won't.
In my opinion, she is, but pop culture says she's not, plus, if she assumes the role, it would ignite more power to Scotts, Irish, and Welsh people for independency.
@@rangenard you've got a point but the fact that she is a queen of so many countries justifies her as an empress unlike Japan right now.
@@kevsh4997 the use of the title Emperor in East Asian culture is very different from european one, in East Asian, the title of Emperor originally only meant for the ruler of Chinese Dynasties, other nations adopted the title to show to the world that they are equal to China, only to dismay Chinese and as such these nations only use the title inside their own territory, they would refer to themselves as king only when their diplomats presents in Chinese court
The Pope is a monarchy and is a king.
Lmao.
An ABSOLUTE monarchy, an elected monarchy.
What happened to Liechtenstein
If you mean where in the video is it, it’s at 08:50
Interesting but actually it is not true that the only empire in Medieval Europe was Holly Roman Empire, and also word and title ''Tsar'' does not come from Russian language at all, neither is Russian title.
There Was Franc Empire, before the Holly Roman Empire, divided on east and west and also Byzantium (East Roman Empire witch exist till 1453 and Roman Emperor was '' Valises'' the Emperor of Emperors), Latin Empire, Bulgarian Empire, some late periods of the medieval times also Serbian Empire and let not mention Swedish one.
The word Tsar it is coming from old church Slavonic language from Bulgaria and Moravia, who are actually first ''Slavic'' countries and Cyrillic alphabet and Slavic languages, actually comes from there . First who start use title Tsar is Bulgarians who used it till from 917 - 1946 and it is mean ''Creaser'' or ''Kaiser'' and it is equivalent of the Emperor. Russian start use it in 16th century.
Even in mediaeval Spain in the Christian part there were emperors and empresses -empress Urracca was empress of Spain in her own right and not a consort.
It was the Frankish kingdom though. Charlemagne adopted the title of emperor of the Romans later in life and thus more or less created the idea of the Holy Roman Empire.
What it want to say was that there was only one emperor title in the catholic world, the « Imperator romanorum ». The monarch of the HRE was only reference as the Emperor because catholic monarch can’t tittle themselves as emperor.
Also, bulgarian and russian empire emperor title were supposed to be the one of the Eastern Roman Empire, they claimed to be the new basileus.
It’s only in the 19th century that european monarchs decided to styled themselves as emperor of their countries.
Like previously said it was the Frankish Kingdom and it was divided in 3 not 2, there was a middle part between Eastern and Western Francia.
Just that the pope gave Charlemagne the title of Emperor/Augustus of the Romans in defiance of the (rightfully) uncooperative (eastern) Roman Empress/Augusta. The HRE used the same title for the prestige of Charlemagne and the Roman Empire that comes with it.
What about the POPE
The Pope is technically a monarch as well but since it is unique role I didn't want to include in this video as it is unclear where the role of Pope would fit in the hierarchy of monarchical roles
@@KobeanHistory wow thank you for answer my question and its clear to me now
Yeah, the Pope is a really odd case. He's the Bishop of Rome, the King of Vatican City and also technically-sort-of the spiritual Emperor of all of Catholic Europe (since he's the head of the church as a whole and all Catholic Monarchs are supposed to take their authority from God and mother church).
Ultimately, the Pope's position is simply unique. During the mediaeval period his authority sort of mirrored the Divine Trinity; head of the faith, supposedly holding ultimate political power over Catholic Monarchs and also a Monarch in his own right. Three distinct responsibilities in one indivisible office.
@@MrMortull the Pope is actually a "Prince" just like the Cardinals. They are the Princes of the Church.
Up date today (as i type this message is)
Mar. 23 2023 and the new head of the royal family of is King Charles III....
The only difference between Emperor and King depends on where you live and at what time you live in, don't ever buy that (a king rules over a kingdom and an emperor rules over many kingdoms) The Swedish Empire had a King while ruling many other countries & Qing Dynasty had an Emperor while ruling over only China and tribute states. The biggest empire in the world the British Empire had a king and Japan that only rules over it's own country has an emperor. Both kings and emperors can be elected so is the US president an emperor? Why was the ruler of the Swedish Empire and the British Empire called a King while
The Persian Empire a King of Kings
The German Empire both High king and Kaiser
The Austro-Hungarian Empire an Emperor-King
The Russian Empire a Tsar
The Mongol Empire a Khan
The Ottoman Empire a Sultan
The Roman Empire an Emperor
And the Qing dynasty also an Emperor even if it wasn't an Empire?
Roman Emperor an Augustus, the heir being Caesar.
But yes (translation of non European titles aside) Emperor isn't or rather wasn't related to size or power but a link to the Roman Empire. The emperor part was simply from the part of their title that mentioned them as Emperor of the Romans. Yes Holy Roman Emperors, and later German Emperors were titled Emperors of the Romans. Which started due to the (eastern) Roman Empire being ruled by an uncooperative (to the pope and Charlemagne) Empress.
Then rulers who idolised the Roman Empire, like Napoleon, claimed it for prestige.
I want to be king of archduke land.
That makes you archduke or king?
Wait so is this why we have Princess Peach and Princess Zelda and not Queen Peach or Queen Zelda?
And yet their domains are still called the Mushroom Kingdom and the Kingdom of Hyrule, respectively. We've met a King of Hyrule a time or two so that confuses things further, although possibly it's a Hylean tradition that their female monarchs remain Princesses? It could also be that Zelda retains her title of Princess in respect of her being the holder of the Triforce of Wisdom, her spiritual position considered more significant than her temporal power as a Monarch. Peach? I've got no idea with her... of course, it might just be that Nintendo didn't quite understand how European Monarchies are meant to work overall. Or they thought that Princesses are more enticing to go rescue than Queens.
@@MrMortull
I can give some real explanations for that. Not every kingdom at the time explicitly had a king or queen. Some had arch dukes, or dukes, or princes ruling them. (Archduchys, duchys, and principalities respectively.)
@@MrMortull
In Zelda's case, in some instances the king of Hyrule is very much still alive so there's no reason for her to ascend. Also Zelda is a relatively younger princess. Usually young adult to teenaged. Age is a factor in some real kingdoms when a prince or princess to become a king or queen. And in a few instances (BotW being one of them.) Hyrule went through a cataclysm of some sort so a coronation wouldn't be possible at the time.
With the mushroom kingdom...
Maybe Peach and her kingdom are just minor and relatively unimportant areas in the world.
@@mill2712 What I'm hearing is "It should really be the Mushroom Grand Duchy, but Peach and the Toads have an ego problem". xD
Maybe the title is withheld until a marital union has been filled. I’ve always supposed that.
No mention of sultan
I have a separate video where I go over sultan and other Middle Eastern ranks:
ua-cam.com/video/rbJUiTRQZWw/v-deo.html
@@KobeanHistory tnx mate 👍
Huzzah, Huzzah, make way for the Dukes of Hazzard!
Interesting fact is that the first "Tsar" is the Bulgarian ruler - Tsar Simeon I.
The last Tsar in the history is again the Bulgarian ruler - Tsar Simeon II. He is currently 86 years old.
Not tzar but King.bwfore was a tzar in mediveal Bulgaria. Its biblical translate to bulg.and in Slavic
lsnguage s king means tzar as i read info and fscts.boris and others in new era never was real tzars and also they are not
they are not recognized as such.its just tradition and symbolism from old times..Serbia and Bulgaria have empires before..
He was King and his father etc. Bulgaria was Kingdom in 20century..Empire just was be a name becouse in bible in Slavic countries tzar means King more thsn real car.also he never crowned as s a tzar..
@@djordjesm7431 , хаха, да - признати са за царе.
Цар Симеон е първият български цар, а неговият син - Свети цар Петър I , е официално признат за цар и от Източната Римска империя (Византия).
Това става през 927 г. , в Цариград, където взима за жена Мария-Ирина Лакапина - дъщерята на император Христофор Лакапин ;)
Then what is a sultan
Sultan would be the equivalent of King of Kings so it would fall on the same tier as Emperor
and duke comes from Dukes family iE Rome
Emperor is highest rank you can get in monarchy system
AUGUST:Am I a joke to you
August was just a title given to Roman Emperors if im not mistaken
Hallelujah JESUS is the king of kings and lord of lords
اكو عراقي هنا لو بس اني 😂😂🤣🤣🤣
Sorry, but there are many mistakes in this video. E.g., the German word for „emperor“ is written „Kaiser“, with an „e“. And the old German duchies were actually called stem duchies (NOT arch duchies), and Austria was not one of them (instead: Franconia, Lorraine, Saxony, Bavaria, Swabia).
Oops yea I made a spelling mistake but I didn't claim old German Duchies were called Archduchies. I didn't even talk about stem Duchies in this video because the video is about the different monarchical positions people have taken and in that sense stem Duchies are ruled by Dukes like any other Duchy. If you look back at the video I specifically state that the title of Archduke was given as an honorary title to the Duke of Lotharingia (look up Bruno the Great for more info). What else did I get wrong according to you?
Apart from the 1 spelling there are no errors, he didn’t talk about stem duchies
@@KobeanHistory I just watched the video again, after a second reply came in, that I got it wrong reg. the archduchies/stem duchies. Guess what: you‘re both right, I got it wrong indeed! Please accept my sincere apologies.
Still, I checked on Bruno the Great, and it appears, that he never actually was given the title of archduke, but that rather his court biographer simply invented that title as a concoction of his two major titles as ARCHbishop (of Cologne) and DUKE (of Lotharingia). Lotharingia itself by the way was never called an archduchy, nor was apparently any of Bruno‘s predecessors or successors ever called archduke, it was a totally singular occasion. He was likely also not recognized by his contemporary peers as an „archduke“.
@@marc-julien6826 Thanks I appreciate that, true I didn’t explain the Lotharingia situation that well in the video I should have gone into more detail to clarify
You have omitted to mention the principality of Liechtenstein
I haven’t, check the timestamps, Liechtenstein has it’s own chapter.
You forgot to mention "SULTAN"
its on the same level as Emperor
I just cover the European titles in this video, i might do a video in the future on other parts of the world
@@KobeanHistory but Japan isn't European or an empire.
@@spaggitles yes but they use the title of Emperor which is also used in Europe
Sultans are just the same as King or if not Below there's Sultan is not The same as Emperor They're just a King like
Sultan brunei known internationally as King of Brunei today
In cause if Japan. The Reason why Japan still has the Emperor
The Reason was after the WW2 the Conditional Surrender of Japanese Empire in 1947 to keep the Emperor as it's Monarch and the Imperial Family
This Condition by Japanese Empire in 1945-1947 has been agreed in condition for Japanese Empire to Stop the War and The WW2
Among Nations who agreed to the Conditional Surrender of Japanese Empire was RUSSIA , USA , UNITED KINGDOM , and Allies
And Yet Japan is Still Empire because they have Emperor
Several mistakes about the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg which stills exists as an indépendant country !
I literally say that in the video, what are the mistakes you are referring to?
He come you skipped African Royal families?
That's why we are latin america
''wherein latin was spoken''
People not from here can't explain my own history and doesn't it seem weirder that people from out of my ring know our history and so much of it, the majority of documentary films etc learning books etc about our back ground is in your way of behavior
No wonder why you would later maybe understand more clearly why cannibalism started in somewhere around Germany or France
Hasburgs ware never holy roman emperors but german emperors ware
You might have to do some more research, you’ll find you’re wrong
@@KobeanHistory i dont nead to becouse i know so in the year 1434 the count of celje saved holy roman emperor he was a german not austrian life after the battle with muslims for a brave act he got the title of a prince which hasburg fake emperor protested.do you know what did the holy roman emperor said to this fake hasburg?who gives you the right to call yourselfe the emperor of holy roman empire ?since i last check this title belong to german emperor's then he add give me one document with a titles you didnt write with your own hand.the golden apple document they writed by their own hand which was never recognized and they become a laughing stock.when nepoleon comes here why did this fake roman emperor suddenly change frome emperor to arch duke? Because he was not the emperor his title was only a duke of Austria that was his title and even this title was stolen they ware criminals liers robbers and etc and ask yourselfe why they ware exiled frome the tirol? 1st as i mention before they are robbers killers backstabers and they didnt have no royal or noble blood inside them .they kill the count of the tirol becouse they ware power hungry only to be hunted down like dogs .and btw holy roman empire never existe it wasn't holy and it wasnt roman ither it was a german empire and german empire had his own emperor .and btw austria was never so big the whole land today belongs to slovenian except smal state of the tirol and uper lands .dou you know why becouse before those userpers come thefe was a great kindom of Caranthania who ware ruled by slovenian kings .the 1st king was Romulus the last roman emperor the last king of noricum and the first king of Caranthania and the last one was king Arnulf The I of koroska .that is history the real history .not the fake history .so ask them why ware they exiled ?and i am youst wondering will they tell you the truth.
Im confused on what your saying are you saying that the hasburgs were not the "true" leaders as in they stole the throne and had no real claim or that the hasburgs never ruled the hre in general?.
@@jozebutinar44 wtf are you even saying? The Habsburg were elected by the imperial princes same as every Holy Roman Emperor before them.
@@Siegbert85 no they ware not that is the truth if that would be truth why did napoeon wanted to take this title frome them? and why sudenly they sai ok we are not emperors ? why did sigismund tell him give me one proff that the title you have are not writen with your own hand ? exlpain that
There is only one King of Kings, His Name is Jesus Christ.
Bruh
yeah, in Biblical fiction. We're talking reality here
@@Siegbert85 you're the fictional one here
3 seconds into the video and I had to quit it.. Borring narrator.. NEXT!
believe in jesus
Dukes of austria ware never elected they stole the title but they ware never recognized and 2 this wasnt holy roman empire nither was roman and nither was a holy it was german empire and not austrian empire.2 archduchy wasnt recreated by hasburgs but the kindom of carinthia have a king and a archduke again you are wrong.
So, I have listened to 3 minutes of your video, and you are already wrong about so many things that I have zero confidence in what you have to say. Example: "The British monarch did not take the title of emperor". In fact, they did. "Emperor of India" was part of the title of many British monarchs.
I literally say that in the next sentence if you had cared to listen a second longer before having the need to comment, you could have saved yourself the embarrassment of posting this “example”.
Exactly four.
Only after 1857.
Do read up on this.
actually enjoyed all female commentary!