Why did the person in charge of a principality not just declare themself king?How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?Why is the heir to the British throne called “Prince of Wales”?What 17C protocol left a princess standing whilst commoners sat?Which European countries did not have a revolution in the aftermath of the French Revolution and why?Why China was able to unify and not Europe?How “religious” was the average person in the Middle Ages?Why did the Arab spring and Iranian Green movement failed for the most part, but the European revolution did not?Has Catholic excommunication ever caused the dethronement of any king?When the king was away, did their queens sign Acts of Parliament on their behalf?In the 18th c., did/would China accept gold from Europe as trade payment? Why / why not?Why did Stephen II of Blois (father of King Stephen of England) abandon the First Crusade in 1098 knowing how much he would lose by doing so?Why did Europeans (and not people in other regions) dominate oceans?Why did the maize-based society that Spain found in the Central Valley of Mexico not dominate over Europe?
Security vulnerabilities of POST over SSL
Why would a rational buyer offer to buy with no conditions precedent?
Grade-school elementary algebra presented in an abstract-algebra style?
Manager questioning my time estimates for a project
What weight should be given to writers groups critiques?
Drums and punctuation
Shorten or merge multiple lines of `&> /dev/null &`
Writing style before Elements of Style
Are there any German nonsense poems (Jabberwocky)?
What did the 'turbo' button actually do?
Can a character with the War Caster feat call a bolt with Call Lightning instead of making an opportunity attack?
Can we assume that a hash function with high collision resistance also means highly uniform distribution?
Count all vowels in string
Is there an idiom that means that you are in a very strong negotiation position in a negotiation?
What's difference between "depends on" and "is blocked by" relations between issues in Jira next-gen board?
How to patch glass cuts in a bicycle tire?
My players want to grind XP but we're using landmark advancement
Why did Drogon spare this character?
Is keeping the forking link on a true fork necessary (Github/GPL)?
Why isn't 'chemically-strengthened glass' made with potassium carbonate to begin with?
“For nothing” = “pour rien”?
Navigating a quick return to previous employer
Why did other houses not demand this?
Mercedes C180 (W204) dash symbol
Why did the person in charge of a principality not just declare themself king?
How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?Why is the heir to the British throne called “Prince of Wales”?What 17C protocol left a princess standing whilst commoners sat?Which European countries did not have a revolution in the aftermath of the French Revolution and why?Why China was able to unify and not Europe?How “religious” was the average person in the Middle Ages?Why did the Arab spring and Iranian Green movement failed for the most part, but the European revolution did not?Has Catholic excommunication ever caused the dethronement of any king?When the king was away, did their queens sign Acts of Parliament on their behalf?In the 18th c., did/would China accept gold from Europe as trade payment? Why / why not?Why did Stephen II of Blois (father of King Stephen of England) abandon the First Crusade in 1098 knowing how much he would lose by doing so?Why did Europeans (and not people in other regions) dominate oceans?Why did the maize-based society that Spain found in the Central Valley of Mexico not dominate over Europe?
I just don't understand the concept of principalities, why wouldn't you just call yourself king?
The job description appears to be exactly the same.
When England was ruled by the Saxons we had a bunch of kings, who slowly all got defeated and the winner declared the old king a Duke (or worse).
Is it when an empire got to big to manage the King set his sons off to manage chunks and over time they became more autonomous?
I tried to google but all I could find really were about the bible and demons. One article about wales looked really promising but it just seemed to be an extract about a book.
I looked at the proposed duplicate How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?.
A better Example is Queen Victoria deciding to become Empress of all India after her daughter became Empress of Germany. (I know it is politically more complicated than that really)
This thread doesn't answer my question as principalities weren't under a king who had given them their title and who they owed fealty to. Principalities are top of their own pile. Somebody has answered my question with the Russian Tsar example
I have just read the other suggested link Why is the heir to the British throne called "Prince of Wales"?
and the fact that prince actually means leader is very interesting.
europe
|
show 3 more comments
I just don't understand the concept of principalities, why wouldn't you just call yourself king?
The job description appears to be exactly the same.
When England was ruled by the Saxons we had a bunch of kings, who slowly all got defeated and the winner declared the old king a Duke (or worse).
Is it when an empire got to big to manage the King set his sons off to manage chunks and over time they became more autonomous?
I tried to google but all I could find really were about the bible and demons. One article about wales looked really promising but it just seemed to be an extract about a book.
I looked at the proposed duplicate How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?.
A better Example is Queen Victoria deciding to become Empress of all India after her daughter became Empress of Germany. (I know it is politically more complicated than that really)
This thread doesn't answer my question as principalities weren't under a king who had given them their title and who they owed fealty to. Principalities are top of their own pile. Somebody has answered my question with the Russian Tsar example
I have just read the other suggested link Why is the heir to the British throne called "Prince of Wales"?
and the fact that prince actually means leader is very interesting.
europe
1
You might like to look at the answers to this question. It's not a duplicate but gives reasons as to why Wales became, and remained, a principality.
– Steve Bird
8 hours ago
Possible duplicate of How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
It's not an actual dup, but the linked question will give you one side of the answer by sketching out how noble titles worked. The other side of the answer is that you need other heads of States to recognize your claim that you're heading a kingdom. (In particular the Pope, for Catholic countries.)
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
1
When you are a dictator... You can call yourself whatever you want. Gaddafi called himself colonel. Saddam Hussien, president... Kim Jung Un, Chairman.. King, prince, kaiser, tsar, czar, emperor, imperator, lord protector of the realm, defender of the 7 kingdoms... are all just titles.. they don't mean anything beyond, "top dog here"..
– sofa general
4 hours ago
@sofageneral, agree in general, but it's not exactly "whatever you want", if you want to have diplomatic relationship with other countries/leaders. More outrageous title you take, less serious you look.
– user28434
3 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
I just don't understand the concept of principalities, why wouldn't you just call yourself king?
The job description appears to be exactly the same.
When England was ruled by the Saxons we had a bunch of kings, who slowly all got defeated and the winner declared the old king a Duke (or worse).
Is it when an empire got to big to manage the King set his sons off to manage chunks and over time they became more autonomous?
I tried to google but all I could find really were about the bible and demons. One article about wales looked really promising but it just seemed to be an extract about a book.
I looked at the proposed duplicate How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?.
A better Example is Queen Victoria deciding to become Empress of all India after her daughter became Empress of Germany. (I know it is politically more complicated than that really)
This thread doesn't answer my question as principalities weren't under a king who had given them their title and who they owed fealty to. Principalities are top of their own pile. Somebody has answered my question with the Russian Tsar example
I have just read the other suggested link Why is the heir to the British throne called "Prince of Wales"?
and the fact that prince actually means leader is very interesting.
europe
I just don't understand the concept of principalities, why wouldn't you just call yourself king?
The job description appears to be exactly the same.
When England was ruled by the Saxons we had a bunch of kings, who slowly all got defeated and the winner declared the old king a Duke (or worse).
Is it when an empire got to big to manage the King set his sons off to manage chunks and over time they became more autonomous?
I tried to google but all I could find really were about the bible and demons. One article about wales looked really promising but it just seemed to be an extract about a book.
I looked at the proposed duplicate How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?.
A better Example is Queen Victoria deciding to become Empress of all India after her daughter became Empress of Germany. (I know it is politically more complicated than that really)
This thread doesn't answer my question as principalities weren't under a king who had given them their title and who they owed fealty to. Principalities are top of their own pile. Somebody has answered my question with the Russian Tsar example
I have just read the other suggested link Why is the heir to the British throne called "Prince of Wales"?
and the fact that prince actually means leader is very interesting.
europe
europe
edited 6 hours ago
WendyG
asked 8 hours ago
WendyGWendyG
5881511
5881511
1
You might like to look at the answers to this question. It's not a duplicate but gives reasons as to why Wales became, and remained, a principality.
– Steve Bird
8 hours ago
Possible duplicate of How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
It's not an actual dup, but the linked question will give you one side of the answer by sketching out how noble titles worked. The other side of the answer is that you need other heads of States to recognize your claim that you're heading a kingdom. (In particular the Pope, for Catholic countries.)
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
1
When you are a dictator... You can call yourself whatever you want. Gaddafi called himself colonel. Saddam Hussien, president... Kim Jung Un, Chairman.. King, prince, kaiser, tsar, czar, emperor, imperator, lord protector of the realm, defender of the 7 kingdoms... are all just titles.. they don't mean anything beyond, "top dog here"..
– sofa general
4 hours ago
@sofageneral, agree in general, but it's not exactly "whatever you want", if you want to have diplomatic relationship with other countries/leaders. More outrageous title you take, less serious you look.
– user28434
3 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
1
You might like to look at the answers to this question. It's not a duplicate but gives reasons as to why Wales became, and remained, a principality.
– Steve Bird
8 hours ago
Possible duplicate of How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
It's not an actual dup, but the linked question will give you one side of the answer by sketching out how noble titles worked. The other side of the answer is that you need other heads of States to recognize your claim that you're heading a kingdom. (In particular the Pope, for Catholic countries.)
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
1
When you are a dictator... You can call yourself whatever you want. Gaddafi called himself colonel. Saddam Hussien, president... Kim Jung Un, Chairman.. King, prince, kaiser, tsar, czar, emperor, imperator, lord protector of the realm, defender of the 7 kingdoms... are all just titles.. they don't mean anything beyond, "top dog here"..
– sofa general
4 hours ago
@sofageneral, agree in general, but it's not exactly "whatever you want", if you want to have diplomatic relationship with other countries/leaders. More outrageous title you take, less serious you look.
– user28434
3 hours ago
1
1
You might like to look at the answers to this question. It's not a duplicate but gives reasons as to why Wales became, and remained, a principality.
– Steve Bird
8 hours ago
You might like to look at the answers to this question. It's not a duplicate but gives reasons as to why Wales became, and remained, a principality.
– Steve Bird
8 hours ago
Possible duplicate of How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
Possible duplicate of How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
It's not an actual dup, but the linked question will give you one side of the answer by sketching out how noble titles worked. The other side of the answer is that you need other heads of States to recognize your claim that you're heading a kingdom. (In particular the Pope, for Catholic countries.)
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
It's not an actual dup, but the linked question will give you one side of the answer by sketching out how noble titles worked. The other side of the answer is that you need other heads of States to recognize your claim that you're heading a kingdom. (In particular the Pope, for Catholic countries.)
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
1
1
When you are a dictator... You can call yourself whatever you want. Gaddafi called himself colonel. Saddam Hussien, president... Kim Jung Un, Chairman.. King, prince, kaiser, tsar, czar, emperor, imperator, lord protector of the realm, defender of the 7 kingdoms... are all just titles.. they don't mean anything beyond, "top dog here"..
– sofa general
4 hours ago
When you are a dictator... You can call yourself whatever you want. Gaddafi called himself colonel. Saddam Hussien, president... Kim Jung Un, Chairman.. King, prince, kaiser, tsar, czar, emperor, imperator, lord protector of the realm, defender of the 7 kingdoms... are all just titles.. they don't mean anything beyond, "top dog here"..
– sofa general
4 hours ago
@sofageneral, agree in general, but it's not exactly "whatever you want", if you want to have diplomatic relationship with other countries/leaders. More outrageous title you take, less serious you look.
– user28434
3 hours ago
@sofageneral, agree in general, but it's not exactly "whatever you want", if you want to have diplomatic relationship with other countries/leaders. More outrageous title you take, less serious you look.
– user28434
3 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
If you are a prince you may call yourself whatever you want. And you can try to impose the usage of the title on your subjects, if you really care. But this is not the main point. The main point is the recognition by your neighboring princes and kings.
A good case to illustrate this is the story of Russia. It used to be the Grand Duchy of Moscow, or simply Moscovia. After the conquest of several neighbors, including one or two who called himself Tsars, the prince
decided to call himself Tsar. (Which means somewhat more than a king, rather an emperor). Those neighbors not yet conquered refused. But the Russian prince insisted. This created a lot of diplomatic problems and even wars with the principal neighbor (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth). Indeed, several times the problem of properly addressing the prince was a cause of war.
The situation changed as a result of the Great Northern war in which Moscovia defeated Sweden, though the main result of this war was conquest of what is called nowadays Eastern Ukraine and converting the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth into
a satellite (to be completely conquered few decades later). The result of this war
was an international recognition of the "Emperor of all Russias". The struggle for this title lasted almost 200 years. (Some historians say that this Northern war was the most devastating war in Russian history, in terms of relative loss of population).
Another source of the higher title is some higher authority. For example Prince Danylo of Galicia was crowned the King of Galicia by the Roman Pope,
in exchange for the recognition of the Pope authority.
As an extreme example I can mention an adventurist Jørgen Jørgensen who in 1809 declared himself the "King of Iceland". Apparently the Icelanders had nothing against it, so he "ruled" for two months, until a British ship arrived and he was arrested. Source: https://guidetoiceland.is/history-culture/the-top-7-most-infamous-icelanders-of-history. Moral: you need at least some degree of international recognition to become a king:-)
1
Tsarwas just russian form ofCaesar, and before fall of Constantinople was used only for rulers of Byzantium(Western Roman Empire). And taking this title as official title of russian monarch was kind of a sign thatMoscow is new Constantinople (or Third Rome). So, it was mostly symbolic. Also, no slavic rulers ever usedprinceper se. They've usedKnyaz(orGreat Knyaz) which was derived from the same original PIE root as english word "King" was.
– user28434
4 hours ago
Poland/Lithuania/Ukraine had been a satellite since the 1650s. Charles XII's rampage during the Great Northern War weakened it further, but this wasn't the result of any real action by Peter.
– Spencer
2 hours ago
@user28434: still the correct translation of kniaz iz "prince", not "king", and kniajestvo iz always translated as "duchy" or "great duchy", disregarding its linguistic root.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: I disagree. Poland in 17th century was still a great power and independent, and included Western (right shore, to be precise) Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine is another matter. And there was a continuous sequence of wars, with final subjugation of Poland only at the time of Peter.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: you cannot call Jan Sobeski a "Russian vassal". The real decline started under his successor, August II. And also not without opposition.
– Alex
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Expanding on Alex' answer, there is the example of the Hohernzollern dynasty. They were the prince-electors of Brandenburg, but from 1701 to 1772 they called themselves kings in Prussia. They did not call themselves king of Prussia yet because Brandenburg was part of the HRE and their kingship was only seen as valid outside the HRE -- in Prussia, not in Brandenburg.
After some generations they got the other German princes and kings to accept their kingship without the qualifier.
add a comment |
Sometimes sovereigns had to downgrade their title. We often think of Franz Josef as Emperor of Austria-Hungary after the creation of the dual monarchy (with Hungary having won autonomy from Austria in 1866-1867) since he previously had been Emperor of Austria. But in fact he was Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary, complicating many things...e.g., the joint army was called "the imperial and royal army" as the Hungarians insisted it not be called "the imperial army".
add a comment |
Several people did just that: have control over a territory, declare themselves to be $insert–title.
Odoacer declared himself to rex Italiae, king of Italy
Fall and death
As Odoacer's position improved, Zeno, the Eastern Emperor, increasingly saw him as a rival. According to John of Antioch, Odoacer exchanged messages with Illus, who had been in revolt against Zeno since 484.
Napoleon
To expand his power, Napoleon used these assassination plots to justify the creation of an imperial system based on the Roman model. He believed that a Bourbon restoration would be more difficult if his family's succession was entrenched in the constitution.
Wilhelm I
William I, German Emperor
Instead of Emperor of Germany! The feelings of other princes in Germany were an obstacle, and other European rulers or countries as well.
They all have in common that it was difficult for them to not come across as parvenus. Upstarts make for jealous peers and neighbours, all keen to not fall behind or loose their standing.
That is, it all depends whether it is perceived as something real.
The Emperor of the United States began his rule with well formed reason and conviction, after all:
By 1859, Norton had become completely discontented with what he considered the inadequacies of the legal and political structures of the United States. On September 17, 1859, he took matters into his own hands and distributed letters to the various newspapers in the city, proclaiming himself "Emperor of these United States".
If one can pull it off, fine. It looked for a while that Napoleon could do it. Wilhelm was also in a position to hold on until his death.
It's difficult enough to subjugate your own subjects, many kings and Roman or even Holy Roman Emperors knew the lyrics of that song by heart. But during several epochs, usurping the wrong title could mean imminent attack by rivals. Rivals who showed them who was king.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "324"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52754%2fwhy-did-the-person-in-charge-of-a-principality-not-just-declare-themself-king%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If you are a prince you may call yourself whatever you want. And you can try to impose the usage of the title on your subjects, if you really care. But this is not the main point. The main point is the recognition by your neighboring princes and kings.
A good case to illustrate this is the story of Russia. It used to be the Grand Duchy of Moscow, or simply Moscovia. After the conquest of several neighbors, including one or two who called himself Tsars, the prince
decided to call himself Tsar. (Which means somewhat more than a king, rather an emperor). Those neighbors not yet conquered refused. But the Russian prince insisted. This created a lot of diplomatic problems and even wars with the principal neighbor (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth). Indeed, several times the problem of properly addressing the prince was a cause of war.
The situation changed as a result of the Great Northern war in which Moscovia defeated Sweden, though the main result of this war was conquest of what is called nowadays Eastern Ukraine and converting the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth into
a satellite (to be completely conquered few decades later). The result of this war
was an international recognition of the "Emperor of all Russias". The struggle for this title lasted almost 200 years. (Some historians say that this Northern war was the most devastating war in Russian history, in terms of relative loss of population).
Another source of the higher title is some higher authority. For example Prince Danylo of Galicia was crowned the King of Galicia by the Roman Pope,
in exchange for the recognition of the Pope authority.
As an extreme example I can mention an adventurist Jørgen Jørgensen who in 1809 declared himself the "King of Iceland". Apparently the Icelanders had nothing against it, so he "ruled" for two months, until a British ship arrived and he was arrested. Source: https://guidetoiceland.is/history-culture/the-top-7-most-infamous-icelanders-of-history. Moral: you need at least some degree of international recognition to become a king:-)
1
Tsarwas just russian form ofCaesar, and before fall of Constantinople was used only for rulers of Byzantium(Western Roman Empire). And taking this title as official title of russian monarch was kind of a sign thatMoscow is new Constantinople (or Third Rome). So, it was mostly symbolic. Also, no slavic rulers ever usedprinceper se. They've usedKnyaz(orGreat Knyaz) which was derived from the same original PIE root as english word "King" was.
– user28434
4 hours ago
Poland/Lithuania/Ukraine had been a satellite since the 1650s. Charles XII's rampage during the Great Northern War weakened it further, but this wasn't the result of any real action by Peter.
– Spencer
2 hours ago
@user28434: still the correct translation of kniaz iz "prince", not "king", and kniajestvo iz always translated as "duchy" or "great duchy", disregarding its linguistic root.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: I disagree. Poland in 17th century was still a great power and independent, and included Western (right shore, to be precise) Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine is another matter. And there was a continuous sequence of wars, with final subjugation of Poland only at the time of Peter.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: you cannot call Jan Sobeski a "Russian vassal". The real decline started under his successor, August II. And also not without opposition.
– Alex
1 hour ago
add a comment |
If you are a prince you may call yourself whatever you want. And you can try to impose the usage of the title on your subjects, if you really care. But this is not the main point. The main point is the recognition by your neighboring princes and kings.
A good case to illustrate this is the story of Russia. It used to be the Grand Duchy of Moscow, or simply Moscovia. After the conquest of several neighbors, including one or two who called himself Tsars, the prince
decided to call himself Tsar. (Which means somewhat more than a king, rather an emperor). Those neighbors not yet conquered refused. But the Russian prince insisted. This created a lot of diplomatic problems and even wars with the principal neighbor (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth). Indeed, several times the problem of properly addressing the prince was a cause of war.
The situation changed as a result of the Great Northern war in which Moscovia defeated Sweden, though the main result of this war was conquest of what is called nowadays Eastern Ukraine and converting the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth into
a satellite (to be completely conquered few decades later). The result of this war
was an international recognition of the "Emperor of all Russias". The struggle for this title lasted almost 200 years. (Some historians say that this Northern war was the most devastating war in Russian history, in terms of relative loss of population).
Another source of the higher title is some higher authority. For example Prince Danylo of Galicia was crowned the King of Galicia by the Roman Pope,
in exchange for the recognition of the Pope authority.
As an extreme example I can mention an adventurist Jørgen Jørgensen who in 1809 declared himself the "King of Iceland". Apparently the Icelanders had nothing against it, so he "ruled" for two months, until a British ship arrived and he was arrested. Source: https://guidetoiceland.is/history-culture/the-top-7-most-infamous-icelanders-of-history. Moral: you need at least some degree of international recognition to become a king:-)
1
Tsarwas just russian form ofCaesar, and before fall of Constantinople was used only for rulers of Byzantium(Western Roman Empire). And taking this title as official title of russian monarch was kind of a sign thatMoscow is new Constantinople (or Third Rome). So, it was mostly symbolic. Also, no slavic rulers ever usedprinceper se. They've usedKnyaz(orGreat Knyaz) which was derived from the same original PIE root as english word "King" was.
– user28434
4 hours ago
Poland/Lithuania/Ukraine had been a satellite since the 1650s. Charles XII's rampage during the Great Northern War weakened it further, but this wasn't the result of any real action by Peter.
– Spencer
2 hours ago
@user28434: still the correct translation of kniaz iz "prince", not "king", and kniajestvo iz always translated as "duchy" or "great duchy", disregarding its linguistic root.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: I disagree. Poland in 17th century was still a great power and independent, and included Western (right shore, to be precise) Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine is another matter. And there was a continuous sequence of wars, with final subjugation of Poland only at the time of Peter.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: you cannot call Jan Sobeski a "Russian vassal". The real decline started under his successor, August II. And also not without opposition.
– Alex
1 hour ago
add a comment |
If you are a prince you may call yourself whatever you want. And you can try to impose the usage of the title on your subjects, if you really care. But this is not the main point. The main point is the recognition by your neighboring princes and kings.
A good case to illustrate this is the story of Russia. It used to be the Grand Duchy of Moscow, or simply Moscovia. After the conquest of several neighbors, including one or two who called himself Tsars, the prince
decided to call himself Tsar. (Which means somewhat more than a king, rather an emperor). Those neighbors not yet conquered refused. But the Russian prince insisted. This created a lot of diplomatic problems and even wars with the principal neighbor (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth). Indeed, several times the problem of properly addressing the prince was a cause of war.
The situation changed as a result of the Great Northern war in which Moscovia defeated Sweden, though the main result of this war was conquest of what is called nowadays Eastern Ukraine and converting the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth into
a satellite (to be completely conquered few decades later). The result of this war
was an international recognition of the "Emperor of all Russias". The struggle for this title lasted almost 200 years. (Some historians say that this Northern war was the most devastating war in Russian history, in terms of relative loss of population).
Another source of the higher title is some higher authority. For example Prince Danylo of Galicia was crowned the King of Galicia by the Roman Pope,
in exchange for the recognition of the Pope authority.
As an extreme example I can mention an adventurist Jørgen Jørgensen who in 1809 declared himself the "King of Iceland". Apparently the Icelanders had nothing against it, so he "ruled" for two months, until a British ship arrived and he was arrested. Source: https://guidetoiceland.is/history-culture/the-top-7-most-infamous-icelanders-of-history. Moral: you need at least some degree of international recognition to become a king:-)
If you are a prince you may call yourself whatever you want. And you can try to impose the usage of the title on your subjects, if you really care. But this is not the main point. The main point is the recognition by your neighboring princes and kings.
A good case to illustrate this is the story of Russia. It used to be the Grand Duchy of Moscow, or simply Moscovia. After the conquest of several neighbors, including one or two who called himself Tsars, the prince
decided to call himself Tsar. (Which means somewhat more than a king, rather an emperor). Those neighbors not yet conquered refused. But the Russian prince insisted. This created a lot of diplomatic problems and even wars with the principal neighbor (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth). Indeed, several times the problem of properly addressing the prince was a cause of war.
The situation changed as a result of the Great Northern war in which Moscovia defeated Sweden, though the main result of this war was conquest of what is called nowadays Eastern Ukraine and converting the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth into
a satellite (to be completely conquered few decades later). The result of this war
was an international recognition of the "Emperor of all Russias". The struggle for this title lasted almost 200 years. (Some historians say that this Northern war was the most devastating war in Russian history, in terms of relative loss of population).
Another source of the higher title is some higher authority. For example Prince Danylo of Galicia was crowned the King of Galicia by the Roman Pope,
in exchange for the recognition of the Pope authority.
As an extreme example I can mention an adventurist Jørgen Jørgensen who in 1809 declared himself the "King of Iceland". Apparently the Icelanders had nothing against it, so he "ruled" for two months, until a British ship arrived and he was arrested. Source: https://guidetoiceland.is/history-culture/the-top-7-most-infamous-icelanders-of-history. Moral: you need at least some degree of international recognition to become a king:-)
edited 21 mins ago
answered 6 hours ago
AlexAlex
28.9k156109
28.9k156109
1
Tsarwas just russian form ofCaesar, and before fall of Constantinople was used only for rulers of Byzantium(Western Roman Empire). And taking this title as official title of russian monarch was kind of a sign thatMoscow is new Constantinople (or Third Rome). So, it was mostly symbolic. Also, no slavic rulers ever usedprinceper se. They've usedKnyaz(orGreat Knyaz) which was derived from the same original PIE root as english word "King" was.
– user28434
4 hours ago
Poland/Lithuania/Ukraine had been a satellite since the 1650s. Charles XII's rampage during the Great Northern War weakened it further, but this wasn't the result of any real action by Peter.
– Spencer
2 hours ago
@user28434: still the correct translation of kniaz iz "prince", not "king", and kniajestvo iz always translated as "duchy" or "great duchy", disregarding its linguistic root.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: I disagree. Poland in 17th century was still a great power and independent, and included Western (right shore, to be precise) Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine is another matter. And there was a continuous sequence of wars, with final subjugation of Poland only at the time of Peter.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: you cannot call Jan Sobeski a "Russian vassal". The real decline started under his successor, August II. And also not without opposition.
– Alex
1 hour ago
add a comment |
1
Tsarwas just russian form ofCaesar, and before fall of Constantinople was used only for rulers of Byzantium(Western Roman Empire). And taking this title as official title of russian monarch was kind of a sign thatMoscow is new Constantinople (or Third Rome). So, it was mostly symbolic. Also, no slavic rulers ever usedprinceper se. They've usedKnyaz(orGreat Knyaz) which was derived from the same original PIE root as english word "King" was.
– user28434
4 hours ago
Poland/Lithuania/Ukraine had been a satellite since the 1650s. Charles XII's rampage during the Great Northern War weakened it further, but this wasn't the result of any real action by Peter.
– Spencer
2 hours ago
@user28434: still the correct translation of kniaz iz "prince", not "king", and kniajestvo iz always translated as "duchy" or "great duchy", disregarding its linguistic root.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: I disagree. Poland in 17th century was still a great power and independent, and included Western (right shore, to be precise) Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine is another matter. And there was a continuous sequence of wars, with final subjugation of Poland only at the time of Peter.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: you cannot call Jan Sobeski a "Russian vassal". The real decline started under his successor, August II. And also not without opposition.
– Alex
1 hour ago
1
1
Tsar was just russian form of Caesar, and before fall of Constantinople was used only for rulers of Byzantium(Western Roman Empire). And taking this title as official title of russian monarch was kind of a sign that Moscow is new Constantinople (or Third Rome). So, it was mostly symbolic. Also, no slavic rulers ever used prince per se. They've used Knyaz (or Great Knyaz) which was derived from the same original PIE root as english word "King" was.– user28434
4 hours ago
Tsar was just russian form of Caesar, and before fall of Constantinople was used only for rulers of Byzantium(Western Roman Empire). And taking this title as official title of russian monarch was kind of a sign that Moscow is new Constantinople (or Third Rome). So, it was mostly symbolic. Also, no slavic rulers ever used prince per se. They've used Knyaz (or Great Knyaz) which was derived from the same original PIE root as english word "King" was.– user28434
4 hours ago
Poland/Lithuania/Ukraine had been a satellite since the 1650s. Charles XII's rampage during the Great Northern War weakened it further, but this wasn't the result of any real action by Peter.
– Spencer
2 hours ago
Poland/Lithuania/Ukraine had been a satellite since the 1650s. Charles XII's rampage during the Great Northern War weakened it further, but this wasn't the result of any real action by Peter.
– Spencer
2 hours ago
@user28434: still the correct translation of kniaz iz "prince", not "king", and kniajestvo iz always translated as "duchy" or "great duchy", disregarding its linguistic root.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@user28434: still the correct translation of kniaz iz "prince", not "king", and kniajestvo iz always translated as "duchy" or "great duchy", disregarding its linguistic root.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: I disagree. Poland in 17th century was still a great power and independent, and included Western (right shore, to be precise) Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine is another matter. And there was a continuous sequence of wars, with final subjugation of Poland only at the time of Peter.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: I disagree. Poland in 17th century was still a great power and independent, and included Western (right shore, to be precise) Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine is another matter. And there was a continuous sequence of wars, with final subjugation of Poland only at the time of Peter.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: you cannot call Jan Sobeski a "Russian vassal". The real decline started under his successor, August II. And also not without opposition.
– Alex
1 hour ago
@Spencer: you cannot call Jan Sobeski a "Russian vassal". The real decline started under his successor, August II. And also not without opposition.
– Alex
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Expanding on Alex' answer, there is the example of the Hohernzollern dynasty. They were the prince-electors of Brandenburg, but from 1701 to 1772 they called themselves kings in Prussia. They did not call themselves king of Prussia yet because Brandenburg was part of the HRE and their kingship was only seen as valid outside the HRE -- in Prussia, not in Brandenburg.
After some generations they got the other German princes and kings to accept their kingship without the qualifier.
add a comment |
Expanding on Alex' answer, there is the example of the Hohernzollern dynasty. They were the prince-electors of Brandenburg, but from 1701 to 1772 they called themselves kings in Prussia. They did not call themselves king of Prussia yet because Brandenburg was part of the HRE and their kingship was only seen as valid outside the HRE -- in Prussia, not in Brandenburg.
After some generations they got the other German princes and kings to accept their kingship without the qualifier.
add a comment |
Expanding on Alex' answer, there is the example of the Hohernzollern dynasty. They were the prince-electors of Brandenburg, but from 1701 to 1772 they called themselves kings in Prussia. They did not call themselves king of Prussia yet because Brandenburg was part of the HRE and their kingship was only seen as valid outside the HRE -- in Prussia, not in Brandenburg.
After some generations they got the other German princes and kings to accept their kingship without the qualifier.
Expanding on Alex' answer, there is the example of the Hohernzollern dynasty. They were the prince-electors of Brandenburg, but from 1701 to 1772 they called themselves kings in Prussia. They did not call themselves king of Prussia yet because Brandenburg was part of the HRE and their kingship was only seen as valid outside the HRE -- in Prussia, not in Brandenburg.
After some generations they got the other German princes and kings to accept their kingship without the qualifier.
answered 2 hours ago
o.m.o.m.
10.1k1738
10.1k1738
add a comment |
add a comment |
Sometimes sovereigns had to downgrade their title. We often think of Franz Josef as Emperor of Austria-Hungary after the creation of the dual monarchy (with Hungary having won autonomy from Austria in 1866-1867) since he previously had been Emperor of Austria. But in fact he was Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary, complicating many things...e.g., the joint army was called "the imperial and royal army" as the Hungarians insisted it not be called "the imperial army".
add a comment |
Sometimes sovereigns had to downgrade their title. We often think of Franz Josef as Emperor of Austria-Hungary after the creation of the dual monarchy (with Hungary having won autonomy from Austria in 1866-1867) since he previously had been Emperor of Austria. But in fact he was Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary, complicating many things...e.g., the joint army was called "the imperial and royal army" as the Hungarians insisted it not be called "the imperial army".
add a comment |
Sometimes sovereigns had to downgrade their title. We often think of Franz Josef as Emperor of Austria-Hungary after the creation of the dual monarchy (with Hungary having won autonomy from Austria in 1866-1867) since he previously had been Emperor of Austria. But in fact he was Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary, complicating many things...e.g., the joint army was called "the imperial and royal army" as the Hungarians insisted it not be called "the imperial army".
Sometimes sovereigns had to downgrade their title. We often think of Franz Josef as Emperor of Austria-Hungary after the creation of the dual monarchy (with Hungary having won autonomy from Austria in 1866-1867) since he previously had been Emperor of Austria. But in fact he was Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary, complicating many things...e.g., the joint army was called "the imperial and royal army" as the Hungarians insisted it not be called "the imperial army".
answered 2 hours ago
C MonsourC Monsour
43817
43817
add a comment |
add a comment |
Several people did just that: have control over a territory, declare themselves to be $insert–title.
Odoacer declared himself to rex Italiae, king of Italy
Fall and death
As Odoacer's position improved, Zeno, the Eastern Emperor, increasingly saw him as a rival. According to John of Antioch, Odoacer exchanged messages with Illus, who had been in revolt against Zeno since 484.
Napoleon
To expand his power, Napoleon used these assassination plots to justify the creation of an imperial system based on the Roman model. He believed that a Bourbon restoration would be more difficult if his family's succession was entrenched in the constitution.
Wilhelm I
William I, German Emperor
Instead of Emperor of Germany! The feelings of other princes in Germany were an obstacle, and other European rulers or countries as well.
They all have in common that it was difficult for them to not come across as parvenus. Upstarts make for jealous peers and neighbours, all keen to not fall behind or loose their standing.
That is, it all depends whether it is perceived as something real.
The Emperor of the United States began his rule with well formed reason and conviction, after all:
By 1859, Norton had become completely discontented with what he considered the inadequacies of the legal and political structures of the United States. On September 17, 1859, he took matters into his own hands and distributed letters to the various newspapers in the city, proclaiming himself "Emperor of these United States".
If one can pull it off, fine. It looked for a while that Napoleon could do it. Wilhelm was also in a position to hold on until his death.
It's difficult enough to subjugate your own subjects, many kings and Roman or even Holy Roman Emperors knew the lyrics of that song by heart. But during several epochs, usurping the wrong title could mean imminent attack by rivals. Rivals who showed them who was king.
add a comment |
Several people did just that: have control over a territory, declare themselves to be $insert–title.
Odoacer declared himself to rex Italiae, king of Italy
Fall and death
As Odoacer's position improved, Zeno, the Eastern Emperor, increasingly saw him as a rival. According to John of Antioch, Odoacer exchanged messages with Illus, who had been in revolt against Zeno since 484.
Napoleon
To expand his power, Napoleon used these assassination plots to justify the creation of an imperial system based on the Roman model. He believed that a Bourbon restoration would be more difficult if his family's succession was entrenched in the constitution.
Wilhelm I
William I, German Emperor
Instead of Emperor of Germany! The feelings of other princes in Germany were an obstacle, and other European rulers or countries as well.
They all have in common that it was difficult for them to not come across as parvenus. Upstarts make for jealous peers and neighbours, all keen to not fall behind or loose their standing.
That is, it all depends whether it is perceived as something real.
The Emperor of the United States began his rule with well formed reason and conviction, after all:
By 1859, Norton had become completely discontented with what he considered the inadequacies of the legal and political structures of the United States. On September 17, 1859, he took matters into his own hands and distributed letters to the various newspapers in the city, proclaiming himself "Emperor of these United States".
If one can pull it off, fine. It looked for a while that Napoleon could do it. Wilhelm was also in a position to hold on until his death.
It's difficult enough to subjugate your own subjects, many kings and Roman or even Holy Roman Emperors knew the lyrics of that song by heart. But during several epochs, usurping the wrong title could mean imminent attack by rivals. Rivals who showed them who was king.
add a comment |
Several people did just that: have control over a territory, declare themselves to be $insert–title.
Odoacer declared himself to rex Italiae, king of Italy
Fall and death
As Odoacer's position improved, Zeno, the Eastern Emperor, increasingly saw him as a rival. According to John of Antioch, Odoacer exchanged messages with Illus, who had been in revolt against Zeno since 484.
Napoleon
To expand his power, Napoleon used these assassination plots to justify the creation of an imperial system based on the Roman model. He believed that a Bourbon restoration would be more difficult if his family's succession was entrenched in the constitution.
Wilhelm I
William I, German Emperor
Instead of Emperor of Germany! The feelings of other princes in Germany were an obstacle, and other European rulers or countries as well.
They all have in common that it was difficult for them to not come across as parvenus. Upstarts make for jealous peers and neighbours, all keen to not fall behind or loose their standing.
That is, it all depends whether it is perceived as something real.
The Emperor of the United States began his rule with well formed reason and conviction, after all:
By 1859, Norton had become completely discontented with what he considered the inadequacies of the legal and political structures of the United States. On September 17, 1859, he took matters into his own hands and distributed letters to the various newspapers in the city, proclaiming himself "Emperor of these United States".
If one can pull it off, fine. It looked for a while that Napoleon could do it. Wilhelm was also in a position to hold on until his death.
It's difficult enough to subjugate your own subjects, many kings and Roman or even Holy Roman Emperors knew the lyrics of that song by heart. But during several epochs, usurping the wrong title could mean imminent attack by rivals. Rivals who showed them who was king.
Several people did just that: have control over a territory, declare themselves to be $insert–title.
Odoacer declared himself to rex Italiae, king of Italy
Fall and death
As Odoacer's position improved, Zeno, the Eastern Emperor, increasingly saw him as a rival. According to John of Antioch, Odoacer exchanged messages with Illus, who had been in revolt against Zeno since 484.
Napoleon
To expand his power, Napoleon used these assassination plots to justify the creation of an imperial system based on the Roman model. He believed that a Bourbon restoration would be more difficult if his family's succession was entrenched in the constitution.
Wilhelm I
William I, German Emperor
Instead of Emperor of Germany! The feelings of other princes in Germany were an obstacle, and other European rulers or countries as well.
They all have in common that it was difficult for them to not come across as parvenus. Upstarts make for jealous peers and neighbours, all keen to not fall behind or loose their standing.
That is, it all depends whether it is perceived as something real.
The Emperor of the United States began his rule with well formed reason and conviction, after all:
By 1859, Norton had become completely discontented with what he considered the inadequacies of the legal and political structures of the United States. On September 17, 1859, he took matters into his own hands and distributed letters to the various newspapers in the city, proclaiming himself "Emperor of these United States".
If one can pull it off, fine. It looked for a while that Napoleon could do it. Wilhelm was also in a position to hold on until his death.
It's difficult enough to subjugate your own subjects, many kings and Roman or even Holy Roman Emperors knew the lyrics of that song by heart. But during several epochs, usurping the wrong title could mean imminent attack by rivals. Rivals who showed them who was king.
edited 4 mins ago
answered 2 hours ago
LangLangCLangLangC
28.9k595145
28.9k595145
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to History Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52754%2fwhy-did-the-person-in-charge-of-a-principality-not-just-declare-themself-king%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
You might like to look at the answers to this question. It's not a duplicate but gives reasons as to why Wales became, and remained, a principality.
– Steve Bird
8 hours ago
Possible duplicate of How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
It's not an actual dup, but the linked question will give you one side of the answer by sketching out how noble titles worked. The other side of the answer is that you need other heads of States to recognize your claim that you're heading a kingdom. (In particular the Pope, for Catholic countries.)
– Denis de Bernardy
7 hours ago
1
When you are a dictator... You can call yourself whatever you want. Gaddafi called himself colonel. Saddam Hussien, president... Kim Jung Un, Chairman.. King, prince, kaiser, tsar, czar, emperor, imperator, lord protector of the realm, defender of the 7 kingdoms... are all just titles.. they don't mean anything beyond, "top dog here"..
– sofa general
4 hours ago
@sofageneral, agree in general, but it's not exactly "whatever you want", if you want to have diplomatic relationship with other countries/leaders. More outrageous title you take, less serious you look.
– user28434
3 hours ago