What are your favorite Royal/Noble styles?

Nicholas II of Russia in the 1906 Constitution.

"By the Grace of God, We Nicholas, Emperor and Autocrat of All the Russias, of Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod; Tsar of Kazan, Tsar of Astrakhan, Tsar of Poland, Tsar of Siberia, Tsar of Tauric Chersonesus, Lord of Pskov, and Grand Prince of Smolensk, Lithuania, Volhynia, Podolia, and Finland; Prince of Estonia, Livonia, Courland and Semigalia, Samogitia, Bielostok, Karelia, Tver, Yugor, Perm, Vyatka, Bogar and others; Sovereign and Grand Prince of Nizhni Novgorod, Chernigov, Ryazan, Polotsk, Rostov, Jaroslavl, Beloozero, Udoria, Obdoria, Kondia, Vitebsk, Mstislav, and Ruler of all the Severian country; Sovereign and Lord of Iveria, Kartalinia, the Kabardian lands and Armenian province: hereditary Sovereign and Possessor of the Circassian and Mountain Princes and of others; Sovereign of Turkestan, Heir of Norway, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein, Stormarn, Dithmarschen, and Oldenburg, and so forth, and so forth, and so forth."
 
  • Vercingetorix: "Super Warrior King
It wasn't a title, but more probably and more simply its name : there's no other real mention of Vercingetorixs elsewhere in Gaulish history, and how it's depicted in coinage is perfectly fitting how personal names were used.
You'd have better chances with Brennos/Brenn as a function name.
  • Romanorum Imperator August: "August Emperor of the Romans"
Charlemagne's own style, much more convoluted (at the point it was abandoned in favour of "August Emperor" after his death, and that himself rather preferred King of the Franks and Lombards) is quite worth the sight.
Karolus serenissimus Augustus a Deo coronatus magnus pacificus imperator Romanum gubernans imperium
Charles, most Serene August crowned by God, great and pacific emperor ruling over the empire of Rome
 
Alberic II of Rome titled himself "Prince of All the Romans" (Princeps Omnium Romanorum). For a man who pretty much ruled only the city of Rome, you can interpret that as either the most stunningly grandiose claim of the age, or the the most narrowly accurate use of "Romans" in any title of the medieval era (in the strict sense of "people actually living in Rome").

His grandmother Theodora is, as far as I have been able to determine, the only person we know of who held the title of vestararissa, "treasuress" (a female version of vestararius).
 
Moa Anbessa Ze Imnegede Yehuda ("Conquering Lion of the Tribe of Judah") His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Ethiopia, Negusa Nagast ("King of Kings") and Seyoume Igziabeher ("Elect of God"), Neguse Tsion ("King of Zion")

King of Kings was considered to be the everyday title!
 
How can one be a count of a duchy?
You didn't really have a stable style or title system before the Late Middle-Ages or even more recently (some great noble families in France didn't have titles even before the Revolution) : especially in the IXth to XIth centuries, it could be quite creative.
In the current case, Guilhèm also was named "count palatine of Aquitaine", and (eventually) "duke of Aquitaine", his ducal title wasn't always acknowledged by royal authority, but Guilhèm still held by his claims and was acknowledged by a good part of Aquitain nobility, hence the weird style until Lothar.
I don't quite remember the specifics, but I can search about it if you're interested.

Cause real titles didn't work like in CK2.
Real titles doesn't "works" anyway (they are rather, like "succession laws" or feudalism efficient historiographic models): especially in Xth century which is a mess in Western Europe especially in fragmented ensembles as Aquitaine, Provence and Italy (frankly, I know a bit about the period, and I'm still extremely confused about it)

It's because it was weird-looking even for the period that I mentioned it, so there's no need to be overly snappy (at least, not without an explanation IMO)
 
Last edited:
Mehmed IV, Sultan; son of Muhammad; brother of the sun and moon; grandson and viceroy of God; ruler of the kingdoms of Macedonia, Babylon, Jerusalem, Upper and Lower Egypt; emperor of emperors; sovereign of sovereigns; extraordinary knight, never defeated; steadfast guardian of the tomb of Jesus Christ; trustee chosen by God Himself; the hope and comfort of Muslims; confounder and great defender of Christians.

The Cossacks also had a lot of titlea for him, but none were particularly flattering.
 
Mehmed IV, Sultan; son of Muhammad; brother of the sun and moon; grandson and viceroy of God; ruler of the kingdoms of Macedonia, Babylon, Jerusalem, Upper and Lower Egypt; emperor of emperors; sovereign of sovereigns; extraordinary knight, never defeated; steadfast guardian of the tomb of Jesus Christ; trustee chosen by God Himself; the hope and comfort of Muslims; confounder and great defender of Christians.

The Cossacks also had a lot of titlea for him, but none were particularly flattering.
That letter is a forgery, very possibly invented in the Age of Romanticism. The Ottoman Padishah would never have used titles like "brother of the sun and moon" or "grandson of God." It also doesn't line up with actual Ottoman titulature.
 

Vuu

Banned
How can one be a count of a duchy?

in the more feudalistic areas these things start stacking upon each other to idiotic results. That or one place gets halved by two bigger places

Emperor and autocrat of the Serbs, Greeks, Bulgarians and Albanians - Pretty sure Dušan was one of the first ones to pretty much conquer a ton of East Roman core and not immediately claim the title to Rome, but to Greeks explicitly. Pretty proto-nationalistic to not claim any specific title, but to claim rulership over entire peoples, rare in Europe. Plus, it's not enough to be just emperor, but autocrat too. A short title, but with a big punch
 
How can one be a count of a duchy?

Cause real titles didn't work like in CK2.

You didn't really have a stable style or title system before the Late Middle-Ages or even more recently (some great noble families in France didn't have titles even before the Revolution) : especially in the IXth to XIth centuries, it could be quite creative.
In the current case, Guilhèm also was named "count palatine of Aquitaine", and (eventually) "duke of Aquitaine", his ducal title wasn't always acknowledged by royal authority, but Guilhèm still held by his claims and was acknowledged by a good part of Aquitain nobility, hence the weird style until Lothar.
I don't quite remember the specifics, but I can search about it if you're interested.


Real titles doesn't "works" anyway (they are rather, like "succession laws" or feudalism efficient historiographic models): especially in Xth century which is a mess in Western Europe especially in fragmented ensembles as Aquitaine, Provence and Italy (frankly, I know a bit about the period, and I'm still extremely confused about it)

It's because it was weird-looking even for the period that I mentioned it, so there's no need to be overly snappy (at least, not without an explanation IMO)

As I understand it is because Counts became hereditary and land based much sooner than Dukes who tended to be more often appointed viceroys and generals than land owners even where their jurisdiction was described by land.
 
That letter is a forgery, very possibly invented in the Age of Romanticism. The Ottoman Padishah would never have used titles like "brother of the sun and moon" or "grandson of God." It also doesn't line up with actual Ottoman titulature.
Ah, should have figured. Still a neat series of titles though. What did the Ottoman Sultans go by anyway?
 
As I understand it is because Counts became hereditary and land based much sooner than Dukes who tended to be more often appointed viceroys and generals than land owners even where their jurisdiction was described by land.
I'm not too sure this is a good rule of thumb.
By the late IXth and Xth century, it was mixed up with the lot of hereditary titles. Dukedom of Aquitaine was mostly no longer appointed or confirmed by royal authority since the late IXth and rather fought over, roughly at the same time counties in Aquitaine ceased to be as well, (especially after Eudes' election that most of Aquitain nobility didn't acknowledged.)
 

Md139115

Banned
Best singular titles:
  • Sayf al-Dawla: "Sword of the Dynasty"
  • Alp Arslan: "Heroic Lion"
  • Vercingetorix: "Super Warrior King"
  • Romanorum Imperator August: "August Emperor of the Romans"
  • Khagan: "Khan of Khans"

The most glorious combined title:

Charles V, by the grace of God, Holy Roman Emperor, forever August, King of Germany, King of Italy, King of all Spains, of Castile, Aragon, León, of Hungary, of Dalmatia, of Croatia, Navarra, Grenada, Toledo, Valencia, Galicia, Majorca, Sevilla, Cordova, Murcia, Jaén, Algarves, Algeciras, Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, King of Two Sicilies, of Sardinia, Corsica, King of Jerusalem, King of the Western and Eastern Indies, of the Islands and Mainland of the Ocean Sea, Archduke of Austria, Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, Lorraine, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, Limburg, Luxembourg, Gelderland, Neopatria, Württemberg, Landgrave of Alsace, Prince of Swabia, Asturia and Catalonia, Count of Flanders, Habsburg, Tyrol, Gorizia, Barcelona, Artois, Burgundy Palatine, Hainaut, Holland, Seeland, Ferrette, Kyburg, Namur, Roussillon, Cerdagne, Drenthe, Zutphen, Margrave of the Holy Roman Empire, Burgau, Oristano and Gociano, Lord of Frisia, the Wendish March, Pordenone, Biscay, Molin, Salins, Tripoli and Mechelen.

Ummm... I don’t think Charles ever was king of Hungary. I think only his brother Ferdinand and his line was.
 
I'm not too sure this is a good rule of thumb.
By the late IXth and Xth century, it was mixed up with the lot of hereditary titles. Dukedom of Aquitaine was mostly no longer appointed or confirmed by royal authority since the late IXth and rather fought over, roughly at the same time counties in Aquitaine ceased to be as well, (especially after Eudes' election that most of Aquitain nobility didn't acknowledged.)
Well, I think Aquitaine does strike me as a special case. Especially with narrowing down the distinctions between the full regional Duchy (ie roughly Gallia Aquitania) and the smaller Duchy (ie roughly Aquitania Secunda) which seems to change every generation or so!
 
Well, I think Aquitaine does strike me as a special case.
I'm not sure : Provence is quite similar on this regard, and while it happened differently in Northern France, the privatisation of counties and duchies seems to have happened in roughly the same time at the exception of titles directly tied to royal authority such as Dux Francorum. I'd be interested on what @Carp have to say about privatisation of counties and duchies or marches in Italy, this being said

Especially with narrowing down the distinctions between the full regional Duchy (ie roughly Gallia Aquitania) and the smaller Duchy (ie roughly Aquitania Secunda) which seems to change every generation or so!
Aquitaine was essentially divided in three parts (Gascony, Auvergne, Poitou/Limousin) plus Gothia which ended up being more and more integrated as Gascony was less and less so. You only had one ducal title that was transmitted to various centers (Poitou, Auvergne, Gothia) before settling for Poitou at the end of the War of Succession of Aquitaine/Auvergne.
 
Top