What were the most prestigious European titles during the Middle Ages?

So where was the Byzantine Emperor in all this?
At least for this papal order of precedence, the Byzantine Empire no longer existed by 1504, so there would be no place for it in that list.

As for earlier than that, I suspect that the Byzantine Emperor wouldn't have ranked very high. In Western Europe, the Holy Roman Emperor was believed to be the true Roman Emperor after the Pope bestowed the title on Charlemagne. The Byzantine "emperor" was therefore an imposter in the eyes of the Catholic Church, so that monarch would probably be ranked according his actual power, which was not much at this point.
 
Last edited:
At least for this papal order of precedence, the Byzantine Empire no longer existed by 1504, so there would be no place for it in that list.

As for earlier than that, I suspect that the Byzantine Emperor wouldn't have ranked very high. In Western Europe, the Holy Roman Emperor was believed to be the true Roman Emperor after the Pope bestowed the title on Charlemagne. The Byzantine "emperor" was therefore an imposter in the eyes of the Catholic Church, so that monarch would probably be ranked according his actual power, which was not much at this point.
What is rank and what is being ranked?
The Europeans of the Western Christendom lived in the world of "us and them".
So "rank" was important between "us", that was kind of inner thing. "Them/they" were always treated according to their factual strength, wealth and influence.

The Ottoman Turks at the peak of their power did not give a damn about these European rankings. They treated the ambassadors of European countries without too much politeness - they could be thrown to prison at will. The sultan definitely considered himself to be much higher in rank than any European monarch.
 
American Emperor said:
As for earlier than that, I suspect that the Byzantine Emperor wouldn't have ranked very high. In Western Europe, the Holy Roman Emperor was believed to be the true Roman Emperor after the Pope bestowed the title on Charlemagne. The Byzantine "emperor" was therefore an imposter in the eyes of the Catholic Church, so that monarch would probably be ranked according his actual power, which was not much at this point.
I don't think so. It seems to me that Charlemagne was more seen as the heir to the Western Roman Empire. Thus, the Byzantine Empire would have been considered as the Eastern Roman Empire. That would thus both place them on equal rank.

That said, the Middle Age spans over a long time-period (476-1453 if you take the fall of Rome and Constantinople as your starting and ending points) and there are some events such as the Greast Schism and the Fourth Crusade that could have downgraded the view of the Byzantine Emperor.
 
That said, the Middle Age spans over a long time-period (476-1453
And if we take geographical Europe...
the most prestigious European titles will be:
- Caesar/Emperor
- Khagan (of the Huns, Avars and Khazars)
- Caliph (Spain is pretty much European to me)
- Khan (that seems to be the most prestigious European title of all as that was the title of the ruler of the World Mongol Empire and parts of Europe was under his direct rule)
- Sultan
 
I don't think so. It seems to me that Charlemagne was more seen as the heir to the Western Roman Empire. Thus, the Byzantine Empire would have been considered as the Eastern Roman Empire.
No. When Charlemagne was crowned Emperor by the Pope, the Byzantine throne was held by a woman, Empress Irene. Pope Leo III reasoned that a woman could not be the Roman Emperor, so he declared the imperial throne was vacant, and consequently gave that vacant throne to Charlemagne.

Now, the Pope might not have had any legal power to gift the imperial throne to whomever he wished, but that was nevertheless both his intention and how his actions were perceived in Europe. That's why the Byzantines were so offended by it. It was not the resurrection of the long-dead Western Roman Empire, over which the Byzantines had exercised no control for centuries, but rather intended as a return of the imperial throne away from Constantinople and back to Rome.
 
No. When Charlemagne was crowned Emperor by the Pope .... Now, the Pope might not have had any legal power to gift the imperial throne to whomever he wished...
Hm, the Pope did not have any power to give the title of Emperor. At all.
But on the other hand legally anyone on the Roman soil could claim the title of Emperor. And anyone definitely could proclaim anyone the Roman Emperor.
So the Pope and Charlemagne did not do anything wrong.

Charlemagne got too much power and too much lands and he obviously looked for suitable title. What choice did he have?
If he was close to Persia he might try a title of shahinshah. If he was closer to the Avars or the Khazars he would try on the title of Khagan.
But he happened to be closer to Bysantium and his peoples still kept memory of great Roman Emperors of the past. So he became the Roman Emperor. And the Pope just got handy for this occasion.

The choice of the title is always quite interesting. Let's take first Rurikid rulers of the Kievan Rus. When the Rurikid ruler got too important he started to look for a suitable title. First Rurikids called themselves Khagan as that was the title of the Great Khazar Empire and their subject Slavs had been under rule of various Khagans of the Avars and the like.
But it did not stick as the Turkic influence faded away especially after the defeat of the Khazar Khaganate.
Some of the Grand Princes even called themselves Caesar at home, but it did not stick as well as the Byzantines were too important as trade partners and they did not like the Barbarians using the Roman title.
So the Rurikids went on using an old Slavic title "Knyaz" (Prince) as it was the best known comprehensible to the majority of their Slavic-speaking population.
 
It seems fairly pointless to include both, as they are next to each other in the list and only one will ever exist at once...

That's not the case. Whenever there was a relatively strong Emperor he got his son elected as King of the Romans and thus heir to the Imperial title
 
Top