-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Really nice would be if you could gain new titles - like the French King or Habsburg ruler (both had an nearly insane amount of titles, ie Baron fo Habsburg, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, Archduke of Austria, King of Bohemia, King of Hungary, Grand Master of the Order of the Golden Fleece etc. etc.)
Would be really fun if you could amass titles like that.
Would be really fun if you could amass titles like that.
Oh, I think you can...Originally posted by von Adler
Really nice would be if you could gain new titles - like the French King or Habsburg ruler (both had an nearly insane amount of titles, ie Baron fo Habsburg, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, Archduke of Austria, King of Bohemia, King of Hungary, Grand Master of the Order of the Golden Fleece etc. etc.)
Would be really fun if you could amass titles like that.
I want King of Egypt title for every christian ruler who will be able to conquer this old christian land
Originally posted by Dzoser
I want King of Egypt title for every christian ruler who will be able to conquer this old christian land
Great idea... (Tomislav V, King of Croatia, King of Egypt etc etc etc)
Originally posted by von Adler
Really nice would be if you could gain new titles - like the French King or Habsburg ruler (both had an nearly insane amount of titles, ie Baron fo Habsburg, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, Archduke of Austria, King of Bohemia, King of Hungary, Grand Master of the Order of the Golden Fleece etc. etc.)
Would be really fun if you could amass titles like that.
Maybe both had many titles but I can see a difference : the Habsburgs were respectde because of all of their titles (among which Emperor was the highest but was not enough) but the title "King of France" was respected in itself (he was a sacred man).
I'd expect him to have to give out some to vassals...Originally posted by Foolish
so a ruler who would conquer the hre would end up with over 400 titles?
Does in Ck exist states, like France, England, etc. or will it be only the counties and other smaller teritorial units?
My question is if a certain family wants to unite teritories and form a kingdom, and the leader of the family from count (example) will become King. Will it be possible in CK?
My question is if a certain family wants to unite teritories and form a kingdom, and the leader of the family from count (example) will become King. Will it be possible in CK?
That would not likely happen, under the situation like the one you gave, the two lands would still technically be separate. You see in the Feudal Age (I don't like the term 'Middle Ages' or 'Medieval' as they really don't work) land and property was not owned in the "sense" that we in the modern world understand it. If two or more counties were controlled by one family who's head retained the titles himself or herself they would be united ONLY in that the titles where held by one individual. i.e. if county "A" and duchy "B" where held in fief by one person that person would be known as "So and So, duke of 'B', count of 'A'"....
It was not that a count, who might hold more then one title could NOT combine hes lands into a sovereign state, he likely wouldn't have because he would see no purpose in it.
As for gaining a crown, the idea of kingship in the feudal age does not make the king the absolute monarch (sole ruler). As a title all it meant was that he had traditional authority over a given region, which really only amounted to war leader of a collection of fighting men (land holders, and minor nobles). A king no more owned his kingdom than a modern president owns his government. The "Land" itself had rights in the form of the traditional feudal customs of the people who inhabited it. Laws changed from city to city as well as from county to county, and woe betide the feudal lord who tried to change them without the full support of both the people and his feudal vassals, not to mention the lawyers and townsmen having a fit at the idea of playing around and combining laws and charters and the whole deal, into one seamless realm.
To be sure there was, of course, always a tendency towards incorporation among the the various feudal states and princes, however it was generally resisted by the people and minor nobles. It was Only the rediscovery of Roman Imperial law and the concept of ownership (i.e. the right to 'use and abuse') that permitted the justification for the combining of land and property into vast territories headed by absolutist monarchs (and incidently allowed the renaissance of slavery and commercialism).
So in short the answer to you question would be "why?" Certainly that is what a titled noble of the period (11th-14th century) would say.
Continued....
Also any new kingdom would have a hard time justifying its existence without the authority of tradition backing the crown. The antiquity of a crown was one of the main factors in its claim to exercise authority over any given region. And, since a king in the feudal age HAD to be acclaimed by the peers of the realm (A kind of limited-democracy really) for him to have any real authority he couldn't just declare himself king legitimately, only the nobles as a body could.
Also any new kingdom would have a hard time justifying its existence without the authority of tradition backing the crown. The antiquity of a crown was one of the main factors in its claim to exercise authority over any given region. And, since a king in the feudal age HAD to be acclaimed by the peers of the realm (A kind of limited-democracy really) for him to have any real authority he couldn't just declare himself king legitimately, only the nobles as a body could.
It is worth pointing out, that in the space of three generations, Norman Sicily rose from a County, to a Duchy, to a Kingdom by extorting the Pope and through success at arms. So it should definitely be possible.
Yes, but really hard. For examples of conquest situations, (such as say the crusades or the Norman adventures), the rules are somewhat different.
i.e. you will have a brand new nobility with no traditional authority themselves.
Indeed. But the Normans did move in, subdue the natives in Apulia and Napoli, conquer Sicily from the Muslims, and set up their own short lived dynasty/kingdom. So it should be possible. It would be a shame if Sicily were to remain a County throughout the entire game when it historically rose to Kingdom.
It could conceivably happen elsewhere.
I just hope it isn't one of those all or nothing game mechanics.
It wasn't unheard of for the church to forge documents in order to legimize something by claiming that its heritage was much older than in reality it was. Pass enough money the Pope's way and it might be possible to get an advanced title for yourself.
Also, certain areas would be even more likly than others to become Kigdoms, as they had once existed as such in the past: Burgundy, Lombardy and so forth.
Other areas actually WERE Kingdoms but had distinigrated so far that by the end of the Middle Ages the title meant nothing; Germany, Italy, Ireland. In these cases there should be no reason that a player could gain these titles and then try to fuse them into a coheriant whole...although it won't be easy!
Also, certain areas would be even more likly than others to become Kigdoms, as they had once existed as such in the past: Burgundy, Lombardy and so forth.
Other areas actually WERE Kingdoms but had distinigrated so far that by the end of the Middle Ages the title meant nothing; Germany, Italy, Ireland. In these cases there should be no reason that a player could gain these titles and then try to fuse them into a coheriant whole...although it won't be easy!
Example?
p.s. The Church didn't need to "forge" documents to create a title. After all the Church didn't forge any documents to create the HRE. It did so on its spiritual authority, if you can't understand the significance of that you won't understand the middle ages. No one in the feudal age would have questioned the Church's authority to legitimizes a kingdom on it's own.
p.p.s How do the trees look up in Marquette?
Last edited:
You misunderstand a bit; when I was refering to "church" I meant the entire structure not just the Pope. It was pretty common for Kings to hire out Monks to create forgories in order to build up thier prestige.
Ex: Edward II(?) had several documents forged in order to make it look as if he had a dirrect claim upon the Scottish throne while he was mediating a dispute between two rival Kings.
A little before our time, but when the Church was first beginning to really exert itself during the early Dark Ages it forged and created several documents in order to increase its own authority; one of the more famous is one in which one of the Roman Emperor's is cured of some diease and, as such, claims that the heris of Peter in Rome are stronger than the Roman government and the crown of Empire should pass to the Pope upon his death. I apologise for the story not being exact; I don't feel like tearing through my old lecture notes at the moment
Marquette's really nice right now; its a bit warm for my taste but a cold front is moving through now at least. Life is good
For a brief time during the reign of Brian Boru and that was pretty much it
Actually Republics have a tradition of holding more power in Ireland than Monarchies(the first Irish Republic was actually during the English Civil War...although it was allied to the King of England. WEIRD time period )