CORRECTION: The illustration I made depicting Richard the II was accidentally based on a painting of Richard III, my mistake. Thank you to those who pointed it out to me.
Emperor - Governs over many countries. King/Prince - Governs a country. Duke - Governs a regions, and rules over counties under its region. Marques - Governs a county & has military rights. Count - Governs a county. Baron - Has a castle & land. Baronet - Commoner raised to new nobility, no land. Knight - Noble elite soldier
@@리주민 Uh wrong, a Knight by it's very definition is nobility, in order to be a Knight who was usually a Mounted warrior who could afford good military equipment you had to be wealthy.
The lost content: An Archduke is a member of the House of Habsburg. They were annoyed that their main realm (austria) was "just" a dukedom. So they created the titel Archduke to be a step above the other dukes.
The British use Earl and Countess because the commoners used to giggle when the Norman counts called themselves count... It sounded like a VERY rude word (which still exists), so they adopted the Anglo-Saxon word instead.
Another little wrinkle is that nobles often have multiple titles and would be granted new ones over time. Since they were referred to by their highest title, if the Earl of X was granted the title Duke of Y, he'd stop being referred to as X and now be referred to as Y. Also, it was traditional that the noble's eldest son would be granted the right to use his father's second highest title as a courtesy.
Don't forget the absolute gongshow of Henry II's stacking, and sometimes contradicting, titles. Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, Count of Anjou and Toulouse (and more that I'm forgetting), King of England, doing homage to the French king for his southern continental lands even though they were always at war. The early medieval period was wild before the nobility settled on how to divide power.
@@Levacque that was a unique circumstance that only happened because they were personally held lands of a King. Had they have been held by a lower ranking nobleman things would have been a lot different.
It would be a courtesy as long as there was not a need for a Writ of Acceleration (like creating peers to force legislation through the old form of the House of Lords) taking the title from the father and actually giving it to the heir thus making him a peer, too. This is also why Earl of Arundel is the oldest earldom in England but because it is held by the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of Shrewsbury is considered the premier earl. There is also the issue of passing down titles in the Peerage of Scotland where women can inherit.
@@odysseusrex5908 Yes, but any random noble could simply shout "Liberum Veto" and leave the Sejm, disbanding the meeting. This rule was established in the middle ages as a last resort secret weapon for a goodhearted noble to use, in case the Parliment wanted to pass a harfull reform. It was mostly forgotten, and then was dug up later in the 17th century, and used to do the opposite. Ironic.
@@Maximmuss_ Unfortunetly the Polish nobles got so much power and often abused it and elected the wrong king that Poland became weak by the late 18 century and was dismembered by it's more powerful neighbors. It's only now becoming strong and united again.
@@mattbarbarich3295 Yeah, but that's the point. The nobles became so powerfull in the 18th century, that when the russian Tzar proposed to one polish noble, that he can bribe the others to make him king, he actually took it as an offence, because making him king would actually take his privileges. And ironically - all of this was going on while other countries adopted absolutism - it was the reign of the "Sun King", Peter the Great and the Prussian Frederics. So basicly... the lesson to be learned here is... abandon democracy, embrace... tyranny? XD
@@Maximmuss_ Hmmm, not necessarily . The British did it the right way, the monarchs became less powerful but a representative Parliment and Prime Minister was stronger and worked with the king or queen and Britain prospered an Empire was the biggest. Poland should've kept with a hereditary monarchy as they had a chance I read once but they elected a weak foreign king , forget his name in 1700s.
It's kind of weird , because European and russian system are not really similar. Prince (князь) wasn't like son or hier of king, he was usually kind of sovereign or authority with army. So Tsar is more eastern roman term, rus people call the emperor of the Eastern roman empire, tsar. Because tsar is their version of the word "Caesar" , in their vision , the king of kings - emperor. So basically, princes of Russia was more like kings. And in Russian empire ,hier title was Tsesarevich, not a prince.
CK2/3 has taught me below every duke are multiple counts, and below every count are multiple barons. Sometimes the "king" can be a prince, sometimes a grand prince, and sometimes an archduke.
This is an antiquated view still used for ease of gameplay. For example in the Kingdom of France, the Count of Flanders was just as important as the Duke of Toulouse. This count also owed no fealty to any duke above them save the king.
@Ornithocheirus I would add, that title "Duke" came from "duc" (French), which came from "dux" (Latin), which means "leader" and was referred in Republican Rome to "military commander without a land". "Dux" became military commander of province after Diocletian reforms. When you take into account the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, and then following organization of Germanic tribes, the "dux" became used as "herzog" (German, from words Heer + zog/ziehen, "somebody who leads an army to battle"). Term "stem duchy" refers to those leaders of an entire tribe. In other words, "Duke" strictly refers to military leader of an entire province in either Empire, or united entity (kingdom), who was designated to rule in behalf of a ruler. Even later in HRE, "Herzog" was traditional kind of "below kings/emperor" prince-like title, which represents old governance about certain tribe and territory. In HRE they were "Herzog" and "Fürst" ("the first chief", from Latin "princeps"). The German equivalent of somebody naming themselves "grand prince/grand duke" was in fact "Großfürst".
The title "duke" comes from the Latin "dux" which meant a roman military leader: think something similar to a general or field marshal (another title derived from "march"!). As such, it is the title with the oldest roots.
Frogmouth, which comes from the latin word "crawfish", meaning "weaver of polyester", is a rank which is considered to be subordinate to Toady, an ancient Javanese Celtic ceremonial position which performed the function of production line shift lead unless relieved by his superior which would often be referred to as "that jackelope".
@@MLopez-fu8fd If the crown so wished. Letters patent could even create a Countess Grantham as the inaugural holder in the new creation. Nothing inherently requires title holder be a man.
@@economath8164 Thank You for the reply. I do marvel at the English Monarchy, and hope it survives for many years to come. As an American Commoner, I doubt I’ll ever have the chance to Meet any, or even meet any English Nobility for that matter, but it is truly an Extraordinary thing to witness.
A jewel. I'm trying to repay you, but, alas, all I have is that when the Arabs reached "Caesar Augusta", they perceived the name as "Sarqusta", and I find it hilarious that the "S" and "Z" sounds in "Cesar" annoyed them. It ended up as "Zaragoza", or "Saragossa" (try the google traslator from Spanish to English for more laughs), both alien to any listener in any language :) I pray you accept my humble offering :D
Interesting. I always just go alphabetically from lowest to highest B,C,D,K for Baron, Count, Duke, King; Then I just remember Arch higher and Vice is Lower for the weird splinter titles.
Margraves and marquesses could frequently have a lot more territory than a regular Earl would be expected to have, despite being technically roughly peers. Especially as borders shifted during wars a Margrave could lose or expand territory quite extremely. Such as the Margrave of Brandenburg. Which eventually came to exceed the size of many duchies.
The marquess rank was actually preceded by the rank of Marcher Baron or marcher lord - referring to the Welsh marches which these men were responsible for guarding. These individuals held authority and wealth (military wealth if not financial) equivalent to a duke and were treated much the same as such.
The marcher lords didnt pay taxes to the king with the universtanding that they would use that extra money to build up their armies. And then you get the baron wars.
The equivalent in the Holy Roman Empire was the Markgraf (margrave) who was more powerful than a Landgraf (landgrave). Graf = Count or Earl. Markgraf = Earl Marcher. The title of Count was often much older than Marquis or Duke, so some noble families kept using it even after they had gone on to greater things. Examples of that include the Count-Duke of Olivares in Spain, and in France the Marquis de Sade, members of whose family alternated that with Comte de Sade. The British nobility did not do that.
Duke comes from the Latin Dux(leader) through the French Duc and Prince comes from Princeps(first man) which was the actual title given to the Roman Emperors. For a long time Prince was used in the same way we use King. It helps to understand that when reading old documents, can be confusing if you assume they are the son of a living king.
@@A3_870 Principality has the same origin though so its actually the land being named for the type of ruler. There was a period in which prince has become a generic term for any ruler hence Machiavellis book "The Prince" which was effectively a guide book for rulers.
@@shock_n_Aweful Quite right - Queen Elizabeth I, nearing death in 1603, still had enough spirit to say to her doctors when they said she should undergo a certain treatment: "must is not a word to use to princes!" - meaning any royalty, queens included..
@@chaosnight2006 That is sort of true, but there is actually some overlap as some Dukes are members of the royal family themselves and referred to as Royal Dukes, like Princes Charles, Andrew, Edward, William, Harry and Richard (the Queen's first cousin).
@@harrymelad942 Not really overlaps, but rather that heirs were allowed to "rank down" in preparation for their inherited title. That is, the heir presumptive of the title of King could be called Duke (like Duke of Cornwall) even though he isn't an actual hereditary Duke. Likewise, the heir presumptive of the title Earl of Grantham could be called Viscount until he assumed the role.
@@derricktucker1533 This is called a Courtesy Title. The eldest son uses his father's next highest title. Many families acquired or built up holdings over centuries so had multiple titles (Baron this or that, Viscount blah blah) as the English peerages are generally not divisible. The eldest heir gets it all. But also, many when ennobled for the first time would be given say, an Earldom, which would almost always come with both a title of Viscount and Baron. Or just Baron. I believe all nobles of the rank of Earl and above have subsidiary titles. The younger siblings though are just called Lord or Lady.
Just a note, English "earl" came from Old English "eorl", not from "jarl" nor "ealdorman". I think you got confused by the fact that it is related to Old Norse "jarl" as they both come from Proto-Germanic "*erlaz", and in late Anglo-Saxon times the rank of "eorl" and "ealdorman" were nearly synonymous and used somewhat interchangeably.
@@FullCircleguitar That's not a valid argument. Many words have a common origin. Caesar evolved into Kaiser, César, Tsar, etc. Each word is similar, but does not mean the same.
@@FullCircleguitar A little explanatory note: in the UK members of local governing bodies (councils) are called "councillors", a title borne by both men and women. An alderman is a kind of senior councillor. Usually about 20% of a council will be aldermen. The chief councillor, or mayor, is generally appointed from among their ranks, and even with that additional dignity, he or she is still referred to as "Alderman Such-and-such". So it's a very old title, but one still very much in use.
The most important Lord in England, after the Royal Dukes, is probably the Duke of Norfolk. He is also the Earl of Arundel and lives in Arundel Castle. He is Earl Marshall of England and therefore has important ceremonial roles at state occasions and matters of Heraldry. Other important Dukes are Northumberland, who owns Alnwick castle, used in Harry Potter and Blackadder, who's ancestor arrived with William the Conqueror in 1066 and had the job of holding the Scottish Frontier, and the present Duke of Wellington, who is active in the House of Lords. I believe the greatest Scots Duke is the Duke of Buccleuch, still a major landowner. Probably the richest Duke is relatively recent (19th Century) creation, the Duke of Westminster.
@@fosterfuchs Well one of the reasons for feudalism dying in may places around the world was the commoners becoming more rich than the nobility that the whole system kinda stopped working.
So what do those ranks do? For example, in Downton Abbey, Lord Granthan (earl) was in charge of a county. Were Marquises and Viscounts and Barons also in charge of counties at that time? In Bridgerton, what does Viscount Anthony do? He seems to have no purpose. And what do dukes do, ie. Duke Hastings in Bridgerton. Just trying to figure out their purposes and what these ranks oversee.
By the 18th and 19th centuries, the ranks became pretty ceremonial. Many of the old families lost their land, as less and less people worked in the agricultural sector (which is how the aristocracy made their money mostly, by owning the farmable land). If they still had land and money, through good investment and management, they're responsibility and purpose in their communities was as an employer. Their large estates needed servants, gardeners, farmers and what not. The slow March of democracy had taken the nobility's governing power, so for example Lord Grantham didn't really run the county in a governing sense, he just owned most of the land in the area. I haven't started watching Bridgeton yet, so I can't really say anything about the viscount. Thanks so much for the question! Hopefully I answered it adequately.
They also pledged loyalty to a higher ranking noble or the king, depending on rank and would raise and lead armies and collect taxes for the king...the Earl was entitled to a third of the taxes collected in his county and used to appoint the sheriff...though that power was taken away as the monarchy became stronger...many nobles had the right to maintain their own private army, which made them the literal king makers during times of chaos, as for example when Henry the VII usurped Richard the III's throne...🤷♂️ also most nobles had royal blood in their veins, so they had some degree of a claim to the throne...yikes...
Also, eldest sons are entitled to use the next highest subsidiary title of their fathers as a courtesy. Meaning, the Earl of Wessexs son is called Viscount Linely but he’s not an actual viscount and serves no function in government. So not everyone referred to with a title is an actual peer.
the difference of dukes and earls is quite big, and understandable by looking into the most important heraldic system of the HRE (because nobility didnt gave a crap about modern borders of nationality). If you look up at dukes-maps of the HRE in ~1000 you realice, that dukes had countless of earls under their controll, they were sub-kings in these areas and in the HRE they were able to vote for a king, thereby limiting the numbers of dukes (limiting means automatical more quality of the title). the "Mark/marchen"-earl is an earl on the border, but the HRE had heretical non-christian nations/tribes from poland and hungary on their borders....and they liked to raid and pillage and kill christians. So the HRE had to build defenses against these invaders. castles with noble soldiers. it became in a timeline of 300 years more and more a colonization(missionation) of eastern europa, the start of the feudal castle-structure and the actual militarian powerhouse of the empire. nearly all territorities east of the Elb-river (basicly everything of today austria and the former eastern-german territorities) became german in these times, until hungary and poland became christian themself and stoped the rights of colonization for the HRE. the clerical titles grown in power because of the same system (mission of converting and settling were combined) and bishops were militarian and economical active persons, related to nobles and owned large areas of the nation, so dont imagine clerical people...they were sometimes basicly soldiers and extremly powerfull. kings allways tried to get their support (until reformation and protestantic movments happend, the true problem of the reformation for the catholic church was the lose of their rights for their church-territories) now the whole system became more non-historical by the extrem population-growth, the creation of economical powerfull cities and the reformation. the reformation made it possible, that some dukes became extremly powerfull by grabing and reowning clerical areas. so the catholic nobility wa sin a disadvantage. the population growth gave an increase of different city-concils (senats), who demanded rights of representation against the nobility (some citites were basicly the area of rule of nobility, but these citites had to pay taxes to the nobility, while the nobility got their main taxes from their farmers. the difference between farming-areas and old nobility and the citites and their modern nobility increased. at the same time the king introduced "magister" or rather "offical workers of the king". they were tax collectors or tried to improve the roads in the empire or build a better contact to cities and nobility. they were personal servant of the king and not connected to the nobility-dynasties. the nobility tend to hate these guys for talking to the king i their present on equal value. these offical worker sof the king were pro-king, so the nobility tend to get less power by their actions and they were sometimes called "slaves" or even worse in documents by nobles. So in many cases the king tried to integrate these offical workers into the old heraldic system, to prevent an infight and to reward his supports in these areas of non-nobility-workers. work for me for 20 years, be loyal and your family/son will become a small noble. this system created a specification of the king-rule and supported the rise of powerfull people into the heraldic system (like the former von Weizensäcker, a leader of democratic modern germany. this family was one of these "new" competent intellectuel "nobles". obliviously related to taxes in weat-bags) . the same system destroyed the old system of easy heraldic system and created an influx of new titles. most of these small non-important titles were from these creations. the reformation in the HRE increased the numbers of big titles to prevent the rise of power from one confession. in some cases this conflict of the confession was NEVER settled, some writers pointed out, that the 7year-war was an conflict over german rule by confession (prot. prussia and catholic habsburg-austria) and both states remain to exist to this day or at least until the end of 1.WW in the last century.
Great stuff. Is it possible to make a video on the noble rankings in the Holy Roman Empire, The Ancien Regime (France), the Papal States and Spain? It would make an AMAZING series. Thanks again.
In Spain is almost the same, but with a little difference, they have a list of people with the title of "Greatness of Spain" and can have a regular one and the greatness... I'm not Spaniard but have the same doubt and do a Google search and that came up
Also you had the untitled nobility.These were people who were of noble birth, but weren't given a title like baron.Our family has the right to use von in our name, though it seems some of the family didn't .Many Uradel or ancient German families like ours didn't always use it
Nope, Marquess (mar-kwis) was used in England and Ireland, while Marquis (mar-kee) was used in continental Europe, Canada, and parts of Scotland. Same goes for their female counterparts, Marchioness (mar-shuh-ness) and Marquise (mar-keez). Marquess was never pronounced the same way as Marquis, perhaps because the English looked down on the French?
Very clear and quite interesting. The whole issue of knights is as you say another topic. One could be a Lord and by bravery earn a knighthood too, which sounds confusing at first. And I understand in Germany, especially when it was fragmented into many small states, barons were extremely common. Nobody seems quite sure if "von" (another question) Steuben was actually a baron though he claimed to be one. (Fun fact: Imperial Austria had two courts, one for nobility another for commoners. Beethoven tried to use the former claiming his "van" was the equivalent of a von. Eventually they figured out he was just inventing that.)
All lords were knighted back in the day. But most knights were not lords. Knight was both an occupation and a distinct social class, like the Equites of Rome. So all lords were expected to train and be proficient as mounted warriors, as knights. But, most knights, as in professional mounted warriors, were not lords, but a member of the intermediate knightly class that was in-between nobles and gentlemen/Burgers. To add to that, some knights had a hereditary title of free knight, who could pass his knightly title to his eldest son and didn't need to be knighted to be a knight. In the UK this is the Baronet, in France various Chevaliers, and in German lands Ritters and Freiherr. There was great mobility between the knightly and noble classes. Many, many knights could earn a lordship by his prowess, like William Marshal, who started out as the younger son of a lord, who was but a lowly household knight, who gained renown and eventually was elevated to Lord of Sturgil and then Earl of Pembroke. Or, sometimes, all it took was one really good day on the battlefield and the king would elevate a knight to lord.
So in addition to those ranks, you have Knight, Lord and Baronet, in ascending order, that are all also technically part of the nobility, though not necessarily part of the peerage. Additionally, whilst Earl supplants Count in England, and Marquess supplants Marquis, it was also possible to have Count and Marquis. In this case, Count would be above Viscount, and below an Earl, Marquis would be above an Earl, but below a Marquess. Both Count and Marquis were rare, and only ever used either because someone gained them as titles in other Kingdoms, and the Crown recognised them, OR in some cases, when it was deemed unwise to promote someone to a rank with full powers and peerage as well as resources. Ergo, if a Viscount... who was a Vice Count... and not an Earl, that is, did not have right to peerage or a County of his own, provided some service whereby a promotion was deemed justified.... but the Crown did not wish to empower this person too much, it may make them a 'Count'.... essentially a Earl without a County or necessarily the same privileges, but still a promotion, with some pursuant increase in privilege. Same for Marquis, if an Earl was deemed to have provided service which warranted promotion, but not to a Duke, and even not to Marquess... especially it was a service that was not necessarily military.... or if they were too popular with militaristic forces in the country... they might become a Marquis. These ranks almost never existed, but did kind of, on occasion, in the English nobility. Actually this was the same reason some Earls were made Marquess' rather than Dukes....but even then, they DID have all pursuant privileges, and at times, it was deemed appropriate to prevent someone having these. As for Dukes and Princes, sometimes it depends on the Duke, and the Prince. A Prince is normally always a title of the immediate Royal family.... HOWEVER, some blood Princes/Princesses, are born such, and somehow remain able to pass their title down, even long long after they are far distant kin to Royal line of the time. Essentially, Princes of a County or Duchy, or would otherwise be, but due their rank and privilege is a Principality within the Kingdom. It was occasionally also possible for someone in the higher ranks, a Marquess or Duke, to be made a Prince, not sure how often it happened in England, but in Europe it was not unheard of... it was for example how Lichtenstein came to be. These Princess/Princesses may have a lot privileges, even more than Dukes.... but by this point, they are NOT Blood Princess.... that is, of the immediate Royal line. They are of the bluest of blue Noble blood, but they are not immediate blood kin of the Monarch. Often times, Principalities like this, which existed in a Kingdom or Empire, also had some degree of autonomy, and much more privilege when it came to taxation and debt of service through vassalage.... but NOT always, so they might not be vassal Sovereign Princess, or even autonomous ones. Conversely, sometimes a Duchy might not be part of another Kingdom, but like Luxembourg, be a Sovereign State in it's own right. Or it could be a Duchy home to an immediate Royal, who was a fourth or fifth child, and so not afford Prince or Princess, at birth, but a Ducal title, or a Nephew or Niece so given one. Additionally it could be a Duke with a honors and orders that essentially make them what 'Duc' originally was, in the earliest Frankish nobility (borrowed from the Romans)... the supreme military leader.. something akin to General of the Armies in the US military today. These might also be styled differently. A Sovereign Duke would be a Grand Duke, or an Arch Duke, if a Royal Duke of the Blood. The latter may or may not be made an Arch Duke, but would be considered one anyway in all circumstances due to his position as sword of the Kingdom... and unless in the company of the former two, be the ranking Duke any place. Now, if the latter Dukes were to be somewhere with the former Princes, then those Dukes would OUTRANK the Princess, because they would either be Monarchs in their own right, immediately of the Blood, or simply have more responsibility than any other Noble, in their duties of Command. In this case, they would be deemed to outrank Princess not of the Blood, and not of Sovereign Principalities. Of course, Princes/Princesses of the Blood, or of Sovereignty or who were essentially the 'Duc' of their Kingdoms, like the Black Prince, who was two of three of those, well they would outrank any Dukes, even those outlined above. Prince can be a tricky one though..... before the 1400s, when Wales was still something of an independent entity, for example... it was a Principality... it still is within the UK technically.... but it was it's own then. But unlike England, where Athelstan conquered the other Anglo Saxon kingdoms and made the Kingdom of England, Wales was like Ireland pre 1100s.... all the smaller Kingdoms retained their Kings, and some degree of Sovereignty, and just pledged allegiance to the 'concept' of Ireland or Wales... and the premier overlord. Kind of like the German Empire of the medieval period. But in Germany, this rank was an Emperor... as it was in many places like China, and had been in Rome. The Irish, they called it High King... and some places went this way, with High Kings or Great Kings....like Mongolia with naming one Temujin Borjigin "Genghis Khan".... ...but in Wales.... a country with a mythical creature as their national animal, an onion as their national flower, and burning hatred of vowels... well... of course their ruler would be as confusing... this person was Prince of Wales.... but technically... he was an EMPEROR. So in this instance, this Prince, if in a meeting of European Nobles, would actually not only outrank Dukes, or most Dukes... unless a Grand Duke..... but actually... as someone who has the fealty of Kings and their Kingdoms...would outrank KINGS and Queens, as well as Sovereign Princes and Dukes... and essentially be considered an Emperor. Because that was what an Emperor was, an overlord who ruled as the ultimate authority over a region, which consisted of many vassal Kingdoms who pledged fealty to his crown and authority. If you had that, as High King, or Great King.... or even PRINCE, you were considered an Emperor as if you held such a title. Generally speaking this level confusing... of complex seniority, or promotions in name not nature, never happened with the lower Nobility, but theoretically IT COULD there too. If dynamics and blood was crazy enough, a Knight might outrank a Baronet, or even a Baron....but these people never really held enough authority or enough power through land and men at arms.... to matter enough for such considerations, so fortunately, it essentially only mattered when talking about the highest blood of the Nobility, Dukes and above. Unless of course.... you had a Monarch of a place, with some nobles of a place.... who all had ranks and position within ANOTHER Kingdoms Nobility too! Then things could VERY VERY weird. Or if something like the Chanel Isles of England existed in the Kingdom... were there was essentially another whole section of lands, which were the personal sovereign possession of the Monarch, and through their Monarchial Rights, their sole domain, over which they appoint someone to specific title.... like the Seingeur of Sark. Then you have to work our where a Seingeur fits in the Nobility.... or Governor for Guernsey and Jersey, and President in the case of Alderney. Which can also really mess things up, in regards to who outranks whom, and how convoluted the titular gymnastics get.
@@bighands69 A Knight might be referred to as a Lord, but they are NOT Lords. Lords start with, well, Lords, or Ladies, and go up from there. Many Lords were, are, by default Lords, and called "M'Lord" by commons, but actually are titled above Lord. They may be a Baron, or Viscount or an Earl or a lowly Baronet, but are because of that Lords.. ..But there's actual Lords, too, whose rank title is Lord...they rank below the aforementioned but ABOVE Knights. A Knights correct title, was, and is Sir, or Lady, if a Dame. Yet a Dame is NOT a titular Lady, as in a female Lord, it is purely a formal form of address. Knights did not, and do not, have the same privileges as Lords or higher. They are kind of ....vice-aristocrat...even though of the nobility.
Hello I just discovered a Lord with my last name somewhere in Europe ... it's very vague what I discovered. And it's cool tho .. it's also strange because around the world there are supposedly only 116 people with my last name .. most in South America. I have ancestry in Spain and In Basque country..also In Italy. I'dike to find more info but I don't know where to start . I'm 90 percent positive I'm not related to those Lord's in Europe but it's still cool tho .. I'm in the US 🇺🇸
@@Apis4 A Lord was anybody who exercised rule of a manner, house or group of peoples. They also held titles. If you are referring to a knight as in a bondsman then no they are not a lord and are servant. But if you are talking about a vassal who is a Knight with power such as a Lords son then you are talking about an actual Lord. I should have made it clear in my original comment that I am not referring to the modern honorary system such as the Order of empire which are not real Lords they just carry a fancy title and nothing else. Most are poor and have no manner or house.
@@bighands69 A Lord in your sense, anybody who exercised rule, is what I mean when talk of address. However, as you yourself note, there are ACTUAL lords, who's TITLE and RANK in the aristocracy is LORD. This goes back well before 'Modern' Lords. This is, essentially, entry level Aristocracy. Knights are not part of this, but also kind of are a little, like certain other Vassals. A Signeur or a Seneshal or like might be other examples. These were, to some extent, Nobles, but without any of rights and privileges of the Aristocracy. A Knight was a member of the Warrior class essentially, sort of like Samurai in Japan (the other two were crown positions, one essentially an avatar of Monarch, ruling directly over a region in their name, by their mandate, the other a kind of Mayor, and Cheif Bureaucrat in one, administering for the crown over a place which may or may not be it's own, or just being run until the seat is filled).....they were not commoners, but they had far less power than ACTUAL lords, including proper Lords.
Actually the nobility pre-Norman conquest was in descending order was Earl (who was the official in charge of one of the old Kingdoms or a group of shires), High Reeve (which was a rare office/title used for the rulers of Bamburgh and Dumnonia), Shire Reeve (later became Sheriff and was in charge of a Shire), Reeve (a magistrate or bailiff of a town or district), and Thegn (which were basically retainers with the King's Thegns being the equivalents of later Barons). Notice that these were originally offices. This true of most noble titles actually. After the Conquest and the Revolt of the Earls, William the Conquerer eliminated the old Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms as units of administration and made Earls the rulers of Shires or Counties. All the old Anglo-Saxons offices were either devalued as in the cases of the Reeve ranks or replaced as in the case of Thegns, who were replaced by Barons and Knights.
In german Nibelungen tale a man is called Degen, he is one of the nonservant men at king Gunthers court. Degen , in current german epee, smallsword, rapier once was thegn. In 1980s some old people used ,degenmäßig' ( like a thegn) to describe men with good behavior.
And effectively Anglo-Saxon earls were the rough equivalent of European dukes, so the Battle of Hastings was essentially fought between two men who at the beginning of 1066 had held equivalent positions: the Earl of Wessex and the Duke of Normandy.
Simple, easy to follow and very informative! If I have to bitch at anything I would say that the flickering white background makes it look less "clean" but the content is great!
Very interesting. I would have appreciated going into how each rank seems to also have the titles of the lower ranks as well. I’m not quite sure how all that works. I’m just familiar with the fact that it seems to be what is.
It's not so much that they absolutely HAVE titles of lower ranks attached to their higher rank titles, it seems like some titles are associated to others and passed down through families. I think someone could have the title of "Duke/Duchess of ___" without other titles attached in theory. Same thing for other titles.
Noble families tend to accumulate multiple titles over time. For example someone is created a Baron and his grandson gets raised in rank to be a Viscount. The baronial title still exists but it has become subsidiary to a higher title, so if the Viscount dies without heirs then the viscountcy becomes extinct but his younger brother can still inherit the title of Baron. Another possibility is that a descendant of the original Baron, who is not descended from the current titleholder, may do something (like being a leading politician or military commander) which leads to his being created an Earl. Perhaps centuries later the senior branch of the family becomes extinct and the 7th Earl inherits the families original baronial title. Lower ranked titles can also be used as a courtesy title for the heir. The eldest son of a Duke of Norfolk is known as the Earl of Arundel and Surrey, although the Duke would still be the substantive holder of those subsidiary titles. There was also a process, which was used on rare occasions, when the Crown granted a Writ in Acceleration so that the heir apparent to a peerage could be called to the House of Lords by passing a subsidiary title to him in his fathers lifetime. Another possibility, particularly for people mostly royals raised to a high rank in the peerage would be for multiple titles at different levels of the peerage to be created at the same time.
What dictates a lord's importance is not their actual title but their wealthy and power. Such as how many men were at their service, how much force they could wield in a kingdom and so on. So there would have been situations were a Knight which is the lowest form of a lord could exert more influence than an actual Earl or Count.
@@garygriffin6411 This needed to be said. For those who don't know, the Duke of Norfolk lives in Arundel Castle in Sussex, and has nothing to do with Norfolk. This sort of thing is not uncommon .
The term earl doesn't come from Old Norse "jarl" or OE "ealdorman". It comes from the OE "eorl", which coulda meant a nobleman ranking above a thane/ealdorman or a warrior.
Hey, man! Nice video, keep them coming.If you can it will be amazing if you were able to a series on other nobility systems such as the one in France or the Byzantine empire, or even the HRE (Good luck on that one). Once more, amazing videos!
Thank you for this. Very clear and interesting. There are also the spiritual ranks. In fact after the royal family (Majesties, Royal Dukes) the highest rank is archbishop (Most Reverend). Not sure where Bishops come, somewhere between baron and Earl I suspect (Right reverend).
It would depend on which see they sit and if they are a lord spiritual. The form of address doesn’t change but the order they are address and where they sit does.
Simple. "Royalty" are members of the Nobility, which happens to be the highest ranking among the nobles because they rule the country. The nobles administer their sections of the whole Kingdom/Empire, and the royals, who are members of the nobility themsleves, rule the whole country. All royals are nobles, but not all nobles are royals. I hope that helped lol
@@alistairt7544 Actually, that's not true. Royals are not Noble, and Nobles aren't Royal. There are major differences. A Noble's entire family is Noble, but only the King is Royal. None of the "Royal Family" is actually Royal, despite the terms used in the press. Nobility flows to all decedents of a Nobleman, Royalty can only be passed to a single heir. That's why the Royal's family is often given title such as Duke, Earl, etc., to confirm non-common status to the family of the king.
“I’m a new writer trying to write a story about royalty and I had so much difficulty distinguishing the ranks! Ive understood through wiki and more but it’s still confusing. Thank you so much for this video and thank TH-cam for recommending it to me.” She sighs in relief as she continued to watch the video.
In dutch the vicount is the Burchtgraaf. Translated it’s something like count of the castle. And it was the “concierge” or castlekeeper when the count wasn’t there. Although we speak of the Count of Flanders, the figure was actually the marquess of Flanders. Flanders was mostly part of the French Kingdom and bordered the Dutchy of Brabant which was part of the Holy Roman Empire. Older dukedoms where also situated at the strategic borderlands of a Kingdom. The different nobles in the low countries (Belgium, The Netherlands, Luxemburg and Northern France) where quit independent from the emperor and could rule as defacto kings. Filip the Good and hid Son Charles the Bold almost made it to King. But that honour was bestowed upon King Willem I of the Kingdom of the United Netherlands 400 years later. Only to be split up 15 years later in the Kingdom of The Netherlands and the Kingdom of Belgium.
This is an excellent video. Much appreciated. Thank you. Any chance that you might be able to craft one on the ranks of nobility in the HRE extending to Prussia, et al? It would be very helpful to have an English-language guide to that, serving the same purpose that this one does for the English ranks.
Thanks for the info. I have been researching the Genealogy of my family and have gotten back to the Middle Ages. Most of my family history is from England and Scotland with some of ancestors being called Lords/Ladies, Barons and Knights.
So, French here. Why was the Marchioness (Marquise in French) of Pompadour called that when Pompadour itself isn't at a boarder? Unless French nobility was relatively different or geography of France had changed a lot maybe, but I still have to ask.
Great work! You really tell everything in detail. But I just want to know- can't you call a Duke Lord "insert name"? Can't you say, for Example- Lord Mountbatten, Earl of Burma? Or Lord Someone, Duke of Somewhere?
3:40 Let me just correct a small mistake here. In the video is said that the title of Duke was used in "German and French lands". However theres kingdom of Bohemia included in these lands. And Czechs are slavic and were their own nation even though they were and werent (this part is very complicated and deserving video on its own) part of Holy Roman Empire.
Duke is derived from the Dux, the military commander of the regions under the Roman Empire, and was created by Imperator Dioclaetion during the Tetrarchy to keep regional governer, magistrates from leading armies in open rebelion,
"You may be ask, what's a Baronet?" Isn't that the pointy thing at the end of a rifle? XD also, very informative. I may use this info for Dungeons and Dragons.
Amazing video! This channel is going to be big! I have a question and a suggestion, as like a follow up to this video, could you make a video explaining the British honours or at least like how knighthood changed from people fighting to people honoured for their achievements.
@@stephenheath8465 Napoleon was a Bonapartist: his core philosophy was whatever was best for himself. In his earlier years during this revolution he supported the republic, then after a while in charge of the republic he thought “I want to be emperor now” so crowned himself emperor, and went on to install his brothers, sisters and relatives as kings, grand dukes, princes etc. all over Europe
And of course the last, or first rung on the ladder of nobility would be the knight, though in later times they wouldn’t go through a knighthood and instead be called Esquires, of course long before esquire was put at the end of the name of an attorney/lawyer/barrister. Looking forward to your video that goes from Viscount down, as I probably forgot something and your videos are well done and researched as well as to the point and entertaining. You definitely earned the likes and subscribe. TY and keep up the great work 👍🏻
This was sooo easy to understand and follow, I'm so thankful! I wish I would've had this video in school way back in the day As an American none of this has ever been relevant to me but when I first started hearing about it, I was so confused it was frsutrating
Emperor King Arch Duke Duke Marquess / Marquis Count Viscount Baron Baronet Knight Esquire Gentleman These are the major noble titles you might ever need to know. Descending titles are almost always beholden to the rank cited above them. There have be some large skips in the past such as Barons being directly under a Marquess or Duke instead. All titles below are hereditary, and almost always to the oldest male heir of the main bloodline. Emperors were those that had multiple kingdom titles under them, or sovereign king subjects. Kings are widely known. Skip. Arch Duke. Not as well known, but usually had multiple dukedom titles and lands, and would usually be announced with all of them specifically. Also for large Duchies not beholden to a king. Duke. Vast lands which themselves contained counties and cities as vassal states. Almost all Dukes or Duchess are in direct line for the throne, as their families were younger siblings to the heir and were granted or created unto titles. Marquess. Think very large county or counties. Not good enough to be a Duke, but the area is important enough strategically to reward noble title. The word comes from Marche meaning frontier as these territories were on the borders of the kingdom. It's one of the reasons that we hear the terminology "March to war". Count. Directly involved in the word county. A smaller division of named land and the ruler of said land. Such area would likely have several small to large cities included. Viscount. As it said in the video it was originally an assistant that managed a part of the land for a Count, but eventually it became a title also passed down essentially becoming a title. Baron. Usually a single large city hereditary holder. Might also hold several small villages nearby along with whatever resources they produce. Baronet. NOT a noble title, but a granted title to those that have done service to a high noble, including large donations. Usually hereditary to the first degree, so that a son can inherit but then the family no longer has a title, but not always. Some few are hereditary knights and orders though. Knight. The lowest form of nobility most of the time. Often landless, and without title. Usually hereditary but not in all cases. Still above commonfolk. Esquire. A man usually held in high regard without a noble title. Often important workmen for Knights. Gentleman. Mentlegen.....
Emperor was more or less a re-introduced Roman title and legacy on top of the feodal system since Charlemagne. He based the claim of Emperor arguing there was no emperor in Constantinople at that time, Irene was empress, and the Pope seeking to get rid of the dominance of the Byzantine Emperor for centuries, backed him up. For centuries it was the Pope that bestoved the title of Emperor on the German kings, who actually were called king of the Romans.
This was quite informative and has helped shed light on something Google has thus far refused to tell me. I was playing the Tabletop RPG Pathfinder in their organized Society system and a few of the adventures reward characters with Noble titles. One such title was something like Visbaron (you were granted a visabarony, I think?). Assuming it is a real title and not something made up, your video suggests it to be lower than even Baron and would be like a Vice Baron. Again, Google has not helped me on this, so I gave up and figured it was just a made up title for the campaign, but even if it is, I now have some context for the hierarchy.
Thane and moramer were ancient Scottish titles which were displaced by Earl, Duke etc after several French or Norman French aristocrats settled in Scotland during the reign of David I and his immediate successors. 3 of these "French" families the Bruces, Balliols and Stewarts ended up on the Scottish throne
If I could choose any nobility rank, it would be high enough to get me into all the parties but low enough to where I don’t have any real responsibilities.
There were huge expectations associated with the varied ranks. One 19th gentlemen declined a dukedom and requested a Marquisate instead, as the cost of entertaining on the scale of a duke was too high.
I’d like to know why in Germany Baron and Freiherr are both used but not synonymously Btw to all those wondering, an Archduke is a fictional title for a strong duchy inside the HRE. HRE princes were not allowed to call themselves king (except for Bohemia but that’s a weird one) so before 1803 if Austria wants to show that they’re superior to a regular count (like the count of Brunswick or Württemberg) they call themselves Archduke. Grand duke is basically the same but post 1803 (Baden).
Sort of actually, while that is one reason, the secondary reason was that in the golden bull of 1356 austria got skipped from gaining an electorial vote, this vote had some privileges and basically allowed primogeniture. Meanwhile both Bavaria and Austria kept being divided upon succession. There was a most likely forged privilege that the austrian emperor Frederick came up with which he used to try and keep his realm from dividing upon succession.
Yes. But, Grand Dukes do outrank Archdukes if the Grand-Duke is a Sovereign Head of State in his own right like Luxembourg today, or Baden/Hesse/Sax-Coburg prior to 1918. Back in the 19th Century when there were multiple types of Grand Duke, generally a legitimate reigning Head of State outranks royal princes etc., even if it is a small state or principality. So the precedence was: Emperor -Imperial Majesty King -Royal Majesty (Reigning) Grand Dukes -Royal Highness Crown Princes (whatever the title may be) -Imperial/Royal Highness Archdukes/Imperial Russian Grand Dukes -Imperial Highnesses (Reigning) Sovereign Princes -Serene Highness (e.g. Lichtenstein, Monaco, formerly Ponte Corvo) Princes of the Blood/ etc. -Royal Highness, Highness (depends) (e.g. the French brother of the King, Monsieur) Royal Dukes/Grand Princes/Royal Princes (non-reigning) Sovereign Princes Princes/Furst Dukes (Your Grace) Marquis/Margrave/Marquess Count/Earl/Comte Viscount Baron Freiherr (sometimes) *Non-Noble Hereditary* Freiherr/Baronet Ritter/Chevalier Knights...
Fear not for your small error in numbering the Richards (although Richard II would have been upset to be compared to Richard III.) Your content is accurate with good references. Expansion might include seeing a Marquis as "A lord of the March," keeping safe those borders. This means that the lands referred to ( like The Duke of Cornwall or The Earl of Huntingdon) apply to a marquis only where the lands are indeed a border. Here my own limits appear, as I am not sure whether the borders are for England, Great Britain or The United Kingdom. Finally, you mentioned that a knighthood is not considered as a rank of the nobility. Perhaps, but the order of preference (coarsely, some kind of league table) does see some ranks of knighthood taking precedence over ranks of the nobility (see Knight of the Garter in the rankings.) As for Archdukes, consider the (apparently) humorous line, "Archduke Ferdinand found alive, First World War a mistake." Google et al can explain.
All three Richards were deeply flawed characters. The first one was only interested in military adventures, and all but bankrupted England over the ransom that had to be paid to release him from capture by the Austrians. The second was one of those fundamentally insecure types who always have to be validating and revalidating themselves, in his case by demanding absolute obedience and self-abasement from even the highest-ranking of his subjects. The third was in some ways a better ruler than either of them, but his reputation never recovered from the accusation that he murdered his nephews to consolidate his position on the throne.
My ascendente used to be Viscounts and Barons in Portugal. Eventually around the 1600s with Spain taking over, the titles were lost at some point and then they all ended anyway in 1910 with tue republic being implanted.
Interesting! Titles of nobility were also explicitly banned in Mexico in 1910 as well. I have seen many 18th century documents with my ancestors and Marquesses/Barons, their signatures are awesome!
Since the Kings of England of the time were from a French family (Plantagenets), I think the titles came from France rather than the HRE. Marquis -> Marquess, Vicomte-> Viscount.
0:30 Actually the titles have their origin before feudalism. Duke comes form Dux a military commander in the roman military. Prince from princeps one of the titles of the emperors. Earl from Jarl a germanic chieftain of sort. Count from the comitatanses, the professional soldiers of the late roman legions.
My fanon ranks which I'll be using for my novel: Royalty: Emperor/Empress - Empire King/Queen - Kingdom Prince/Princess - Principality (For proceeding ranks, the suffix -dom represents independence from a higher monarch, the lack of which signifies being under a monarch and whose lands constitute a part of said monarch's land) Nobility: Duke/Duchess - Dukedom/Duchy Marquis/Marquess - Marquisdom/Marquisate Earl/Earless - Earldom/Earleine Gentry: Count/Countess - Countdom/County Viscount/Viscountess - Viscountdom/Viscounty Baron/Baroness - Barondom/Barony
In Poland from XV century all the nobility (10% of society) was equal to each other and king was elected by them. There was popular proverb: Nobleman on the yard equal to the voivode (governer of the province)
I really enjoyed your ranks of nobility video - I found it interesting. Spain has similar nobility titles but they are ranked in the following order. Starting with the highest rank: Grande de España - Grandee of Spain Duque - Duke Marqués - Marquess Conde - Earl Vizconde - Viscount Barón - Baron Señor - Sir (as title) Hidalgo - Nobleman or Squire
Where does 'Don' as a form of address, come in there..? Is it simply the equivalent of English 'Sir,' for an otherwise untitled knight (caballero), or more like, 'M'Lord'?
@@n.w.1803You’re mostly right, ‘Don’ is just about equivalent to ‘Sir’. Don came from the Latin word *dominus*, meaning “Lord or Master”. ‘Lord’ is also equivalent to ‘Señor’, which was a title as well. Both ‘Don’ and ‘Señor’ were used as titles or pre-fixes for titled nobles. But it is now common for every day language like ‘Sir’ or ‘Mister’ are. In the 18th century and possibly most of the 19th, it was still only used for people “worthy” of being called that. As in the case of my male line ancestors in 18th century Mexico, they are listed in a census near other Spanish inhabitants, but they are the only ones with the written pre-fix 'Don' in front of their names, as owners of the Hacienda and members of the gentry.
@@Duquedecastro Now, me must get into the nebulous ranking of the German, "Freiherr," and whether it deserves equivalent noble title in English, Spanish, etc...see also: The famous Freiherr von Richtofen, aka, the "Red Baron"..
In Poland it went completely different. Early on we didn't really have ranks of nobility, I mean we had "duke" (used for the ruler) and he had warriors. They were granted land later but no one dared to use any high title. There was also a voivode, which was the second most important person, right after the duke. Sometimes the duke was crowned a king, too. Later Poland was divided between multiple sons of one man, from one dynasty, and those were called dukes, and one was a senior duke and he was to appoint the voivode. However the seniority rule was abolished. Many dukes appointed their own voivodes, the voivodes became so strong. At some point there was a call for unity. This caused us to have 3 units of the same level: duchies (that had both a duke and a voivode), voivodeships (with just a voivode) and lands (with just a duke). When Poland got united, it underwent some changes, and so each voivodeship was an administrative division containing a few lands (oftentimes lands were put inside voivodeships), but the lands had their own legislature (sejmik, aka the nobility from the area gathering together). All the upper offices (voivodes, but also ministers and some other ones) formed the Senate, while the sejmiks cound sent their representatives/deputies (poseł) to the Sejm, which formed the House of Deputies (Izba Poselska). Both houses were in the Sejm. Back to the nobility, when we were a permanent kingdom, we finally decided that we want equality of all noblemen (even the poorest nobleman is equal to the voivode). They just called each other with the word "pan", later with very long forms containing the word (the word can be translated as "sir" or even "lord", but I'd go with the first translation). Also, when we made an union with Lithuania, we decided to let descendants of their Grand Ducal family to use the title of prince/duke (we don't really have separate names here). Later some families usurped or took those titles from other countries (like from the HRE) and used them in the Commonwealth, which was kinda illegal. We also had some titles illegally granted by the Sejm a while before Poland collapsed. Finally, we had some people claiming the title of count. Also, one distinguishing feature of Polish nobility. All children inherit your title.
As I recall, the title "Baronet" was invented by King James -- I don't recall which one -- who needed some cash. He made up a title that roughly meant "little baron" and sold what was basically a hereditary knighthood. They are called "Sir" and "Dame" rather than "Lord" and "Lady" because they are not peers, and have no power or rights other than the title.
One mistake: The rank Duke exists in Germany as Herzog. Duc is french. In frankish empire and early days of HRE the administration was divided into tribal duchies/ Herzogtümer. So in those days a Herzog was basicly a tribal chief. If Herzog realy once meant ,Leader of the Heerzug( campaign)' i don' t know.
A nice simply summary, but the forms of address (spoken and written) do get much more involved then that, as does stuff around marriage, inheritance of titles, etc. I know this from spending many a quiet and happy hour reading a copy of Titles and Forms of Address I got out of my local library as a teen.
CORRECTION: The illustration I made depicting Richard the II was accidentally based on a painting of Richard III, my mistake. Thank you to those who pointed it out to me.
Yeah I was about to say something lol
Now do all my subscribers inform against me.
who cares!
Thank you. I think most people would prefer a standard ranking system such as: private, corporal, sergeant, lieutenant, captain, etc.
Came here to correct you, job already done ;)
Emperor - Governs over many countries.
King/Prince - Governs a country.
Duke - Governs a regions, and rules over counties under its region.
Marques - Governs a county & has military rights.
Count - Governs a county.
Baron - Has a castle & land.
Baronet - Commoner raised to new nobility, no land.
Knight - Noble elite soldier
Better then video itself.
I will read the comments first from now on to not waste the time
Why didn't I open the comments before watching?
Pretty sure knights are not nobility.
@@리주민 Uh wrong, a Knight by it's very definition is nobility, in order to be a Knight who was usually a Mounted warrior who could afford good military equipment you had to be wealthy.
The lost content: An Archduke is a member of the House of Habsburg. They were annoyed that their main realm (austria) was "just" a dukedom. So they created the titel Archduke to be a step above the other dukes.
The prefix "arch-" means first, so an archduke is the top-ranking duke. ("Archbishop" is another example.)
@@Blaqjaqshellaq
And archangel must mean top ranking angel.
@@zhouwu it does. Archangels Gabriel, Michael and Lucifer(prior to his fall) were among the most powerful.
@@chrismc410
And Lucifer threw it all away just for what? A promotion he failed to get anyway? That he wasn't qualified for in the first place?
The title Archduke is higher than a prince and a Grand Duke and lower than a king and an emperor they are addressed as Imperial highness.
The British use Earl and Countess because the commoners used to giggle when the Norman counts called themselves count... It sounded like a VERY rude word (which still exists), so they adopted the Anglo-Saxon word instead.
It makes modern people giggle too.
I never thought about that until now lmao
Oh wow, that's so funny-- but it makes sense
What’s the rude word that still exists today? I’m a freeman from the former 13 colonies so I don’t know what you’re talking about anymore.
Hey Genghis, little hint: think of the German philosopher Immanuel Kant.
Another little wrinkle is that nobles often have multiple titles and would be granted new ones over time. Since they were referred to by their highest title, if the Earl of X was granted the title Duke of Y, he'd stop being referred to as X and now be referred to as Y. Also, it was traditional that the noble's eldest son would be granted the right to use his father's second highest title as a courtesy.
Oh that's interesting
Don't forget the absolute gongshow of Henry II's stacking, and sometimes contradicting, titles. Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, Count of Anjou and Toulouse (and more that I'm forgetting), King of England, doing homage to the French king for his southern continental lands even though they were always at war. The early medieval period was wild before the nobility settled on how to divide power.
@@Levacque that was a unique circumstance that only happened because they were personally held lands of a King. Had they have been held by a lower ranking nobleman things would have been a lot different.
@@CubeInspector yes I know it was unique, that's why I added it to the conversation
It would be a courtesy as long as there was not a need for a Writ of Acceleration (like creating peers to force legislation through the old form of the House of Lords) taking the title from the father and actually giving it to the heir thus making him a peer, too. This is also why Earl of Arundel is the oldest earldom in England but because it is held by the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of Shrewsbury is considered the premier earl. There is also the issue of passing down titles in the Peerage of Scotland where women can inherit.
Western Nobility: has rights
Polish Nobility, who could basicly overthrow the king via a simple vote: Laughs in Liberum Veto
I believe that required a *unanimous* vote.
@@odysseusrex5908 Yes, but any random noble could simply shout "Liberum Veto" and leave the Sejm, disbanding the meeting. This rule was established in the middle ages as a last resort secret weapon for a goodhearted noble to use, in case the Parliment wanted to pass a harfull reform. It was mostly forgotten, and then was dug up later in the 17th century, and used to do the opposite. Ironic.
@@Maximmuss_ Unfortunetly the Polish nobles got so much power and often abused it and elected the wrong king that Poland became weak by the late 18 century and was dismembered by it's more powerful neighbors. It's only now becoming strong and united again.
@@mattbarbarich3295 Yeah, but that's the point. The nobles became so powerfull in the 18th century, that when the russian Tzar proposed to one polish noble, that he can bribe the others to make him king, he actually took it as an offence, because making him king would actually take his privileges. And ironically - all of this was going on while other countries adopted absolutism - it was the reign of the "Sun King", Peter the Great and the Prussian Frederics. So basicly... the lesson to be learned here is... abandon democracy, embrace... tyranny? XD
@@Maximmuss_ Hmmm, not necessarily . The British did it the right way, the monarchs became less powerful but a representative Parliment and Prime Minister was stronger and worked with the king or queen and Britain prospered an Empire was the biggest. Poland should've kept with a hereditary monarchy as they had a chance I read once but they elected a weak foreign king , forget his name in 1700s.
I'd love to know about the nobility system in Tsarist Russia. Seems like there were a lot of princes.
It's kind of weird , because European and russian system are not really similar. Prince (князь) wasn't like son or hier of king, he was usually kind of sovereign or authority with army. So Tsar is more eastern roman term, rus people call the emperor of the Eastern roman empire, tsar. Because tsar is their version of the word "Caesar" , in their vision , the king of kings - emperor. So basically, princes of Russia was more like kings. And in Russian empire ,hier title was Tsesarevich, not a prince.
There were only two titles of nobility in Tsarist Russia, Prince and Count, making their system very simple compared to that of the Holy Roman Empire.
@@doctor_death4239 So how does "Grand Prince of Kiev" fit into that?
@@nunyabiznez6381 ,it was before Moscow
@@nunyabiznez6381 there were a number of grand princess, not only Kiev. You can compare it to elector counts of the HRE
CK2/3 has taught me below every duke are multiple counts, and below every count are multiple barons. Sometimes the "king" can be a prince, sometimes a grand prince, and sometimes an archduke.
@@vit968 obviously lol. It was sarcasm.
And EMPEROR is above ALL!!!
This is an antiquated view still used for ease of gameplay. For example in the Kingdom of France, the Count of Flanders was just as important as the Duke of Toulouse. This count also owed no fealty to any duke above them save the king.
@Ornithocheirus I would add, that title "Duke" came from "duc" (French), which came from "dux" (Latin), which means "leader" and was referred in Republican Rome to "military commander without a land". "Dux" became military commander of province after Diocletian reforms.
When you take into account the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, and then following organization of Germanic tribes, the "dux" became used as "herzog" (German, from words Heer + zog/ziehen, "somebody who leads an army to battle"). Term "stem duchy" refers to those leaders of an entire tribe.
In other words, "Duke" strictly refers to military leader of an entire province in either Empire, or united entity (kingdom), who was designated to rule in behalf of a ruler. Even later in HRE, "Herzog" was traditional kind of "below kings/emperor" prince-like title, which represents old governance about certain tribe and territory. In HRE they were "Herzog" and "Fürst" ("the first chief", from Latin "princeps"). The German equivalent of somebody naming themselves "grand prince/grand duke" was in fact "Großfürst".
@@cd180 looks at the kingdom of bohemia and margraviate of brandenburg (both electors). Yeah it checks out
To remember the precedence of British nobility, use the mnemonic:
Do - Duke
Men - Marquess
Ever - Earl
Visit - Viscount
Boston - Baron
Like the Mnemonic of the cardinal directions
Never - North
Eat - East
Sea - South
Weed - West
@@marloyorkrodriguez9975
Never
Eat
Soggy
Weed
In both of these cases, it's easier to remember the thing than the mnemonic.
Clever…thanx.
@@marloyorkrodriguez9975 Never, Eat, Shredded, Wheat……..
1:48 Earl and Countess
2:35 Baron/Baroness
3:25 Duke/Duchess
4:13 Marquess/Marchioness
5:08 Viscount/Viscountess
The title "duke" comes from the Latin "dux" which meant a roman military leader: think something similar to a general or field marshal (another title derived from "march"!). As such, it is the title with the oldest roots.
And Count comes from "comes", another Roman office.
Marshall = mareskal = horse keeper = ecuyer
So a Duke is....a Duce.
@@a.b.6233 il Duce
Frogmouth, which comes from the latin word "crawfish", meaning "weaver of polyester", is a rank which is considered to be subordinate to Toady, an ancient Javanese Celtic ceremonial position which performed the function of production line shift lead unless relieved by his superior which would often be referred to as "that jackelope".
There was at one point an actual Earl of Grantham, but the line went extinct in the 18th century, so the title reverted to the crown.
Where do I sign up to fill in the situations vacant?
@ J. D. Montgomery So does that mean that Her Majesty could Grant a Gentleman the Title of Earl of Grantham, and effectively Restart the Line?
@@MLopez-fu8fd If the crown so wished. Letters patent could even create a Countess Grantham as the inaugural holder in the new creation. Nothing inherently requires title holder be a man.
@@economath8164 Thank You for the reply. I do marvel at the English Monarchy, and hope it survives for many years to come. As an American Commoner, I doubt I’ll ever have the chance to Meet any, or even meet any English Nobility for that matter, but it is truly an Extraordinary thing to witness.
@@MLopez-fu8fd You can have it mate - they still linger on here living of the proceeds of thievery in centuries past
Here is your mnemonic: Don't Men Ever Visit Boston - Duke Marquess Earl Viscount Baron. Now you'll never get them out of order again.
A jewel. I'm trying to repay you, but, alas, all I have is that when the Arabs reached "Caesar Augusta", they perceived the name as "Sarqusta", and I find it hilarious that the "S" and "Z" sounds in "Cesar" annoyed them. It ended up as "Zaragoza", or "Saragossa" (try the google traslator from Spanish to English for more laughs), both alien to any listener in any language :) I pray you accept my humble offering :D
@@JorgeNajjar Thanks. Just to be completely honest I did NOT author that mnemonic; it's something I learned a long time ago.
Wow! Just like that, you schooled us all. Thank you!!
Interesting. I always just go alphabetically from lowest to highest B,C,D,K for Baron, Count, Duke, King; Then I just remember Arch higher and Vice is Lower for the weird splinter titles.
Did Mary Ever Visit Brighton Beach ... includes Baronet
Margraves and marquesses could frequently have a lot more territory than a regular Earl would be expected to have, despite being technically roughly peers. Especially as borders shifted during wars a Margrave could lose or expand territory quite extremely. Such as the Margrave of Brandenburg. Which eventually came to exceed the size of many duchies.
The marquess rank was actually preceded by the rank of Marcher Baron or marcher lord - referring to the Welsh marches which these men were responsible for guarding. These individuals held authority and wealth (military wealth if not financial) equivalent to a duke and were treated much the same as such.
The marcher lords didnt pay taxes to the king with the universtanding that they would use that extra money to build up their armies. And then you get the baron wars.
The equivalent in the Holy Roman Empire was the Markgraf (margrave) who was more powerful than a Landgraf (landgrave). Graf = Count or Earl. Markgraf = Earl Marcher.
The title of Count was often much older than Marquis or Duke, so some noble families kept using it even after they had gone on to greater things. Examples of that include the Count-Duke of Olivares in Spain, and in France the Marquis de Sade, members of whose family alternated that with Comte de Sade. The British nobility did not do that.
Thank you for making this.
It's going to be super useful to my D&D campaign.
I'm positive that anyone here is a history nerd or a dm, probably both
@@ravenhunter1355 Yeah, probably both.
History nerd here!
I've mused about these things a hundred times without ever bothering to look them up. You've answered most of my questions so thanks for that!
Duke comes from the Latin Dux(leader) through the French Duc and Prince comes from Princeps(first man) which was the actual title given to the Roman Emperors. For a long time Prince was used in the same way we use King. It helps to understand that when reading old documents, can be confusing if you assume they are the son of a living king.
An example is Machiavelli's "The Prince" or Erasmus's treaties on advice for Christian Princes
Prince is also a title of the ruler of a principality.
@@A3_870 Principality has the same origin though so its actually the land being named for the type of ruler. There was a period in which prince has become a generic term for any ruler hence Machiavellis book "The Prince" which was effectively a guide book for rulers.
@@shock_n_Aweful Quite right - Queen Elizabeth I, nearing death in 1603, still had enough spirit to say to her doctors when they said she should undergo a certain treatment: "must is not a word to use to princes!" - meaning any royalty, queens included..
@@Krzyszczynski yea I should have caught that, corrected, thx
TIL viscount's "S" is silent. This is an interesting video and useful in writing a fiction.
Well if you're speaking English then you can pronounce the S. It's silent in french
@@ep6600 No, the S in viscount is silent in English too.
@@SA-oq5lz
Saying with a short I and with the s makes it sound like you're getting a good deal (discount) 😋
Is it pronounced "Vie-count" (vie as like die)?
@@redpanda7071 yes
"Duke is the highest rank of nobility" is that because everything above it (That is, Kings and Queens) counts as royalty, not nobility?
Exactly. Royalty and Nobility are separate social classes.
@@chaosnight2006 That is sort of true, but there is actually some overlap as some Dukes are members of the royal family themselves and referred to as Royal Dukes, like Princes Charles, Andrew, Edward, William, Harry and Richard (the Queen's first cousin).
Some dukes are royals tho or have I been reading too much medieval fantasy stuff
@@harrymelad942 Not really overlaps, but rather that heirs were allowed to "rank down" in preparation for their inherited title. That is, the heir presumptive of the title of King could be called Duke (like Duke of Cornwall) even though he isn't an actual hereditary Duke. Likewise, the heir presumptive of the title Earl of Grantham could be called Viscount until he assumed the role.
@@derricktucker1533 This is called a Courtesy Title. The eldest son uses his father's next highest title. Many families acquired or built up holdings over centuries so had multiple titles (Baron this or that, Viscount blah blah) as the English peerages are generally not divisible. The eldest heir gets it all. But also, many when ennobled for the first time would be given say, an Earldom, which would almost always come with both a title of Viscount and Baron. Or just Baron. I believe all nobles of the rank of Earl and above have subsidiary titles. The younger siblings though are just called Lord or Lady.
Just a note, English "earl" came from Old English "eorl", not from "jarl" nor "ealdorman". I think you got confused by the fact that it is related to Old Norse "jarl" as they both come from Proto-Germanic "*erlaz", and in late Anglo-Saxon times the rank of "eorl" and "ealdorman" were nearly synonymous and used somewhat interchangeably.
Not to mention, ealdorman evolved into alderman, not earl.
@@FullCircleguitar That's not a valid argument. Many words have a common origin. Caesar evolved into Kaiser, César, Tsar, etc. Each word is similar, but does not mean the same.
@@korosuke1788 that's as may be, but in THIS case, ealdorman became alderman, not earl. My "argument" was not an argument but a statement of fact.
@@FullCircleguitar I always thought elder just meant old.
as in Senator, which just means senior ie old.
@@FullCircleguitar A little explanatory note: in the UK members of local governing bodies (councils) are called "councillors", a title borne by both men and women. An alderman is a kind of senior councillor. Usually about 20% of a council will be aldermen. The chief councillor, or mayor, is generally appointed from among their ranks, and even with that additional dignity, he or she is still referred to as "Alderman Such-and-such". So it's a very old title, but one still very much in use.
The most important Lord in England, after the Royal Dukes, is probably the Duke of Norfolk. He is also the Earl of Arundel and lives in Arundel Castle. He is Earl Marshall of England and therefore has important ceremonial roles at state occasions and matters of Heraldry. Other important Dukes are Northumberland, who owns Alnwick castle, used in Harry Potter and Blackadder, who's ancestor arrived with William the Conqueror in 1066 and had the job of holding the Scottish Frontier, and the present Duke of Wellington, who is active in the House of Lords. I believe the greatest Scots Duke is the Duke of Buccleuch, still a major landowner. Probably the richest Duke is relatively recent (19th Century) creation, the Duke of Westminster.
Very good video. I was surprised to see you aren't famous. Keep going the same way man!!
Since we’re going back to feudalism we may as well learn this stuff.
Except today's nobility doesn't have titles. They have high net worth.
@@fosterfuchs Well one of the reasons for feudalism dying in may places around the world was the commoners becoming more rich than the nobility that the whole system kinda stopped working.
Fun fact, "Esquire" was originally a noble title, and passing the bar would allow you to become ennobled with that title.
A great asset of yours in talking slowly on these complex topics, but also not sounding boring or monotone.
Try to keep a good balance there.
So what do those ranks do? For example, in Downton Abbey, Lord Granthan (earl) was in charge of a county. Were Marquises and Viscounts and Barons also in charge of counties at that time? In Bridgerton, what does Viscount Anthony do? He seems to have no purpose. And what do dukes do, ie. Duke Hastings in Bridgerton. Just trying to figure out their purposes and what these ranks oversee.
By the 18th and 19th centuries, the ranks became pretty ceremonial. Many of the old families lost their land, as less and less people worked in the agricultural sector (which is how the aristocracy made their money mostly, by owning the farmable land). If they still had land and money, through good investment and management, they're responsibility and purpose in their communities was as an employer. Their large estates needed servants, gardeners, farmers and what not. The slow March of democracy had taken the nobility's governing power, so for example Lord Grantham didn't really run the county in a governing sense, he just owned most of the land in the area. I haven't started watching Bridgeton yet, so I can't really say anything about the viscount.
Thanks so much for the question! Hopefully I answered it adequately.
They also pledged loyalty to a higher ranking noble or the king, depending on rank and would raise and lead armies and collect taxes for the king...the Earl was entitled to a third of the taxes collected in his county and used to appoint the sheriff...though that power was taken away as the monarchy became stronger...many nobles had the right to maintain their own private army, which made them the literal king makers during times of chaos, as for example when Henry the VII usurped Richard the III's throne...🤷♂️ also most nobles had royal blood in their veins, so they had some degree of a claim to the throne...yikes...
Also, eldest sons are entitled to use the next highest subsidiary title of their fathers as a courtesy. Meaning, the Earl of Wessexs son is called Viscount Linely but he’s not an actual viscount and serves no function in government. So not everyone referred to with a title is an actual peer.
@@withonelook1985 No, the Earl of Wessex's son is Jamie, Viscount Severn. Viscount Linley is the subsidiary title of the Earls of Snowdon
the difference of dukes and earls is quite big, and understandable by looking into the most important heraldic system of the HRE (because nobility didnt gave a crap about modern borders of nationality). If you look up at dukes-maps of the HRE in ~1000 you realice, that dukes had countless of earls under their controll, they were sub-kings in these areas and in the HRE they were able to vote for a king, thereby limiting the numbers of dukes (limiting means automatical more quality of the title). the "Mark/marchen"-earl is an earl on the border, but the HRE had heretical non-christian nations/tribes from poland and hungary on their borders....and they liked to raid and pillage and kill christians. So the HRE had to build defenses against these invaders. castles with noble soldiers. it became in a timeline of 300 years more and more a colonization(missionation) of eastern europa, the start of the feudal castle-structure and the actual militarian powerhouse of the empire. nearly all territorities east of the Elb-river (basicly everything of today austria and the former eastern-german territorities) became german in these times, until hungary and poland became christian themself and stoped the rights of colonization for the HRE.
the clerical titles grown in power because of the same system (mission of converting and settling were combined) and bishops were militarian and economical active persons, related to nobles and owned large areas of the nation, so dont imagine clerical people...they were sometimes basicly soldiers and extremly powerfull. kings allways tried to get their support (until reformation and protestantic movments happend, the true problem of the reformation for the catholic church was the lose of their rights for their church-territories)
now the whole system became more non-historical by the extrem population-growth, the creation of economical powerfull cities and the reformation. the reformation made it possible, that some dukes became extremly powerfull by grabing and reowning clerical areas. so the catholic nobility wa sin a disadvantage. the population growth gave an increase of different city-concils (senats), who demanded rights of representation against the nobility (some citites were basicly the area of rule of nobility, but these citites had to pay taxes to the nobility, while the nobility got their main taxes from their farmers. the difference between farming-areas and old nobility and the citites and their modern nobility increased.
at the same time the king introduced "magister" or rather "offical workers of the king". they were tax collectors or tried to improve the roads in the empire or build a better contact to cities and nobility. they were personal servant of the king and not connected to the nobility-dynasties. the nobility tend to hate these guys for talking to the king i their present on equal value. these offical worker sof the king were pro-king, so the nobility tend to get less power by their actions and they were sometimes called "slaves" or even worse in documents by nobles. So in many cases the king tried to integrate these offical workers into the old heraldic system, to prevent an infight and to reward his supports in these areas of non-nobility-workers. work for me for 20 years, be loyal and your family/son will become a small noble. this system created a specification of the king-rule and supported the rise of powerfull people into the heraldic system (like the former von Weizensäcker, a leader of democratic modern germany. this family was one of these "new" competent intellectuel "nobles". obliviously related to taxes in weat-bags) . the same system destroyed the old system of easy heraldic system and created an influx of new titles. most of these small non-important titles were from these creations.
the reformation in the HRE increased the numbers of big titles to prevent the rise of power from one confession. in some cases this conflict of the confession was NEVER settled, some writers pointed out, that the 7year-war was an conflict over german rule by confession (prot. prussia and catholic habsburg-austria) and both states remain to exist to this day or at least until the end of 1.WW in the last century.
Great stuff. Is it possible to make a video on the noble rankings in the Holy Roman Empire, The Ancien Regime (France), the Papal States and Spain? It would make an AMAZING series. Thanks again.
In Spain is almost the same, but with a little difference, they have a list of people with the title of "Greatness of Spain" and can have a regular one and the greatness... I'm not Spaniard but have the same doubt and do a Google search and that came up
Also you had the untitled nobility.These were people who were of noble birth, but weren't given a title like baron.Our family has the right to use von in our name, though it seems some of the family didn't .Many Uradel or ancient German families like ours didn't always use it
Great video! You have an image of Richard III when you’re talking about Richard II.
Wouldn't Marquess be pronounced similarly as Marquis (Mar-kee) since by the 1300s Britain's noble class would've been speaking mostly French?
Ye thought so, pretty sure its (mar-kes)?
Nope! That's another Americanism. It's either Mark-us or Mark-wes. Never, most absolutely never, mar-Key.
Nope, Marquess (mar-kwis) was used in England and Ireland, while Marquis (mar-kee) was used in continental Europe, Canada, and parts of Scotland. Same goes for their female counterparts, Marchioness (mar-shuh-ness) and Marquise (mar-keez). Marquess was never pronounced the same way as Marquis, perhaps because the English looked down on the French?
@@Ea-Nasir_Copper_Co I'm betting "Marquess" was derived from Marquis, given the English propensity for mispronouncing French words
@@derricktucker1533
Margrave in Germany and other countries.
Only nobility that mattered was the Earl of Sandwich!
and earl grey too
In the US we have Cattle Barons and Oil Barons, both are from the Republic of Texas
Duke of Earl, Count of Basie, Sir Loin of Beef.
But who was the Duke of Earl?
So where did "Sandwich" come from? Was that his family's name, or the name of the land he owned?
The German equivalent of "march" is actually "Mark." Great presentation!!
Thanks so much for your video. This question just popped in my head.
Great explaination ans simple and understanding. I wonder why u are not famous youtube channel. Keep going dudes hope u will be a famous channel soon👍
Very clear and quite interesting. The whole issue of knights is as you say another topic. One could be a Lord and by bravery earn a knighthood too, which sounds confusing at first. And I understand in Germany, especially when it was fragmented into many small states, barons were extremely common. Nobody seems quite sure if "von" (another question) Steuben was actually a baron though he claimed to be one. (Fun fact: Imperial Austria had two courts, one for nobility another for commoners. Beethoven tried to use the former claiming his "van" was the equivalent of a von. Eventually they figured out he was just inventing that.)
now the knighthood can be earned doing nothing much, even driving in circles ala Sir Hamilton haha
All lords were knighted back in the day. But most knights were not lords. Knight was both an occupation and a distinct social class, like the Equites of Rome. So all lords were expected to train and be proficient as mounted warriors, as knights. But, most knights, as in professional mounted warriors, were not lords, but a member of the intermediate knightly class that was in-between nobles and gentlemen/Burgers. To add to that, some knights had a hereditary title of free knight, who could pass his knightly title to his eldest son and didn't need to be knighted to be a knight. In the UK this is the Baronet, in France various Chevaliers, and in German lands Ritters and Freiherr. There was great mobility between the knightly and noble classes. Many, many knights could earn a lordship by his prowess, like William Marshal, who started out as the younger son of a lord, who was but a lowly household knight, who gained renown and eventually was elevated to Lord of Sturgil and then Earl of Pembroke. Or, sometimes, all it took was one really good day on the battlefield and the king would elevate a knight to lord.
Small correction, this is the English system rather than the British system, it’s different elsewhere in Britain
Anglo-Saxon England also had thegns/thanes and, as you mentioned, ealdormen; it wasn't just earls (or eorls, as they spelled it).
So in addition to those ranks, you have Knight, Lord and Baronet, in ascending order, that are all also technically part of the nobility, though not necessarily part of the peerage. Additionally, whilst Earl supplants Count in England, and Marquess supplants Marquis, it was also possible to have Count and Marquis. In this case, Count would be above Viscount, and below an Earl, Marquis would be above an Earl, but below a Marquess.
Both Count and Marquis were rare, and only ever used either because someone gained them as titles in other Kingdoms, and the Crown recognised them, OR in some cases, when it was deemed unwise to promote someone to a rank with full powers and peerage as well as resources. Ergo, if a Viscount... who was a Vice Count... and not an Earl, that is, did not have right to peerage or a County of his own, provided some service whereby a promotion was deemed justified.... but the Crown did not wish to empower this person too much, it may make them a 'Count'.... essentially a Earl without a County or necessarily the same privileges, but still a promotion, with some pursuant increase in privilege. Same for Marquis, if an Earl was deemed to have provided service which warranted promotion, but not to a Duke, and even not to Marquess... especially it was a service that was not necessarily military.... or if they were too popular with militaristic forces in the country... they might become a Marquis. These ranks almost never existed, but did kind of, on occasion, in the English nobility. Actually this was the same reason some Earls were made Marquess' rather than Dukes....but even then, they DID have all pursuant privileges, and at times, it was deemed appropriate to prevent someone having these.
As for Dukes and Princes, sometimes it depends on the Duke, and the Prince.
A Prince is normally always a title of the immediate Royal family.... HOWEVER, some blood Princes/Princesses, are born such, and somehow remain able to pass their title down, even long long after they are far distant kin to Royal line of the time. Essentially, Princes of a County or Duchy, or would otherwise be, but due their rank and privilege is a Principality within the Kingdom. It was occasionally also possible for someone in the higher ranks, a Marquess or Duke, to be made a Prince, not sure how often it happened in England, but in Europe it was not unheard of... it was for example how Lichtenstein came to be. These Princess/Princesses may have a lot privileges, even more than Dukes.... but by this point, they are NOT Blood Princess.... that is, of the immediate Royal line. They are of the bluest of blue Noble blood, but they are not immediate blood kin of the Monarch. Often times, Principalities like this, which existed in a Kingdom or Empire, also had some degree of autonomy, and much more privilege when it came to taxation and debt of service through vassalage.... but NOT always, so they might not be vassal Sovereign Princess, or even autonomous ones.
Conversely, sometimes a Duchy might not be part of another Kingdom, but like Luxembourg, be a Sovereign State in it's own right. Or it could be a Duchy home to an immediate Royal, who was a fourth or fifth child, and so not afford Prince or Princess, at birth, but a Ducal title, or a Nephew or Niece so given one. Additionally it could be a Duke with a honors and orders that essentially make them what 'Duc' originally was, in the earliest Frankish nobility (borrowed from the Romans)... the supreme military leader.. something akin to General of the Armies in the US military today. These might also be styled differently. A Sovereign Duke would be a Grand Duke, or an Arch Duke, if a Royal Duke of the Blood. The latter may or may not be made an Arch Duke, but would be considered one anyway in all circumstances due to his position as sword of the Kingdom... and unless in the company of the former two, be the ranking Duke any place.
Now, if the latter Dukes were to be somewhere with the former Princes, then those Dukes would OUTRANK the Princess, because they would either be Monarchs in their own right, immediately of the Blood, or simply have more responsibility than any other Noble, in their duties of Command. In this case, they would be deemed to outrank Princess not of the Blood, and not of Sovereign Principalities.
Of course, Princes/Princesses of the Blood, or of Sovereignty or who were essentially the 'Duc' of their Kingdoms, like the Black Prince, who was two of three of those, well they would outrank any Dukes, even those outlined above.
Prince can be a tricky one though..... before the 1400s, when Wales was still something of an independent entity, for example... it was a Principality... it still is within the UK technically.... but it was it's own then. But unlike England, where Athelstan conquered the other Anglo Saxon kingdoms and made the Kingdom of England, Wales was like Ireland pre 1100s.... all the smaller Kingdoms retained their Kings, and some degree of Sovereignty, and just pledged allegiance to the 'concept' of Ireland or Wales... and the premier overlord. Kind of like the German Empire of the medieval period.
But in Germany, this rank was an Emperor... as it was in many places like China, and had been in Rome. The Irish, they called it High King... and some places went this way, with High Kings or Great Kings....like Mongolia with naming one Temujin Borjigin "Genghis Khan".... ...but in Wales.... a country with a mythical creature as their national animal, an onion as their national flower, and burning hatred of vowels... well... of course their ruler would be as confusing... this person was Prince of Wales.... but technically... he was an EMPEROR.
So in this instance, this Prince, if in a meeting of European Nobles, would actually not only outrank Dukes, or most Dukes... unless a Grand Duke..... but actually... as someone who has the fealty of Kings and their Kingdoms...would outrank KINGS and Queens, as well as Sovereign Princes and Dukes... and essentially be considered an Emperor. Because that was what an Emperor was, an overlord who ruled as the ultimate authority over a region, which consisted of many vassal Kingdoms who pledged fealty to his crown and authority. If you had that, as High King, or Great King.... or even PRINCE, you were considered an Emperor as if you held such a title.
Generally speaking this level confusing... of complex seniority, or promotions in name not nature, never happened with the lower Nobility, but theoretically IT COULD there too. If dynamics and blood was crazy enough, a Knight might outrank a Baronet, or even a Baron....but these people never really held enough authority or enough power through land and men at arms.... to matter enough for such considerations, so fortunately, it essentially only mattered when talking about the highest blood of the Nobility, Dukes and above.
Unless of course.... you had a Monarch of a place, with some nobles of a place.... who all had ranks and position within ANOTHER Kingdoms Nobility too! Then things could VERY VERY weird. Or if something like the Chanel Isles of England existed in the Kingdom... were there was essentially another whole section of lands, which were the personal sovereign possession of the Monarch, and through their Monarchial Rights, their sole domain, over which they appoint someone to specific title.... like the Seingeur of Sark. Then you have to work our where a Seingeur fits in the Nobility.... or Governor for Guernsey and Jersey, and President in the case of Alderney. Which can also really mess things up, in regards to who outranks whom, and how convoluted the titular gymnastics get.
A Knight is a lord but is considered to be at the lowest level of Lordship and tends to serve under a lord as a vasel.
@@bighands69 A Knight might be referred to as a Lord, but they are NOT Lords.
Lords start with, well, Lords, or Ladies, and go up from there.
Many Lords were, are, by default Lords, and called "M'Lord" by commons, but actually are titled above Lord. They may be a Baron, or Viscount or an Earl or a lowly Baronet, but are because of that Lords.. ..But there's actual Lords, too, whose rank title is Lord...they rank below the aforementioned but ABOVE Knights.
A Knights correct title, was, and is Sir, or Lady, if a Dame. Yet a Dame is NOT a titular Lady, as in a female Lord, it is purely a formal form of address.
Knights did not, and do not, have the same privileges as Lords or higher. They are kind of ....vice-aristocrat...even though of the nobility.
Hello I just discovered a Lord with my last name somewhere in Europe ... it's very vague what I discovered. And it's cool tho .. it's also strange because around the world there are supposedly only 116 people with my last name .. most in South America. I have ancestry in Spain and In Basque country..also In Italy. I'dike to find more info but I don't know where to start . I'm 90 percent positive I'm not related to those Lord's in Europe but it's still cool tho .. I'm in the US 🇺🇸
@@Apis4
A Lord was anybody who exercised rule of a manner, house or group of peoples. They also held titles.
If you are referring to a knight as in a bondsman then no they are not a lord and are servant.
But if you are talking about a vassal who is a Knight with power such as a Lords son then you are talking about an actual Lord.
I should have made it clear in my original comment that I am not referring to the modern honorary system such as the Order of empire which are not real Lords they just carry a fancy title and nothing else. Most are poor and have no manner or house.
@@bighands69 A Lord in your sense, anybody who exercised rule, is what I mean when talk of address.
However, as you yourself note, there are ACTUAL lords, who's TITLE and RANK in the aristocracy is LORD.
This goes back well before 'Modern' Lords. This is, essentially, entry level Aristocracy.
Knights are not part of this, but also kind of are a little, like certain other Vassals. A Signeur or a Seneshal or like might be other examples.
These were, to some extent, Nobles, but without any of rights and privileges of the Aristocracy. A Knight was a member of the Warrior class essentially, sort of like Samurai in Japan (the other two were crown positions, one essentially an avatar of Monarch, ruling directly over a region in their name, by their mandate, the other a kind of Mayor, and Cheif Bureaucrat in one, administering for the crown over a place which may or may not be it's own, or just being run until the seat is filled).....they were not commoners, but they had far less power than ACTUAL lords, including proper Lords.
Actually the nobility pre-Norman conquest was in descending order was Earl (who was the official in charge of one of the old Kingdoms or a group of shires), High Reeve (which was a rare office/title used for the rulers of Bamburgh and Dumnonia), Shire Reeve (later became Sheriff and was in charge of a Shire), Reeve (a magistrate or bailiff of a town or district), and Thegn (which were basically retainers with the King's Thegns being the equivalents of later Barons). Notice that these were originally offices. This true of most noble titles actually. After the Conquest and the Revolt of the Earls, William the Conquerer eliminated the old Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms as units of administration and made Earls the rulers of Shires or Counties. All the old Anglo-Saxons offices were either devalued as in the cases of the Reeve ranks or replaced as in the case of Thegns, who were replaced by Barons and Knights.
In german Nibelungen tale a man is called Degen, he is one of the nonservant men at king Gunthers court. Degen , in current german epee, smallsword, rapier once was thegn. In 1980s some old people used ,degenmäßig' ( like a thegn) to describe men with good behavior.
And effectively Anglo-Saxon earls were the rough equivalent of European dukes, so the Battle of Hastings was essentially fought between two men who at the beginning of 1066 had held equivalent positions: the Earl of Wessex and the Duke of Normandy.
The clear and succinct video I was looking for. Thank you so much.
Simple, easy to follow and very informative! If I have to bitch at anything I would say that the flickering white background makes it look less "clean" but the content is great!
Very interesting. I would have appreciated going into how each rank seems to also have the titles of the lower ranks as well. I’m not quite sure how all that works. I’m just familiar with the fact that it seems to be what is.
It's not so much that they absolutely HAVE titles of lower ranks attached to their higher rank titles, it seems like some titles are associated to others and passed down through families. I think someone could have the title of "Duke/Duchess of ___" without other titles attached in theory. Same thing for other titles.
Noble families tend to accumulate multiple titles over time. For example someone is created a Baron and his grandson gets raised in rank to be a Viscount. The baronial title still exists but it has become subsidiary to a higher title, so if the Viscount dies without heirs then the viscountcy becomes extinct but his younger brother can still inherit the title of Baron. Another possibility is that a descendant of the original Baron, who is not descended from the current titleholder, may do something (like being a leading politician or military commander) which leads to his being created an Earl. Perhaps centuries later the senior branch of the family becomes extinct and the 7th Earl inherits the families original baronial title. Lower ranked titles can also be used as a courtesy title for the heir. The eldest son of a Duke of Norfolk is known as the Earl of Arundel and Surrey, although the Duke would still be the substantive holder of those subsidiary titles. There was also a process, which was used on rare occasions, when the Crown granted a Writ in Acceleration so that the heir apparent to a peerage could be called to the House of Lords by passing a subsidiary title to him in his fathers lifetime.
Another possibility, particularly for people mostly royals raised to a high rank in the peerage would be for multiple titles at different levels of the peerage to be created at the same time.
What dictates a lord's importance is not their actual title but their wealthy and power. Such as how many men were at their service, how much force they could wield in a kingdom and so on. So there would have been situations were a Knight which is the lowest form of a lord could exert more influence than an actual Earl or Count.
@@garygriffin6411 This needed to be said. For those who don't know, the Duke of Norfolk lives in Arundel Castle in Sussex, and has nothing to do with Norfolk. This sort of thing is not uncommon .
The term earl doesn't come from Old Norse "jarl" or OE "ealdorman". It comes from the OE "eorl", which coulda meant a nobleman ranking above a thane/ealdorman or a warrior.
While the word originates from Norse the concept probably comes from the Roman Empire.
I see a bright future for this channel, I'm glad I've joined when you're still at 400 subs, good luck to you mate
Thanks, *a good knowledgeable video* . It shed some light on me, who doesn't have any idea at all about the nobility rank.
Great work! I appreciate the content and the visuals of the video.
Hey, man! Nice video, keep them coming.If you can it will be amazing if you were able to a series on other nobility systems such as the one in France or the Byzantine empire, or even the HRE (Good luck on that one). Once more, amazing videos!
An archduke is a duke who's kinda bent over in a curve. A baronet is a little tiny baron who crossdresses...😁
No, a baronet is a baron you affix to the barrel of a gun and stab people with.
@@BalooSJ haahahaha
Thank you for this. Very clear and interesting. There are also the spiritual ranks. In fact after the royal family (Majesties, Royal Dukes) the highest rank is archbishop (Most Reverend). Not sure where Bishops come, somewhere between baron and Earl I suspect (Right reverend).
It would depend on which see they sit and if they are a lord spiritual. The form of address doesn’t change but the order they are address and where they sit does.
Good job. Looking forward to seeing you tackle the HRE.
How about a video explaining the difference between Nobility and Royalty? How varied were these differences across Europe?
Simple. "Royalty" are members of the Nobility, which happens to be the highest ranking among the nobles because they rule the country. The nobles administer their sections of the whole Kingdom/Empire, and the royals, who are members of the nobility themsleves, rule the whole country.
All royals are nobles, but not all nobles are royals. I hope that helped lol
@@alistairt7544 Actually, that's not true. Royals are not Noble, and Nobles aren't Royal. There are major differences. A Noble's entire family is Noble, but only the King is Royal. None of the "Royal Family" is actually Royal, despite the terms used in the press. Nobility flows to all decedents of a Nobleman, Royalty can only be passed to a single heir. That's why the Royal's family is often given title such as Duke, Earl, etc., to confirm non-common status to the family of the king.
Hey man, you'll be famous one day!
“I’m a new writer trying to write a story about royalty and I had so much difficulty distinguishing the ranks! Ive understood through wiki and more but it’s still confusing. Thank you so much for this video and thank TH-cam for recommending it to me.”
She sighs in relief as she continued to watch the video.
Same
@@nerdgeekcosplay909 Writers go!
@@nerdgeekcosplay909 Writers go!
In dutch the vicount is the Burchtgraaf. Translated it’s something like count of the castle. And it was the “concierge” or castlekeeper when the count wasn’t there. Although we speak of the Count of Flanders, the figure was actually the marquess of Flanders. Flanders was mostly part of the French Kingdom and bordered the Dutchy of Brabant which was part of the Holy Roman Empire. Older dukedoms where also situated at the strategic borderlands of a Kingdom. The different nobles in the low countries (Belgium, The Netherlands, Luxemburg and Northern France) where quit independent from the emperor and could rule as defacto kings. Filip the Good and hid Son Charles the Bold almost made it to King. But that honour was bestowed upon King Willem I of the Kingdom of the United Netherlands 400 years later. Only to be split up 15 years later in the Kingdom of The Netherlands and the Kingdom of Belgium.
This is an excellent video. Much appreciated. Thank you. Any chance that you might be able to craft one on the ranks of nobility in the HRE extending to Prussia, et al? It would be very helpful to have an English-language guide to that, serving the same purpose that this one does for the English ranks.
Good information. I always wondered. Great channel. Good narrative skills and voice.
Thanks for the info. I have been researching the Genealogy of my family and have gotten back to the Middle Ages. Most of my family history is from England and Scotland with some of ancestors being called Lords/Ladies, Barons and Knights.
Gracias por la explicación de los títulos de Nobleza desde duques a barón y también Lord y Lady.🤴👸.
Yeah, lord sir, you fulfilled an old want and I thereby subscribe to your most imperatorious channel for I can't have enough of this :D Many thanks.
So, French here. Why was the Marchioness (Marquise in French) of Pompadour called that when Pompadour itself isn't at a boarder? Unless French nobility was relatively different or geography of France had changed a lot maybe, but I still have to ask.
Great work! You really tell everything in detail. But I just want to know- can't you call a Duke Lord "insert name"? Can't you say, for Example- Lord Mountbatten, Earl of Burma? Or Lord Someone, Duke of Somewhere?
No, Dukes and Duchesses are always addressed as Your Grace. All other peers are addressed as Lords and Ladies.
@@ianrobertson2282 Ok. Thanks Ian! I have waited 11 months for a reply😁
Finally someone has appeared who knows the answer.
1:30
3:55 Duke (Your Grace)
5:33 Vis (Count) (Lord and Lady)
2:18 Count
1:57 Earl
3:15 Baron
Unless you're a Royal Duke in which case it's Your Royal Highness.
3:40 Let me just correct a small mistake here. In the video is said that the title of Duke was used in "German and French lands". However theres kingdom of Bohemia included in these lands. And Czechs are slavic and were their own nation even though they were and werent (this part is very complicated and deserving video on its own) part of Holy Roman Empire.
Great , informative video 👍 i hope your channel becomes much bigger , because you deserve it
Can you do a video about empires, kingdoms, duchies, counties, countries and principalities?
Duke is derived from the Dux, the military commander of the regions under the Roman Empire, and was created by Imperator Dioclaetion during the Tetrarchy to keep regional governer, magistrates from leading armies in open rebelion,
"You may be ask, what's a Baronet?"
Isn't that the pointy thing at the end of a rifle?
XD also, very informative. I may use this info for Dungeons and Dragons.
In parts of the rural South :-)
Amazing video! This channel is going to be big! I have a question and a suggestion, as like a follow up to this video, could you make a video explaining the British honours or at least like how knighthood changed from people fighting to people honoured for their achievements.
Thank you! Good suggestion, I'll put it on the list.
@@TheGeneralistPapers Thank you!
Napoleon simplified the complex system of nobility in France.
Mass graves are pretty simple.
Biggest understatement I've heard this month.
Wasn't Napoleon a Republican?
@@stephenheath8465 Napoleon was a Bonapartist: his core philosophy was whatever was best for himself. In his earlier years during this revolution he supported the republic, then after a while in charge of the republic he thought “I want to be emperor now” so crowned himself emperor, and went on to install his brothers, sisters and relatives as kings, grand dukes, princes etc. all over Europe
And of course the last, or first rung on the ladder of nobility would be the knight, though in later times they wouldn’t go through a knighthood and instead be called Esquires, of course long before esquire was put at the end of the name of an attorney/lawyer/barrister. Looking forward to your video that goes from Viscount down, as I probably forgot something and your videos are well done and researched as well as to the point and entertaining. You definitely earned the likes and subscribe. TY and keep up the great work 👍🏻
This was sooo easy to understand and follow, I'm so thankful!
I wish I would've had this video in school way back in the day
As an American none of this has ever been relevant to me but when I first started hearing about it, I was so confused it was frsutrating
Emperor
King
Arch Duke
Duke
Marquess / Marquis
Count
Viscount
Baron
Baronet
Knight
Esquire
Gentleman
These are the major noble titles you might ever need to know. Descending titles are almost always beholden to the rank cited above them. There have be some large skips in the past such as Barons being directly under a Marquess or Duke instead. All titles below are hereditary, and almost always to the oldest male heir of the main bloodline.
Emperors were those that had multiple kingdom titles under them, or sovereign king subjects.
Kings are widely known. Skip.
Arch Duke. Not as well known, but usually had multiple dukedom titles and lands, and would usually be announced with all of them specifically. Also for large Duchies not beholden to a king.
Duke. Vast lands which themselves contained counties and cities as vassal states. Almost all Dukes or Duchess are in direct line for the throne, as their families were younger siblings to the heir and were granted or created unto titles.
Marquess. Think very large county or counties. Not good enough to be a Duke, but the area is important enough strategically to reward noble title. The word comes from Marche meaning frontier as these territories were on the borders of the kingdom. It's one of the reasons that we hear the terminology "March to war".
Count. Directly involved in the word county. A smaller division of named land and the ruler of said land. Such area would likely have several small to large cities included.
Viscount. As it said in the video it was originally an assistant that managed a part of the land for a Count, but eventually it became a title also passed down essentially becoming a title.
Baron. Usually a single large city hereditary holder. Might also hold several small villages nearby along with whatever resources they produce.
Baronet. NOT a noble title, but a granted title to those that have done service to a high noble, including large donations. Usually hereditary to the first degree, so that a son can inherit but then the family no longer has a title, but not always. Some few are hereditary knights and orders though.
Knight. The lowest form of nobility most of the time. Often landless, and without title. Usually hereditary but not in all cases. Still above commonfolk.
Esquire. A man usually held in high regard without a noble title. Often important workmen for Knights.
Gentleman. Mentlegen.....
Great info 👍 What about the Margrave? Which is the difference to the Marquis?
Emperor was more or less a re-introduced Roman title and legacy on top of the feodal system since Charlemagne.
He based the claim of Emperor arguing there was no emperor in Constantinople at that time, Irene was empress, and the Pope seeking to get rid of the dominance of the Byzantine Emperor for centuries, backed him up. For centuries it was the Pope that bestoved the title of Emperor on the German kings, who actually were called king of the Romans.
This was quite informative and has helped shed light on something Google has thus far refused to tell me. I was playing the Tabletop RPG Pathfinder in their organized Society system and a few of the adventures reward characters with Noble titles. One such title was something like Visbaron (you were granted a visabarony, I think?). Assuming it is a real title and not something made up, your video suggests it to be lower than even Baron and would be like a Vice Baron. Again, Google has not helped me on this, so I gave up and figured it was just a made up title for the campaign, but even if it is, I now have some context for the hierarchy.
Me: Laughs in polish (All nobles were equal in Poland)
Me laughs with the oldest crown of christiandom ;) Pozdrawiam from Hungary.
So well done, and fascinating.
What about titles of nobility mentioned in British literature, etc. like in Shakespeare MacBeth…the title of Thane, etc. ?
Thane and moramer were ancient Scottish titles which were displaced by Earl, Duke etc after several French or Norman French aristocrats settled in Scotland during the reign of David I and his immediate successors. 3 of these "French" families the Bruces, Balliols and Stewarts ended up on the Scottish throne
If I could choose any nobility rank, it would be high enough to get me into all the parties but low enough to where I don’t have any real responsibilities.
As a noble you HAVE responsibility of managing your area. Imagine a tpwn mayor or some sort.
There were huge expectations associated with the varied ranks. One 19th gentlemen declined a dukedom and requested a Marquisate instead, as the cost of entertaining on the scale of a duke was too high.
I’d like to know why in Germany Baron and Freiherr are both used but not synonymously
Btw to all those wondering, an Archduke is a fictional title for a strong duchy inside the HRE. HRE princes were not allowed to call themselves king (except for Bohemia but that’s a weird one) so before 1803 if Austria wants to show that they’re superior to a regular count (like the count of Brunswick or Württemberg) they call themselves Archduke. Grand duke is basically the same but post 1803 (Baden).
Sort of actually, while that is one reason, the secondary reason was that in the golden bull of 1356 austria got skipped from gaining an electorial vote, this vote had some privileges and basically allowed primogeniture. Meanwhile both Bavaria and Austria kept being divided upon succession. There was a most likely forged privilege that the austrian emperor Frederick came up with which he used to try and keep his realm from dividing upon succession.
Yes. But, Grand Dukes do outrank Archdukes if the Grand-Duke is a Sovereign Head of State in his own right like Luxembourg today, or Baden/Hesse/Sax-Coburg prior to 1918. Back in the 19th Century when there were multiple types of Grand Duke, generally a legitimate reigning Head of State outranks royal princes etc., even if it is a small state or principality. So the precedence was:
Emperor -Imperial Majesty
King -Royal Majesty
(Reigning) Grand Dukes -Royal Highness
Crown Princes (whatever the title may be) -Imperial/Royal Highness
Archdukes/Imperial Russian Grand Dukes -Imperial Highnesses
(Reigning) Sovereign Princes -Serene Highness (e.g. Lichtenstein, Monaco, formerly Ponte Corvo)
Princes of the Blood/ etc. -Royal Highness, Highness (depends) (e.g. the French brother of the King, Monsieur)
Royal Dukes/Grand Princes/Royal Princes
(non-reigning) Sovereign Princes
Princes/Furst
Dukes (Your Grace)
Marquis/Margrave/Marquess
Count/Earl/Comte
Viscount
Baron
Freiherr (sometimes)
*Non-Noble Hereditary*
Freiherr/Baronet
Ritter/Chevalier
Knights...
Fear not for your small error in numbering the Richards (although Richard II would have been upset to be compared to Richard III.) Your content is accurate with good references. Expansion might include seeing a Marquis as "A lord of the March," keeping safe those borders. This means that the lands referred to ( like The Duke of Cornwall or The Earl of Huntingdon) apply to a marquis only where the lands are indeed a border. Here my own limits appear, as I am not sure whether the borders are for England, Great Britain or The United Kingdom. Finally, you mentioned that a knighthood is not considered as a rank of the nobility. Perhaps, but the order of preference (coarsely, some kind of league table) does see some ranks of knighthood taking precedence over ranks of the nobility (see Knight of the Garter in the rankings.) As for Archdukes, consider the (apparently) humorous line, "Archduke Ferdinand found alive, First World War a mistake." Google et al can explain.
All three Richards were deeply flawed characters. The first one was only interested in military adventures, and all but bankrupted England over the ransom that had to be paid to release him from capture by the Austrians. The second was one of those fundamentally insecure types who always have to be validating and revalidating themselves, in his case by demanding absolute obedience and self-abasement from even the highest-ranking of his subjects. The third was in some ways a better ruler than either of them, but his reputation never recovered from the accusation that he murdered his nephews to consolidate his position on the throne.
That was good. Thanks. I'd be very pleased to hear more. Please!
Fifty year old Brit was today years old when he understood the ranks of nobility! Thanks!
1:05 that map... that could get you killed
Why so?
@@eclyphhit's mid, but funny tho😂
My ascendente used to be Viscounts and Barons in Portugal.
Eventually around the 1600s with Spain taking over, the titles were lost at some point and then they all ended anyway in 1910 with tue republic being implanted.
Nice
Interesting! Titles of nobility were also explicitly banned in Mexico in 1910 as well. I have seen many 18th century documents with my ancestors and Marquesses/Barons, their signatures are awesome!
Since the Kings of England of the time were from a French family (Plantagenets), I think the titles came from France rather than the HRE. Marquis -> Marquess, Vicomte-> Viscount.
Enjoyed, TYVM! Volume level was too low, better to be too loud and able to be turned down. I had to use headphones.
the understanding of these concepts may bear great value, in the days to come.
0:30 Actually the titles have their origin before feudalism. Duke comes form Dux a military commander in the roman military. Prince from princeps one of the titles of the emperors. Earl from Jarl a germanic chieftain of sort. Count from the comitatanses, the professional soldiers of the late roman legions.
In Jersey 🇯🇪 when we do a formal toast to the Queen, we call her the Duke.
No need my friend. I play CK3.
Hahaha 😂; CK3 has explained the nuances of a Feudal society and the social classes quite good ngl
Great vid mane! Keep up the good work!
My fanon ranks which I'll be using for my novel:
Royalty:
Emperor/Empress - Empire
King/Queen - Kingdom
Prince/Princess - Principality
(For proceeding ranks, the suffix -dom represents independence from a higher monarch, the lack of which signifies being under a monarch and whose lands constitute a part of said monarch's land)
Nobility:
Duke/Duchess - Dukedom/Duchy
Marquis/Marquess - Marquisdom/Marquisate
Earl/Earless - Earldom/Earleine
Gentry:
Count/Countess - Countdom/County
Viscount/Viscountess - Viscountdom/Viscounty
Baron/Baroness - Barondom/Barony
Here you go son. Thanks Dad 🤣
I know these titles, I played crusader kings hehe
Best game ever!
In Poland from XV century all the nobility (10% of society) was equal to each other and king was elected by them.
There was popular proverb: Nobleman on the yard equal to the voivode (governer of the province)
I really enjoyed your ranks of nobility video - I found it interesting. Spain has similar nobility titles but they are ranked in the following order. Starting with the highest rank:
Grande de España - Grandee of Spain
Duque - Duke
Marqués - Marquess
Conde - Earl
Vizconde - Viscount
Barón - Baron
Señor - Sir (as title)
Hidalgo - Nobleman or Squire
Where does 'Don' as a form of address, come in there..? Is it simply the equivalent of English 'Sir,' for an otherwise untitled knight (caballero), or more like, 'M'Lord'?
@@n.w.1803You’re mostly right, ‘Don’ is just about equivalent to ‘Sir’. Don came from the Latin word *dominus*, meaning “Lord or Master”. ‘Lord’ is also equivalent to ‘Señor’, which was a title as well. Both ‘Don’ and ‘Señor’ were used as titles or pre-fixes for titled nobles. But it is now common for every day language like ‘Sir’ or ‘Mister’ are. In the 18th century and possibly most of the 19th, it was still only used for people “worthy” of being called that. As in the case of my male line ancestors in 18th century Mexico, they are listed in a census near other Spanish inhabitants, but they are the only ones with the written pre-fix 'Don' in front of their names, as owners of the Hacienda and members of the gentry.
@@Duquedecastro Now, me must get into the nebulous ranking of the German, "Freiherr," and whether it deserves equivalent noble title in English, Spanish, etc...see also: The famous Freiherr von Richtofen, aka, the "Red Baron"..
In Poland it went completely different. Early on we didn't really have ranks of nobility, I mean we had "duke" (used for the ruler) and he had warriors. They were granted land later but no one dared to use any high title. There was also a voivode, which was the second most important person, right after the duke. Sometimes the duke was crowned a king, too.
Later Poland was divided between multiple sons of one man, from one dynasty, and those were called dukes, and one was a senior duke and he was to appoint the voivode. However the seniority rule was abolished. Many dukes appointed their own voivodes, the voivodes became so strong. At some point there was a call for unity. This caused us to have 3 units of the same level: duchies (that had both a duke and a voivode), voivodeships (with just a voivode) and lands (with just a duke). When Poland got united, it underwent some changes, and so each voivodeship was an administrative division containing a few lands (oftentimes lands were put inside voivodeships), but the lands had their own legislature (sejmik, aka the nobility from the area gathering together). All the upper offices (voivodes, but also ministers and some other ones) formed the Senate, while the sejmiks cound sent their representatives/deputies (poseł) to the Sejm, which formed the House of Deputies (Izba Poselska). Both houses were in the Sejm.
Back to the nobility, when we were a permanent kingdom, we finally decided that we want equality of all noblemen (even the poorest nobleman is equal to the voivode). They just called each other with the word "pan", later with very long forms containing the word (the word can be translated as "sir" or even "lord", but I'd go with the first translation). Also, when we made an union with Lithuania, we decided to let descendants of their Grand Ducal family to use the title of prince/duke (we don't really have separate names here). Later some families usurped or took those titles from other countries (like from the HRE) and used them in the Commonwealth, which was kinda illegal. We also had some titles illegally granted by the Sejm a while before Poland collapsed. Finally, we had some people claiming the title of count.
Also, one distinguishing feature of Polish nobility. All children inherit your title.
As I recall, the title "Baronet" was invented by King James -- I don't recall which one -- who needed some cash. He made up a title that roughly meant "little baron" and sold what was basically a hereditary knighthood. They are called "Sir" and "Dame" rather than "Lord" and "Lady" because they are not peers, and have no power or rights other than the title.
Hereditary knighthood sound based
Note.......He SOLD this title.So any rich merchant could buy heredity Knighthoods
One mistake: The rank Duke exists in Germany as Herzog. Duc is french. In frankish empire and early days of HRE the administration was divided into tribal duchies/ Herzogtümer. So in those days a Herzog was basicly a tribal chief. If Herzog realy once meant ,Leader of the Heerzug( campaign)' i don' t know.
Dammit...
Now I feel the urge to go play Crusader Kings 3 again :/
A nice simply summary, but the forms of address (spoken and written) do get much more involved then that, as does stuff around marriage, inheritance of titles, etc. I know this from spending many a quiet and happy hour reading a copy of Titles and Forms of Address I got out of my local library as a teen.
Thanks for clarifying some of this. But what I still don't get are specific titles in the format of "Xth Earl of ___________".