Chatty Duelist Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 Something that really strikes me to this day is why the "King" of Westeros is a King instead of an Emperor.Guy has a whole continent to rule (plus Seven Kingdoms), wouldn't that warrant a greater title than King? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LC Jaime Lannister Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 Maybe now, in this world. In ASOIAF, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearson Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 That only makes sense if there had ever previously been emperors in the asoiaf world. Otherwise, they had no reason not think of the title, King, as the highest title one could have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Ravens Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 Something that really strikes me to this day is why the "King" of Westeros is a King instead of an Emperor.Guy has a whole continent to rule (plus Seven Kingdoms), wouldn't that warrant a greater title than King? Or they could use both titles. Queen Victoria added Empress to her title when Britain added India to their territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaak Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 The historically more common practice would have been to use a title like "Great King", "High King", "King of Kings" or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaarioKnowsBest Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 An emperor usually controls territory outside of his nations own borders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LC Jaime Lannister Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 Or they could use both titles. Queen Victoria added Empress to her title when Britain added India to their territory. Regardless, it doesn't really make sense to add Emperor or Empress if the terminology has never been used before. In this world, their word for "king" can/ does mean our word for emperor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chatty Duelist Posted November 29, 2013 Author Share Posted November 29, 2013 An emperor usually controls territory outside of his nations own borders. *King is an Andal AFAIK, rules over Rhoynar and the First Men* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thendel Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 Aegon the Conqueror had a vision of a unified Westeros, one where the was only one great kingdom. For that to happen, Aegon would have to make sure none of the lords paramount would regress into autonomy by being allowed to style themselves kings. By opting for a "lesser" title, Aegon denied his lords paramount the option to rise above the title of lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Blue Eyes Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 The title of emperor is kinda tricky. The reason the roman emperors where emperors instead of kings is the founding myth of Rome and Tarquinius Rex. "Rex" (= king) was like a red rag to the romans. That's why Augustus and his successors avoided the title rex like the plague and the titles of Caesar, Augustus or Imperator sprung up and left their mark in the european languages. Without the same or a similar history, Westeros wouldn't develop such titles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaarioKnowsBest Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 *King is an Andal AFAIK, rules over Rhoynar and the First Men*The First Men and Rhoynar aren't territories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearson Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 An emperor usually controls territory outside of his nations own borders. The same can be said of almost all kings, indeed that was the norm for kings. Most historical kingdoms were multi-ethnic and nation-states are a relateively modern invention. Also, some of those kingdoms have indeed been termed by later historians as empires even though their rulers never were emperors (such as the North Sea Empire or the British Empire - who were only emperors in India, and not emperors as their main title). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chatty Duelist Posted November 29, 2013 Author Share Posted November 29, 2013 The First Men and Rhoynar aren't territories. They're nations (ethnicities). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaarioKnowsBest Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 They're nations (ethnicities).But not territories, the King has no authority over Rhoynar in Dorne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chatty Duelist Posted November 29, 2013 Author Share Posted November 29, 2013 But not territories, the King has no authority over Rhoynar in Dorne. "Steve the Nth of his name,of House Blabla , King of the Andals, the Rhoynar and the First Men, Lord of the Seven Kingdoms and Protector of the Realm." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaarioKnowsBest Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 "Bob the Nth of his name, King of the Andals, the Rhoynar and the First Men, Lord of the Seven Kingdoms and Protector of the Realm."Rhoynar and First Men are people, not territories.The king of the Iron Throne doesn't have authority over a First Man nor Rhoynar that live outside of his nationThe Rhoyne river would be territory, the Rhoynar are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaak Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 Historical titles:"High King" was used by:SumeriansHigh King of Irelandthe Grand Prince of Lithuania"Great King" was used by:Hittite, Egyptian, Babylonian, Mitanni and Assyrian kingsIndian Maharajas "King of Kings" was used by:AssyriaAchaemenid and Sassanid Persians.Some Indians.The rulers of GeorgiaThe rulers of Ethiopia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chatty Duelist Posted November 29, 2013 Author Share Posted November 29, 2013 Rhoynar and First Men are people, not territories.The king of the Iron Throne doesn't have authority over a First Man nor Rhoynar that live outside of his nationThe Rhoyne river would be territory, the Rhoynar are not. The Rhoynar are a nation, Dorne is part of that nation; Likewise for the First Men they're a nation, and the North is part of said nation.In this context what do you think of when you hear the word nation and "outside the borders"? Also: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Emperor_vs_KingEmperor: Many kingdoms with their different policies and politics form an empire, and the ruler i.e. the emperor is the ultimate ruler of all the kingdoms.Remind how many kingdoms there are in Westeros? Oh that's right no less than 7(!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Greg of House House Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 Aegon the Conqueror had a vision of a unified Westeros, one where the was only one great kingdom. For that to happen, Aegon would have to make sure none of the lords paramount would regress into autonomy by being allowed to style themselves kings. By opting for a "lesser" title, Aegon denied his lords paramount the option to rise above the title of lord. My thoughts exactly. Aegon the Conqueror said 'there will be only one king'. He was trying to form one big nation, and therefore using the title King makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Blue Eyes Posted November 29, 2013 Share Posted November 29, 2013 The Rhoynar are a nation, Dorne is part of that nation; Likewise for the First Men they're a nation, and the North is part of said nation.In this context what do you think of when you hear the word nation and "outside the borders"? Also: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Emperor_vs_KingEmperor:Remind how many kingdoms there are in Westeros? Oh that's right no less than 7(!).Interesting definition. Of course I disagree with it. There is no real difference between King or Emperor, no more than between any two kings or two emperors, not over all the cultures that had one or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.