Investing Titles

[kgauck]

Some topics crop up again and again and beg for explanation. One is why certain titles don't seem to match the history of the place (Why is Diemed a Barony?) or their power (Why is Ghoere a Barony?). It is possible to offer historical sounding explanations for why this is so, but I have happened across another possible explanation.

Perhaps titles are invested as well as lands. So that at various times regents were unable (or unwilling to spend the regency) to invest the titles of their ancestors.

So what makes a title hard to invest? Basically the same things that cause a major loss of regency. Along with hits to bloodline, perhaps if this situation still holds at the time of investiture of a new regent, the title "sticks" and won't come along.

This implies the notion that there is something objective about a title. Here I propose that in order to protect succession, items have been made only usable by the lawful "Duke of Diemed". Such items might include thrones, scepters, crowns, as well as other things. The Thorn Throne is only the most obvious example. Some of these things, like sitting on the Thorn Throne are for appearances during investiture.

Consider how many coronations go. You are handed an item for you right hand (sword, scepter, scroll, scales, &c) an item for your left hand (orb, scepter, &c) and a crown. Perhaps other articles of state are placed on your person, a robe, a belt, and so on. Each might have different requirements. Some item (say the Sword of Diemed) can be used only by the scions of Diem, and can be passed to family members to command armies, go on quests, or what have you. Another item, say the signet Ring of Diemed can only be worn by the Baron of Diemed (or the Duke) so that either the Duke or his designated heir can wear the ring and impart the seal of Diemed. And the Crown of Diemed can only be worn by the Duke of Diemed. So along comes some heir (Hierl?) and he holds the sword, wears the ring, but cannot bear the crown. The crowd gasps! This part of investiture has failed. Hierl is Baron to be sure (he was invested by his father during the ceremony of designation) and he can bear the ring, but without the crown, he is not the duke.

So we have the case of Ghoere. According to the history written several years ago there was a Baron of Ghoere who was a vassal of the Duke of Bhalaene, and at some point he conquers the two duchies of Bhalaene and Ghieste, but won't assume the title of Duke because the peers won't accept it. This kind of argument makes sense in some cases (why did Alamie/Tournen drop from Archduchy to a pair of Duchies), but certainly seems to weak to explain why the regent of two former duchies can't be a Duke, let alone an Archduke.

Perhaps the Baron of Ghoere who conquered Ghieste and Bhalaene, he was unable to make use of the regalia of either duchy (perhaps because their were other claimants) and so continues to use their ancient baronial title.

How does one (say the Baron of Diemed) get use of their full titles? Quests! In a sense its the same as the way you become Emperor (another vacant title) but smaller. You must hold the area the title covers, and perform certain quests (tied to the history of the title) in any order, and then you can invest the title.

One quest we know right off the top relates to Endier, Richard Endier confronted the Spider and was able to claim his title. A logical quest for such a regent. Do to claim his duchy, the Baron of Diemed must reconquer some part (most or all) of the old duchy, perform a quest or two related to the founding myths of the Duchy, maybe some minor quests (a pilgrimage), and then the investment works.

Gavin Tael might have such a list of quests and things to do to bear any of the regalia that either he is only part way through his list, or just isn't bothering.

Thoughts?

[AndrewTall]

I wonder if it is partly related to the invisible flow of reverence that is regency and bloodline.

I.e. not only must one fulfill various legal and social issues to claim a title, one also needs to 'be' the title to a sufficient number of the 'right' people.

So the Barons of Ghoere are still remembered as the usurpers who struck down/etc the dukes as far as the peasants are concerned - and no amount of beatings down the generations have made them think otherwise.

In this scenario the need for a quest or glorious act makes great sense - what happens when Ghoere doesn't just defend his lands, but throws back the Spider or Gorgon thus saving the south? The great act 'proves' to the people that he has truly taken on the mantle of the lost dukes...

In mechanic terms you have the three fold task -

1) assume the throne - not usually an issue...
2) convince your peers - get the support of 'X' domain points of allies
3) convince your people - perform 'X' great acts to the benefit of the people

The greater the title, the greater the difficulties involved. And as the great act probably needs to benefit the people not the ruler (otherwise it is just them looking after themselves) it is a high risk/low reward effort other than for the prestige of the title.

I can also under this system see Avan, Boeruine, etc militarily dominating all Anuire, but still not being emperor because 'they need force to keep their throne - the real emperors held it with love alone'. In this case even running the empire for blameless decades would not make the title generally accepted, as the claimant would not have won the hearts of the people through some great act.

[cccpxepoj]

Well i have some thoughts and some questions about this topic.
Thoughts: Maybe beside items and investiture some titles requires some provinces in a control of a aspirant.
For example, if a Baron of Diemed wants to become a Duke of Diemed, or an Archduke, he needs to recover some of the "rebelled" realms lost by his ancestors ( Endier, Medoere, Ilien and some parts Roesone).
Acquiring the greater title can give you some benefits beside prestige.
For example the Baron of Diemed proclaims himself a Duke, by conquest of Medoere, this act rises the prestige and authority of his realm but also gives him rightful claim on the ex-diemedan provinces of Roesone and on a counties of Endier and Ilien, by acquiring those provinces by conquest or vassalage he gains right to proclaim himself as Archduke of Diemed, the protector of the south :p, and that gives him the shot at the title of Emperor.

Questions: Most of the titles on Cerilia are vaguely described, and a connection between them is unclear, except for the Anuire and Rjurickland.
The titles in Brechtur leaves me totally confused. Graaf should mean a King, but most of the rulers are defined as counts, some even as baronets ???
I am not familiar with Khinasi titles, but as i remember only the highest noble titles were presented, there is no titles for provincial nobility.
Any thoughts?

[kgauck]

I wonder if it is partly related to the invisible flow of reverence that is regency and bloodline.

I.e. not only must one fulfill various legal and social issues to claim a title, one also needs to 'be' the title to a sufficient number of the 'right' people.

I was thinking about this, but didn't quite have my finger on it. Certainly for domains with a clear focus, like temple domains, its obvious. Its certainly possible that domain alignment (or whatever concept you prefer) style of rulership connects with a particular title. As such a given plot of territory or a domain could have potentially more than one territory.

If Medoere were ever ruled by a Haelynite, IHH devoted fighter, he might start out as Count of Medoere, and be unable to become whatever Suris was, since he's not a Ruornil priest or wizard, or even an undead slaying, shadow world fighting, warrior. So he needs to perform quests and so on to become Baron of Medoere.


In this scenario the need for a quest or glorious act makes great sense - what happens when Ghoere doesn't just defend his lands, but throws back the Spider or Gorgon thus saving the south? The great act 'proves' to the people that he has truly taken on the mantle of the lost dukes...

Exactly the direction I was thinking.


In mechanic terms you have the three fold task -

1) assume the throne - not usually an issue...
2) convince your peers - get the support of 'X' domain points of allies
3) convince your people - perform 'X' great acts to the benefit of the people


The point I made about "in any order" is that a hero might start with #3, then get #2, then finally #1, rather than the other way round.


The greater the title, the greater the difficulties involved. And as the great act probably needs to benefit the people not the ruler (otherwise it is just them looking after themselves) it is a high risk/low reward effort other than for the prestige of the title.
Again I would point to what is required for a major gain of regency. But I am also partial to a way to integrate quests. As an Arthurian, I like the idea of having quests, but aside from looking for lost goodies, I didn't know how to put them in the setting. A great monster has traditionally menaced this realm, be he awnshegh, or dragon, or what have you, remove this threat permenantly, and new things are possible.

[kgauck]

For example, if a Baron of Diemed wants to become a Duke of Diemed, or an Archduke, he needs to recover some of the "rebelled" realms lost by his ancestors ( Endier, Medoere, Ilien and some parts Roesone).

I mentioned this at the end:

To claim his duchy, the Baron of Diemed must reconquer some part (most or all) of the old duchy, perform a quest or two related to the founding myths of the Duchy, maybe some minor quests (a pilgrimage), and then the investment works.



Acquiring the greater title can give you some benefits beside prestige. [reclaim the Duchy, add more, become] Archduke of Diemed, the protector of the south :p, and that gives him the shot at the title of Emperor.

Exactly, no need to bite the whole Imperial piece off at once. Defeating the Spider would be critical to becoming Archduke of Diemed, here is where I would put Endier as required, plus another four or so provinces, and a few quests. From Archduke of Diemed, its clear you are on your way to Emperor, rather that jumping from Baron to Emperor.


The titles in Brechtur leaves me totally confused. Graaf should mean a King, but most of the rulers are defined as counts, some even as baronets ???

Graf means Count, Herzog means Duke, Erzherzog is Archduke, and Konig is King.


I am not familiar with Khinasi titles, but as i remember only the highest noble titles were presented, there is no titles for provincial nobility. Any thoughts?

Here is what I've been using:
King.......Sultan
Prince....Emir
Duke......Mushir
Baron.....Malik
Count.....Qadi
Viscount.Naquib
Lord......Sayyid
Knight....Faris

[bbeau22]

I mentioned this at the end:




Exactly, no need to bite the whole Imperial piece off at once. Defeating the Spider would be critical to becoming Archduke of Diemed, here is where I would put Endier as required, plus another four or so provinces, and a few quests. From Archduke of Diemed, its clear you are on your way to Emperor, rather that jumping from Baron to Emperor.



Graf means Count, Herzog means Duke, Erzherzog is Archduke, and Konig is King.



Here is what I've been using:
King.......Sultan
Prince....Emir
Duke......Mushir
Baron.....Malik
Count.....Qadi
Viscount.Naquib
Lord......Sayyid
Knight....Faris


I could be wrong but I think Emir is a higher level than Sultan. According to typically history they seem fairly equal when I look it up. Sultan does mean monarch but Emir is a decent of Mohammad and also crown prince. Both seem pretty important.

In Khanasi you also have Grand Sultan. Emir's tend to rule much larger countries. Khourane is a Emirate but Mairada is a Sultana.

It could be that the titles in Khanasi are just as messed up as Anuire.

-BB

[Green Knight]

Interesting concept...but I still think that the great variety of titles presented in the RoE book is "erroneous". If you look at the various realms, there are sooo many different titles for the sovereign. Duke, archduke, prince, baron, thane, queen etc. etc. Looks to me like they wanted different titles for each regent to help differentiate. So I don't feel like using time and energy to try and explain how these titles make sense...I just change them!

There's a Duke in Diemed for example (perhaps the one title that makes the LEAST sense).

[Sir Tiamat]

I could be wrong but I think Emir is a higher level than Sultan. According to typically history they seem fairly equal when I look it up. Sultan does mean monarch but Emir is a decent of Mohammad and also crown prince. Both seem pretty important.

In Khanasi you also have Grand Sultan. Emir's tend to rule much larger countries. Khourane is a Emirate but Mairada is a Sultana.

It could be that the titles in Khanasi are just as messed up as Anuire.

-BB

The problem is that Khinashi is some sort of arab-persian-turkish amalgamation and it is therefore unclear what the exact ranking should be.

An Emir is a prince and a Malik is a king

I do not know what a mushir is but I think it might be an Arabic derivation of the persian word Shir which means lion.

A Qadi is a Judge

The Highest title would probably be Caliph, which meant defender of the faithfull. The Caliph was the political leader of al Muslim subjects... Of course there could exist more than one claim to the title at the same time. All mayor Islamic emipres, Ummayad Abbassid and fatimid have sought this title.

[cccpxepoj]

Graf means Count, Herzog means Duke, Erzherzog is Archduke, and Konig is King.
Then why is Erick Danig just a Count, and what is the Baronet of Wierech then ?
And i am positive that i read somewhere( Havens of the great Bay ??) that in high brecht Graaf means King.
Point is in Brechtur we have real confusion with titles because of anurian occupation, so we have strange mix of Dukes, Counts, Kings, Barons, Baronets,Sthatholders and so forth.

[kgauck]

All the titles are intended to be confusing because it adds verisimilitude to the idea that there is a history to this place. Why is there a Duke of Guise and a Count of Provence? There are historical reasons this is so, but if you look at a map, Guise is a tiny little place and Provence is huge, full of people and cities, and very wealthy. Champagne is a county and Bar is a duchy. Champagne is huge, rich, and full of people and cities, Bar is tiny.

The sense is that the fortunes of realms have changed historically and some are rising and others are falling (or have fallen far). Some realms don't even exist anymore, though in some cases we know their names, like Medec and Ghieste.

This makes it harder to learn, but it does offer the sense that the world was not assembled yesterday. So I presume when I find a place with a grand title, that they had a grand history, even if they are tiny and obscure today. Mairada also got prestige and dignity because of its connection to the Temple of Rilni.

[kgauck]

Then why is Erick Danig just a Count, and what is the Baronet of Wierech then ?

This goes to the history of the Great Bay. The Brecht realms were originally city states (the Khinasi even more so) so like a lot of Danigau's neighbors it was once mostly a single province realm with maybe some outlying empty provinces. In the case of Danigau those empty provinces have gotten developed, but because of his wish to avoid association with the grander titles of the Empire, he has not sought to improve his title.


And i am positive that i read somewhere( Havens of the great Bay ??) that in high brecht Graaf means King.

All the titles mean king, in the sense of a sovereign, and the books refer to every kind of realm as a kingdom. If Brecht realms were city states, then the guy who ran the one big province (a graf) ruled the whole realm. Now when a realm ceases to be a city state and has eight provinces, each of which may have their own graf, it can be confusing, but it reflects the history of the settlement of the Great Bay.


Point is in Brechtur we have real confusion with titles because of anurian occupation, so we have strange mix of Dukes, Counts, Kings, Barons, Baronets,Sthatholders and so forth.

Its only a strange mix if we try an import an understanding of these terms from conventional, over-simplified modern understandings of them. Used historically, European titles were far more complex and confusing than they appear to us, because living in a post-aristocratic age, we have cleaned the system up. Its also the case that title inflation of the 19th century made the system much more sensible.

Who ever (Rich Baker one supposes) came up with the variety of titles in all of the realms knew that historical use of titles was also a mess and required some understanding of things to use correctly. If we suppose that a duke outranks a count, we take a very narrow understanding of rank, based only on who stands closer to the Emperor. But there is no Emperor, so it makes no sense to use that as our main metric.

Take the Duke of Marlborough or the Duke of Wellington. Each of these title was created because someone was a great general who never lost a battle and fought in very long and extended wars for the very survival of Great Britain. In addition to their titles, they received cash gifts from the crown and a pension of Parliament. No land, no vast estates (though with cash you can buy land, but its not part of your title) and no historical connection to a region of England or anywhere else.

[geeman]

At first, I was opposed to this concept of investing titles, but the more I think about it the more I`m liking the idea. After all, the setting is based on investing to rule, and what better reflection of that process is there than in the titles used to describe the actual rulers? It might also be a nice way of explaining how/why the nobles titles of Cerilia appear, when compared to real world titles, seem to be so haphazardly and chaotically applied. If there was actually some internal, campaign-based logic to the concept then we might go a long way toward explaining what many folks view as an inconsistency in the setting.

There are also hints that such a thing is possible in existing game mechanics. There are dribs and drabs of rules having to do with things like a temple holding domain becoming the "official" religion of a landed domain. The coronation ceremony, the investiture ceremony, grants, decrees and even bloodtheft have little snippets of information in them that might be used as a basis for deciding how BR titles are transferred. However, I`d suggest a few things should be kept in mind:

1. There doesn`t appear to be a very direct relationship between domain size, bloodline strength or score, and the titles of those who rule/have a bloodline. We have a broad range of characters with relatively powerful domains, but lousy titles with those with high titles, but not-so-powerful realms. The aforementioned Baron of Ghoere is a pretty good example of the former, with the Queen of Aerenwe the other. (The elven kingdoms tend to go straight to "king" and "queen" which might also be a factor.)

2. Titles needn`t only reflect the status of rulers. There might be titled characters who have no actual domain--such characters should have an actual reason (game mechanical) to explain the value of their titles.

3. Generally speaking, knighthood is the lowest rank of nobility, and might be viewed as the highest level of the concept at an adventure level. Knights don`t generally rule realms at the level of BR landed domains. The closest we might get to a non-titled landed regent would be a few folks who are called something like "captain" or something along those lines, which might be considered equivalent to the lowest rung of the noble titles. I imagine "general" or "commodore" might relate in a similar way.

4. When it comes to titles the only people who appear to regularly be more interested than landed regents are those who control temple holdings. Title structures seem to be very closely linked to the temple. Conversely, guilders have titles, but are not particularly involved, and though there are a few source regents with titles it seems like they are just as often mixed with other types of holdings if the regent has a title. I wonder if "High Mage" actually counts as a title in this sense?

Those a few of the things that occur to me as very general things to keep in mind when discussing the idea of a title investiture in BR. It seems to me the idea could be expressed with a write up that would be about the length of the "official temple" text, but it could be longer if one wanted to iterate the particulars of titles in separate levels with a lot of effects.

Gary

[Robbie]

IMO Rich Baker didn't have a deeper understanding on how medieval nobility looked at titles when he was designing Birthright. The principal flaw is that no aristocrat would ever give up a title, even if he loses all of his lands.

The Habsburgs lost their original possession, the town of Habsburg in modern Switzerland in 1415 and yet they retained the title until this day.

If you look at the following link

http://wapedia.mobi/en/List_of_titles_and_honours_of_the_Spanish_Crown

you'll see that even the present day king of Spain (albeit only as titular) holds the titles of archduke of Austria, Duke of Brabant, Milan etc even though they have no real claim to the tile at all.

Therefore, there isn't a realistic and historical explanation why the Duke of Diemed would be called a baron, by himself or by anyone for a nobleman would hold on to his title even if he was without land, let alone in possession of the core provinces of Diemed.

But as Bjorn said, Birtrhight titles are erroneus and each DM should adopt a system that suits him or her best.

[AndrewTall]

I think that the answer would be that it happened the other way around - not that they gave up a higher rank, but that the main line died out and the holder of the junior rank gained the land but not the title. Excepting Cariele this should work, although it would take some restraint on simply claiming titles to be credible.

[kgauck]

I think Rich intended to have some things work differently in Cerilia.

This is why I felt it would make sense to require that titles have to be invested, otherwise why not just claim the biggest and the most titles to which you have some tenuous claim.

Also, there is a difference between a title to a place and place itself. The Spanish Crown, created by the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella (and some declarations of a permanent union) then descended to their grandson, Charles of Habsburg, who was the Duke of Burgundy and had all the various claims which the Duke of Burgundy had, such as Brabant. Like Milan and the honorific, Archduke of Austria, these are places which were lost to the Austrian side of the family during the War of the Spanish Succession. However, for whatever reason, the Austrians did not insist that the new Spanish monarchy (replacing their Habsburg couins) abandon titles which were essentially Habsburg in origin and whose lands shifted to the Austrians (Milan, Brabrant, and the honorific of Archduke of Austria should no longer have been extended to the Spanish Crown).

In a sense, what the new Bourbon monarchy of Spain was claiming was that they were not just successors of the Spanish territory, but also of the Habsburg dynastic privilege. Austria could have insisted, at the Congress of Rastatt, that the Bourbons cease the use these titles with the loss of both the connection to the House of Austria and the territories which the Austrians acquired through Rastatt.

Today, the heir to the throne of Belgium is the Duke of Brabant, currently Prince Philippe. So Spain is happy to claim titles which are entirely vestigal.

[Robbie]

A cadet or junior branch of Diemed would still inherit or claim the ducal title. Only if they were completely unrelated to Diemed could they possibly accept a lowering of their status. To relinquish a title on account of losing Roesone or Medoere is completely unnoble behavior.

A hierarchical and feudal society would, naturally, require the monarch/emperor to bestow new titles, at least those belonging to the upper tiers, like dukes or barons (actually counts were higher up than barons but this was inverted by mr. Baker, probably under the influence of english feudalism). Thus, in the absence of an emperor Anuire became a confederation of sovereign rules bound only by tradition. And exactly this tradition would have prevent the relinquishing of old titles.

Thus a cadet branch of Diemed would still claim the title of duke and "Baron" Gaving Tael would have titled himself Duke of Dhalaene and Ghieste, and not Baron of Ghoere. With his military might no neighbor would dare deny him this title.

But, after having argued this for several years and in many PBEMS, the only conclusion I can make is that Anuire is an illogical patchwork of european noble principles and rules :)

[kgauck]

But, after having argued this for several years and in many PBEMS, the only conclusion I can make is that Anuire is an illogical patchwork of european noble principles and rules :)

Or, titles are invested just like domains, and when major losses of regency occurred, the successor was unable to invest the titles of their predecessors.

[Robbie]

If that's how you'd explain it in your campaign, why not. But as for official, I doubt there'll ever be a satisfying argument for the mish mash in BR

[kgauck]

Of course not, since there is no more official content being created. So solutions to these issues require embrace of one or another player solutions or explanations.

[AndrewTall]

A cadet or junior branch of Diemed would still inherit or claim the ducal title. Only if they were completely unrelated to Diemed could they possibly accept a lowering of their status. To relinquish a title on account of losing Roesone or Medoere is completely unnoble behavior.

No noble wants to lose face or influence, and all wish to maximise their gain - that is a truism. However Aerenwe is specifically noted as having rejected the traditional means of gaining rank when it took the title king/queen, the others are noted as holding to the old ways to stay in the race for emperor.

If only the emperor can issue / permit the assumption by a baron of a ducal title then someone who has only an indirect claim may be barred from claiming it without stepping out of the race for emperor. To encourage this view the noble tradition may have been not that one can only lose a title in rare instances, but that one can only claim/gain title in rare instances - it is worth remembering that under a Haelynite system of inheritance legal nicety and proprietary will be tremendously influential on tradition and power practicalities would be less influential than we might expect on social issues.

This might need an imperial college of titles that demands adherence to the arcane processes invented over a millennia of empire (much as the French have a ministry that tries to maintain the purity of the French language) to enforce the title rules, and a social order that punishes 'upstarts', but neither is a significant reach.

One possible system of rank inheritance would be that only one child inherits the 'full' title, others drop a rank (so prince Avan has one daughter who is a princess, and other children are counted only as barons). This follows bloodline inheritance rules which are 1 parent: 1 child - and the inheritance system should follow bloodline inheritor across the board. This system would certainly knock the cadet branches down, lead to a need to adventure to maintain/earn rank by younger children, and encourage nobles families to put all their eggs in one basket and invest heavily in the single 'true' heir to the family name which makes for more kidnap and assassination possibilities.


Thus a cadet branch of Diemed would still claim the title of duke and "Baron" Gaving Tael would have titled himself Duke of Dhalaene and Ghieste, and not Baron of Ghoere. With his military might no neighbor would dare deny him this title.

With his military might his title is irrelevant, and holding a '2nd tier' title makes him less noticeable as a threat to Avan and Boeruine. Nothing makes feuding parties unite like a new contender - and no-one can face both Avan and Boeruine. Thus Ghoere accepts a minor loss of face (no one will ignore his military might, let the girly-men wag their tongues over trivial titles) to gain an advantage in achieving his eventual goals.

With Diemed the cadet branch would have started with a lower rank under this system, and have been prevented by claiming the greater rank by tradition and protocol - and while Ghoere might bulldoze his right to be called Duke if he really wanted to, Diemed does not have the strength to do so.


But, after having argued this for several years and in many PBEMS, the only conclusion I can make is that Anuire is an illogical patchwork of european noble principles and rules :)

Indeed, gloriously so. But it is what we have, the issue is do we 'correct' the situation, or find a way to justify and explain it... Personally I like the idea of Ghoere undertaking a glorious quest to prove his ducal nature and so invest the title, and Diemed similarly proving he has the strength and prowess to be worthy of being named Duke. Further I like that Avan may have to follow 'princely courtesy' to avoid dropping to duke...

[Elton Robb]

I believe that the main reason why the titles are so mismashed is because of one reason alone: we don't live in that time.

In our day, we rely on other means of achieving glory and success. Glory comes through personal achievement in our culture. We gain glory by making a name for ourselves. In our day, we believe in personal freedom and/our total freedom. The people of the Middle Ages had a different idea.

In Ars Magica, the people were divided up into three castes: those who toil, those who war, and those who pray. In Birthright, you have two castes: unblooded commoners and those of the Blood. The blooded are divided into two other castes: scions and regents.

Then regents are divided up into what they control. Priest regents control temples or religious networks; Source Regents are wizards, sorcerers, or warlocks that control ancient sources. Warrior regents usually control law, and Rogue regents control businesses.

The titles that come from Anuire (which can be as big as Spain, or as big as Belgium, depending on how big you think Cerilia really is), is based on Tradition. Of the three big claimants for the Iron Throne; all of them hold titles because of tradition. Sure, Gavin Taele can claim the title of Archduke of Ghoere, Duke of Ghieste, Duke of Baelaene, and Baron of Ghoere by nature of how much he controls. But he is traditionally the Baron of Ghoere mainly because of tradition.

Also, think about this: the Church often crowned kings in the Middle Ages. It is the right of the Archbishop of Canterbury to pass along the title of King (or High King) to the Kings and Queens of England. Then the Kings and Queens would bestow titles or knight individuals into the Aristocracy.

Since the temples of Haelyn are splintered, its hard to claim the title of Emperor since all the leaders of the temples will have to bestow the regency of Emperor upon a person. Plus, you have the Theocracy of Medoere to consider in order to give you legitimacy. After all, Ruornil's theocracy is close to the city of Anuire.

In order for Gavin Taele to take the title befit his station, he needs support of one of the Churches of Haelyn to do it; since Haelyn is the personification of Nobility. And he needs the love and respect of his people.