Slavery

SLAVERY

updated on

The Anunnaki bred humans to work the gold mines of South Africa. Slaves were socialized and civilized, “progressed” and became city slaves that served the Gods and later the “royals”, the “Demi-Gods”, those of the bloodline, connected more to the Anunnaki then humanity. Humanity has always suffered from a caste/class system, where those of “greater intelligence or social standing” ruled those who were “less than”. Humans were taught to mind their “betters”, their masters, owners, the rule makers, the leaders, kings, queens, emperors, czars, priests, etc. It mattered not their title. It mattered not their color. What mattered was they were and are “of the bloodline” and that makes them chosen to lead and direct those who are stationed beneath them.

Kings and Queens have given way to Presidents. You might say Presidents are different from royals, that they are elected. But if so, how did it come to be that almost all the American Presidents are related to the royals?

While I’m really not into conspiracy theories, it’s interesting to note that people who are in power in this world, be they world leaders, royals, executives or CEO’s, tend to link back to the ancients who link back to the Anunnaki, our creator “Gods”, the LORDS of our planet that bred humanity to slave. While few are yanked from their normal lives into slavery, most are tricked, are fooled to incur debt, work jobs until they retire, die, or can no longer function, indebted to “the man”.

Some things never change, but just look and sound slightly different. But a rose by any other name is a rose. And human beings, rich and poor, are slaves to the system that’s controlled by the invisible hand of the all-seeing eye at the top of the pyramid.

The-1619-Project-Wikipedia

SLAVERY: Anunnaki brain-virus for physical, marital, military & debt bondage
.
Youtube: Click the word “ROOTS” on the post below this one
.

For a detailed review, illustrations, references, and youtubes on slavery, click https://wp.me/p1TVCy-5CU
.
From ANUNNAKI, FALSE GODS* by Sasha Alex Lessin, Ph.D. (Anthropology, UCLA) & Janet Kira Lessin (CEO, Aquarian Media)
.

300,000 years after the Anunnaki from Nibiru created us, we’ve forgotten they made us as slaves. They trained and forced us to labor, serve, soldier, prostitute and serve their needs. They imprinted us to labor as wives, debtors, prisoners, underclasses, low castes, and serfs. We now slave for their hybrid Illuminati controlers. “Man was created,” Tellinger writes, “as a slave to the Anunnaki gods.” After Noah’s flood, Earthlings enslaved other Earthlings.


.
SLAVES FROM THE GETGO
.
For decades, volunteers from Nibiru dug gold under southeast Africa. The miners and Enki–nominally mining boss–resented Enlil, the Commander. Enlil oppressed the miners. The miners from Nibiru had signed up for work in Earth’s mines. Enlil ordered Enki to make them send ever-more gold, ever-faster to Iraq.
.

Enki, fed up with Enlil’s demands and the escalating suffering Enlil inflicted on the miners, left the mines to his #2, Ennugi.
.

Enki went to his lab in Africa’s Great Rift Valley. He tested the genome of a smart hominoid, Homo erectus–a humanoid the Federation fostered on Earth after the Hatona Counsel.
.

Enki thought he could graft Erectus’s genes onto his and make a hybrid Anunnaki-Erectus Earthling to mine gold.
.

Erectus’ immunities suited Earth. He reasoned, freed trapped animals and sent thoughts without speaking.
.
Enki wished the Anunnaki felt for other beings as Erectus did. Enki thought telepathic abilities if genetic, would help Anunnaki get along better. Earthlings he’d create would have more joy and peace than their makers.
.

Three hundred thousand years ago in his lab he, Ninmah and Ningishzidda grafted Erectus genes into the Anunnaki genome and created hybrid clone masters to make slaves and get Nibirans out of the mines.

.
The miners now verged on mutiny. Enlil’s pressure them evermore to get more gold and due with less and less beer and recreation. Enlil insisted that the hybrid slaves would lack the Anunnaki level of intelligence but remain “primitive, ignorant, obedient, fearful and in its place.”

Ninmah added surrogate Anunnaki mothers whose wombs gave the hybrids and mitochondrial DNA and some immunities.

Adam and Ti-Amat, the clone masters “had 22 chromosomes” and couldn’t procreate until Ningishzidda grafted sex-marking alternatives at chromosome 23 and let Adam impregnate Ti-Amat.
.

Meanwhile, Enki told the miners, “Shrink gold shipments. When Enlil comes to investigate, trap and threaten him.”

Enki planned to “save” Enlil from the mutinous miners. The Chief, Enki reasoned, could fill Nibiru’s gold needs with cloned hybrid slaves Enki’s team would create. Enlil could send the Anunnaki miners home as heroes.
.

When the miners cut the gold volume they shipped to the metallurgy plant in Iraq, Enlil sent his son Ninurta to investigate.

.
When Ninurta got to the mines, Miners “backbiting and lamenting, in the excavations they were grumbling. Unbearable is the toil.'”

.
“Call Enlil to the mines,” Enki told Ninurta; “Let the Commander see how the miners suffer.”
.

When Enlil and his Vizier, Nusku, arrived, “‘Let us unnerve Enlil,’ mine-working heroes shouted. ‘Of the heavy work let him relieve us. Let us proclaim war, with hostilities let us gain relief.’ To their tools they set fire, fire to their axes they put.” They held Ennugi hostage and, with tools as torches, surrounded the house Enlil occupied.

.
Enlil messaged Anu back on planet Nibiru to shuttle to Earth and shoot the miners’ leaders and their instigator (he meant Enki).
.

The miners wouldn’t tell Ninurta who led or incited them, but Anu messaged that he felt for the miners. Ninurta asked Anu to send new miners from Nibiru.

.
Enki entered the house where Enlil and Ninurta stood, weapons at-ready. Enki said, “Let us create a Lulu, a primitive worker, the hardship to take over, let the Being the toil of the Anunnaki carry on his back. The Being that we need, it already exists. All that we have to do is put on it the mark of our essence [genome], thereby a Lulu, a Primitive Worker, shall be created!”

.

Enki showed Erectus to Enlil and Ninurta, “Ningishzidda, my son, their fashioning essence [DNA structure] has tested; akin to ours it is, like two serpents it is entwined. When with our life essence shall be combined, our mark upon them shall be, a Primitive Worker shall be created. Our commands will he understand. Our tools he will handle, the toil in the excavations he shall perform, to the Anunnaki in the Abuzu relief shall come.”
.

Enlil objected. “Don’t create slaves. Slavery has from Nibiru long been ended. Tools are slaves, not other beings.”

.
Ninurta said, “Make machines, not slaves.”
.

“Earthlings we create,” said Enki, “shall helpers, not slaves, be.’”
.

Enlil shouted, “To create hybrid beings is in The Rules of Planet Journeys forbidden.”
.

Enki and Enlil contacted Anu on Nibiru. Each brother spoke to them. Enki, the scientist, lobbied for a project he’d run to make workers adapted to Earth from the Nibiran genome.
.

Enlil, the military-man, urged the Council to deny Enki. If Enki made slaves, it would validate the miners, traitors who valued themselves more than gold for Nibiru. Execute the traitors.

.
The Rules of Planetary Journeys, Enlil said, forbade cloned slaves. He said he’d resign as Commander if the Anu’s Council failed to veto Enki’s slave project.
.

But Enlil “forgot” to resign when Anu ruled, and the Council okayed Enki’s project.
.

Anu messaged Earth: “Gold must be obtained. Let the Being be fashioned! Forsake The Rules of Planetary Journeys, let Nibiru be saved.”

.
Enlil immediately fell in line and accepted his father’s decision. Enlil believed the Earthlings Enki would make would be clones who, when the Anunnaki quit Earth, would die out anyhow.

.

The genetics team, however, exceeded its mandate to make only clones. They also made breedable hybrids. Enlil, disgusted, ordered Adamu and Ti-Amat to Africa to breed.

.
For detailed review, illustrations, references and youtubes on slavery, click https://wp.me/p1TVCy-5CU
>>>
.
* ANUNNAKI, FALSE GODS http://amazon.com/Anunnaki-Sasha-Alex…/dp/1490334246) (Preview)

.


ANUNNAKI, FALSE GODS extends Zecharia Sitchin’s translations from clay tablets that underlie the Bible. Ten thousand years ago, scribes in ancient Sumer (Iraq) wrote on these tablets what they said the Anunnaki gods (tall people from the sky) dictated. Sitchin asked Dr. Lessin to keep public attention on his legacy by creating an educational program.

.

The Anunnaki are Homo sapiens like us but who live hundreds of thousands of years. They said they rocketed to Iraq 450,000 years ago from a planet called Nibiru to harvest gold to send back (via Mars) to Nibiru to powder into an atmospheric shield. They mined abundant gold in Africa until, 300,000 years ago, their miners mutinied.

.

To replace the mutineers, Anunnaki geneticists created short-lived slaves, called Adamites, adapted from their own genome but modified with a bit of clay, copper and genes from an intelligent hominoid, Homo erectus (Bigfoot’s ancestor) already living in Africa. Two hundred thousand years ago, Enki, their Chief Scientist, begat a line of Earthlings called Adapites with two Adamite girls.

.

Fifty thousand years ago Enki and an Adamite beauty begat Noah, who carried Enki’s longevity genes and ruled the Iraqi city of Sharuppak. Enki saved Noah and many of his subjects from the Deluge of 13,000 years ago. The Anunnaki had Noah’s people and other flood survivors proliferate and build cities in the Middle East and Egypt with up to 50,000 inhabitants.

.

The Anunnaki ruled the new civilizations as gods with descendants of Noah’s sons as intermediaries. The Anunnaki gave us the best and the worst of planet-wide civilization–kings, historians, taxes, temples, priests, bicameral congresses, record-keeping, law codes, library catalogs, furnaces, kilns, wheeled vehicles, paved roads, medicines, cosmogony, cosmology, festivals, beer, food recipes, art, music, music instruments, music notes, dance, textiles, and multicolored apparel.

.
Sumerian schools taught mathematics, architecture, theology, writing, grammar, botany, zoology, geography. They displayed but did not pass on a world-wide energy grid, air, submarine and interplanetary transport vehicles and advanced computers.

.

They also gave us hierarchy, misogyny, violence, greed, slavery, debt and war that featured genocide and weapons of mass destruction.

.

In 2024 BCE Anunnaki ruined their eastern Mediterranean cities with nuclear blasts and fallout storms.

.

Most of the Anunnaki returned to Nibiru by 311 BCE. But some stayed. They and their descendants (the power elite) rule us to this day. They and their spawn created and perpetuate exclusive, hostile nations and religions to keep us divided. They addicted us to credit institutions to keep us slaving.

.

Their tales of their stay on Earth before they made our ancestors, as well as what our forefathers directly saw, imprinted us with the values of their hierarchic, male-run, master-slave-enemy mentality. We assumed values of extraction, pollution, monetary monopoly and obsession with gold.
.

The genetics team that created us also gave us the capacity and preserved the histories Sitchin and others translated so we can overcome the liabilities they left us.
.

Recently, Anunnaki Royals returned to Earth, joining Enki and those who remained. The returning Anunnaki pledge to end the era of Marduk’s control on Earth (Kali Yuga), make sure he makes amends for the suffering he fostered here to secure his control, and usher in the Age of Enki (Aquarian, Satya Yuga).
xxx

.

ANUNNAKI & ANCIENT ANTHROPOLOGY EVIDENCE, REFERENCES, TIMELINE & WHO’S WHO

Evidence https://wp.me/p1TVCy-1zg
References http://wp.me/p1TVCy-2cq
Timeline http://wp.me/p1TVCy-1Km
Who’s Who http://wp.me/p1TVCy-1PE
New Stuff www.enkispeaks.com
https://youtu.be/tCqNi2o7FWo
.

PLEASE SHARE; I friend fb users who share my posts. See Less

The 1619 Project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to navigationJump to search

“The 1619 Project”
The 1619 Project logo
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
Genre(s)Long-form journalism
PublisherThe New York Times
Publication dateAugust 2019

The 1619 Project is a long-form journalism project developed by Nikole Hannah-Jones, writers from The New York Times, and The New York Times Magazine which “aims to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of Black Americans at the very center of the United States‘ national narrative”.[1] The project was first published in The New York Times Magazine in August 2019 for the 400th anniversary of the arrival of the first enslaved Africans in the English colony of Virginia.[2] The project later included a broadsheet article, live events, and a podcast.[3]

The project has sparked criticism and debate among prominent historians and political commentators.[4][5][6] In a letter published in The New York Times in December 2019, historians Gordon S. Wood, James M. McPherson, Sean Wilentz, Victoria Bynum and James Oakes expressed “strong reservations” about the project and requested factual corrections, accusing the project of putting ideology before historical understanding. In response, Jake Silverstein, the editor of The New York Times Magazine, defended the accuracy of the 1619 Project and declined to issue corrections.[7] In March 2020, The Times issued a “clarification”, modifying one of the passages that had sparked controversy.[8][9]

On May 4, 2020, the Pulitzer Prize Board announced the award of the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary to project creator Nikole Hannah-Jones for her introductory essay to the 1619 Project.[10][11]

In September 2020, renewed controversy arose over edits that had been made to the project without accompanying editorial notes, which critics—including Bret Stephens of the Times—claimed showed the New York Times was backing away from some of the project’s more controversial claims.[12][13][14] The Times defended its practices.[12][13][15]

Contents

Background[edit]

A 1901 illustration of the landing of the first Africans in Virginia. The White Lion is seen anchored in the background.Further information: Slavery in the colonial history of the United States

The 1619 Project was launched in August 2019 to commemorate the 400th anniversary of the first enslaved Africans arriving in colonial Virginia.[16][17] In 1619, a group of “twenty and odd” captive Africans arrived in the Virginia Colony. A Dutch-operated privateer, White Lion, carried 20–30 Africans who had been captured by a joint African-Portuguese raid[18] against the Kingdom of Ndongo in modern-day Angola, making its landing at Point Comfort in the English colony of Virginia.[16][19]

Although the Project places this moment in the context of slavery in the colonial history of the United States, some have taken issue with this, questioning whether those 1619 arrivals became slaves, calling attention to intermingling with English and native people and the creation a community of people of African descent.[20] Others have pointed out that the first enslaved Africans arrived in North America in 1526,[21] that slavery in North America existed prior to European arrival,[22] and that European slavery in the New World is documented as far back as Columbus in 1494, possibly as early as 1493.[23]

Project[edit]

The project dedicated an issue of the magazine to a re-examination of the legacy of slavery in the United States, at the anniversary of the 1619 arrival of the first slaves to Virginia, challenging the notion that the history of the United States began in 1776 or with the arrival of the Pilgrims.[24] The initiative quickly grew into a larger project.[19] The project encompasses multiple issues of the magazine, with related materials in multiple other publications of the Times as well as a project curriculum developed in collaboration with the Pulitzer Center, for use in schools.[19] The project employed a panel of historians and had support from the Smithsonian, for fact-checking, research and development.[25] The project was envisioned with the condition that almost all of the contributions would be from African-American contributors, deeming the perspective of black writers an essential element of the story to be told.[26]

August 14, 2019 magazine issue[edit]

The first edition, which appeared in The New York Times Magazine on August 14, 2019, published in 100 pages with ten essays, a photo essay, and a collection of poems and fiction by an additional 16 writers[27] and an introduction by Jake Silverstein, included the following works:[17][28]

  • “America Wasn’t a Democracy Until Black Americans Made It One”, essay by Nikole Hannah-Jones
  • “American Capitalism Is Brutal. You Can Trace That to the Plantation”, essay by Matthew Desmond
  • “How False Beliefs in Physical Racial Difference Still Live in Medicine Today”, essay by Linda Villarosa
  • “What the Reactionary Politics of 2019 Owe to the Politics of Slavery”, essay by Jamelle Bouie
  • “Why Is Everyone Always Stealing Black Music?”, essay by Wesley Morris
  • “How Segregation Caused Your Traffic Jam”, essay by Kevin Kruse
  • “Why Doesn’t America Have Universal Healthcare? One Word: Race”, essay by Jeneen Interlandi
  • “Why American Prisons Owe Their Cruelty to Slavery”, essay by Bryan Stevenson
  • “The Barbaric History of Sugar in America”, essay by Khalil Gibran Muhammad
  • “How America’s Vast Racial Wealth Gap Grew: By Plunder”, essay by Trymaine Lee
  • “Their Ancestors Were Enslaved by Law. Now They’re Lawyers”, photo essay by Djeneba Aduayom, with text from Nikole Hannah-Jones and Wadzanai Mhute
  • “A New Literary Timeline of African-American History”, a collection of original poems and stories

One of the central claims made by Hannah-Jones is that the colonists fought the Revolutionary War in order to preserve slavery.[29][30] The claim was later softened to “some of” the colonists having fought to preserve slavery.[31] The essays further discuss details of history as well as modern American society, such as traffic jams and the American affinity for sugar, and their connections to slavery and segregation.[32] Matthew Desmond‘s essay argues that slavery has shaped modern capitalism and workplace norms. Jamelle Bouie‘s essay draws parallels between pro-slavery politics and the modern right-wing politics.[26] Bouie argues that the United States still has not let go of the assumption that some people inherently deserve more power than others.[33]

Accompanying material and activities[edit]

The magazine issue was accompanied by a special section in the Sunday newspaper, in partnership with the Smithsonian, examining the beginnings of the transatlantic slave trade, written by Mary Elliott and Jazmine Hughes. Beginning on August 20, a multi-episode audio series titled “1619” began,[32] published by The Daily, the morning news podcast of the Times.[19] The Sunday sports section had an essay about slavery’s impact on professional sports in the United States: “Is Slavery’s Legacy in the Power Dynamics of Sports?”.[19][34] The Times plans to take the project to schools, with the 1619 Project Curriculum developed in collaboration with the Pulitzer Center.[35] Hundreds of thousands of extra copies of the magazine issue were printed for distribution to schools, museums and libraries.[16]

The Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting has made available free online lesson plans, is collecting further lesson plans from teachers, and helps arrange for speakers to visit classes.[36] The Center considers most of the lessons usable by all grades from elementary school through college.[37]

Reception[edit]

Reaction from historians[edit]

See also: Slavery in the United States § Revolutionary era

Beginning in October 2019, the World Socialist Web Site published a series of interviews with prominent historians critical of the 1619 Project, including Victoria E. Bynum, James M. McPherson, Gordon S. Wood, James Oakes, Richard Carwardine and Clayborne Carson.[6][5][38][39] In an essay for The New York Review of Books, historian Sean Wilentz accused the 1619 Project of cynicism for its portrayal of the American Revolution, the Civil War and Abraham Lincoln, who Wilentz wrote is “rendered as a white supremacist”.[40]

In a December 2019 letter published in The New York Times, historians Gordon S. Wood, James M. McPherson, Sean Wilentz, Victoria Bynum and James Oakes expressed “strong reservations” about the project and requested factual corrections, accusing the authors of a “displacement of historical understanding by ideology”. The letter disputed the claim, made in the Hannah-Jones’ introductory essay to the 1619 Project, that “one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery”. The Times published the letter along with a rebuttal from the magazine’s editor-in-chief, Jake Silverstein,[7][5] who defended the accuracy of the 1619 Project and declined to issue corrections. Wood responded in a letter, “I don’t know of any colonist who said that they wanted independence in order to preserve their slaves … No colonist expressed alarm that the mother country was out to abolish slavery in 1776.”[6][41] In an article in The Atlantic, Wilentz responded to Silverstein, writing, “No effort to educate the public in order to advance social justice can afford to dispense with a respect for basic facts”, and disputing the factual accuracy of Silverstein’s defense of the project.[42]

Also in December 2019, twelve scholars and political scientists specializing in the American Civil War sent a letter to the Times saying that “The 1619 Project offers a historically-limited view of slavery.” While agreeing to the importance of examining American slavery, they objected to what they described as the portrayal of slavery as a uniquely American phenomenon, to construing slavery as a capitalist venture, and to presenting out-of-context quotes of a conversation between Abraham Lincoln and “five esteemed free black men”. The following month, Times editor Jake Silverstein replied with a rebuttal.[43]

In January 2020, historian Dr. Susan Parker, who specializes in the studies of Colonial United States at Flagler College, noted that slavery existed before any of the 13 Colonies. She wrote in an editorial in The St. Augustine Record that “The settlement known as San Miguel de Gualdape lasted for about six weeks from late September 1526 to the middle of November. Historian Paul Hoffman writes that the slaves at San Miguel rebelled and set fire to some homes of the Spaniards.”[44] Writing in USA Today, several historians among them Parker, archaeologist Kathleen A. Deagan also of Flagler, and civil rights activist and historian David Nolan all agreed that slavery was present decades before the year 1619. According to Deagan, people have “spent their careers trying to correct the erroneous belief,” and Nolan said that in ignoring the earlier settlement, the authors were “robbing black history”.[45]

In March 2020, historian Leslie M. Harris, who was consulted for the Project, wrote in Politico that she had warned that the idea that the American Revolution was fought to protect slavery was inaccurate, and that the Times made avoidable mistakes, but that the project was “a much-needed corrective to the blindly celebratory histories”.[46] Hannah-Jones has also said that she stands by the claim that slavery helped fuel the revolution, though she concedes she might have phrased it too strongly in her essay, in a way that could give readers the impression that the support for slavery was universal.[5][46] On March 11, 2020, Silverstein authored an “update” in the form of a “clarification” on the Times‘ website, correcting Hannah-Jones’s essay to state that “protecting slavery was a primary motivation for some of the colonists”.[47] This “clarification” was reportedly prompted by a private warning to Silverstein by Harvard classicist and political scientist Danielle Allen that she might go public with criticism if the passage on the revolution were not corrected.[12]

Revision of initial claims[edit]

In September 2020, lead 1619 Project writer Nikole Hannah-Jones criticized conservatives for their depiction of the project, arguing that it “does not argue that 1619 is our true founding”.[12] Atlantic writer Conor Friedersdorf responded on Twitter by citing statements from Hannah-Jones arguing that 1619 was the nation’s true founding.[12] Philip Magness noted in a Quillette essay that the claim that the project aimed to “reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding” had been removed from the opening text of project’s page on the New York Times‘ site without an accompanying correction notice. Magness argued that this showed that the Times was quietly revising its position.[12][48][49] This unannounced substitution was decried by the conservative National Association of Scholars, which published a public letter in reaction to the change, asking for the revocation of the project’s Pulitzer Prize.[12][50]

Responding to the criticism, Hannah-Jones said that the argument about dating the founding to 1619 was self-evidently metaphorical.[48] In an opinion column in the New York Times, Bret Stephens wrote, “These were not minor points. The deleted assertions went to the core of the project’s most controversial goal, ‘to reframe American history by considering what it would mean to regard 1619 as our nation’s birth year'”, and argued that “The question of journalistic practices, however, raises deeper doubts about the 1619 Project’s core premises.”[48] This column led to tension within the Times, and prompted statements by Times executive editor Dean Baquet, publisher A. G. Sulzberger and New York Times Magazine editor Jake Silverstein in support of the 1619 Project.[12][13][15][51] Responding to criticism, Hannah-Jones wrote on Twitter, “Those who’ve wanted to act as if tweets/discussions about the project hold more weight than the actual words of the project cannot be taken in good faith”, and that “Those who point to edits of digital blurbs but ignore the unchanged text of the actual project cannot be taken in good faith.”[12]

Motivations for the American Revolution[edit]

Significant controversy had centered on the project’s claim that “one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery”. According to Princeton University professor Sean Wilentz, the claim that there was a “perceptible British threat to American slavery in 1776” is an ahistorical assertion, noting that the British abolitionist movement was practically non-existent in 1776.[52] Wilentz also criticized the project’s mentioning of the Somerset v Stewart case to support their argument, since it only concerned slavery in England, but had no effect in the American colonies.[52] Wilentz further noted that the project claims that “if the Revolution had caused the ending of the slave trade, this would have upended the economy of the colonies, in both the North and the South” did not consider the numerous attempts to outlaw—or impose prohibitive duties on—the slave trade by several colonies from 1769 to 1774.[52] In defense of the project’s claims, Silverstein claimed that the Somerset case caused a “sensation” in American reports. However, according to Wilentz, the decision was reported by only six newspapers in the southern colonies, and the tone of coverage was indifferent.[52]

Journalistic reaction[edit]

The 1619 Project received positive reviews by Alexandria Neason in the Columbia Journalism Review,[19] and by Ellen McGirt in Fortune magazine, which declared the project “wide-reaching and collaborative, unflinching, and insightful” and a “dramatic and necessary corrective to the fundamental lie of the American origin story”.[28]

Andrew Sullivan critiqued the project as an important perspective that needed to be heard, but one presented in a biased way under the guise of objectivity.[53] Writing in The Week, Damon Linker found the 1619 Project’s treatment of history “sensationalistic, reductionistic, and tendentious”.[54] Timothy Sandefur deemed the project’s goal as worthy, but observed that the articles persistently went wrong trying to connect everything with slavery.[55] In the National Review, Phillip W. Magness wrote that the Project provides a distorted economic history borrowed from “bad scholarship” of the New History of Capitalism (NHC),[56] and Rich Lowry wrote that Hannah-Jones’ lead essay leaves out unwelcome facts about slavery, smears the Revolution, distorts the Constitution, and misrepresents the founding era and Lincoln.[57] The World Socialist Web Site criticized what its editors consider the Times‘ reactionary, politically motivated “falsification of history” that wrongly centers around racial rather than class conflict.[6][5][58] Marxist political scientist Adolph L. Reed Jr. dismissed the 1619 Project as “the appropriation of the past in support of whatever kind of ‘just-so’ stories about the present are desired”.[59]

Political reaction[edit]

The publication of the project received varied reactions from political figures. Democratic Senator Kamala Harris praised the project in a tweet, stating “The #1619Project is a powerful and necessary reckoning of our history. We cannot understand and address the problems of today without speaking truth about how we got here.”[26]

On the other hand, several high-profile conservatives criticized the project. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, for instance, criticized the project as “brainwashing” “propaganda,” in a tweet,[26] and later wrote an op-ed characterizing it as “left-wing propaganda masquerading as ‘the truth'”.[60] Republican Senator Ted Cruz also equated it with propaganda.[32] President Donald Trump, in an interview on Fox News with Chris Wallace, said,

I just look at—I look at school. I watch, I read, look at the stuff. Now they want to change—1492, Columbus discovered America. You know, we grew up, you grew up, we all did, that’s what we learned. Now they want to make it the 1619 project. Where did that come from? What does it represent? I don’t even know.[61]

In July 2020, Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas proposed the “Saving American History Act of 2020”, prohibiting K-12 schools from using federal funds to teach curriculum related to the 1619 project, and make schools that did ineligible for federal professional-development grants. Cotton added that “The 1619 Project is a racially divisive and revisionist account of history that threatens the integrity of the Union by denying the true principles on which it was founded.”[62] On September 6, 2020, Trump responded on Twitter to a claim that the State of California was adding the 1619 project to the state’s public school curriculum. Trump stated that the Department of Education was investigating the matter and, if the aforementioned claim was found true,[original research?] federal funding would be withheld from Californian public schools.[63][64][65] On September 17, Trump announced the 1776 Commission to develop a “patriotic” curriculum.[66][67]

In October 2020, the National Association of Scholars, a conservative advocacy group, published an open letter with 21 signatories calling on the Pulitzer Prize Board to rescind Hannah-Jones’ prize due to its claim that “protecting the institution of slavery was a primary motive for the American Revolution, a claim for which there is simply no evidence”.[50][12]

In November 2020, then-President Trump established the “1776 Commission” by executive order,[68] organizing 18 conservative leaders to generate an opposing response to the 1619 Project.[69] The 1776 Report, released on January 18, 2021, was widely criticized for factual errors, incomplete or missing citations, and lack of academic rigor.[70] The commission was terminated by President Joe Biden on January 20, 2021.[71]

On April 30, 2021, U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell sent a letter to Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona protesting the Department of Education‘s proposal to modify federal grants to states and local schools to “incentivize them to use tools like the 1619 Project in their classrooms” and demanding that the proposal be abandoned.[72] McConnell’s letter charges that the programs are being modified “away from their intended purposes toward a politicized and divisive agenda” and notes that “Actual, trained, credentialed historians with diverse political views have debunked the project’s many factual and historical errors.”

Awards[edit]

Project creator Nikole Hannah-Jones was awarded the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary for the introductory essay to the 1619 Project.[10][11] The award cited her “sweeping, provocative and personal essay for the ground-breaking 1619 Project, which seeks to place the enslavement of Africans at the center of America’s story, prompting public conversation about the nation’s founding and evolution”.[73]

In October, 2020, New York University’s Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute named the 1619 Project as one of the 10 greatest works of journalism in the decade from 2010 to 2019.[74]

See also[edit]

43 U.S. Presidents Have Carried European Royal Bloodlines Into Office

43 U.S. Presidents Have Carried European Royal Bloodlines Into Office

Published at: December 11, 2017 / Category: Freedom, Globalization, Government, Secret Societies / Comments: 5 Comments

Did you know all 43 U.S. presidents have carried European royal bloodlines into office? 34 have been genetic descendants from just one person, Charlemagne, the brutal eighth century King of the Franks. 19 of them directly descended from King Edward III of England. In fact, the presidential candidate with the most royal genes has won every single American election.

“This information comes from Burke’s Peerage, which is the Bible of aristocratic genealogy, based in London. Every presidential election in America, since and including George Washington in 1789 to Bill Clinton, has been won by the candidate with the most British and French royal genes.Of the 42 presidents to Clinton, 33 have been related to two people: Alfred the Great, King of England, and Charlemagne, the most famous monarch of France.So it goes on: 19 of them are related to England’s Edward III, who has 2000 blood connections to Prince Charles.The same goes with the banking families in America. George Bush and Barbara Bush are from the same bloodline the Pierce bloodline, which changed its name from Percy, when it crossed the Atlantic. Percy is one of the aristocratic families of Britain, to this day.They were involved in the Gunpowder Plot to blow up Parliament at the time of Guy Fawkes”
Researcher/Author David Icke, “Alice in Wonderland and The World Trade Center Disaster”

43 U.S. Presidents Have Carried European Royal Bloodlines Into Office

If America declared its Independence from the European monarchies in 1776, how is it possible that every single president has descended from European monarchs? If presidents are democratically elected as we are told, what are the odds that we would always choose members of British and French royal bloodlines to lead us?

“The Americas have always been owned and governed by the same royal families of Britain and Europe that conventional history states as being among those defeated during the wars of so-called ‘Independence.”

Michael Tsarion, “Astrotheology and Sidereal Mythology”

“If it really is the Land of the Free and if, as is claimed, anyone really can become the president, you would fairly expect that the 43 presidents from George Washington to George W. Bush would express that genetic diversity. You’re having a laugh. The presidents of the United States are as much a royal dynasty as anything in Europe, from whence their bloodlines came.”

David Icke, “Tales From Time Loop”

43 U.S. Presidents Have Carried European Royal Bloodlines Into Office

Researchers like David Icke, Michael Tsarion, and Fritz Springmeier, along with foundations like the New England Historical Genealogy Society, Burkes Peerage, the Roman Piso Homepage, and other reliable genealogical sources have documented these royal presidential bloodlines.

Actually, by branching out far enough on the presidential family tree, the dedicated researcher will find that all 43 presidents share kinship, belonging to the same general ancestry, often called the 13th Illuminati bloodline, the Merovingian line, and/or the Windsor-Bush bloodline.

“If you go deeply enough into the genealogical research you will find that ALL the presidents are from this line …A spokesman for Burkes Peerage, the bible of royal and aristocratic genealogy based in London, has said that every presidential election since and including George Washington in 1789 has been won by the candidate with the most royal genes. Now we can see how and why. United States presidents are not chosen by ballot, they are chosen by blood!”David Icke, “The Windsor-Bush Bloodline”

Granted the relationships are sometimes distant 10th or 15th cousins, but in a country with hundreds of millions to choose from, this simply cannot be chance or coincidence. Gary Boyd Roberts, a genealogist at the New England Historic Genealogical Society thoroughly traced these connections in his book “Ancestors of American Presidents.”

George W. Bush himself is directly related to 16 former U.S. presidents including George Washington, Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes, James Garfield, Grover Cleveland, Teddy Roosevelt, William H. Taft, Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, and Gerald Ford.

Bush is closely related to the king of Albania and has kinship with every member of the British royal family and the House of Windsor. He is related to 20 British Dukes, the 13th cousin of Britain’s Queen Mother, and of her daughter Queen Elizabeth. He is 13th cousin once removed from Prince Charles and is a direct descendant of from King Henry III, Charles II, and Edward I of England.

Through the House of Windsor and King Henry III, the Bush’s and Clinton’s are genetically related as well.

“According to Burke’s Peerage, even according to the official genealogy, Bill Clinton is genetically related to the House of Windsor, the present royal family in Britain; to every Scottish monarch; to King Henry III of England; and to Robert I of France.”David Icke, “Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Center”

43 U.S. Presidents Have Carried European Royal Bloodlines Into Office

In 2004 George W. Bush ran as a “Republican” against “Democrat” John Forbes Kerry – his 16th cousin. These cousins, related to the same British and French monarchs, are also secret society brothers in the infamous Skull and Bones fraternity. John Kerry descends from King Henry II of England and Richard the Lionheart, leader of the third Christian crusade in 1189. He also has links to royalty in Albania, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Russia, Persia, and France, but still not enough royal genes to top George Bush.

Earlier in 2000 we see the same story George W. Bush ran neck and neck with Al Gore; another supposed democrat and cousin of the Bush family.

“Al Gore is a descendant of Edward I, Roman Emperors Louis I, II, and Charles II and is direct descendant of Charlemagne which makes him a distant cousin of Richard Nixon and George W. Bush. So the top “democratic” candidates against Bush in 2000 and 2004 were actually his cousins!”

Michael Tsarion, “Where History Ends DVD”

“Never in the history of the United States have two presidential candidates been as well endowed with royal alliances. There has always been a significant “royal factor,” in those who aspired to the White House, with Presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan, among others, all boasting blue blood links. Al Gore…a descendant of Edward I, he is also a cousin of former U.S. President Richard Nixon, who resigned from the White House in 1974 for his part in the Watergate scandal. However, Al Gore does have direct links to the Holy Roman Empire. He is descendant of Roman Emperors Louis II, Charles II, and Louis I and is therefore also a direct descendant of Charlemagne, the eighth century Emperor. The problem is that Gore’s Charlemagne links also make him a cousin of George W. Bush.”

Harold Brooks Baker, Burke’s Peerage Publishing Director from p. 7, NEXUS magazine, Vol. 8, No 1, January-February edition By placing bloodline members on both sides of America’s faux political dichotomy, the old monarchs have guaranteed their right to the throne under the guise of democratic elections.

Back in 1996, we see the same tactic as “Democrat” Bill Clinton defeated “Republican” Bob Dole, his cousin.

“Even Bill Clinton and Bob Dole, who ‘opposed’ each other at the 1996 election, are distant cousins. They can trace their ancestry to England’s King Henry III, who reigned from 1227 to 1273, and US Presidents William Henry and Benjamin Harrison …Clinton has far more royal blood than Dole and is directly descended from the same bloodline as the House of Windsor, every Scottish monarch, and King Robert I of France. This is why he was the Brotherhood’s choice.”
David Icke, “The Biggest Secret” (191-192)

The Windsor-Bush bloodline reaches from the American presidents, back to British/European royalty, and it doesn’t stop there. It continues back through Roman emperors, all the way to Babylonian Kings and Egyptian Pharaohs near the beginning of recorded history.

From Marie Antoinette and King Louis XVI, the French line continues back through Louis XVI, Charles XII, Henry IV, Philip VI, Robert II and many other French monarchs. It passes the de Medici family, specifically Queen Catherine de Medici of France, who supported Columbus’ expedition to the “New World” along with bloodline Queen Isabella of Castile, King Ferdinand of Spain, and the House of Lorraine. It was also Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand who started the 350 year Spanish Inquisition, which ordered the murder of millions who refused to convert to Christianity.

And from the House of Lorraine, Duke Godfroi de Bouillon became the first Crusader King of Jerusalem.

“Father George and wife Barbara [Bush] are both descendants of Godfroi de Bouillon who, in 1099, led European noblemen in the successful Crusade to recapture Jerusalem from the Islamic faith and moved into the King’s palace at Temple Mount … Godfroi de Bouillon was the first king of Jerusalem and the Duke of Lower Lorraine, a major region for the Illuminati bloodline …So when George W. Bush, a descendant of the de Bouillon through his mother and father, talked of a “Crusade” against “Islamic” terrorism…this was no slip of the tongue…as was reported”.David Icke “Alice In Wonderland and the World Trade Center Disaster”

The British line goes back from Prince William and Harry, through Prince Charles and Princess Diana, to Queen Elizabeth II, King George VI and V, King Edward VII, Queen Victoria, King Edward III, II, I, and King George III, II, I.

Then it passes through King James I who ordered and financed the now most widely read version of the Bible. Before James came Mary Stuart, King Henry III, II, I, King John (signer of the Magna Carta) and back to the Plantagenet and Habsburg dynasties under the Roman Empire.

Other branches carried the bloodline to Scotland, Austria, Germany, Spain, Sweden and even Mexico:

This same bloodline also includes key Scottish families like the Lords of Galloway and the Comyns; MarieLouise of Austria, who married Napoleon Bonaparte; Kaiser Wilhelm II, the king of Germany at the time of the First World War; and Maximilian, the Habsburg emperor of Mexico, who died in 1867.On and on it goes into country after country. This bloodline connects into every surviving royal family in Europe, including King Juan Carlos of Spain and the Dutch, Swedish, and Danish royal lines.”David Icke, “The WindsorBush Bloodline”

Before the Habsburgs, the House of Lorraine and Charlemagne were the Merovingians (Meroveus/Merovee) who originally brought the bloodline to France and Northwest Europe. Back in 4th century Rome the bloodline passed through Emperor Constantine, the first professed Christian emperor who initiated the Roman Empire’s transition into a Christian State and presided over the first Council of Nicaea.

He was preceded by the Roman Piso family whom will be discussed later. Before them came Herod the Great of Biblical fame and Ptolemy XIV, son of the most well-known Roman emperor Julius Caesar. Caesar actually married into the bloodline through Cleopatra, the most well-known Egyptian Queen.

A little further down this very same bloodline brings us to Alexander the Great:

“One common link in this bloodline is Philip of Macedonia (382-336 BC), who married Olympias, and their son was Alexander the Great (356-323 BC), a tyrant who plundered that key region of Greece, Persia, Syria, Phoenicia, Egypt, Babylon, the former lands of Sumer, and across into India before dying in Babylon at the age of 33. During his rule of Egypt he founded the city of Alexandria, one the greatest centers for esoteric knowledge in the ancient world. Alexander was taught by the Greek philosopher, Aristotle, who in turn was taught by Plato and he by Socrates. The bloodline and the hidden advanced knowledge have always gone together.”David Icke, “The WindsorBush Bloodline”

Back the bloodline goes past Alexander, past Nebuchadnezzar IV, III and other Kings of Babylon, all the way to ancient African Kings and Pharaohs of Egypt Ramesis II, I, Tuthmosis IV, III, II, I, Amenhotep III, II, I and many more. For millennia these Kings, Queens, Pharaohs, and Emperors have obsessively interbred with themselves to preserve and spread their bloodline. They have ruled over us since the beginning of recorded history, claiming they were given the divine right to the throne by God or gods.

“This ‘Divine right’ is simply the right to rule by DNA. We have a head of state in Britain to this day who is only there because of her DNA and the whole freeloading hierarchy of the royal family is structured according to a person’s DNA relationship to the king or queen …what is royal rule by DNA if not outrageous racial and genetic elitism? This ‘Divine’ right to rule has nothing to do with the ‘Divine’ and everything to do with the real origin of these bloodlines.They claim to descend from the ‘gods’ of the ancient world and who or what these ‘gods’ were and are, I will explain in detail later. The ‘royal’ families have interbred incessantly with each other since ancient times because they are seeking to retain the DNA corruption that can apparently be quickly diluted by breeding outside of itself. How interesting that the families of the Illuminati and the power elite do the same to this day. Why?They are the same bloodlines. The royal ‘Divine’ bloodlines of ancient Sumer and Babylon (now Iraq), Egypt, the Indus Valley and elsewhere expanded into Europe to become the royal and aristocratic families that ruled that continent and most of the world through the British Empire and those of France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and so on.As the people began to challenge and reject the open dictatorship of royal rule the bloodlines began to move ‘underground’ by operating among the population in all the areas that control modern society …You will find a similar story all over the world.Credo Mutwa, the official historian of the Zulu nation, told me how so many black African leaders that were placed in power after the colonial masters gave the continent ‘independence’, came from the bloodlines of African kings and queens who claimed to descend from the same ‘gods’ as their white counterparts.”David Icke, “Tales from the Time Loop”

Imperial, royal and noble ranks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to navigationJump to search

Part of a series of articles on
Monarchy
showCentral concepts
showTypes
showPeople
showHistory
showRelated topics
Politics portal
vte
Part of a series on
Imperial, royal, noble,
gentry and chivalric ranks in Europe
Emperor · Empress · King-Emperor · Queen-Empress · Kaiser · Tsar · Tsarina
High king · High queen · Great king · Great queen
King · Queen
Archduke · Archduchess · Tsesarevich
Grand prince · Grand princess
Grand duke · Grand duchess
Prince-elector · Prince · Princess · Crown prince · Crown princess · Foreign prince · Prince du sang · Infante · Infanta · Dauphin · Dauphine · Królewicz · Królewna · Jarl · Tsarevich · Tsarevna
Duke · Duchess · Herzog · Knyaz · Princely count
Sovereign prince · Sovereign princess · Fürst · Fürstin · Boyar
Marquess · Marquis · Marchioness ·
Margrave · Marcher Lord
 · Landgrave · Count palatine
Count · Countess · Earl · Graf · Châtelain · Castellan · Burgrave
Viscount · Viscountess · Vidame
Baron · Baroness · Freiherr · Advocatus · Lord of Parliament · Thane · Lendmann · Primor
Baronet · Baronetess · Scottish Feudal Baron · Scottish Feudal Baroness · Ritter · Imperial Knight
Eques · Knight · Chevalier · Ridder · Lady · Dame · Sir · Sire · Madam · Edelfrei · Seigneur · Lord · Laird
Lord of the manor · Gentleman · Gentry · Esquire · Edler · Jonkheer · Junker · Younger · Maid · Don · Nobile
Ministerialis
vte
Part of a series on
Imperial, royal, noble, gentry and chivalric ranks in West, Central, South Asia and North Africa
Emperor: Caliph · King of Kings · Shahanshah · Padishah · Sultan of Sultans · Chakravarti · Chhatrapati · Samrat · Khagan
High King: Great King · Maharaja · Beg Khan · Amir al-umara · Khagan Bek · Nawab
King: Malik · Sultan · Sultana · Emir · Hakim · Sharif · Shah · Shirvanshah · Raja · Khan · Dey · Nizam · Nawab
Grand Duke: Khedive · Nawab · Nizam · Wāli · Yabghu
Crown Prince: Shahzada · Mirza · Nawabzada · Yuvraj · Vali Ahd · Prince of the Sa’id · Mir · Tegin
Prince or Duke: Emir · Sheikh · Ikhshid · Beylerbey · Pasha · Babu Saheb · Sardar · Rajkumar · Sahibzada · Nawab · Nawabzada · Yuvraj · Sardar · Thakur · Şehzade · Mirza · Morza · Shad
Noble Prince: Sahibzada
Earl or Count: Mankari · Dewan Bahadur · Sancak bey · Rao Bahadur · Rai Bahadur · Khan Bahadur · Atabeg · Boila
Viscount: Zamindar · Khan Sahib · Bey · Kadi · Baig or Begum · Begzada · Uç bey
Baron: Lala · Agha · Hazinedar
Royal house: Damat
Nobleman: Zamindar · Mankari · Mirza · Pasha · Bey · Baig · Begzada · al-Dawla
Governmental: Lala · Agha · Hazinedar · Mostowfi ol-Mamalek
vte

Traditional rank amongst European royalty, peers, and nobility is rooted in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Although they vary over time and among geographic regions (for example, one region’s prince might be equal to another’s grand duke), the following is a reasonably comprehensive list that provides information on both general ranks and specific differences.[vague]

Contents

Ranks and title

This article contains embedded lists that may be poorly defined, unverified or indiscriminate. Please help to clean it up to meet Wikipedia’s quality standards. Where appropriate, incorporate items into the main body of the article. (November 2016)

Sovereign

Main articles: Monarch and Sovereign

  • The word monarch is derived from the Greek μονάρχης, monárkhēs, “sole ruler” (from μόνος, mónos, “single” or “sole”, and ἄρχων, árkhōn, archon, “leader”, “ruler”, “chief”, the word being the present participle of the verb ἄρχειν, árkhein, “to rule”, “to lead”, this from the noun ὰρχή, arkhē, “beginning”, “authority”, “principle”) through the Latinized form monarcha.
  • The word sovereign is derived from the Latin above.
  • Autocrat is derived from the Greek αὐτοκράτωρ: αὐτός (“self”) and κρατείν (“to hold power”), and may be translated as “one who rules by themself”.

Common titles for European and West Asian monarchs

Note that many titles listed may also be used by lesser nobles – non-sovereigns – depending on the historical period and state. The sovereign titles listed below are grouped together into categories roughly according to their degree of dignity; these being: imperial (Emperor, Empress, etc.), high royal (King of Kings etc.), royal (King/Queen, sovereign Grand Duke or Grand Prince, etc.), others (sovereign Prince, sovereign Duke, etc.), and religious.

Imperial titles[edit]
  • “Emperor“, from the Latin, ‘imperator,’ was originally a military title.[1] Soldiers would salute the leader of a victorious army as ‘imperator’. In English, the feminine form is Empress (the Latin is imperatrix). The realm of an emperor or empress is termed an Empire. Other words meaning Emperor include:
    • Caesar, the appellation of Roman emperors derived from the Roman dictator Julius Caesar, whose great-nephew and adopted son Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus became the first emperor of Rome. Augustus’ four successors were each made the adoptive son of his predecessor, and were therefore legally entitled to use “Caesar” as a constituent of their names; after Nero, however, the familial link of the Julio-Claudian dynasty was disrupted and use of the word Caesar continued as a title only.
    • Kaiser, derived from Caesar, primarily used in Germanic countries.
    • Otumfuo, literally “the Powerful one”, an Akan title to mean a king of kings. It is thought to originate with the Akan state of Akwamu. It is still used amongst the Akwamu and now the Asante people.
    • Augustus, a Roman honorific title which means ‘Venerable’ or ‘Majestic’, used by Roman Emperors from the beginning of the Empire onwards.
    • Basileus kai Autokrator, Medieval Greek title meaning “sovereign and autocrat”, used by the Roman emperors from the 9th century onwards.
    • Tsar / Tzar / Csar / Czar, derived as shortened variant of the Slavic pronunciation of Caesar (tsyasar), the feminine form Tsaritsa, primarily used in Bulgaria, and after that in Russia and other Slavic countries.
    • Huangdi (皇帝), the Imperial monarch during Imperial China.
    • Samrat, (Sanskrit: samrāt or सम्राट) is an ancient Indian title meaning ‘A paramount sovereign, universal lord’.[2] The feminine form is Samrājñī or साम्राज्ञी.
    • Chhatrapati (Devanagari: छत्रपती), from the Sanskrit chatra (parasol) and pati (master or lord), signifying a king over whom an umbrella is carried as a mark of dignity, a sovereign, emperor.[3] The term was adopted by Maratha ruler Shivaji as his title in the 17th century in Early Modern India.
    • Sapa Inca, The Sapa Inca (Hispanicized spelling) or Sapa Inka (Quechua for “the only Inca”), also known as Apu (“divinity”), Inka Qhapaq (“mighty Inca”), or simply Sapa (“the only one”), was the ruler of the Kingdom of Cusco and, later, the Emperor of the Inca Empire (Tawantinsuyu) and the Neo-Inca State.
    • Tennō (天皇), which means “heavenly sovereign” in Japanese. Is the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people. Historically, he is also the highest authority of the Shinto religion as he and his family are said to be the direct descendants of the sun-goddess Amaterasu
    • Kōtei (皇帝), Japanese title used for emperors of other nations (e.g. Rome, Russia, Germany)
    • Tsenpo, also known as Ihase or “Divine Son”, was the title of emperors of the Tibetan Empire.
    • Chanyu, short for Chengli Gutu Chanyu (撐犁孤塗單于) was a title used by supreme nomadic rulers of Inner Asia. Meaning “Son of Heaven, Ruler of the North”, it was later superseded by the title Khagan.
High royal titles[edit]
  • King of Kings First used by the ancient Persian Achaemenid Empire. Also used in Christian contexts to denote the Christian Roman emperors of the Late Empire and Byzantine periods.
  • High king, A king who rules over lesser kings.
    • Amir al-Mu’minin, or “Commander ( Emir ) of the Faithful,” a title traditionally held by the Caliphs of Islam to denote their suzerainty over all Muslims, even (theoretically) those beyond their territorial borders. Currently, the King of Morocco and the Sultan of Sokoto hold this title, although neither officially claims the Caliphate.
    • Mahārāja, Sanskrit for a “great king” or “high king”. The female form is Maharani.
    • Anax, from Mycenaean wanax for “High King”. Outranked Basileus in Mycenaean usage.
    • Nam-Lugal High kings of ancient Sumer (Mesopotamia).
    • Pharaoh, “Man of the Great House (Palace)” used in Ancient Egypt to denote the High kings of the upper and lower kingdoms of the Nile river valley.
    • Mansa, title of the rulers of the Mali Empire, meaning (King)”.
    • Omanhene or Ohene, an Akan title to mean King of the Nation., with Ohene simply meaning King. Ohemaa, the maternal counterpart(his mother, sister, aunt(referred to as a 2nd mother), cousin(referred to as sister), has equal power and selects which son she wants to lead the people. The Akan king rules on behalf of his mother who is the true power of the land. If the Ohemaa doesn’t select any male relative to lead on her behalf, then she can take the role as King or Omanhene.
    • Mwenematapa, title of the rulers of the Mutapa Empire. It means “Prince of the Realm” in Shona. Also spelled Mwene Mutapa or in Portuguese transliteration Monomotapa.
    • Ard Rí, Gaelic for high king, most notably used for high kings of Ireland and Scotland.
    • Bretwalda, high kings of Anglo-Saxon England.
    • Yang di-Pertuan Agong, the official title of the Malaysian head of state, and means “He who is Made Supreme Lord” and is generally glossed in English as “king”. The officeholder is elected from among the heads of the nine royal states, so the office may also be analogous to that of a high king.
    • Alaafin, or “Man of the Palace” in the Yoruba language, was the title of the emperor of the medieval Oyo Empire in northwestern Yorubaland. He is considered the supreme overlord of the empire and expected to keep tributaries safe from attack as well as mediate disputes between various sub-rulers and their people within the Empire.
    • Lamane, “master of the land” or “chief owner of the soil” in old Serer language were the ancient hereditary kings and landed gentry of the Serer people found in Senegal, the Gambia and Mauritania. The Lamanes were guardians of Serer religion and many of them have been canonized as Holy Saints (Pangool).
Royal titles[edit]
  • King, from the Germanic *kuningaz, roughly meaning “son of the people.” (See: Germanic kingship)[a] The realm of a King is termed a Kingdom (sovereign kings are ranked above vassal kings)
    • Rex Latin for “ruler”. Cognate with Raja, Rí, Reign, Regina, etc.
    • Basileus, from Mycenaean Greek meaning “chieftain”, used by various Ancient Greek rulers.
    • Negus is a royal title in the Ethiopian
    • Arka is a royal title (King) in Great Armenia
    • Tagavor is a royal title (King) in Great Armenia, and later Cilician Armenia
    • Melech, ancient Hebrew king.
    • Wang （王）, the head of state of Ancient China.
    • Król (in Polish) Král (in Czech), Király (in Hungarian), Король (in Russian and Ukrainian), Краљ / Kralj (in Serbian), Крал (in Bulgarian), Crai (in Romanian), Korol – Derived from Old East Slavic Король king, used in Kazakh, Tatar, and Kyrgyz languages. The korol, krol, kral, крал and kiraly versions used in Central and Eastern Europe derive from the name of Charlemagne.
    • Raja, Sanskrit, later Hindustani, for “ruler or king”. Cognate with Latin Rex, Irish Rí, etc.
    • Rai, Sanskrit, meaning Raja, for “ruler or king” in the Indian Subcontinent.
    • Rana, was used to be a title for martial sovereignty of Rajput rulers in the Indian subcontinent.
    • Deshmukh, Marathi for “ruler and king.”
    • Rí, Gaelic title meaning king, of which there were several grades, the highest being Ard Rí (High king). Cognate with Indian Raja, Latin Rex, and ancient Gaulish rix.
    • Khan, from the Turco-Mongol word for “lord,” like Duke it was originally a military rank. A Khan’s realm is called a Khanate.
    • Eze, the Igbo word for the King or Ruler of a kingdom or city-state. It is cognate with Obi and Igwe.
    • Oba, the Yoruba word for King or Ruler of a kingdom or city-state. It is used across all the traditional Yoruba lands, as well as by the Edo, throughout Nigeria, Benin, and Togo.
    • Kabaka, King of Buganda, a realm within Uganda in East Africa.
    • Shah, Persian word for King, from Indo-European for “he who rules”. Used in Persia, alongside Shahanshah (see above). The title of the sons of a Shah is Shahzade / Shahzadeh.
    • Ou (王), Japanese, meaning “king”, or “sovereign”. Also the title of the ruler of ancient Japan (倭王)
    • Sultan, from Arabic and originally referring to one who had “power”, more recently used as synonym for King.
    • Malik, Arabic for King.
    • Tlatoani, Ruler of the atlepetl or city state in ancient Mexico. Title of the Aztec Emperors. The word literally means “speaker” in Nahuatl, but may be translated into English as “king”.
    • Ajaw, In Maya meaning “lord”, “ruler”, “king” or “leader”. Was the title of the ruler in the Classic Maya polity. A variant being the title of K’inich Ajaw or “Great Sun King” as it was used to refer to the founder of the Copán dynasty, K’inich Yax K’uk’ Mo’.
    • Halach Uinik, In Maya meaning “real man”, “person of fact” or “person of command”. Was the title of the ruler in the Post-Classic Maya polity (Kuchkabal).
    • Datu in the Visayas and Mindanao which, together with the term Raja ( in the Rajahnate of Cebu and Kingdom of Maynila) and Lakan (title widely used on the island of Luzon), are the Filipino equivalents of “sovereign prince” and thus, glossed as “king”. (Cf. also Principalía – the hispanized and Christianized Datu class during the Spanish colonial period in the Philippines.)[4][5]
    • Tuanku, literally “My Master” (Tuan Ku), the title of the kings of the nine Royal states of Malaysia; all princes and princesses of the Royal Families also receive the appellation Tunku (literally “My Lord” (Tun Ku) or spelt Tengku) or Raja.
    • Mwami in Rwanda and neighbouring regions in the Congo
    • Maad a Sinig, King of Sine, a pre-colonial kingdom of the Serer people. From the old Serer title “Maad” (king).
    • Maad Saloum, King of Saloum, a pre-colonial kingdom of the Serer people.
    • Ratu, A Fijian chiefly title that is also found in Javanese culture.
    • Susuhunan, “he to whom homage is paid”, title of the Javanese monarch of the Surakarta Sunanate.
    • Teigne, King of Baol, previously a pre-colonial Serer kingdom.
    • Nizam, The word is derived from the Arabic language Nizām (نظام), meaning order, arrangement. Nizām-ul-mulk was a title first used in Urdu around 1600 to mean Governor of the realm or Deputy for the Whole Empire.
    • Lugal, is the Sumerian term for “king, ruler”. Literally, the term means “big man.”[6]
  • Queen, from the Germanic *kwoeniz, or *kwenon, “wife”; cognate of Greek γυνή, gynē, “woman”; from PIE *gʷḗn, “woman”. The female equivalent of a King, or the consort of a King; a Queen’s realm is also a kingdom.
    • Rani, Hindi for Queen. See Raja, above.
    • Shahbanu, Persian for Queen. See Shah, above.
    • Sultana, Arabic for Queen. See Sultan, above.
    • Malika, Arabic for Queen.
    • Joō (女王), Japanese, literally “female sovereign”.
    • Malka, ancient Hebrew Queen.
    • Mwamikazi, Rwanda and Congo kingdoms
    • Ix-ajaw, See Ajaw above, it was a title was also given to women, though generally prefixed with the sign Ix (“woman”) to indicate their gender.
    • Dayang, Filipino feminine equivalent of “Datu”. See Datu
    • Hara, Filipino feminine equivalent of “Raha”. See Raja, above.
  • Sovereign Grand Dukes or Grand Princes are considered to be part of the reigning nobility (“Royalty”, in German Hochadel; their correct form of address is “Royal Highness”)[7]
Princely, ducal, and other sovereign titles[edit]
  • Prince, from the Latin princeps, meaning “first citizen”. The feminine form is Princess. Variant forms include the German Fürst and Russian Tsarevich (царевич) and the feminine form Tsarevna (царевна).[b]
    • Bai, Filipino feminine equivalent of a prince.
    • Ampuan, Maranao royal title which literally means “The One to whom one asks for apology”
    • Ginoo, Ancient Filipino equivalent to noble man or prince (now used in the form “Ginoóng” as the analogue to “mister“).
    • Pillai, Ancient South Indian Title meaning “child”, Prince for junior children of Emperors[8]
    • Ōji (王子), Japanese, used only for the son of a monarch.
    • Morza, a Tatar title usually translated as “prince”, it ranked below a Khan. The title was borrowed from Persian and Indian appellation Mirza added to the names of certain nobles, which itself derived from Emir.
    • Daakyehene, pronounced: Daa-chi-hi-ni, literally: future king. The feminine form is Daakyehemaa. An Akan prince.
    • Knyaz, a title found in most Slavic languages, denoting a ruling or noble rank. It is usually translated into English as “Prince”, but the word is related to the English King and the German König.
  • Despot, Greek for “lord, master”, initially an appellation for the Byzantine emperor, later the senior court title, awarded to sons and close relatives of the emperor. In the 13th-15th centuries borne by autonomous and independent rulers in the Balkans.
  • Voievod şi domn, title held by the sovereign princes of Wallachia and Moldavia. Voievod (from Slavic) means in this context supreme military commander while Domn (from lat. dominus) means master, lord, autocrat. The “civilian” title of domn holds a kind of primacy. The office/authority is called “domnie” (roughly “lordship”) rather than voievodship (as is the case of similar named but lesser Slavic titles). The prince is called upon as “doamne” (“mylord”).
  • Duke, from the Latin Dux, meaning “leader,” a military rank in the late Roman Empire. Variant forms include Doge and Duce; it has also been modified into

Archduke (meaning “chief” Duke), Grand Duke (literally “large,” or “big” Duke; see above under royal titles), Vice Duke (“deputy” Duke), etc. The female equivalent is Duchess.

Tribal titles[edit]
Religious titles[edit]
  • Caliph means ‘successor’ (to Muhammad), both a religious and a secular leader. The ruler of the caliphate was the secular head of the international Muslim community, as a nation. To claim the Caliphate was, theoretically, to claim stewardship over Muslims on earth, under the sovereignty of Allah. (See Amir al-Mu’minin above). This did not necessarily mean that the Caliph was himself the supreme authority on Islamic law or theology; that still fell to the Ulema. The role of the Caliph was to oversee and take responsibility for the Muslim community’s political and governmental needs (both within and beyond the borders of his territorial realm), rather than to himself determine matters of doctrine, like the Pope.
  • Dalai Lama, the highest authority in Tibetan (or more specifically Gelug) Buddhism and a symbol of the unification of Tibet, said to belong to a line of reincarnations of the bodhisattva Avalokitesvara. Among other incarnate Tibetan lamas, the second highest Gelug prelate is the Panchen Lama. From the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama until 1950 the Dalai Lamas effectively ruled Tibet. The chief of the rival Kagyu school of Tibetan Buddhism is the Karmapa.
  • Patriarch is the highest ecclesial title used in the Eastern Christian tradition. Some patriarchs are also styled as popes.
  • Pope, also “Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church and Vicar of Christ”, is considered the apostolic successor of Saint Peter, one of the Twelve Apostles (primary disciples) of Jesus Christ. Once wielding substantial secular power as the ruler of the Papal States and leader of Christendom, the Pope is also the absolute ruler of the sovereign state Vatican City. Also the title of the leader of the Coptic Church, considered successor of the Apostle Saint Mark the Evangelist. The word pope is derived from Latin and Italian papa, a familiar form of “father”.
  • Catholicos is the Chief Bishop, Patriarch of the Armenian Orthodox Church. The earliest ecclesiastical use of the title Catholicos was by the Bishop of Armenia, head of the Armenian Orthodox Apostolic Church, in the 4th century.
  • Saltigue, the high priests and priestesses of the Serer people. They are the diviners in Serer religion.

Other sovereigns, royalty, peers, and major nobility

Main articles: Royal family, Peerage, Nobility, and Imperial immediacy

Several ranks were widely used (for more than a thousand years in Europe alone) for both sovereign rulers and non-sovereigns. Additional knowledge about the territory and historic period is required to know whether the rank holder was a sovereign or non-sovereign. However, joint precedence among rank holders often greatly depended on whether a rank holder was sovereign, whether of the same rank or not. This situation was most widely exemplified by the Holy Roman Empire (HRE) in Europe. Several of the following ranks were commonly both sovereign and non-sovereign within the HRE. Outside of the HRE, the most common sovereign rank of these below was that of Prince. Within the HRE, those holding the following ranks who were also sovereigns had (enjoyed) what was known as an immediate relationship with the Emperor. Those holding non-sovereign ranks held only a mediate relationship (meaning that the civil hierarchy upwards was mediated by one or more intermediaries between the rank holder and the Emperor).

Titles

  • Archduke, ruler of an archduchy; used exclusively by the Habsburg dynasty and its junior branch of Habsburg-Lorraine which ruled the Holy Roman Empire (until 1806), the Austrian Empire (1804-1867), and the Austro-Hungarian Empire (1867-1918) for imperial family members of the dynasty, each retaining it as a subsidiary title when founding sovereign cadet branches by acquiring thrones under different titles (e.g., Tuscany, Modena); it was also used for those ruling some Habsburg territories such as those that became the modern so-called “Benelux” nations (Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg); The title was created in 1358 by the Habsburgs themselves to establish a precedence of their princes over the other titleholders of high nobility of the era; therefore the rank was not recognized by the other ruling dynasties until 1453[9]
  • Grand Duke, ruler of a grand duchy; nowadays considered to be in precedence the third highest monarchial rank in the western world, after “Emperor” and “King”. In the Russian Empire the title of Grand Duke was reserved for sons and grandsons of a reigning Tsar, and as such marked the holder of the title as a member of the Imperial Family.
  • Grand Prince (Velikiy Knyaz), ruler of a grand principality; a title primarily used in the medieval Kyivan Rus’ principalities; It was also used by the Romanovs of the Russian Empire for members of the imperial family, although then it is more commonly translated into English as Grand Duke
  • Duke (Herzog in German), ruler[a] of a duchy;[c] also for junior members of ducal and some grand ducal families
  • Prince (Prinz in German), junior members of a royal, grand ducal, ruling ducal or princely, or mediatised family. The title of Fürst was usually reserved, from the 19th century, for rulers of principalities—the smallest sovereign entities (e.g., Liechtenstein, Lippe, Schwarzburg, Waldeck-and-Pyrmont)—and for heads of high-ranking, noble but non-ruling families (Bismarck, Clary und Aldringen, Dietrichstein, Henckel von Donnersmarck, Kinsky, Paar, Pless, Thun und Hohenstein, etc.). Cadets of these latter families were generally not allowed to use Prinz, being accorded only the style of count (Graf) or, occasionally, that of Fürst (Wrede, Urach) even though it was also a ruling title. Exceptional use of Prinz was permitted for some morganatic families (e.g., Battenberg, Montenuovo) and a few others (Carolath-Beuthen, Biron von Kurland).
    • In particular, Crown prince (Kronprinz in German) was reserved for the heir apparent of an emperor or king
    • Ban, noble title used in several states in Central and Southeastern Europe between the 7th century and the 20th century.
  • Dauphin, title of the heir apparent of the royal family of France, as he was the de jure ruler of the Dauphiné region in southeastern France (under the authority of the King)
  • Infante, title of the cadet members of the royal families of Portugal and Spain
  • Królewicz, title used by the children of the monarchs of Poland and later Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth
  • Elector (Kurfürst in German), a rank for those who voted for the Holy Roman Emperor, usually sovereign of a state (e.g. the Margrave of Brandenburg, an elector, called the Elector of Brandenburg)
  • Marquess, Margrave, or Marquis (literally “Count of a March” (=Border territory)) was the ruler of a marquessate, margraviate, or march
  • Landgrave (literally “Land Count”), a German title, ruler of a landgraviate (large / provincial territory)
  • Count, theoretically the ruler of a county; known as an Earl in modern Britain; known as a Graf in German, known as a Serdar in Montenegro and Serbia
    • Župan, noble and administrative title used in several states in Central and Southeastern Europe between the 7th century and the 21st century.
    • Ispán, leader of a castle district (a fortress and the royal lands attached to it) in the Kingdom of Hungary from the early 11th century.
  • Principal (m.)/Principala (f.), a person belonging to the aristocratic ruling class of Filipino nobles called Principalía, roughly equivalent to ancient Roman Patricians, through whom the Spanish Monarchs ruled the Philippines during the colonial period (c. 1600s to 1898).[10][11]
  • Viscount (vice-count), theoretically the ruler of a viscounty, which did not develop into a hereditary title until much later.[12] In the case of French viscounts, it is customary to leave the title untranslated as vicomte [vi.kɔ̃t].
  • Primor, a Hungarian noble title, originally the highest rank of Székely nobility, usually compared to baron (or less commonly, count).[13] Originally, primores could de jure not be evicted from his fiefdom, even by the King of Hungary (although such instances did occur).[14]
  • Freiherr, a German word meaning literally “Free Master” or “Free Lord” (i.e. not subdued to feudal chores or drudgery), is the German equivalent of the English term “Baron”, with the important difference that unlike the British Baron, he is not a “Peer of the Realm” (member of the high aristocracy)[15]
  • Baron, theoretically the ruler of a barony – some barons in some countries may have been “free barons” (liber baro) and as such, regarded (themselves) as higher barons.
  • Rais, is a used by the rulers of Arab states and South Asia.
  • Yuvraj, is an Indian title for crown prince, the heir apparent to the throne of an Indian (notably Hindu) kingdom
  • Subahdar, is normally appointed from the Mughal princes or the officers holding the highest mansabs.

Usages of the titles of Grand Duke, Duke and Prince[edit]

In all European countries, the sovereign Grand Duke (or Grand Prince in some eastern European languages) is considered the third-highest monarchic title in precedence, after Emperor and King.

Ambox current red.svgThis article needs to be updated. The reason given is: Titles and privileges of nobility were abolished in Germany in 1919.. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2020)

In Germany, a sovereign Duke (Herzog) outranks[citation needed] a sovereign prince (Fürst). A cadet prince (Prinz) who belongs to an imperial or royal dynasty, however, may outrank a duke who is the cadet of a reigning house, e.g., Wurttemberg, Bavaria, Mecklenburg or Oldenburg.

The children of a sovereign Grand Duke may be titled “Prince” (Luxembourg, Tuscany, Baden, Hesse-Darmstadt, Saxe-Weimar) or “Duke” (Oldenburg) in accordance with the customs of the dynasty. The heir of the throne of a Grand Duchy is titled “Hereditary Grand Duke”, as soon as he reaches the full legal age (majority).

Children of a sovereign (i.e., ruling) Duke and of a ruling Prince (Fürst) were, however, all titled prince (Prinz).

The heir apparent to a ruling or mediatised title would usually prepend the prefix Erb- (hereditary) to his or her title, e.g., Erbherzog, Erbprinz, Erbgraf, to distinguish their status from that of their junior siblings.

Children of a mediatised Fürst were either Prinzen or Grafen (counts), depending upon whether the princely title was limited to descent by masculine primogeniture or not. In the German non-sovereign nobility, a Duke (Herzog) still ranked higher than a Prince (Fürst).

In Russia “Grand duke” is the traditional translation of the title Velikiy Kniaz (Великий Князь), which from the 11th century was at first the title of the leading Prince of Kievan Rus’, then of several princes of the Rus’. From 1328 the Velikii Kniaz of Muscovy appeared as the grand duke for “all of Russia” until Ivan IV of Russia in 1547 was crowned as tsar. Thereafter the title was given to sons and grandsons (through male lines) of the Tsars and Emperors of Russia. The daughters and paternal granddaughters of Russian emperors, as well as the consorts of Russian grand dukes, were generally called “grand duchesses” in English.

Minor nobility, landed gentry, and other aristocracy

Main articles: Aristocracy (class) and Landed gentry

The distinction between the ranks of the major nobility (listed above) and the minor nobility, listed here, was not always a sharp one in all nations. But the precedence of the ranks of a Baronet or a Knight is quite generally accepted for where this distinction exists for most nations. Here the rank of Baronet (ranking above a Knight) is taken as the highest rank among the ranks of the minor nobility or landed gentry that are listed below.

Titles

  • Baronet is a hereditary title ranking below Baron but above Knight; this title is granted only in the British Isles and does not confer nobility.
  • Dominus was the Latin title of the feudal, superior and mesne, lords, and also an ecclesiastical and academical title (equivalent of Lord)
  • Vidame, a minor French aristocrat
  • Vavasour, also a petty French feudal lord
  • Seigneur or Lord of the manor rules a smaller local fief
  • Knight is the central rank of the Medieval aristocratic system in Europe (and having its equivalents elsewhere), usually ranking at or near the top of the Minor Nobility
  • Patrician is a dignity of minor nobility or landed gentry (most often being hereditary) usually ranking below Knight but above Esquire
  • Fidalgo or Hidalgo is a minor Portuguese and Spanish aristocrat (respectively; from filho d’algo / hijo de algo, lit. “son of something”)
  • Nobile is an Italian title of nobility for prestigious families that never received a title
  • Edler is a minor aristocrat in Germany and Austria during those countries’ respective imperial periods.
  • Jonkheer is an honorific for members of noble Dutch families that never received a title. An untitled noblewoman is styled Jonkvrouw, though the wife of a Jonkheer is a Mevrouw or, sometimes, Freule, which could also be used by daughters of the same.
  • Junker is a German noble honorific, meaning “young nobleman” or otherwise “young lord”
  • Skartabel is a minor Polish aristocrat.
  • Scottish Baron is a hereditary feudal nobility dignity, outside the Scots peerage, recognised by Lord Lyon as a member of the Scots noblesse and ranking below a Knight but above a Scottish Laird[16][d] in the British system. However, Scottish Barons on the European continent are considered and treated equal to European barons.
  • Laird is a Scottish hereditary feudal dignity ranking below a Scottish Baron but above an Esquire
  • Esquire is a rank of gentry originally derived from Squire and indicating the status of an attendant to a knight, an apprentice knight, or a manorial lord;[17] it ranks below Knight (or in Scotland below Laird) but above Gentleman[e][f]
  • Gentleman is the basic rank of landed gentry (ranking below Esquire), historically primarily associated with land; within British Commonwealth nations it is also roughly equivalent to some minor nobility of some continental European nations[18]
  • Bibi, means Miss in Urdu and is frequently used as a respectful title for women in South Asia when added to the given name
  • Lalla, is an Amazigh title of respect. The title is a prefix to her given name or personal name, and is used by females usually of noble or royal background.
  • Sidi, is a masculine title of respect, meaning “my master” in Maltese, Darija and Egyptian Arabic.
  • Qanungoh Shaikh, are a clan of Muslim Shaikhs in Punjab, other parts of Pakistan, and Afghanistan.

In Germany, the constitution of the Weimar Republic in 1919 ceased to accord privileges to members of dynastic and noble families. Their titles henceforth became legal parts of the family name, and traditional forms of address (e.g., “Hoheit” or “Durchlaucht“) ceased to be accorded to them by governmental entities. The last title was conferred on 12 November 1918 to Kurt von Klefeld. The actual rank of a title-holder in Germany depended not only on the nominal rank of the title, but also the degree of sovereignty exercised, the rank of the title-holder’s suzerain, and the length of time the family possessed its status within the nobility (Uradel, Briefadel, altfürstliche, neufürstliche, see: German nobility). Thus, any reigning sovereign ranks higher than any deposed or mediatized sovereign (e.g., the Fürst of Waldeck, sovereign until 1918, was higher than the Duke of Arenberg, head of a mediatized family, although Herzog is nominally a higher title than Fürst). However, former holders of higher titles in extant monarchies retained their relative rank, i.e., a queen dowager of Belgium outranks the reigning Prince of Liechtenstein. Members of a formerly sovereign or mediatized house rank higher than the nobility. Among the nobility, those whose titles derive from the Holy Roman Empire rank higher than the holder of an equivalent title granted by one of the German monarchs after 1806.

In Austria, nobility titles may no longer be used since 1918.[19]

Titles used by the Maratha Royals

The titles used by royalty, aristocracy & nobility of the Maratha Empire

Corresponding titles of nobility between languages[edit]

Below is a comparative table of corresponding royal and noble titles in various countries. Quite often, a Latin 3rd declension noun formed a distinctive feminine title by adding -issa to its base, but usually the 3rd declension noun was used for both male and female nobles, except for Imperator and Rex. 3rd declension nouns are italicized in this chart. See Royal and noble styles to learn how to address holders of these titles properly.

EnglishEmperor,
Empress		King,
Queen		Archduke,
Archduchess		Grand Duke /
Grand Prince,
Grand Duchess /
Grand Princess		Duke,
Duchess		(Prince)-Elector,
Electress		Prince,[g]
Princess		Marquess/
Margrave,
Marchioness/
Margravine		Earl/Count,
Countess		Viscount,
Viscountess		Baron,
Baroness		Baronet[h]
Baronetess		Knight,[i]
Dame		Esquire/Gentleman
Latin[j]Imperator/
Caesar,
Imperatrix/
Caesarina		Rex,
Regina		Archidux,
Archiducissa		Magnus Dux/
Magnus Princeps,
Magna Ducissa,
Magna Principissa		Dux,
Ducissa		Princeps ElectorPrinceps,
Principissa		Marchio,
Marchionissa		Comes,
Comitissa		Vicecomes,
Vicecomitissa		Baro,
Baronissa		–EquesNobilis Homo (N.H.)
Arabicimperator/ embrator(إمبراطور),imperatora/ embratora(إمبراطوره)Malik(ملك),Malika(ملكه)Al-Ka’ed Al-Askary Al-Akbar(القائد العسكري الأكبر)Al-Emir Al-Akbar(الأمير الأكبر),Al-Emira Al-Kobra(الأميرة الكبرى)Ka’ed Askary(قائد عسكري)Emir Nakheb(أمير ناخب),Emira Nakheba(أميرة ناخبة),Amir/ Emir(أمير),Amira/ Emira(أميرة)–––Baron(بارون),Barona(بارونه)–FarisفارسRajol Nabilرجل نبيل
ArmenianTagavor tagavorats (King of kings); Gaysr (from Latin “Caesar”)Arka (from Greek ‘árchōn,’ ‘king’); Tagavor,
Taguhee		Ishkhanats ishkhan (literally Prince of Princes)Nakharar (‘Grand’ only by precedence among other ‘dukes’)Nakharar (synonyms are Medzamedz, Ter, Tanuter, Nahapet)– A function held by the Dukes when assembled in council. Otherwise, a function held by imperial powers who appointed governors or dependent monarchs. (Prince-électeur,
Princesse-électrice)		Ishkhan,
Ishkhanooee		Bdeshkh,
Bdeshkhooee		– (Comte,
Comtesse)		Paronats ParonParonAznavourAsbedAzat
BulgarianЦар,
Царица		Крал,
Кралица		Ерцхерцог,
Ерцхерцогиня		Велик Княз,
Велика Княгиня		Херцог,
Херцогиня		Курфюрст,
Курфюрстина		Княз,
Княгиня		Маркиз,
Маркиза		Граф,
Графиня		Виконт,
Виконтеса		Барон,
Баронеса		Баронет,
Дама		Рицар,
Дама		Господин
CzechCísař,
Císařovna		Král,
Královna		Arcivévoda,
Arcivévodkyně		Velkovévoda,
Velkovévodkyně		Vévoda,
Vévodkyně		Kurfiřt,
Kurfiřtka		Kníže,
Kněžna10		Markýz/Markrabě[k]
Markýza/Markraběnka		Hrabě,
Hraběnka		Vikomt,
Vikomtka/Vikomtesa		Baron,
Baronka		BaronetRytířPán,
Paní
DanishKejser,
Kejserinde		Konge
Dronning		Ærkehertug,
Ærkehertuginde		Storhertug,
Storhertuginde		Hertug,
Hertuginde		Kurfyrste,
Kurfyrstinde		Prins/Fyrste
Prinsesse/Fyrstinde		Markis,
Markise		Greve
Grevinde, Komtesse		Vicegreve,
Vicegrevinde/
Vicekomtesse		Baron, Friherre,
Baronesse, Friherreinde		Baronet,
Baronetesse		RidderJunker
DutchKeizer,
Keizerin		Koning,
Koningin		Aartshertog,
Aartshertogin 		Groothertog/grootvorst,
Groothertogin/grootvorstin		Hertog,
Hertogin		Keurvorst,
Keurvorstin		Prins/Vorst,
Prinses/Vorstin		Markies/Markgraaf,
Markiezin/Markgravin		Graaf,
Gravin		Burggraaf,
Burggravin		Baron,
Barones(se)		Erfridder
style of wife: Mevrouw		RidderJonkheer,Jonkvrouw
EstonianKeiser,
Keisrinna		Kuningas,
Kuninganna		Ertshertsog,
Ertshertsoginna		Suurhertsog,
Suurhertsoginna		Hertsog,
Hertsoginna		Kuurvürst,
Kuurvürstinna		Vürst,
Vürstinna		Markii,
Markiis		Krahv,
Krahvinna		Vikont,
Vikontess		Parun,
Paruness		BaronetRüütelDžentelmen
Finnish[l]Keisari,
Keisarinna (or Keisaritar, obsolete)		Kuningas,
Kuningatar		Arkkiherttua,
Arkkiherttuatar		Suurherttua/Suuriruhtinas,
Suurherttuatar/Suuriruhtinatar		Herttua,
Herttuatar		Vaaliruhtinas,
Vaaliruhtinatar		Prinssi/Ruhtinas,
Prinsessa/Ruhtinatar[m]		Markiisi/Rajakreivi,
Markiisitar/Rajakreivitär		Jaarli/Kreivi,
Kreivitär[m]		Varakreivi,
Varakreivitär		Paroni, Vapaaherra,
Paronitar, Rouva/ Vapaaherratar[m]		Baronetti, “Herra” (=fiefholder),
Herratar		Aatelinen/Ritari[m]
style of wife: Rouva		–
FrenchEmpereur,
Impératrice		Roi,
Reine		Archiduc, ArchiduchesseGrand-Duc,
Grande-Duchesse		Duc,
Duchesse		Prince-électeur,
Princesse-électrice		Prince,[g]
Princesse		Marquis,
Marquise		Comte,
Comtesse		Vicomte,
Vicomtesse		Baron,
Baronne		BaronnetChevalierEcuyer,
Gentilhomme
GermanKaiser,
Kaiserin		König,
Königin		Erzherzog,
Erzherzogin		Großherzog/
Großfürst,
Großherzogin/
Großfürstin		Herzog,
Herzogin		Kurfürst,
Kurfürstin		Prinz/Fürst,
Prinzessin/Fürstin[n]		Markgraf,[o]
Markgräfin		Graf,
Gräfin		Vizegraf, Burggraf
Vizegräfin, Burggräfin		Baron, Herr, Freiherr
Baronin, Frau, Freifrau, Freiin		–RitterJunker (Prussia), Edler (Austria),
Junkerin, Edle
Greek domesticΑυτοκράτωρ,
Αυτοκράτειρα		Βασιλεύς,
Βασίλισσα		Aρχιδούκας,
Aρχιδούκισσα		Μέγας Δούκας,
Μεγάλη Δούκισσα		Δούκας,
Δούκισσα		EκλέκτοραςΔεσπότης,
Δέσποινα		Μαρκήσιος,
Μαρκησία		Κόμης,
Κόμισσα		Υποκόμης,
Υποκόμισσα		BαρώνοςΒαρωνίσκοςΙππότης,
Ντάμα		Νωβελίσσιμος,
Νωβελίσσιμα;
HindiSamrat (सम्राट)Raja (राजा),
Rani (रानी)		Rana (राना)Rao (राव)Rai (राय)–Yuvraj (युवराज),
Yuvrani (युवरानी)		Thakur (ठाकुर)Chaudhary (चौधरी)Zamindar (ज़मींदार)Mukhia (मुखिया)Sardar (सरदार)Samant (सामन्त)Sriman (श्रीमान)
HungarianCsászár,
császárnő		Király,
királynő		Főherceg,
főhercegnő		Nagyherceg, fejedelem, vajda
nagyhercegnő, fejedelemasszony, –		Herceg,
hercegnő		Választófejedelem,
(választófejedelemnő)		Királyi herceg,
királyi hercegnő		Márki, őrgróf
márkinő, őrgrófnő		Gróf
grófnő		Várgróf, vikomt
Várgrófnő (vikomtnő)		Báró,
bárónő		Baronet,
baronetnő		Lovag (vitéz[p])Nemes,
nemesasszony
IcelandicKeisari,
keisarynja		Konungur, kóngur,
drottning		Erkihertogi,ErkihertoginjaStórhertogi,
stórhertogaynja		Hertogi,
hertogaynja		Kjörfursti,
kjörfurstynja		Prins/fursti,
prinsessa/furstynja		Markgreifi,
markgreifynja		Greifi, jarl
greifynja, jarlkona		Vísigreifi,
vísigreifynja		Barón, fríherra,
barónessa		RiddariAðalsmaður,
aðalskona
JapaneseTennō (天皇), Kōtei (皇帝)Ō (王),Kokuō (国王)Taikō (大公)Taikō (大公)Kōshaku (公爵)Senteikō (選帝侯)Kōshaku (公爵)Kōshaku (侯爵)Hakushaku(伯爵)Shishaku (子爵)Danshaku (男爵)Jundanshaku(準男爵)Kishi (騎士),Kunshakushi(勲爵士)–
ItalianImperatore,
Imperatrice		Re,
Regina		Arciduca,
Arciduchessa		Granduca,
Granduchessa		Duca,
Duchessa		Principe Elettore,
Principessa Electrice		Principe,[g]
Principessa		Marchese,
Marchesa		Conte,
Contessa		Visconte,
Viscontessa		Barone,
Baronessa		BaronettoCavaliereNobile, Nobiluomo
LatvianImperators/Ķeizars,
Imperatrise/Ķeizariene		Karalis/Ķēniņš,
Karaliene/Ķēniņiene		Erchercogs,
Erchercogiene		Lielhercogs,
Lielhercogene		Hercogs,
Hercogiene		Kūrfirsts,
Kūrfirstiene		Princis,
Princese		Markgrāfs/Marķīzs
Markgrāfiene/Marķīziene		Grāfs,
Grāfiene		Vikonts,
Vikontese		Barons,
Baronese		BaronetsBruņinieks,
Bruņiniece		Dižciltīgais/Augstdzimušais,
Dižciltīgā/
Augstdzimusī
LithuanianImperatorius,
Imperatorienė		Karalius,
Karalienė		Kunigaikštis,
Kunigaikštienė		Didysis kunigaikštis,
Didžioji kunigaikštienė		Hercogas,
Hercogienė		–Princas,
Princesė		Markizas,
Markizienė		Grafas,
Grafienė		Vikontas,
Vikontienė		Baronas/Freiheras,
Baronienė/Freifrau		Baronetas,BaronetėRiterisSkvairas, DžentelmenasPonas, Ponia
LuxembourgishKeeser,
Keeserin		Kinnek,
Kinnigin		Erzherzog,
Erzherzogin		Groussherzog,
Groussherzogin		Herzog,
Herzogin		Kuerfierscht,
Kuerfierschtin		Prënz/Fierscht,
Prënzessin/Fierschtin		Markgrof/Marquis,
Markgrofin/Marquise		Grof,
Grofin/Comtesse		Vizegrof/Vicomte,
Vizegrofin/Vicomtesse		Baron,
Baroness(e)		Ritter–
MalteseImperatur,
Imperatriċi		Re/Sultan,
Reġina/Sultana		Arċiduka,
Arċidukessa		Gran Duka,
Gran Dukessa		Duka,
Dukessa		Prinċep Elettur,
Prinċipessa Elettriċi		Prinċep,
Prinċipessa		Markiż,
Markiża		Konti,
Kontessa		Viskonti,
Viskontessa		Baruni,
Barunessa		BarunettKavallier–
NorwegianKeiser,
Keiserinne		Konge,
Dronning		Erkehertug,
Erkehertuginne		Storhertug,
Storhertuginne		Hertug,
Hertuginne		Kurfyrste,
Kurfyrstinne		Prins/Fyrste,
Prinsesse/Fyrstinne		Marki,
Markise		Jarl / Greve,
Grevinne		Vikomte/Visegreve,
Visegrevinne		Baron, Friherre,
Baronesse, Friherreinde		–RidderAdelsmann,
Adelskvinne
Polish[q]Cesarz,
Cesarzowa		Król,
Królowa		Arcyksiążę
Arcyksiężna		Wielki Książę,
Wielka Księżna		Diuk (Książę),
(Księżna)		Książę Elektor,
Księżna Elektorowa		Książę,
Księżna		Markiz/Margrabia,
Markiza/Margrabina		Hrabia,
Hrabina		Wicehrabia,
Wicehrabina		Baron,
Baronowa		BaronetRycerz/ KawalerSzlachcic
PortugueseImperador,
Imperatriz		Rei,
Rainha		Arquiduque,
Arquiduquesa;		Grão-Duque,
Grã-Duquesa		Duque,
Duquesa		Príncipe-Eleitor,
Princesa-Eleitora;		Príncipe,
Princesa		Marquês,
Marquesa		Conde,
Condessa[r]		Visconde,
Viscondessa		Barão,
Baronesa		Baronete,
Baronetesa;		CavaleiroFidalgo
RomanianÎmpărat,
Împărăteasă		Rege,
Regină		Arhiduce,
Arhiducesă		Mare Duce,
Mare Ducesă		Duce,
Ducesă		Prinț Elector,
Prințesă Electora		Prinț,
Prințesă		Marchiz,
Marchiză		Conte,
Contesă		Viconte,
Vicontesă		Baron,
Baroneasă, Baroană		BaronetCavalerGentilom
RussianИмператор/Царь (Imperator/Tsar),Императрица/Царица (Imperatritsa/Tsaritsa)Король/Царь(Koról/Tsar),
Королева/Царица(Koroléva/Tsaritsa)		Эрцгерцог (Ertsgertsog),
Эрцгерцогиня (Ertsgertsoginya)		Великий Князь (Velikiy Knyaz),
Великая Княгиня (Velikaya Kniagina)		Герцог (Gertsog),
Герцогиня (Gertsoginya)		Курфюст (Kurfyurst),
Курфюстина (Kurfyurstina)		Царевич/Князь (Tsarevich/Kniaz),
Царевна/Княгиня (Tsarevna/Kniagina)[s]		Маркиз (Markiz),
Маркиза (Markiza),Боярин (Boyar),
Боярыня (Boyarina)[s]		Граф (Graf),
Графиня (Grafinya)[s]		Виконт (Vikont),
Виконтесса (Vikontessa)		Барон (Baron),
Баронесса (Baronessa)		Баронет (Baronet)Рыцарь (Rytsar),Дама (Dama)Господин (Gospodin),Госпожа (Gospozha)
Serbo-Croatian (Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, Serbian)Car / Цар,
Carica / Царица		Kralj / Краљ,
Kraljica / Краљица		Nadvojvoda / Надвојвода
Herceg / Херцег,
Nadvojvodkinja / Надвојводкиња
Hercoginja / Херцогиња		Veliki vojvoda / Велики војвода,
Velika vojvodkinja / Велика војводкиња		Vojvoda / Војвода,
Vojvodkinja / Војводкиња		Kraljević / Краљевић,
Carević / Царевић,
Princ / Принц,
Princeza / Принцеза		Knez / Кнез,
Knjaz / Књаз,
Knjeginja, Kneginja / Књегиња, Кнегиња		Markiz / Маркиз,
Markiza / Маркиза		Grof / Гроф,
Grofica / Грофица		Vikont / Виконт,
Vikontica / Виконтица		Baron / Барон,
Baronica, Baronesa / Бароница, Баронеса		Barunet / Барунет,
Baruneta / Барунета		Vitez / ВитезGospodin / Господин
SpanishEmperador,
Emperatriz		Rey,
Reina		Archiduque,
Archiduquesa		Gran Duque,
Gran Duquesa		Duque,
Duquesa		Príncipe Elector,
Princesa Electora;		Príncipe,[g]
Princesa		Marqués,
Marquesa		Conde,
Condesa		Vizconde,
Vizcondesa		Barón,
Baronesa		BaronetCaballeroEscudero, Hidalgo
SlovakCisár,
Cisárovná		Kráľ,
Kráľovná		Arcivojvoda,
Arcivojvodkyňa		Veľkovojvoda,
Veľkovojvodkyňa		Vojvoda,
Vojvodkyňa		Kurfirst/
Knieža voliteľ/
Knieža volič		Knieža,
Kňažná		Markíz,
Markíza		Gróf,
Grófka		Vikomt,
Vikontesa		Barón,
Barónka		BaronetRytier–
SloveneCesar,
Cesarica		Kralj,
Kraljica		Nadvojvoda,
Nadvojvodinja		Veliki vojvoda,
Velika vojvodinja		Vojvoda,
Vojvodinja		Volilni knez,
Volilna kneginja		Knez,
Kneginja		Markiz/Mejni grof,
Markiza/Mejna grofica		Grof,
Grofica		Vikont,
Vikontinja		Baron,
Baronica		Baronet,
Baronetinja		VitezOproda
SwedishKejsare,
Kejsarinna		Kung,
Drottning		Ärkehertig,
ärkehertiginna		Storhertig/Storfurste,
Storhertiginna/Storfurstinna		Hertig,
hertiginna		Kurfurste
Kurfurstinna		Prins/Furste,
Prinsessa/Furstinna[m]		Markis/markgreve,
markisinna/markgrevinna[m]		Greve,
Grevinna		Vicomte,
Vicomtessa		Baron, Herre, Friherre,
Baronessa, Fru, Friherrinna		–Riddare/Frälseman,
Dam/Fru[m]		–
TurkishPadişah, Kayser, Sulṭānü’s-SelāṭīnSultan, Şeh–Paşa, Beylerbey,
Beylerbayan		Han,
Hatun		–Şehzade,
Hanımsultan		–––Timariot,
Timariota		TimarŞövalyeEffendi, Bey,
Begum
PersianŠâhanšâh,ŠahrbânuŠâh,
Šahbânu		–Khan-i-Khanan,Khatun BozorgKhan,KhatunEntexâbgare Šâhpur,Entexâbgare Šâhdoxt,Šâhpur,ŠâhdoxtMârki,MârkizKont,KontesVikont,VikontesBarun,BarunesBarunet,BârunetesŠovâlyeAgha, Khanum
UkrainianІмператор/Цісар (Imperator),
Імператриця/Цісариця (Imperatrytsia)		Король/Цар (Koról/Tsar),
Королева/Цариця (Koroléva/Tsarytsia)		Ерцгерцог/Архекнязь (Ertshertsoh/Arkheknyaz),
Ерцгерцогиня/Архікнягиня (Ertshertsohynia/Arkhikniahynia)		Великий Князь (Velykyi Knyaz),
Велика Княгиня (Velyka Kniahynia)		Герцог/Дюк (Hertsoh/Diuk),
Герцогиня/Дючеса (Hertsohynia/Diuchesa)		Курфюрст (Kurfyurst),
Курфюрстина (Kurfyurstyna)		Князь/Принц (Knyaz/Printz),
Княгиня/Принцеса (Kniahynia/Pryntsesa)		Маркіз/Боярин (Markiz/Boyaryn),
Маркіза/Бояриня (Markiza/Boyarynia)		Граф (Hraf),
Графиня (Hrafynia)		Віконт (Vikont),
Віконтеса (Vikontesa)		Барон (Baron),
Баронеса (Baronesa)		Баронет (Baronet)Лицар (Lytsar)Пан/Господар (Pan/Hospodar),
Пані/Господиня (Pani/Hospodynia)
UrduBadishah (بادشاہ),
Shahanshah (شہنشاہ)		Sultan (سلطان),
Shah (شاہ)		Nawab (نواب),
Nizam (نظام)		Mian (میاں)Mir (میر)Nawab Wazir,
Wazir e Azim,
Mir Bakshi		Shahzada (شہزادہ),
Sahibzada (صاحبزادہ),
Nawabzada (نوابزادہ)		Malik (ملک)Pasha (پاشا)Khan (خان)Sardar (سردار),
Tumandar		Baig (بیگ)Ghazi (غازی)Janab (جناب),
Sahib (صاحب)
WelshYmerawdwr,
Ymerodres		Brenin,
Brenhines		Archddug,
Archdduges		Archddug,
Archdduges		Dug,
Duges		–Tywysog,
Tywysoges		Marcwis/Ardalydd,
Ardalyddes		Iarll/Cownt,
Iarlles/Cowntes		Iarll,
Iarlles		Barwn,
Barwnes		Barwnig,
Barwniges		Marchog–

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Jump up to:a b Loss of sovereignty or fief does not necessarily lead to loss of title. The position in the ranking table is however accordingly adjusted. The occurrence of fiefs has changed from time to time, and from country to country. For instance, dukes in England rarely had a duchy to rule.
  2. ^ “Prince”
  3. ^ A duke who is not actually or formerly sovereign, or a member of a reigning or formerly reigning dynasty, such as British, French, Portuguese, Spanish and most Italian dukes, is a non-dynastic noble ranking above a marquis.
  4. ^ There are actually three Scottish dignities that are types of a Scottish Baron; these are (in descending order of rank): Scottish feudal Earl, Scottish Feudal Lord, and Scottish feudal Baron (the general name for the dignity listed above among the ranks of aristocratic gentry).
  5. ^ The meaning of the title Esquire became (and remains) quite diffuse, and may indicate anything from no aristocratic status, to some official government civil appointment, or (more historically) the son of a knight or noble who had no other title above just Gentleman.
  6. ^ In the United States, where there is no nobility, the title esquire is sometimes arrogated (without any governmental authorization) by lawyers admitted to the state bar.
  7. ^ Jump up to:a b c d “Prince” (Prinz in German, Prins in Swedish, Prinssi in Finnish, “Principe” in Spanish) can also be a title of junior members of royal houses. In the British system, for example, prince is not a rank of nobility but a title held exclusively by members of the royal family.
  8. ^ Does not confer nobility in the British system.
  9. ^ Non-hereditary. Does not confer nobility in the British system. See also squire and esquire.
  10. ^ Latin titles are for etymological comparisons. They do not accurately reflect their medieval counterparts.
  11. ^ The title Markýz was not used in Bohemia and thus referred only to foreign nobility, while the title Markrabě (the same as the German Markgraf) is connected only to a few historical territories (including the former marches on the borders of the Holy Roman Empire, or Moravia).
  12. ^ Finland accorded the noble ranks of Ruhtinas, Kreivi, Vapaaherra and Aatelinen. The titles Suurherttua, Arkkiherttua, Vaaliruhtinas, Prinssi, Markiisi, Jaarli, Varakreivi, Paroni, and Baronetti were not granted in Finland, though they are used of foreign titleholders. Keisari, Kuningas, Suuriruhtinas, Prinssi, and Herttua have been used as official titles of members of the dynasties that ruled Finland, though not granted as titles of nobility. Some feudally-based privileges in landowning, connected to nobily related lordship, existed into the nineteenth century; and fiefs were common in the late medieval and early modern eras. The title Ritari was not commonly used except in the context of knightly orders. The lowest, untitled level of hereditary nobility was that of the “Aatelinen” (i.e. “noble”).
  13. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g No noble titles were granted after 1906 when the unicameral legislatures (Eduskunta) were established, removing the constitutional status of the so-called First Estate. However, noble ranks were granted in Finland until 1917 (there, the lowest, untitled level of hereditary nobility was “Aatelinen”, or “noble”; it was in essence a rank, not a title).
  14. ^ In central Europe, the title of Fürst or kníže (e.g. Fürst von Liechtenstein) ranks below the title of a duke (e.g. Duke of Brunswick). The title of Vizegraf was not used in German-speaking countries, and the titles of Ritter and Edler were not commonly used.
  15. ^ In the German system by rank approximately equal to Landgrafand Pfalzgraf.
  16. ^ The “vitéz” title was introduced in Hungary after 1920. In preceding ages simply meant a warrior or a courageous man.
  17. ^ In keeping with the principle of equality among noblemen, no noble titles (with few exceptions) below that of prince were allowed in Poland. The titles in italics are simply Polish translations of western titles which were granted to some Polish nobles by foreign monarchs, especially after the partitions. Instead of hereditary titles, the Polish nobility developed and used a set of titles based on offices held. See “szlachta” for more info on Polish nobility.
  18. ^ In Portugal, a baron or viscount who was a “grandee of the kingdom” (Portuguese: Grandes do Reino) was called a “baron with grandness” (Portuguese: Barão com Grandeza) or “viscount with grandness” (Portuguese: Visconde com Grandeza); each of these grandees was ranked as equal to a count.
  19. ^ Jump up to:a b c For domestic Russian nobility, only the titles Kniaz and Boyar were used before the 18th century, when Graf was added.

References[edit]

  1. ^ According to: https://www.infoplease.com/whos-who-monarchy
  2. ^ The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Vaman Shivaram Apte
  3. ^ A Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Apte
  4. ^ Esta institucion (Cabecería de Barangay), mucho más antigua que la sujecion de las islas al Gobierno, ha merecido siempre las mayores atencion. En un principio eran las cabecerías hereditarias, y constituian la verdadera hidalguía del país; mas del dia, si bien en algunas provincias todavía se tramiten por sucesion hereditaria, las hay tambien eleccion, particularmente en las provincias más inmediatas á Manila, en donde han perdido su prestigio y son una verdadera carga. En las provincias distantes todavía se hacen respetar, y allí es precisamente en donde la autoridad tiene ménos que hacer, y el órden se conserva sin necesidad de medidas coercitivas; porque todavía existe en ellas el gobierno patriarcal, por el gran respeto que la plebe conserva aún á lo que llaman aquí principalía. (Translation: This institution (Cabecera de Barangay), much older than the fastening of the islands to the Government, has always deserved the most attention. In the beginning they were the hereditary heads, and they constituted the true chivalry of the country; but of the day, although in some provinces they are still transacted by hereditary succession, there are also elections, particularly in the provinces closest to Manila, where they have lost their prestige and are a real burden. In the distant provinces they are still enforced, and that is precisely where authority has less to do, and the order is preserved without the need for coercive measures; because the patriarchal government still exists in them, because of the great respect that the plebs still retain for what they call here principalía.FERRANDO.) FERRANDO, Fr Juan & FONSECA OSA, Fr Joaquin (1870–1872). Historia de los PP. Dominicos en las Islas Filipinas y en las Misiones del Japon, China, Tung-kin y Formosa (Vol. 1 of 6 vols) (in Spanish). Madrid: Imprenta y esteriotipia de M Rivadeneyra. OCLC 9362749.
  5. ^ L’institution des chefs de barangay a été empruntée aux Indiens chez qui on la trouvée établie lors de la conquête des Philippines; ils formaient, à cette époque une espèce de noblesse héréditaire. L’hérédité leur a été conservée aujourd hui: quand une de ces places devient vacante, la nomination du successeur est faite par le surintendant des finances dans les pueblos qui environnent la capitale, et, dans les provinces éloignées, par l’alcalde, sur la proposition du gobernadorcillo et la présentation des autres membres du barangay; il en est de même pour les nouvelles créations que nécessite de temps à autre l’augmentation de la population. Le cabeza, sa femme et l’aîné de ses enfants sont exempts du tributo. MALLAT de BASSILAU, Jean (1846). Les Philippines: Histoire, géographie, moeurs. Agriculture, industrie et commerce des Colonies espagnoles dans l’Océanie (2 vols) (in French). Paris: Arthus Bertrand Éd. ISBN 978-1143901140. OCLC 23424678, p. 356.
  6. ^ Harriet Crawford™ (29 August 2013). The Sumerian World. Routledge. p. 283. ISBN 978-1-136-21912-2.
  7. ^ Meyers Taschenlexikon Geschichte 1982, vol 1, p21-22
  8. ^ Indian Epigraphical Dictionary Page 166 Accessed at https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=pySCGvdyYLIC&pg=PA166&dq=indian+epigraphical+pillai+prince&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiHpO3DvuTQAhWpBcAKHRzwDSIQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=indian%20epigraphical%20pillai%20prince&f=false
  9. ^ Meyers Taschenlexikon Geschichte 1982, vol 2, p. 106.
  10. ^ “Esta institucion (Cabecería de Barangay), mucho más antigua que la sujecion de las islas al Gobierno, ha merecido siempre las mayores atencion. En un principio eran las cabecerías hereditarias, y constituian la verdadera hidalguía del país; mas del dia, si bien en algunas provincias todavía se tramiten por sucesion hereditaria, las hay tambien eleccion, particularmente en las provincias más inmediatas á Manila, en donde han perdido su prestigio y su una verdadera carga. En las provincias distantes todavía se hacen respetar, y allí es precisamente en donde la autoridad tiene ménos que hacer, y el órden se conserva sin necesidad de medidas coercitivas; porque todavía existe en ellas el gobierno patriarcal, por el gran respeto que la plebe conserva aún á lo que llaman aquí principalía.” FERRANDO, Fr Juan & FONSECA OSA, Fr Joaquin (1870–1872). Historia de los PP. Dominicos en las Islas Filipinas y en las Misiones del Japon, China, Tung-kin y Formosa, (Vol. 1 of 6 vols, in Spanish). Madrid: Imprenta y esteriotipia de M Rivadeneyra, p. 61.
  11. ^ Durante la dominación española, el cacique, jefe de un barangay, ejercía funciones judiciales y administrativas. A los tres años tenía el tratamiento de don y se reconocía capacidad para ser gobernadorcillo, con facultades para nombrarse un auxiliar llamado primogenito, siendo hereditario el cargo de jefe. Enciclopedia Universal Ilustrada Europeo-Americana. VII. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, S.A. 1921, p. 624.
  12. ^ Upshur, Jiu-Hwa; Terry, Janice; Holoka, Jim; Goff, Richard; Cassar, George H. (2011). Cengage Advantage Books: World History. I. California: Wadsworth Publishing Co. Inc. p. 329. ISBN 9781111345167.
  13. ^ Szilágyi, László (1938). Székely Primor Családok. Budapest. p. 17.
  14. ^ Gerő, József (1938). A M. Kir. Belügyminiszter által igazolt nemesek 1867-1937. Budapest: Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kingdom of Hungary. pp. 5–30.
  15. ^ Meyers Taschenlexikon Geschichte 1982, vol 1, p. 22 & vol 2, p. 198.
  16. ^ Ruling of the Court of the Lord Lyon (26 February 1948, Vol. IV, page 26): “With regard to the words ‘untitled nobility’ employed in certain recent birthbrieves in relation to the (Minor) Baronage of Scotland, Finds and Declares that the (Minor) Barons of Scotland are, and have been both in this nobiliary Court and in the Court of Session recognised as a ‘titled nobility’ and that the estait of the Baronage (i.e. Barones Minores) are of the ancient Feudal Nobility of Scotland”.
  17. ^ Dodd, Charles R. (1843) A manual of dignities, privilege, and precedence: including lists of the great public functionaries, from the revolution to the present time, London: Whittaker & Co., pp.248,251 [1]
  18. ^ Larence, Sir James Henry (1827) [first published 1824]. The nobility of the British Gentry or the political ranks and dignities of the British Empire compared with those on the continent(2nd ed.). London: T.Hookham — Simpkin and Marshall. Retrieved 6 January 2013.
  19. ^ “RIS Dokument”. bka.gv.at.
  20. ^ Alain Daniélou (11 February 2003). A Brief History of India. Inner Traditions / Bear & Co. pp. 257–. ISBN 978-1-59477-794-3.
  21. ^ Jump up to:a b “Chhatrapati Shivaji”.
  22. ^ Temple, Sir Richard Carnac (1 January 1953). Sivaji and the rise of the mahrattas. Susil Gupta.
  23. ^ Yule, Henry; Burnell, A. C.; Teltscher, Kate (13 June 2013). Hobson-Jobson: The Definitive Glossary of British India. OUP Oxford. ISBN 9780199601134.
  24. ^ Sardesai, HS (2002). Shivaji, the Great Maratha, Volume 3. Cosmo Publications. p. 649. ISBN 9788177552874.
  25. ^ The Cambridge History of the British Empire. CUP Archive. 1 January 1933.
  26. ^ “The COININDIA Coin Galleries: Baroda”.
  27. ^ Singh, Ravindra Pratap (1 January 1987). Geography and Politics in Central India: A Case Study of Erstwhile Indore State. Concept Publishing Company. ISBN 9788170220251.
  28. ^ Jump up to:a b Sir Roper Lethbridge (2005). The Golden Book of India: A Genealogical and Biographical Dictionary of the Ruling Princes, Chiefs, Nobles, and Other Personages, Titled Or Decorated of the Indian Empire. Aakar Books. p. 22. ISBN 978-81-87879-54-1.
  29. ^ Social Science. FK Publications. 1 January 2006. ISBN 9788179730423.
  30. ^ Kapoor, Subodh (1 January 2002). The Indian Encyclopaedia: Biographical, Historical, Religious, Administrative, Ethnological, Commercial and Scientific. Cosmo Publications. ISBN 9788177552577.
  31. ^ Jump up to:a b Farooqui Salma Ahmed (2011). A Comprehensive History of Medieval India: From Twelfth to the Mid-Eighteenth Century. Pearson Education India. p. 334. ISBN 978-81-317-3202-1.
  32. ^ Copeman, Jacob; Ikegame, Aya (1 January 2012). The Guru in South Asia: New Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Routledge. ISBN 9780415510196.
  33. ^ Central India (1908). The Central India State Gazetteer Series. Thacker, Spink.
  34. ^ T. N. Madan (1988). Way of Life: King, Householder, Renouncer : Essays in Honour of Louis Dumont. Motilal Banarsidass Publishe. p. 129. ISBN 978-81-208-0527-9.
  35. ^ Rosalind O’Hanlon (2002). Caste, Conflict and Ideology: Mahatma Jotirao Phule and Low Caste Protest in Nineteenth-Century Western India. Cambridge University Press. p. 45. ISBN 978-0-521-52308-0.
  36. ^ Balkrishna Govind Gokhale (1988). Poona in the eighteenth century: an urban history. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195621372.
  37. ^ Sarkar, Jadunath (1 January 1992). Fall of the Mughal Empire. Sangam. ISBN 9780861317493.

External links[edit]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Noble titles.
hidevteImperial, royal, and noble styles
Forms of address for popes, royalty, and nobility
WesternHolinessImperial and Royal Majesty (HI&RM)Imperial and Most Faithful MajestyImperial Majesty (HIM)Apostolic Majesty (HAM)Apostolic KingCatholic MonarchsCatholic Majesty (HCM)Most Christian Majesty (HMCM)Most Faithful Majesty (HFM)Orthodox Majesty (HOM)Britannic Majesty (HBM)Most Excellent MajestyMost Gracious MajestyRoyal Majesty (HRM)Majesty (HM)Grace (HG)Royal Highness (HRH)Monseigneur (Msgr)Exalted Highness (HEH)Highness (HH)Most Eminent Highness (HMEH)Serene Highness (HSH)Illustrious Highness (HIll.H)Excellency (HE)Most ExcellentMost IllustriousHochgeborenHochwohlgeborenWohlgeborenMuch Honoured (The Much Hon.)Milord (Millourt)AntiquityAncient RomePater PatriaeAugustusSebastosDominusMiddle AgesSovereign and mediatised families
in the Holy Roman EmpireImperial and Royal Highness (HI&RH)Imperial Highness (HIH)Royal Highness (HRH)Grand Ducal Highness (HGDH)Grand HighnessHighness (HH)Ducal Serene Highness (HDSH)Serene Highness (HSH)Serenity (HS)Illustrious Highness (HIll.H)Grace (HG)Excellency (HE)
AsianDuli Yang Maha MuliaGreat kingKhan Great KhanKing of KingsMaharajaMikadoShahShogunSon of HeavenIslamicAmir al-Mu’mininCustodian of the Two Holy MosquesHadratSharifSultanic Highness
CountriesFranceGeorgiaNetherlandsPortugalUnited Kingdom CanadaScotland
See alsoBy the Grace of God Divine right of kingsDefender of the Faith (Fidei defensor)Defender of the Holy SepulchreGreat Catholic MonarchList of current sovereign monarchs List of current constituent monarchsSacred kingTranslatio imperiiVictory titleDon (honorific)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility
hidevteRoyal and noble titles and honours by country
MonarchiesCommonwealth realmsSpainSwedenThailand royalnoble
Former monarchiesAustria-Hungary royalnobleBurmaByzantiumBrazilChina QingEgypt MamlukEthiopiaFrance KingdomEmpireGermany royalnobleKorea JoseonOttomanPortugalPoland and LithuaniaRomaniaRussiaSerbia royalnobleSomaliaMaratha
Authority control GND: 7508334-6NDL: 00571938

Categories: