I'm pretty sure Leo II of Cilicia got his crown from the Emperor.Veldmaarschalk said:
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I have read the passage again, in the book of Steven Runciman, and you are right alltough it is quite confusion.
Leo asked the Pope (Celestine III) for a crown. But he was made king by emperor Henry (Heinrich). But the 'actual' crown came from the Byzantine emperor Alexius Angelus.
Leo asked the Pope (Celestine III) for a crown. But he was made king by emperor Henry (Heinrich). But the 'actual' crown came from the Byzantine emperor Alexius Angelus.
While I often have used the kingship thing to add on extra king titles to a king, I've also become a king via crusading. I've played "Count of Salerno" up to "Duke of El Rif" to "King of Tunisia" before. I think that someone ought to be able to get recognized as a King for carving themselves a huge swath of heathen territory. I would find it a significant minus to the game if you removed the ahistorical creatable kingdoms, as it's one of the things I reach for in my games.
I must be one of the few players who willingly loses a title like "King of Tunisia"?
In my current game I started as King of Germany, and have so far conquered half Spain and North Africa. Since my only interest is in whiping out the Poles and French, I have given away any unwanted titles (ie titles in Hispania or Africa) I've conquered or created to unwanted sons and bastards.
That said, I really like the 'Core Lands' approach as above. If this doesn't make it into 1.05, I hope modders will use it.
Makes for a much more satisfying gameplay, I find.
In my current game I started as King of Germany, and have so far conquered half Spain and North Africa. Since my only interest is in whiping out the Poles and French, I have given away any unwanted titles (ie titles in Hispania or Africa) I've conquered or created to unwanted sons and bastards.
That said, I really like the 'Core Lands' approach as above. If this doesn't make it into 1.05, I hope modders will use it.
Makes for a much more satisfying gameplay, I find.
Kill anyone who has that title if it doesn't exist in-game. Eventually you'll weed everyone out.Duuk said:
Then when you start createing country cousins (checking to see if he has no parents), forcibly replacing him with someone who doesn't have that claim and kill of that country cousin.Or just create mr. scapegoat courtier give him the titles and then have him take the dagger.
Last edited:
Havard said:
1253? What happened then?
The way I see it, in 1204 and subsequent years, the institute of 'The Empire' was divided into 4 parts. There was an emperor in Constantinople, in Niceae, in Trabzond and in Thessalonika. The lines in Thessalonika and Constantinople were ended by the line in Niceae, which then moved (back) to Constantinople. Untill 1453 then, there were two Emperors. I'm not sure whether the Ottomans officially aspired to continue the line in Constantinople. The line in Trabzond then finally fell in 1462 (?).
Did the ruler of Rhodes ever claim empirial status post 1204?
Emperors of Trebizond were just claimants, who can hardly be considered successor, much less equilevant, to Byzantium. Reclaiming Constantinopole can be seen as a "revival" of Byzantium, so I suppose Havard got his year wrong by accident and meaned 1261 when Michael Palaeologos reclaimed Constantinopole.
There are several ways to do it. For example you could grant one of your royal titles to your vassal (thus effectively creating a separate Kingdom) or have one of the royal kingdoms be assigned to one of your heirs in Gavelkind law.Duuk said:
Then, such separate Kingdom could disappear the normal way.
Lord Prime said:
How about Kingdom of Carthage? Or Kingdom of the Vandals(which was a Kingdom after all. If Burgundy can exist as a Kigndom after the destruction fo the Burgundians, why not also the Vandals?)
Martinus said:
No, I meant to have the title actually disappear from the game. So that "Kingdom of Italy" disappears. The only way I know is for a Muslim to conquer the entire demense of the King and have the king then have no vassals left to revoke.
DanielMcCollum said:
Carthage could be possible name. In my opinion Kingdom of th Vandals not.
Kingdom of the Vandals would mean that a kingdom of a people called the Vandals.
Burgundy is different, not only did it exist longer. But the region where the first Kingdom of the Burgundians lay, became known as Burgundy. The region where the Kingdom of the Vandals lay never became known as Vandalia or something.
Other examples
Kingdom of the Franks - France
Kingdom of the Lombards - Lombardy
Kingdom of the Alleman - Allemagne (the Frence word for Germany).
Kingdom of the Scots - Scotland
Kingdom of the Anglo-saxons - Engeland
Gah! I ment 1261...Alfihar said:
oThere were claimants, not emperors. The line in Nicaea only became Emperors of Byzantium after they re-took the city. The Trabzond line were splitters who rebelled before 1204, and would most likely have been taken care of had not the Latin Empire "happened".Alfihar said:
No.Alfihar said:
There were a Byzantine province called Numidia (probably named after the ancient kingdom) still existing prior to the moslem to the muslim conquest of North Africa so i still think kingdom of Numidia would be appropriate. However Kingdom of Carthage also sounds good.Veldmaarschalk said:
Replacing North Africa with Carthage would sound odd to me, because the core territory of ancient Carthage was rather in Tunisia, not North Africa. Though I have to say Numidia sounds nice, has a neat latinish ring to it, like Transoxania.
I myself have named North Africa, Numidia. A pre-roman kingdom and the name of a roman province. And I have renamed Tunisia in Africa.
North Africa has been renamed in bugfix to Numidia long time ago. I did myself as well.
Btw. does anyone has suggestion for Tunis? I don't think it should be called that since it covers much greater area than just Tunis.
Btw. does anyone has suggestion for Tunis? I don't think it should be called that since it covers much greater area than just Tunis.
It was called the Kingdom of Tunis though. See for example http://www.khm.at/system2E.html?/staticE/page2459.html : "In 1535, the Emperor Charles V sailed with his fleet to Africa in order to liberate the Kingdom of Tunis that had been conquered by the Turks."
I think I'll rename the 'Kingdom of Tunisia' to 'Lybia' to make it fit better with 'Egypt' and 'Numidia' (ex-NA).
I think I'll rename the 'Kingdom of Tunisia' to 'Lybia' to make it fit better with 'Egypt' and 'Numidia' (ex-NA).
Last edited:
It was not called kingdom of Tunis. The kingdom that is supose to be Kingdom of Tunis is much bigger and in fact coveres far greater area with Tunis being only small wester part of it.
Alfihar said:
Yup, they did actually. When Osman took the throne he sent out a decree declaring himself the Eastern Roman Emperor as well, if I remember correctly. The Pope at the time pointed out that if this was the case, he would have to convert to Christianity as well. Also, if you look at areas of Ottoman Expansion, they did seem to focus on regions which were held by the Byzantine Emperors.