Is the ancient Persian title for their rulers "King of Kings" equivalent to the more modern concept of "Emperor"?
- John PLv 73 weeks agoBest Answer
In modern times, most "kings" are nowhere near in the same position of power as kings were in ancient times.
In noting titles of "rulers" of ancient times you are looking, at least, at translations of ancient languages, sometimes having gone through a translation into some intermediate language. The whole of society and the borders of territories and similar was so different in ancient times that any modern word used must be not an exact equivalent to how people thought of their rulers in times long ago.
- 3 weeks ago
Titles never are, even the title emperor is nearly useless because it is used for such a broad category of offices.
- Anonymous3 weeks ago
Yes. Someone like Darius the Great was considered superior to a conventional king. I would say it was more like a Byzantine or Roman Emperor. The only modern emperor is that of Japan (although it has no empire) and is no more than a constitutional monarch.
- wobafettyLv 63 weeks ago
If somebody managed to overpower Persia at their peak and made them a vassal would that effectively make the victor the king of king of kings?
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 3 weeks ago
You mean " Shahanshah".
I think the concept of King of Kings means there is no-one above them except maybe God. Certainly no equal ruler on earth.