All the Titles of The Warden

Applied to all Origins:

  • Hero of Ferelden
  • Champion of Redcliffe
  • Warden Commander of Ferelden/ Commander of the Grey
  • Arl(essa) of Amaranthine 
  • Grey Warden
  • Veteran of the Fifth Blight (If survived)

Dwarf Commoner Origin:

  • Paragon 
  • Champion of the Dwarven Proving (disqualified from Origin, but if reinstated if won as a warden)

Dwarf Noble Origin:

  • Champion of the Dwarven Proving (both as Origin, and as a Warden)
  • Lord/Lady Auducan of Orzammar
  • Kinslayer (For killing your brother)
  • Commander of Orzammars Army (Origin/ Up until Bhelen came along and framed them)
  • Paragon

Human Noble Origin:

  • Possible: (Male) Prince Consort
  • Possible: (Female) Queen of Ferelden
  • Lord/Lady Cousland, Daughter to the Late Teryn Bryce Cousland and Teryna Elenor Cousland.

Mage Origin:

  • Archmage of The Kinloch Hold’s Circle (After helping the circle/ siding with mages, or reaching level 20 mage)
  • Court Mage of Ferelden (Potential boon after the Archdemons defeat)

City Elf:

  • Bann to Denerims Alienage

Dalish Elf:

  • Lead Hunter to Clan Sabrae

Quest/ Choice Specific

  • Darkwolf (If you completed Slims Crime Waves, this is your thieving title)
  • Possible: Chancellor to the king/queen of Ferelden
  • Possible: Arl(essa) of Denerim 
  • Possible: Teryn(a) of Gwaren
  • Vanquisher of the Old God Urthemiel
  • Mistress to the King of Ferelden
  • Savior of Kal'Hirol 
  • Dragon slayer

venresdi  asked:

When a son of a noble inherits a lord title, what would be the position of his (younger) brother? Is he important? How much can he inherit after their father? Is he dependent on the oldest brother?

One might think this is an easy thing to answer, but titles are a science in and of themselves.

If we are talking about Great Britain, which I will assume we are, then the younger brother would not be a so called “peer” but a “commoner”. Peerage goes from father to son, if there is a son to inherit the title. (Some peerage is created “for life” and not hereditary and in the case of no son you would have to look at the direct linage, but let’s not go there). Below are the courtesy titles. These are possible titles before the oldest son inherits his peerage title from his father.

  • The eldest son of a Duke can adopt the title of Marquess, the younger son/s would be Lord (first name, last name).
  • The eldest son of a Marquess can adopt the title of Earl, the younger son/s would be Lord (first name, last name).
  • The eldest son of a Earl can adopt the title of Viscount, the younger son/s would be The Honourable (first name, last name).
  • For sons of Viscounts and Barons, all their sons would be The Honourable (first name, last name).[1]

The oldest son inherits the title. A younger son does not, instead he would have a courtesy titles (as long as nothing were to happen to the oldest son).

So, in short, no; a younger son would not be important when it comes to peerage but he would have some form of title as seen above. Your character, the younger son, would not have a special position beyond the fact that he belongs to the aristocrat. He will not have a seat in the House of Lords, for example. (But he is allowed one in the House of Commoners). If your story takes place in the Middle Ages, he might pursue knighthood. If it takes place in the 1700 or 1800s, he might try to work towards a career as perhaps a lawyer or a politician. 

As for what the younger son inherits, it’s the older son who inherits the estate and the land. Few countries had such a strict primogeniture as Britain and while other countries would divide inheritance between at least the sons, in Britain all of it went to the oldest son. However, since the twelfth and thirteenth centuries landowners made use of the maritagium - which meant that the landowner could donate land to daughters but also younger sons once they married. In the fourteenth century the maritagium became an entail and the landowner could more freely decide what was to happen to his land after his death. [2] How much “money”, to make it simple, the rest of the children would inherit would differ. It depended on the settlement which would be made on a sliding scale and take into account numer of children and the money in total as well as what is to be inherited to the oldest. [3] So, once you decide how much the family is worth, you can decide how much your characters will inherit.

Hope that helps, good luck with your writing!

Signed, Captain.

[1] Laura A. Wallace. “Courtesy Tittles”

[2] Eileen Spring. Law, Land, and Family: Aristocratic Inheritance in England 1300 to 1800. London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1993. 68-69.

[3] Ibid. 77.

anonymous asked:

Aw, cripes, am I doing it wrong by capitalizing ranks when they're not used in conjunction with the character's name? As in, 'Admiral [name] did this and that' and a few lines later '"That is a bad idea" the Admiral said'?

If your story is fiction then it depends on your world I suppose, but grammatically speaking, you only capitalize a rank if it’s used in conjunction with a name. Otherwise, the rank is lowercase. 

Captain Miller was given the assignment to rescue Private Ryan. 

Though the captain had never met Ryan, he and his men traversed miles of enemy territory in search of the private.

Similarly, while we would capitalize the U.S. Army, we would not capitalize “the army.” You can see a few more examples on the Chicago Manual of Style

Internally some army desk jockeys may capitalize random words like Soldier and Corps to add…emphasis? importance…? but grammatically speaking, all of that’s incorrect. 


Was this post informative? Entertaining? Eye-opening? Then consider supporting SPC Kingsley on Patreon!

anonymous asked:

Why is it that in the English monarchy they can change their name they choose to rule in when they come into the throne?

Thanks for the question, Anon.

Do you mean why some British monarchs have chosen different regnal names than their first given names? As a general rule, while an English (or, rather now, British) monarch can choose a name under which to rule, most have stuck with their first baptismal names. Such changes only happened in three circumstances - almost in a row - and all in the last two centuries.

The first was Queen Victoria, who herself already had an unusual name - a (then, in England) very rare adaptation of her mother’s name, Victoire. When the child of the Duke and Duchess of Kent was born, the original plan was to name her Victoire Georgiana Alexandrina Charlotte Augusta, after her mother and her four sponsors (the Prince Regent, later King George IV; Tsar Alexander I of Russia; her paternal aunt Charlotte, formerly Princess Royal and then Dowager Queen of Wurttemberg; and her maternal grandmother Augusta, the Dowager Duchess of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfield). The Prince Regent, however, refused to allow his niece to have the typical royal names of Charlotte and Augusta, and declared that he could not have his name come before that of the Russian Emperor and would not sit for it coming behind. When, at the christening, the Prince Regent declared the child’s name Alexandrina, the Duke of Kent suggested adding another name, like Elizabeth; the prince refused, and instead said to “give her the mother’s name, then; but it cannot precede that of the Emperor”. Victoria was indeed known as “Drina” among some family members in her earliest years, but eventually came to be known simply as “Victoria”. (Interestingly, in 1831, the British government, with the king’s approval, suggested changing Victoria’s name to Charlotte or Elizabeth - more amenable to the public as names for a future sovereign, and in the former case the name of Victoria’s publicly beloved cousin, Princess Charlotte of Wales, who had been heiress to the throne until her death in childbirth a few years before Victoria’s birth. The Duchess of Kent initially agreed, but upon further consideration told Lord Grey that it would be “quite contrary” to her and Victoria’s feelings if the king persisted in wishing to change Victoria’s name. According to Victoria, writing after the fact, Lord Grey and the Archbishop of Canterbury felt that the public had come to know Victoria as “Victoria”, and thus agreed with the Duchess that her name should not be changed.)

Victoria herself had four sons (as well as five daughters), and named her eldest son and heir Albert Edward. Not content with naming her son after her beloved husband, she also wished the Prince of Wales to rule as “King Albert Edward” when he came into the throne (though no English or British sovereign has ever taken a double regnal name, unlike, say, two Kings of Italy and two Popes). “Bertie”, as he was known all his life, had very different ideas, and when he came into his throne declared publicly that he wished to rule only as Edward. He would not “undervalue the name of Albert”, inherited “from my ever to be lamented, great and wise Father” (who at this point had been dead for nearly half a century, and whose death Victoria had always blamed on Bertie himself); instead, he desired that the name of Albert “should stand alone”. Whether or not he personally desired to separate himself from the ever-moralizing and stuffy father who had roundly censured him after his first affair - and the mother who thought of him as a disappointment - is not recorded.

Bertie named his second son George, who eventually succeeded to the throne as King George V (his elder son, Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence, died before his father ascended the throne). George’s two oldest sons were Edward (who was called “David” in the family, after the last of his given names; his last four baptismal names were the names of the patron saints of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, respectively), and Albert (christened Albert Frederick Arthur George). When Edward succeeded (as Edward VIII) and then abdicated in favor of his brother, Albert took as his regnal name “George”. In doing so, the new King George VI hoped to imply continuity with his respected father and restore confidence in the monarchy, deeply shaken by the abdication crisis of Edward.

As a mildly interesting last note, when our current Queen Elizabeth (who was christened “Elizabeth Alexandra Mary”) was asked what regnal name she would like to use, she is said to have replied “Why, my own, of course. What else?”

I’m glad you asked this, Anon; this is a subject I love nerding out about, as you can tell.

The Queen Regent (NFriel)