King of Kings
King of Kings was an imperial title employed primarily by monarchs based in the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent. Commonly associated with Iran, especially the Achaemenid and Sasanian Empires, the title was originally introduced during the Middle Assyrian Empire by King Tukulti-Ninurta I and was subsequently used in a number of different kingdoms and empires, including the aforementioned Persia, various Hellenic kingdoms, India, Armenia, Georgia, and Ethiopia.
The title is commonly seen as equivalent to that of Emperor, both titles outranking that of king in prestige, stemming from the late antique Roman and Eastern Roman emperors who saw the Shahanshahs of the Sasanian Empire as their equals. The last reigning monarchs to use the title of Shahanshah, those of the Pahlavi dynasty in Iran, also equated the title with "Emperor". The rulers of the Ethiopian Empire used the title of , which was officially translated as "Emperor". Sultan of Sultans is the sultanic equivalent of King of Kings and similarly, Khagan can mean "Khan of Khans". Later, lesser versions Amir al-umara and Beylerbey appeared.
In Judaism, came to be used as a name of God. "King of Kings" is also used in reference to Jesus Christ several times in the Bible, notably in the First Epistle to Timothy and twice in the Book of Revelation.
Historical usage
Ancient India
In Ancient India, Sanskrit language words such as Rājādhirāja and Mahārādhirāja are among the terms that were used for employing the title of the King of Kings. These words also occur in Aitareya Aranyaka and other parts of Rigveda.The monarchs of the Gupta Empire assumed the imperial title of Maharajadhiraja. The Bhauma-Kara kings assumed the imperial title of Maharajadhiraja. The Gurjara-Pratihara monarch in the tenth century was titled the Maharajadhiraja of Aryavarta. The imperial title of Maharajadhiraja was used by rulers of the Pallava dynasty, the Pala Empire and the Salasthamba dynasty. The regnal name of some Chola emperors, such as Rajadhiraja I and Rajadhiraja II, was Rajadhiraja. The Vijayanagar rulers assumed the imperial title of Maharajadhiraj. The title of King of Kings was also common among the rulers of the Kushan Empire.Ancient Mesopotamia
Assyria and Babylon
The title King of Kings was first introduced by the Assyrian king Tukulti-Ninurta I as šar šarrāni. The title carried a literal meaning in that a šar was traditionally simply the ruler of a city-state. With the formation of the Middle Assyrian Empire, the Assyrian rulers installed themselves as kings over an already present system of kingship in these city-states, becoming literal "kings of kings". Following Tukulti-Ninurta's reign, the title was occasionally used by monarchs of Assyria and Babylon. Later Assyrian rulers to use šar šarrāni include Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal. "King of Kings", as šar šarrāni, was among the many titles of the last Neo-Babylonian king, Nabonidus.Boastful titles claiming ownership of various things were common throughout ancient Mesopotamian history. For instance, Ashurbanipal's great-grandfather Sargon II used the full titulature of Great King, Mighty King, King of the Universe, King of Assyria, King of Babylon, King of Sumer and Akkad.
Urartu and Media
The title of King of Kings occasionally appears in inscriptions of kings of Urartu. Although no evidence exists, it is possible that the title was also used by the rulers of the Median Empire, since its rulers borrowed much of their royal symbolism and protocol from Urartu and elsewhere in Mesopotamia. The Achaemenid Persian variant of the title,, is Median in form which suggests that the Achaemenids may have taken it from the Medes rather than from the Mesopotamians.An Assyrian-language inscription on a fortification near the fortress of Tušpa mentions King Sarduri I of Urartu as a builder of a wall and a holder of the title King of Kings;
Iran
Achaemenid usage
The Achaemenid Empire, established in 550 BC after the fall of the Median Empire, rapidly expanded over the course of the sixth century BC. Asia Minor and the Lydian Kingdom were conquered in 546 BC, the Neo-Babylonian Empire in 539 BC, Egypt in 525 BC and the Indus River region in 513 BC. The Achaemenids employed satrapal administration, which became a guarantee of success due to its flexibility and the tolerance of the Achaemenid kings for more-or-less autonomous vassals. The system also had its problems; though some regions became nearly completely autonomous without any fighting, other regions saw repeated attempts at rebellion and secession. Egypt was a particularly prominent example, frequently rebelling against Achaemenid authority and attempting to crown their own Pharaohs. Though it was eventually defeated, the Great Satraps' Revolt of 366–360 BC showed the growing structural problems within the Empire.The Achaemenid Kings used a variety of different titles, prominently Great King and King of Countries, but perhaps the most prominent title was that of King of Kings, recorded for every Achaemenid king. The full titulature of the king Darius I was "great king, king of kings, king in Persia, king of the countries, Hystaspes' son, Arsames' grandson, an Achaemenid". An inscription in the Armenian city of Van by Xerxes I reads;
Parthian and Sasanian usage
The standard royal title of the Arsacid kings while in Babylon was Aršaka šarru, King of Kings was adopted first by Mithridates I, though he used it infrequently. The title first began being consistently used by Mithridates I's nephew, Mithridates II, who after adopting it in 111 BC used it extensively, even including it in his coinage until 91 BC. It is possible that Mithridates II's, and his successors', use of the title was not a revival of the old Achaemenid imperial title but actually stemmed from Babylonian scribes who accorded the imperial title of their own ancestors onto the Parthian kings. Regardless of how he came to acquire the title, Mithridates II did undertake conscious steps to be seen as an heir to and restorer of Achaemenid traditions, introducing a crown as the customary headgear on Parthian coins and undertaking several campaigns westwards into former Achaemenid lands.The title was rendered as šāhān šāh in Middle Persian and Parthian and remained in consistent use until the ruling Arsacids were supplanted by the Sasanian dynasty of Ardashir I, creating the Sasanian Empire. Ardashir himself used a new variant of the title, introducing "Shahanshah of the Iranians". Ardashir's successor Shapur I introduced another variant; "Shahanshah of the Iranians and non-Iranians", possibly only assumed after Shapur's victories against the Roman Empire. This variant, Shahanshah of Iranians and non-Iranians, appear on the coinage of all later Sasanian kings. The final Shahanshah of the Sasanian Empire was Yazdegerd III. His reign ended with the defeat and conquest of Persia by the Rashidun Caliphate, ending the last pre-Islamic Iranian Empire. The defeat of Yazdegerd and the fall of the Sasanian Empire was a blow to the national sentiment of the Iranians, which was slow to recover. Although attempts were made at restoring the Sasanian Empire, even with Chinese help, these attempts failed and the descendants of Yazdegerd faded into obscurity. The title Shahanshah was criticized by later Muslims, associating it with the Zoroastrian faith and referring to it as "impious".
Buyid revival
Following the fall of the Sasanian Empire, Iran was part of the early caliphates. From the 9th century on, parts of Iran were ruled by a series of relatively short-lived Muslim Iranian dynasties; including the Samanids and Saffarids. Although Iranian resentment against the Abbasid Caliphate was common, the resentment materialized as religious and political movements combining old Iranian traditions with new Arabic ones rather than as full-scale revolts. The new dynasties do not appear to have had any interest in re-establishing the empire of the old Shahanshahs, they at no point seriously questioned the suzerainty of the Caliphs and actively promoted Arabic culture. Though the Samanids and the Saffarids also actively promoted the revival of the Persian language, the Samanids remained loyal supporters of the Abbasids and the Saffarids, despite at times being in open rebellion, did not revive any of the old Iranian political structures.The Shi'a Buyid dynasty, of Iranian Daylamite origin, came to power in 934 AD through most of the old Iranian heartland. In contrast to earlier dynasties, ruled by emirs and wanting to appease the powerful ruling Abbasid caliphs, the Buyids consciously revived old symbols and practices of the Sasanian Empire. The region of Daylam had resisted the Caliphate since the fall of the Sasanian Empire, attempts at restoring a native Iranian rule built on Iranian traditions had been many, though unsuccessful. Asfar ibn Shiruya, a Zoroastrian and Iranian nationalist, rebelled against the Samanids in 928 AD, intending to put a crown on himself, set up a throne of gold and make war on the Caliph. More prominently, Mardavij, who founded the Ziyarid dynasty, was also Zoroastrian and actively aspired to restore the old empire. He was quoted as promising to destroy the empire of the Arabs and restore the Iranian empire and had a crown identical to the one worn by the Sasanian Khosrow I made for himself. At the time he was murdered by his own Turkic troops, Mardavij was planning a campaign towards Baghdad, the Abbasid capital. Subsequent Ziyarid rulers were Muslim and made no similar attempts.
After the death of Mardavij, many of his troops entered into the service of the founder of the Buyid dynasty, Imad al-Dawla. Finally, the Buyid Emir Panāh Khusraw, better known by his laqab of 'Adud al-Dawla, proclaimed himself Shahanshah after defeating rebellious relatives and becoming the sole ruler of the Buyid dynasty in 978 AD. Those of his successors that likewise exercised full control over all the Buyid emirates would also style themselves as Shahanshah.
During times of Buyid infighting, the title became a matter of importance. When a significant portion of Firuz Khusrau's army rebelled in the 1040s and wished to enthrone the other Buyid Emir Abu Kalijar as ruler over the lands of the entire dynasty, they minted coins in his name with one side bearing the name of the ruling Caliph and the other side bearing the inscription "al-Malik al-Adil Shahanshah". When discussing peace terms, Abu Kalijar in turn addressed Jalal in a letter with the title Shahanshah.
When the struggle between Abu Kalijar and Jalal al-Dawla resumed, Jalal, wanting to assert his superiority over Kalijar, made a formal application to Caliph Al-Qa'im for the usage of the title Shahanshah, the first Buyid ruler to do so. It can be assumed that the Caliph agreed, but its usage by Jalal in a mosque caused outcry at its impious character. Following this, the matter was raised to a body of jurists assembled by the Caliph. Though some dissented, the body as a whole ruled that the usage of al-Malik al-Adil Shahanshah was lawful.