Charlemagne.
Generally, throughout history, the king depended on the nobles, and the nobles depended on the king. Nevertheless, there was always a struggle going on as to who had what power and authority. In some countries, the king was definitely stronger, and the central government was strong. In others, such as the Holy Roman Empire, the central government was very weak, and the emperor had little power to command. The situation changed with time. In France, the power of the king gradually increased, but in the Holy Roman Empire, it did not. In much of Europe, both king and nobles lost some measure of power to the middle class as time passed. The ideal king was a person who understood the nobles, their strengths and weakness, and also what they wanted, and was able to work with them.
The tzar's were nobles up until 1917 that held the power in Russia.
The Greek nobles gained powers by wining in wars.
the tyrants were able to seize power from the nobles because they had the help and support of the Greek farmers, merchants, and the artisans.
When Brutus killed Julius Caesar, the Roman Republic dissolved into a civil war. Octavius became Emperor, and restored order. Some features of the republic lasted for a number of years, but the Emperors continued to gain power.
No, the nobles had power over the serfs and the king had power over everyone
Their clothes, their houses, and their pride.
Nobles
He was less oppressive than previous rulers. He created a centralized government, and he tried to incorporate traditional Chinese ideas into his government. He reduced the role of the nobles.
Feudalism
To limit the power of the nobles
Limited the authority of nobles