Cromwell was a very important English person, a great figure in history, without a doubt. But he was not really a Briton except in the loosest sense of that word, an inhabitant of Britain. Also, the epithet Great for the head of State is reserved in English history for King Alfred. So the term might well be applied to Cromwell, but it is by no means clear that he "deserved" it.
Cham is an archaic way of spelling Khan, the title of the prince of a number of Turkic Asian nations. Smollett calls Dr. Johnson (1709-1784.), the great cham of liberature.
A title page is at the beginning of a book, usually the first page that you see when you open it. It clearly says the title of the book and author, sometimes they will include other information such as publisher and publishing date, etc... but it mainly just states the title of the book.
Title as in the title of a book is title.
A title rule is something that is important in a title for example, when your teacher writes on your paper fix title rule, the title rule could be if you have to capitalize the first letter of a title.
"Beyond the Jungle: Exploring the Fascinating World of Gorillas"
Yes, he was the reason for the emancipation of proclamation
harlemagne Deserves the title of "Great" because he united much of Europe under his rule, he improved many things like education, government, and culture. He was a great military leader.
Ridiculous is one descriptive term. Religious intolerance does not become anyone who aspires to be remembered by History. I suppose that had Cromwell 'Revolutionised' England, as later Napoleon did in France for example, then he might be viewed differently: But he did not. Drogheda & Wexford are a stain on his character. Massacres are not Battles.
It was called The Great War as in large, not as good. It was the largest conflict that had ever happened and was "The Great Big War."
lord protector
His title was Lord Protector [of the Realm]
No. He abolished the monarchy. His title was Lord Protector.
"Humanity" is not a title, so the answer must be none.
Quite a few generals before and after him got that title (Cyrus, Darius, Pompey etc), so it would be hard to argue against it unless you intend to query them all.
lord protector
yes
Depends on your viewpoint. If you think conquerers are great, and don't mind the slaughter of enemies and innocent people, he did great. If you think otherise, you lump him in with all the other killers and looters in human history.