In order for kingship to be legitimate, it had to be recognised. Only tyrants and usurpers would claim a royal title. Righteous rulers had their dignity thrust upon them. Yet a process of recognition also carried risks: the ability to award or confirm a royal title carried with it a responsibility to ensure that only those suitable of so elevated a dignity received it. Confirming tyrants cast into doubt one’s own legitimacy. Failing to come to the defence of a ruler one had recognised signalled that one lacked judgment, power or authority. Building on biblical, classical and patristic models, awarding royal titles meant that one was responsible for the conduct of the king. Yet that created a tension, given that kings were supposed to be beholden to nobody but God – one could not be a king unless one held power greater than that of a mere prince, but if one allowed others to intervene in the affairs of one's own realm, that power was called into question. Chapter 4 explores how high medieval observers engaged with these issues. It does so in relation to recognition both external (from popes, emperors or neighbours) and internal (from subjects and erstwhile peers).