why did small territories have Princes and not Kings? Why didn't

>>2651986
because prince is objectively a better sounding title

>>2651986
What the fuck is that crane thing on top of the walls? The one just to the right of the gate?

>>2652003
I agree. But still its considered inferior in rank.

>>2651986
More likely those small territories are part of a family of territories and calling themselves king would be akin to declaring yourself enemy of the family.

>>2651986
The term prince comes from the Latin "princeps", which is the title that gave the early Roman Emperors their power.

>>2652012
its supposed to be some sort of grappling hook. Probably based on Archimede's idea.

Don't know if it ever was put into practice though

>>2651986
1. You can't just call yourself a king, that requires some form of legitimacy usually from a religious head i.e. a pope or bishop

2. When you read about "kings" and "princes" from non-english speaking nations you should be aware these terms are commonly used as a translation and aren't necessarily equivalent in rank (see: the japanese ""emperor"")

3. In most cases princes are directly subservient to a king and there can only be on king

>>2652029
>3. In most cases princes are directly subservient to a king and there can only be on king

Wrong. Originally "prince" means the guy in power. Its directly derived from the the office held in the Roman Senate.

On medieval times its used to indicate the monarch of a small territory.

Only after a long time the Kings started to call their heirs "princes" to differentiate them from other nobles in rank.

In conclusion: in most cases princes are sovereign monarchs.

>>2651986
>Fürst (German pronunciation: [ˈfʏʁst], female form Fürstin, plural Fürsten; from Old High German furisto, "the first", a translation of the Latin princeps) is a German word for a ruler and is also a princely title. Fürsten were, since the Middle Ages, members of the highest nobility who ruled over states of the Holy Roman Empire and later its former territories, below the ruling Kaiser (emperor) or König (king).[2] A Prince of the Holy Roman Empire was the reigning sovereign ruler, monarch, of an Imperial State that held imperial immediacy in the boundaries of the Holy Roman Empire.[2] The territory ruled is referred to in German as a Fürstentum (principality),[3] the family dynasty referred to as a Fürstenhaus (princely house), and the (non-reigning) descendants of a Fürst are titled and referred to in German as Prinz (prince) or Prinzessin (princess).[4]

>The English language uses the term prince for both concepts. Latin-based languages (French, Italian, Romanian, Spanish, Portuguese) also employ a single term, whereas Dutch as well as the Scandinavian and Slavic languages (Russian, Polish, Serbian, etc.) use separate terms similar to those used in German (see knyaz for the latter).

2 concepts, 1 cup - #JustEnglishMemes xxdd

>>2651986

>why did small territories have Princes and not Kings?

You can only be a king is you have a kingdom.

>>2652117
>1 cup
wew, apparently I can't even meme without invoking that image and those words

>>2651986
Define a time period, please. It really makes a huge difference wether you mean, say, early HRE or post-Napoleon Germany.

>>2651986
WE WUZ

>>2652136

Middle Ages, perhaps? No specific time in mind.

I was thinking about the Italian princes that Maquiavelli mentions

>>2651986
Because ever since King Sombra, rulers called themselves Princes or Princesses to avoid the evil associated with the enslavement of crystal ponies

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petty_kingdom

>>2652014
No it's not. If you're in a kingdom the prince is under a king, but Prince comes from the Roman title of Princeps which refers to them as the primary, first ruler.
Augustus wasn't a king, but he was Princeps.

>>2652198
Early - germaniac emulate romans - all sovreign rulers under the/a king call themselves the princes - the First (after the King, ofc). Rulers appoint officies/officials dux, count etc.
High - feudal hierarchy forms - with feods and officies becoming heritary, nobles get more and more of the sovreignity previously only associated with princes. Hence Dukes and Counts form as you think lf them. Some become rather powerful.
Late - hierarchy expands - knights and magisters 'fight' their way into the noble class. Never sovreign tho, not princes.

Tl,dr they kept the prince since they were romanboos, also english fails again at trying conveing two meanings with one word.

What do you think the prince in Prince of Wales means?