It is known that there existed sovereign
counts (Armagnac, count at God will). But had you read about sovereign
barons? Or some
boyarin (~= baron) in Eastern Europe?
The same about some Viking titles. Eric the Red was the sovereign of Greenland, being an
earl, for example. Were anywhere some sovereign
On the East,
khans had sovereignty often, and I hadn't heard about sovereign
Again: What was the lowest known title of an independent ruler in Western European, Eastern European, Muslim or Mongol systems. AFAIK, the lowest titles that happened to be sovereign are: count, knjaz(prince), emir, khan. Can you lower one or more of these positions?
Another system with its own lowest possible independent ruler will be appreciated, too.
As a sovereign/idependent ruler, I propose to consider one who:
- has no permanent limitation to his will from without the state. Of course, any state agreement limits the will of the ruler, but these agreements are not permanent. 100000 marks debt does not make a ruler dependent, but permanent yearly payment of 1 mark a day is a dependency.
- The only important limitations are those that are considered serious and that cannot be broken without seriously damaging the state. (serious from the point of view of that ruler)
- The limitations set by commons or gentry juridical bodies are considered irrelevant for the question.
- Religious matters are irrelevant for the question.
- Of course, the question of the power transition should belong to the state.
Point 2 is not up to the medieval understanding of sovereignty, but I voluntarily weakened the principle in this point for not to overlook any early parlamentarian states.
Beware wikipedia: in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolian_nobility it says that noyon was the title just below the Khagan, but no, Batu was just below
Khagan, and he was
khan - that was the title between