[sdeer]

Śākya Gaṇarājya translates to English as Shakya Republic and that is actually correct. Kapilavastu was the capital of the Republic/Oligarchy of the Shakya clan. Buddha's father was the elected chief at the time of his birth. This is why one of his epithets is Shakyamuni ("muni" means sage so sage of the Shakyas.)

Strictly speaking Buddha was not a royal price but scion of an aristocratic family. As a comparison think of someone born in a patrician family of Rome when his father is a Consul of Rome. The Wikipedia article has good details about the Shakyas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakya

[denton-scratch]

> Strictly speaking Buddha was not a royal price but scion of an aristocratic family.

Is that so?

It was propheised at his birth (so the legend goes) that he would either become an enlightened teacher, or a "wheel-turning" world monarch (chakravartin). That doesn't prove he wasn't a royal prince, but then I guess I'm not sure exactly what a "prince" is.

[ithkuil]

Prince is the son of a monarch. A monarch is the sole ruler (mono = one).

In an oligarchy you can still have powerful military rulers "whose chariot wheels roll everywhere"

To continue the comparison with the Roman republic. Consuls where great leaders bestowed with great power and honoured for their military successes. The Roman republic had a taboo of monarchy, one that Caesar himself played with dangerously and which got him killed.