I think it's a misnomer that comes from the mane which some people mistake for a "crown." Some people assume that all wild animals live in the jungle which is a symbol for the domain of any wild beast.
In Europe we have been taught to consider the lion as the king, while in Asian culture they widely consider the tiger to have that title.
I have no idea which idiot calls them King of Beasts, or King of the Jungle. I'm pretty sure the name came from Disney. They don't live in jungles like you said and nowhere near rule other beasts.
“Although the lion may be the king of beasts in looks, actions, and honor, he is far from it in fighting ability."
As the tiger owns every advantage over a lion, they should be known for the title. If you're basing it from lifestyles then I guess it suits the lion as they sleep for over 20 hours per day and rely on women to do 90% of the hunting like a real king.
A tiger is solitary, they work by themselves and if you base the title on fighting one on one; it belongs to the Siberian or Bengal tiger which would maul any lion.
They dominated lions in the Indian and Korean pit fights. In Everland and even Roman amphitheatres such as the Colosseum.
Why are lions called the king of the jungle if they don't live in jungles?
