Is there a fine line between kingdom and empire (I put the picture for a reason)?

Asked by: Adam2
  • I get the impression medieval England was never really an empire, just a kingdom with some iron fist rules

    Though they had wars with Scotland and this and that, they never really had an empire, it was really a united kingdom so to speak. Empire would be what Denmark did to Greenland and Britain did to the Americas. It's difficult to say for sure, but it's that never the less.

  • On the contrary.

    Kingdom and empire are greatly different. Kingdom is the direct rule of one man over a small country, while empire is rule by bureaucracy over many largely autonomous entries. Many of modern "kingdoms" in Europe are basically republics, the monarch has so little power. Which is freer largely depends on the period of history.

  • It's not a fine line

    It's a question of whether or not a given kingdom seeks to expand itself by annexing other countries and manages to do so. Medieval Britain absolutely did both those things, therefore, it was an empire. The line between "empire" and "kingdom" is clear as crystal. Thanks for posting this opinion.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
schachdame says2014-06-14T18:50:00.587
Do I misunderstand the question, or is everyone misunderstanding that a kingdom and a empire a certainly different things because an empire consist of kingdoms or partly autarkic government systems. Britain is a kingdom but the British empire is a thing that included all Colonies. They had their own government although the legal head of them all was the queen. She was the queen of many realms, that's what made her quite an empress.