Adler17
Prussian Feldmarschall
The English language in many things not as exact as other languages. So empire means in German also only Reich and not neccessarily Kaiserreich. Only with an addendum it becomes a word describing the rulership, too (Königreich= Kingdom, Kaiserreich= empire). That can be ruled by a king or emperor or even being a democracy. The kind of government is in no way neccessary to speak about a Reich. A Reich is also not better translated with realm, as this means that the territories are not belonging to the kingdom itself but to the king as ruler (example: Schleswig and Holstein were realms of the Danish king, but not part of Denmark).
That means the British Empire was an empire although ruled only by a king or queen (who was only emperor/ empress of India and not Britain).
The history therefore was the old Roman tradition to be claiming the ruler of the Earth. The same happened in China and Japan. However only after medievel times the Sultan of the Ottoman empire, the Tenno, the Chinese emperor, the Negus negesti of Ethiopia, the Shah of Persia, the emperors of Vietnam and Korea were accepted as emperors. The czar of Bulgaria could not successfully claim that. In former colonies the Brazilian emperors were able to hold the crown until 1888 the crown princess abolished slavery and that lead to a revolution by the conservative forces. The emperors of Mexico and Haiti were soon removed and Bokassa was only a farce emperor.
However in Europe Byzanz claimed to be the only emperor as successor of the Roman Empire. That was countered by the Frankish and later Holy Roman Empire, who claimed to be Roman empires. After the fall of Constantinople 1453 also the Czar of Russia claimed to be an emperor as being the third Rome as he had married a Byzantine princess. Later the Napoleon let himself crown as emperor of France. Austria did so as heiring the title from the HRE 1806, while the Germans wanted to reestablish the title in 1848/70/71 as head of state (The German Kaiser did not have the title Kaiser of Germany not to solve the problems concerning the Swiss and Austrian territories, which belonged to the HRE and in which German was spoken).
In the HRE the German king was crowned as Roman emperor and not as German Kaiser! And not all German kings were able to become emperors before late medievel times. Then being German king was also being Roman emperor.
To become king/ emperor the prince electors of Germany had to vote for him. Originally all ruling princes should have voted but that was soon dropped. These were relicts from the democratic-feudalistic traditions of the Germanic tribes. However only a few princes could elect:
The arch bishops of Trier, Cologne and Mainz, The Pflazgraf bei Rhein, the duke of Saxony, the Marquis of Brandenburg and the king of Bohemia. Later the dukes of Bavaria and Braunschweig-Lüneburg were added. After the Reichsdeputationshauptschluß of 1803 there were some more changes, but I do not post it here as they were never really executed as 3 years later the whole HRE was dissolved.
The German king was so an elected monarch and he was never able to transform that into a "normal" monarchy. Although especially in modern times the heirs were mostly elected, too, that was not a law forcing that. But that meant, too, that no German prince could become a king of a territory inside the HRE. Bohemia was accepted as it joined the HRE already as kingdom and was accepted as such. The Bohemian king was nevertheless not equal to the German king. But, like any other elector, the Bohemian king could (and indeed did) become German king (although Eike von Repgow denies that in his Sachsenspiegel at first, later it was accepted). Because of that several princes still became kings, but only of territories outside of the Reich. The Saxon dukes became kings of Poland, Hannover kings of England and the Hohenzollern of Brandenburg kings of Prussia.
After 1806 several German princes became kings (Bavaria, Saxony and Württemberg) and kept their titles until 1918.
So in HRE the German king/ Roman Emperor was the head of state, with sometimes more sometimes less power. However he had still own realms as his base of power.
Adler
That means the British Empire was an empire although ruled only by a king or queen (who was only emperor/ empress of India and not Britain).
The history therefore was the old Roman tradition to be claiming the ruler of the Earth. The same happened in China and Japan. However only after medievel times the Sultan of the Ottoman empire, the Tenno, the Chinese emperor, the Negus negesti of Ethiopia, the Shah of Persia, the emperors of Vietnam and Korea were accepted as emperors. The czar of Bulgaria could not successfully claim that. In former colonies the Brazilian emperors were able to hold the crown until 1888 the crown princess abolished slavery and that lead to a revolution by the conservative forces. The emperors of Mexico and Haiti were soon removed and Bokassa was only a farce emperor.
However in Europe Byzanz claimed to be the only emperor as successor of the Roman Empire. That was countered by the Frankish and later Holy Roman Empire, who claimed to be Roman empires. After the fall of Constantinople 1453 also the Czar of Russia claimed to be an emperor as being the third Rome as he had married a Byzantine princess. Later the Napoleon let himself crown as emperor of France. Austria did so as heiring the title from the HRE 1806, while the Germans wanted to reestablish the title in 1848/70/71 as head of state (The German Kaiser did not have the title Kaiser of Germany not to solve the problems concerning the Swiss and Austrian territories, which belonged to the HRE and in which German was spoken).
In the HRE the German king was crowned as Roman emperor and not as German Kaiser! And not all German kings were able to become emperors before late medievel times. Then being German king was also being Roman emperor.
To become king/ emperor the prince electors of Germany had to vote for him. Originally all ruling princes should have voted but that was soon dropped. These were relicts from the democratic-feudalistic traditions of the Germanic tribes. However only a few princes could elect:
The arch bishops of Trier, Cologne and Mainz, The Pflazgraf bei Rhein, the duke of Saxony, the Marquis of Brandenburg and the king of Bohemia. Later the dukes of Bavaria and Braunschweig-Lüneburg were added. After the Reichsdeputationshauptschluß of 1803 there were some more changes, but I do not post it here as they were never really executed as 3 years later the whole HRE was dissolved.
The German king was so an elected monarch and he was never able to transform that into a "normal" monarchy. Although especially in modern times the heirs were mostly elected, too, that was not a law forcing that. But that meant, too, that no German prince could become a king of a territory inside the HRE. Bohemia was accepted as it joined the HRE already as kingdom and was accepted as such. The Bohemian king was nevertheless not equal to the German king. But, like any other elector, the Bohemian king could (and indeed did) become German king (although Eike von Repgow denies that in his Sachsenspiegel at first, later it was accepted). Because of that several princes still became kings, but only of territories outside of the Reich. The Saxon dukes became kings of Poland, Hannover kings of England and the Hohenzollern of Brandenburg kings of Prussia.
After 1806 several German princes became kings (Bavaria, Saxony and Württemberg) and kept their titles until 1918.
So in HRE the German king/ Roman Emperor was the head of state, with sometimes more sometimes less power. However he had still own realms as his base of power.
Adler
