What's the difference between a King and Emperor?

King rules single country.

Emperor rules multiple countries.

King = hereditary tribe leader
emperor = herditary multinational entity leader

>>74987443
This

>>74987456
Emperor isnt necessarily a hereditary title.

King: what black people wuz
Emperor: what black people wuzn't so far

I learned that
King rules single country, while
Emperor rules single world/cultural sphere.
It doesn't always have to rule multiple nations.

>>74990042
but you are ching chong
your cultural sphere is China
and the tenno doesn't rule China

>japan has an emperor
>japan doesn't have an empire
???

File: ethnical and cultural division.jpg (317KB, 812x1348px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 812x1348px

>>74990309
>being this uneducated

>>74987456
King of Poland ruled multinational entity (Commonwealth) and the title wasn't herditary since 1573

File: 1487550671206.png (48KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 800x800px

>>74990404
japan's national power is pretty much empire-tier, so i don't find any problem here

>>74987208
Isn't yours supposed to be some heavenly superperson?

>>74987443

Our emperor has only ruled Japan for 2000 years

>>74990553
Not since 1946. He's a filthy ningen now

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanity_Declaration

>>74990553
天子

Son of heaven.

Actually is a chink concept originally

King is one title below Emperor.

>>74990648
Doesnt the Imperial family have Korean blood in it?

>>74990741

Of of the ancient emprors had a Korean wife.

By now it's less than 1% of thier blood probably

The royal family is no more Korean than the British royal family is Indian

>>74990741
some emperors had concubines of korean descent, but it doesn't matter because only paternal line matters in traditional japanese imperial succession system.

File: image.jpg (126KB, 959x629px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 959x629px

>>74990934
>only paternal line matters in traditional japanese

we wuz japanese n shiiet

>>74991044
she's a pleb, has nothing to do with imperial succession in the first place.

>>74989700
underrated

>>74987508
>>74990591
>UK
>Literally 4 countries
>Ruled by king
>Japan
>1 country
>Ruled by emperor

>>74991494
>Ruled by king
By a queen tbqh

>>74991704
>queen
Queen is dead m8

>>74991902
wtf

>>74990309
slav needs education
i'll report Unicef

>>74987208
Usually an Empire means one group of people dominate others (like with Romans, European and Japanese colonial empires, etc.) but today it's just a different way of saying the same thing since there aren't really any proper empires anymore. It's similar to how the title of sultan used to have a religious meaning (where a sultan was an independent ruler who didn't claim the caliphate) but now is synonymous with king. Before modernization in the 1800s the Japanese Emperor was ceremonially above all of the other nobility, but today as far as I know the only nobility in Japan are the Imperial Family.

Similarly, the German Emperor (who was also the King of Prussia) ruled over all of the other monarchs of the German Empire like the King of Bavaria, Saxony, Baden, etc.

British monarchs were also the Emperors/Empresses of India because all of the Indian monarchies paid tribute to them.

>>74991044
ugly teeth tbqh

>>74992404
Didn't Charlemagne and HRE rulers become emperors after recieving the title "King of Romans"?

>>74987208
Xidnaf just made about this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2O-n0KV1a0

>>74991494
>Literally 4 countries

Not really. England and Wales was a single entity. England and Scotland both separately had the same monarch for a while until they became one entity in 1707. Ireland shared the same king as England until they were incorporated into the UK in 1800. The UK is a single kingdom, there is no Scottish or English or Irish monarchy.

>>74991494
iirc british monarch abolished the title of emperor that inherited from mughal emperor when india won independence, though i don't know why they didn't declare themselves emperor regardless of india when they had the british empire and were entitled to do so.

>>74987208
One calls himself king and the other calls himself emperor, that's pretty much it. Usually having someone ruling over different kingdoms makes them Emperor

>>74992576
Yeah, they became King of the Romans before being crowned, then they were called emperors. In the 1500s they stopped being crowned by the Pope and the title wasn't used anymore.

>>74992656
Because the British Empire without India was just African colonies that weren't worth keeping.

>>74987208
king= germanic ruler

emperor= LARPer of roman emperor

>>74992712
Centralization means emperor, king is a ruler emperor is divine ruler

>>74993366
what mkes a king a king and not some bum a king if not divine rule? Hell, some kings in medieval times were coronated by the pope

HRE was decentralised as fuck, while the kingdom of france was pretty centralised

>>74993500
Centralization and power ruler has emperor means supreme power hre was heridatary with fluctuating laws.

>>74993574
Charlemagne was supreme rulrr over all powers and so were most of his successors until decentralization

>>74993574
>hre was heridatary
not really, that's not what euiv taught me!
But seriously, the HRE was a millenia old, it had centralisation and slowly drifted from that

>>74990591
You were once multiple kingdoms though.

I think this thread and it's replies demonstrate that there is no difference and everyone seems to try to make up totally arbitrary differences that are demonstrably wrong.

>>74994325
>>74992610