After the dissolution of the British empire, British historians have hesitated to examine directly the history of the empire for a long time. Critical reflection of colonialism urged historians to change their attitudes to find self-satisfactory explanations from the dissolution. Increased researches on the empire after the 1990s show that now British historians could historicalize the history of the British empire free from colonialism complex. What is more important, here, is the fact that ‘historicalizing the empire’ has been related to Anglo-centric perspectives explaining the dissolution as a successful adaptation to new international order initiated by two super-powers. Recent studies on the British empire were little influenced by post-colonial theories. On the problems of acculturation and adaption in culture, British historians usually focus on globalization of the British culture, emphasizing the expansion of the British culture, which have been realized through the network of the British empire. This paper purposes to examine the explanations of culture in Niall Ferguson, David Cannadine and John Darwin’s works on imperial history. They are little interested in the influence of inpouring foreign cultures into the British culture and cultural hybridity. To understand the history of the British empire more deeply, we need to reflect some relations between the British culture and colonial ones and to examine aspects of acculturation of the British culture through imperial expansion.