Has your country ever invaded other country or been invaded?

Pedro y La Torre

Senior Member
English (Ireland)
Well, no Norwegian, Swedish or Danish are spoken in Normandy, Sicily, Russia, Dublin or the Danelaw. For whatever reason (low numbers, inferiority of the written culture, I do not know), Vikings/Norsemen did not seem very interested in speaking with natives or spreading their languages. I know there are Scandinavian loanwords in English and place names. It would surprise to me if Gaelic would not have loanwords from Scandinavian languages (via Ireland or the Scottish isles).

It did indeed. And reasonable numbers of Scandinavians settled in what became Scotland. Places like Dublin, at one point, were almost wholly Scandinavian. But for whatever reason, their language disappeared while Gaelic soldiered on (although English has now largely killed off what remains of Gaelic save in certain specific areas).
 
  • eno2

    Senior Member
    Dutch-Flemish
    The villager Lukas to Eleni in the film Eleni about civil war and the Greek ELLAS communists 'invading their mountain village Lia: <It finally came tot his, we have been invaded by everybody, now we have been invaded by ourselves.> Έγινε κι αυτό. Όλοι ήρθαν να μας σκλαβώσουν . Τώρα σκλαβονόμαστε μονάχοι μας.
     

    ewie

    Senior Member
    English English
    It can surely only be a matter of time before Communist China invades Hong Kong and imposes martial law leading to direct rule.
     

    Pedro y La Torre

    Senior Member
    English (Ireland)
    The Chinese are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If similar protests had broken out in Mainland China, the tanks would surely have been sent in long ago (over a million Uighurs are currently locked up in gulags so as to be "re-eductated in Communist principles"). But Hong Kong is the model that the PRC is looking to sell to Taiwan (in between regular bouts of threatening devastating war if Taiwan should ever declare outright independence). If the Chinese Army intervenes in Hong Kong, the model for reincorporating Taiwan dies with it. As (in all probability) does Hong Kong's economy.
     

    Frank78

    Senior Member
    German
    But Hong Kong is the model that the PRC is looking to sell to Taiwan (in between regular bouts of threatening devastating war if Taiwan should ever declare outright independence). If the Chinese Army intervenes in Hong Kong, the model for reincorporating Taiwan dies with it. As (in all probability) does Hong Kong's economy.

    Why should Taiwan declare independence? It IS China. It would be completely against their identity.
     

    Pedro y La Torre

    Senior Member
    English (Ireland)
    Why should Taiwan declare independence? It IS China. It would be completely against their identity.

    The major split in Taiwan politics is between those who see Taiwan as part of China and are content with the current situation where the PRC claims to govern the whole of China but only exercises control on the "mainland", and those who think that Taiwan should declare independence and forget about the rest of China.

    Hong Kong protests give Taiwanese president Tsai Ing-wen a boost as elections approach
     

    Rondivu

    Senior Member
    Español
    The Spanish stripped, looted, raped and exterminated en masse. Certainly the most brutal colonizers around in the modern era excluding perhaps Hitler's historically brief foray into Eastern Europe.

    If Spain killed so many people in South America, how come there is still a lot of indigenous population in Spanish speaking countries and in North America the majority of people are all white, how many millions were killed by the English?
    The result is that while Latin America has an enormous mestizo (and indigenous) population, in the USA the few remaining natives are still concentrated in "Reservations".

    As early as 1512, the Laws of Burgos regulated the behavior of the Spaniards in the New World forbidding the ill-treatment of indigenous people and limiting the power of the colonists. Which other European colonial power did that? It is true that these laws were not always followed across all American territories but at least they reflect the will of the Spanish colonial government of the time to protect the rights of the native population.


    The place is still largely a basket case to this day, and much of that can be attributed to the toxic legacy of Spanish colonization

    The current delay in Latin America with respect to North America, as many people think, is not due to a culture of entrepreneurism and science that supposedly existed in British but not Spanish power. Mexico City was notoriously larger, more dynamic and richer than Washington at the time of the American independence and the salaries of the indigenous were higher than in the West. The contrast is coherent with the quite higher number of printing presses, universities, scientific publications and hospitals documented in the Spanish Empire.
     
    Last edited:

    Frank78

    Senior Member
    German
    Mexico City was notoriously larger, more dynamic and richer than Washington at the time of the American independence and the salaries of the indigenous were higher than in the West.

    I didn't know Washington, D.C. had existed at the time of the American independence. :D
     

    Frank78

    Senior Member
    German
    I take it you've never heard about the Second War of American Independence (1812- 1815).

    You neither wrote "second" nor did you mention the word "war" nor is it an established historical term.

    The American independence was 1776 even though the "first" war of independence lasted longer.
     

    ewie

    Senior Member
    English English
    I take it you've never heard about the Second War of American Independence (1812- 1815).
    That's called the War of 1812 in the English-speaking world.
    In the 19th century, the Canadian historian William Kingsford was only half-joking when he commented, “The events of the War of 1812 have not been forgotten in England for they have never been known there.” In the 20th, another Canadian historian remarked that the War of 1812 is “an episode in history that makes everybody happy, because everybody interprets it differently...the English are happiest of all, because they don’t even know it happened.”
    Very true.
     

    L'irlandais

    Senior Member
    Ireland: English-speaking ♂
    Well it may not be public knowledge, and certainly was over shadowed by the Napoleonic Wars here in Europe. But anybody with an interest in Regimental history or firearms will be aware of the conflict, even if they view it differently from our English speaking friends on the other side of the Pond. In 1813 the East India Company lost its monopoly in India, and soon they had bigger fish to fry.
     
    Last edited:

    L'irlandais

    Senior Member
    Ireland: English-speaking ♂

    symposium

    Senior Member
    Italian - Italy
    I didn't know Washington, D.C. had existed at the time of the American independence. :D
    I had assumed he was talking about the Independance of the Spanish colonies in America around 1810, and not the Independance of the British colonies in America in 1776...
     

    I am a Chinese boy

    Member
    Chinese - China
    Portugal invaded and was invaded by many countries throughout history, but it was mostly all a long time ago. We don't really relate to such ancient events. The only recent example I can think of are the colonial wars in Africa and Asia (East Timor), which ended in 1974. Many people who fought in those wars are still alive. But since this is a case of invading, rather than being invaded, I don't think it's what you're asking for.

    If I may hijack the conversation just a little bit, why is the memory of the Japanese invasion of China still so strong in the minds of the Chinese? Many European countries were also invaded during World War II, but I don't think the French still feel any animosity towards the Germans because of that, today (though I'm not so sure about Eastern Europeans, who had it much worse). And are you sure that the Japanese give as much importance to that event as many Chinese seem to, nowadays?
    The reason why French no longer feel animosity toward Germany is that the president of Germany knelt right in front of some tomb monument set up for the French victims as we watch in domumentary. But, up till now, Japanese government has always insisted that Japan did never ever invade China, and there is no such mention written in Japanese history book where Japanese youth cannot learn this particular dark history. You feel me?
     

    Flaminius

    hedomodo
    日本語 / japāniski / יפנית
    No, I don't. I don't feel you.

    Willy Brandt, then Chancellor of West Germany, did not kneel for the French victims. I pray you take a moment to get historical facts straight.

    The leaders of Japan have made quite a few formal statements to the former belligerencies and colonies regarding the pains and damages wrought by the Imperial Japan. Claiming that "Japanese government has always insisted that Japan did never ever invade China" is an act of propagating utter falsehood. The statements are out there for everyone to read and scrutinise. You may not agree with some of the wording, but a careful reader would not commit to a blanket negation such as "Japan did never ever invade China."

    Criticisms to "Japanese history book (当作textbooks)" has prompted the Japanese government well before I reached school age (e.g., a statement by the Cabinet Spokesman in 1982, 「歴史教科書」に関する宮沢内閣官房長官談話). Whatever effects those statements had, I didn't need extra reading outside school materials to realise that Japan did terrible things to China in the past. Again, you may not like some of the ways history is taught in Japan, but a careful reader would not commit to a blanket negation such as "Japanese youth cannot learn this particular dark history."
     

    Ben Jamin

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Countries don't invade other countries. States do it, usually. In some rare situations in history a country may have been invaded by private forces from another country, without a permission of the state the invaders came from.
    99 % of existing states have a history which includes being invaded by someone, and 98% have invaded someone. So, it would be more practical to ask if there is a country that has never been invaded or if there is a state that has never invaded anybody (it includes also earlier state organisms occupying the same territory or people that have formed the earlier state).
    As far as I know Monaco and San Marino have never invaded anyone, and Iceland has never been invaded. Singapore has not invaded anyone, but the countries that possessed the territory in the past did.
     

    WME

    Senior Member
    French-France
    Countries don't invade other countries. States do it, usually. In some rare situations in history a country may have been invaded by private forces from another country, without a permission of the state the invaders came from.
    99 % of existing states have a history which includes being invaded by someone, and 98% have invaded someone. So, it would be more practical to ask if there is a country that has never been invaded or if there is a state that has never invaded anybody (it includes also earlier state organisms occupying the same territory or people that have formed the earlier state).
    As far as I know Monaco and San Marino have never invaded anyone, and Iceland has never been invaded. Singapore has not invaded anyone, but the countries that possessed the territory in the past did.


    Finally a factual, irrefutable contribution to this thread ! thanks :)
     

    L'irlandais

    Senior Member
    Ireland: English-speaking ♂
    Never say never. Heinrich Böll incorrectly stated that Ireland never invaded another country. Okay he was very disallusioned with Germany at the time.
    The Vikings in Iceland
    Subsequent waves of Viking settlement in Iceland could be view as invasion, since their origins varied. Whatever the case, the island had a turbulent and violent past like most other nations.
     

    Ben Jamin

    Senior Member
    Polish
    UK invaded Iceland during WWII. Maybe the unhabitants were not very against it, but British did not ask for permission.

    Invasion of Iceland - Wikipedia
    This is a disputable matter.

    Never say never. Heinrich Böll incorrectly stated that Ireland never invaded another country. Okay he was very disallusioned with Germany at the time.
    The Vikings in Iceland
    Subsequent waves of Viking settlement in Iceland could be view as invasion, since their origins varied. Whatever the case, the island had a turbulent and violent past like most other nations.
    As far as I know Iceland was uninhabited before the Norsemen began to settle there, so how can we speak about invasion? The subsequent waves of colonist were not invaders. But the Icelanders themselves were dangerous aggressors.

    Finally a factual, irrefutable contribution to this thread ! thanks :)
    I forgot to write about one more type of invasion: hordes of nomadic people (without a permanent "country" of their own and not yet organized as a state), acting as a (tribal og intertribal) military organization, like Huns, Kipchaks, Proto-Bulgars, Germanic tribes, Slavic tribes, Mongols, and many others.
     

    Fernando

    Senior Member
    Spain, Spanish
    This is a disputable matter.

    Well. A foreign army entered the country without written or tacit permission of any authority under international law or domestic constitution (king of Danemark or the government of Iceland). The Icelandic government protested. Not very much, but protested.

    During the following years Iceland could not have any foreign affairs, a foreign army (Britosh, Canadians, Americans) was in its territory.

    It is more disputable if Netherlands invaded England in 1688 or whether UK and France invaded Norway in 1940, but I think the Icelandic case qualify.
     

    L'irlandais

    Senior Member
    Ireland: English-speaking ♂
    Not sure how happy you think Gardar the Swede (also known as Garðarr Svavarsson, c. 860s CE) was when folks from Norway turned up to settle in a country he’d already established a settlement in. It’s convenient to view Vikings as some sort of homogeneous group.
    They are said to have encountered Irish monks on the island who then left because they did not wish to live among the heathens. Hjörleifr and his party were killed by the slaves they had brought from Ireland
    Doesn’t much sound like they controlled the country. Then having resisted Norwegian sovereignty over Iceland for a long time, it was finally imposed. Icelanders might view this as being invaded, certainly it was unwanted outside interference in their land.
     
    Last edited:

    L'irlandais

    Senior Member
    Ireland: English-speaking ♂
    ... As far as I know Monaco and San Marino have never invaded anyone, and Iceland has never been invaded. ...
    Both states are too tiny to raise an army to’invade anybody. As seen in their inability to keep out any invaders. 38k and 34k populations, even at a massive 10% of the population conscription wouldn’t field much of an army, and how could they afford to arm and train such a force? A regiment, or at best a brigade, without any tanks wouldn’t be much use. States tend to invade their neighbors, Mussolini had a army of 2 and a half million, equiped with tankettes. The idea of invading is usually to hold on to lands gained.
    San Marino sought to remain neutral during WWII. I guess it depends if you view the American troops driving the Germans out as a liberation or not. If you opt for liberation, then what does that make the earlier German occupation of the neutral state. Technically, the Allies were an invasion force in Italy at that time. Let’s stick with the official position, that it was an incident, rather than an invasion. (Lots of armed soldiers killing lots of other armed defenders kind of incident. Reference: Battle of Monte Pulito.). A footnote: The British government refused to compensate St Marino for this incident and subsequent occupation. They argued that as Germany had breached the Sammarinese neutrality before Allied troops had entered the country, it was not liable.
    Attempting to remain neutral during World War II, Prince Louis II’s sympathies were strongly pro-French. Nevertheless, the Italian army invaded and occupied Monaco. After Mussolini's collapse in Italy, Monaco was also occupied by Nazi Germany. Prince Louis used the Monaco police to warn Jewish inhabitants of Monaco that they were marked to be arrested by the Gestapo, allowing them time to escape. Many Jewish people who lived in Monaco at the time were able to escape due to the assistance of Louis II and the Monegasque police. With the German army retreating from Monaco due to the Allied advance, an American contingent liberated the Principality.
    Source: History of Monaco
    Looks like they considered themselves invaded at least twice.
     
    Last edited:

    Fernando

    Senior Member
    Spain, Spanish
    About Cyprus: Its history in its current avatar is so short that I guess you are right. I would like to be present in an argument among a Cypriot and a North Cypriot about who invaded who.

    Malta has certainly been invaded and HAS invaded. The Order was an aggresive military power which acted as corsair and attacked Muslim possessions in N Africa, most times as allies of other Christian powers (kings of Spain, specially).
     

    rhitagawr

    Senior Member
    British English
    I've arrived late to the forum, so this has probably been said already. In any case, I decided not to read all of the 483 preceding contributions. It depends what you mean by your country and invade. My country, whether in the form of England, Great Britain, or the United Kingdom has invaded hundreds of countries. But did, for example, the Maoris regard what is now New Zealand as a country? Probably not. A previous contributor said that states and not countries invade other countries. A fair point, but when did states arise in the modern sense?
    William the Conqueror invaded England and parts of what is now Wales in 1066. It didn't take William and his successors long to turn their attention to the remaining areas in what became the United Kingdom. Parts of what is now Scotland were ruled by Norwegian kings after 1066. Does 'Scotland' in this context refer to a political entity or was it just the name given to the area north of England? I'd better let our Scottish friends answer that.
    William III's landing in Torbay in 1688 started off as an invasion, although William became a constitutional monarch.
    I suppose you could say England was invaded by Bonnie Prince Charlie, although not by Scotland, in 1745.
    French troops landed in Wales during the Napoleonic Wars, although this hardly amounted to a raid, let alone an invasion.
    German troops occupied the Channel Islands in the Second World War. As the Channel Islands are not part of the United Kingdom but owe their allegiance directly to the monarch, I suppose it's a moot point as to whether they're part of 'my country.'
    Borders changed frequently in the past (less often now). So I suppose you can pick and choose as to what you call your country. Celtic nationalists don't regard the United Kingdom as their country, although it is from a legal point of view.
     
    Last edited:

    Ben Jamin

    Senior Member
    Polish
    I've arrived late to the forum, so this has probably been said already. In any case, I decided not to read all of the 488 preceding contributions. It depends what you mean by your country and invade. My country, whether in the form of England, Great Britain, or the United Kingdom has invaded hundreds of countries. But did, for example, the Maoris regard what is now New Zealand as a country? Probably not. A previous contributor said that states and not countries invade other countries. A fair point, but when did states arise in the modern sense?
    William the Conqueror invaded England and parts of what is now Wales in 1066. It didn't take William and his successors long to turn their attention to the remaining areas in what became the United Kingdom. Parts of what is now Scotland were ruled by Norwegian kings after 1066. Does 'Scotland' in this context refer to a political entity or was it just the name given to the area north of England? I'd better let our Scottish friends answer that.
    William III's landing in Torbay in 1688 started off as an invasion, although William became a constitutional monarch.
    I suppose you could say England was invaded by Bonnie Prince Charlie, although not by Scotland, in 1745.
    French troops landed in Wales during the Napoleonic Wars, although this hardly amounted to a raid, let alone an invasion.
    German troops occupied the Channel Islands in the Second World War. As the Channel Islands are not part of the United Kingdom but owe their allegiance directly to the monarch, I suppose it's a moot point as to whether they're part of 'my country.'
    Borders changed frequently in the past (less often now). So I suppose you can pick and choose as to what you call your country. Celtic nationalists don't regard the United Kingdom as their country, although it is from a legal point of view.
    I have modified my post adding the following: "I forgot to write about one more type of invasion: hordes of nomadic people (without a permanent "country" of their own and not yet organized as a state), acting as a (tribal og intertribal) military organization, like Huns, Kipchaks, Proto-Bulgars, Germanic tribes, Slavic tribes, Mongols, and many others." In addition, I mentioned that private armies and plundering parties also used to invade other countries (and do it sometimes today). In any case, a country can be invaded, but can't invade, unless we define country and state as synonyms, which is quite normal in the colloquial language, but sounds too "low key" in a serious discussion.
     

    rhitagawr

    Senior Member
    British English
    I don't see how I can say that the Romans, or even the Anglo-Saxons, invaded 'my country.' However, I feel some affinity with Anglo-Saxon England even as it was before England was unified. I don't suppose the British thought they were invading Australia even though that was what they were doing in practice. They would have said they were just claiming it for the British crown. The language and culture of the Channel Islands is English and people can pass freely between there and the United Kingdom. So I regard the German occupation of the islands in much the same way as I would have regarded a German occupation of the Scilly Isles.
     

    Fernando

    Senior Member
    Spain, Spanish
    If one define country as a bunch of people, countries can not be invaded, you can only invade the land where many of them are a majority or is considered its historical soil with more or less reasons.

    If you take nuances too far, the common phrase 'Germany invaded Poland in 1939' turns to 'Soldiers of various ethnicities, specially Germans, Austrians , Slovaks, Czechs, self-perceived Bavarians with maybe some Ashkenazi Jews and Frisians, under the authority of the 'Deutsches Reich' invaded the territory under the authority of the restablished Rzeczpospolita Polska, inhabitated by Poles, Jews, Germans, Lithuanians, Ukranians et altrii.
     

    L'irlandais

    Senior Member
    Ireland: English-speaking ♂
    Both Germany and Russia invaded Poland in 1939, is fine. Even if one was called the Soviet Union at the time. Moscow was calling the shots. Folks need to be careful qbout being pedantic, there are revisionists only too happy to take advantage of such squabbling. Russia Says It Never Invaded Poland in 1939
    “Nonetheless, after the German invasion on September 1, 1939, the Soviet government declared that Poland no longer existed as a nation and that such a vacuum threatened Soviet security. On September 17, the Red Army crossed the border into eastern Poland, annexing territory that the Soviets had long considered their own. Their feelings toward Poland would later be seen in the Katyn massacre of 1940, when the Soviet NKVD secret police murdered 22,000 Polish military officers, policemen and educated professionals. After years of claiming that the Nazis did it, in 2010 the Russian Duma voted to blame Stalin for the killings.
    Reality versus revisionism
    ...it would be one thing if today's Russian government acknowledged that the Soviet Union had illegally seized Polish territory, and then pointed out that the Soviet state no longer exists, and that Russia has moved on from Stalin's day. Yet by attempting to stamp out criticism of Soviet aggression, Russia is essentially announcing that it accepts responsibility for the historical legacy of the Soviet Union.
     
    Last edited:

    twenty6

    Senior Member
    English - U.S., Chinese - Mandarin
    While there certainly has been a lot of talk about China, no one has bothered to answer all these questions, so here:

    The modern Asian states (China, Japan, Mongolia, the Koreas, Taiwan, India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, etc.) did not exist for most of history. Many are fairly young, though that depends on how you define a country. Since I am most familiar with the history of the "Chinese heartland" (plains around the Yangtze and Yellow rivers), I'll focus on China. First, we'll define "China" as the dynasties in general (I will talk about them as a collective whole, since all but two of the twenty "official" dynasties were founded by people of Han ethnicity). Let's get started:

    How has this coloured their subsequent relations?
    China always had -- and still does have -- strained relationships with its neighbors. The Chinese dynasties were always engaged in fighting some other nation or the other. Consequently, there is great tension in Asia amongst China and her neighbors today. Though all Asian countries are economic partners, deep down there are still groups of people in every country that hold grudges against others. Everyone hates everyone to some extent, and the counterweight of economic benefit can only do so much. Foreign affairs sound very much like hostage negotiations when things get hot (i.e. trade wars). The CCP itself uses the double-edged sword of nationalism very well: they promote economic activity (or at least pretend to) while affirming China's status as the main power broker of East Asia (and Asia in general).

    Do you think that they have successfully put their history behind them and looked forward?
    Not really. From my experience, the younger generations of China (and all other Asian countries) are rather open-minded towards other states. Much of the tension between China and other Asian states is due to historical causes, of which there are many, and Asians highly value the concept of "face", or dignity. You could say that countries have big egos, with China having a pretty large one, but good at relative self-control.

    What actions are necessary, on a national and individual basis, for countries to put their past behind them and form a strong bond with each other?
    The biggest obstacle is, as said, historical issues. China has fought South Korea, Japan has fought China, South Korea has fought Japan, Vietnam has fought China, China has fought India, and so on and so forth. Dignity and face are very important concepts, but they do wear out over time, so I think the best strategy is to continue economic partnership and just simply wait without stoking political flames.

    How many years, or generations, does it take for countries to overcome their history?
    Sadly, this question is almost unanswerable for us Chinese, since our history is just a long list of wars, rebellions, civil wars, and the such. If one had to give an estimate, the time period is as short as some 50 years, as evidenced by the continuous warfare but surprising tolerance of periods such as the Three Kingdoms period, the Five Dynasty Ten Kingdoms period, or the peace between the Xiong-nu (Hsung-Nu; nomadic tribesmen from the north and believed to be the ancestors of the Huns of Europe) and the Han dynasty. However, this is far from certain, given the traditional conflict between countries and states.


    Do they need outside assistance to achieve this? What sort of assistance?
    This is also a very hard question, since for most of history China has prided itself on being self-reliant (up until WWII, when the Nationalist government had to rely on the Allied Powers for support and equipment). If the globalized economy were to keep going with minimal political interference from China or any other trading partner, I think that old wounds could and will be repaired quickly.

    To which point can this country be considered having "overcome this history", as an invador or an invadee?

    I do not believe a country can overcome their history, since that is what makes up the core of the spirit of that country, though we can learn to accept it. Still, there is no definite answer.

    Quick edit: In response to almostfreebird's post (#340) on the Nanking Massacre (or the Rape of Nanking, whichever you prefer): your source is not reliable, and I can't find anything else (from an official media outlet or government organization anywhere) that supports your claims. Your first claim that ex-Chinese officers blamed certain attacks on the Japanese is possible, but that doesn't support your claim that the Nanking Massacre was fake. Your second source, and your claim about Japanese journalists witnessing Chinese citizens getting ID cards has a blatant fact that you simply ignored: the witnesses were all Japanese journalists, and during that time there was no free press anywhere, not in the Allied powers and certainly not in the Axis. I do not refute your claim about China being a dictatorship and that it is suppressing ethnic minorities, but keep in mind that almost every country and ethnic group has done this. Every culture is racist in some sort (including both the Han Chinese and the Japanese), and it is almost impossible for a society to exist without invading, or being invaded. No country is a paragon of virtue or peace.
     
    Last edited:

    Sepia

    Senior Member
    High German/Danish
    Well, no Norwegian, Swedish or Danish are spoken in Normandy, Sicily, Russia, Dublin or the Danelaw. For whatever reason (low numbers, inferiority of the written culture, I do not know), Vikings/Norsemen did not seem very interested in speaking with natives or spreading their languages. I know there are Scandinavian loanwords in English and place names. It would surprise to me if Gaelic would not have loanwords from Scandinavian languages (via Ireland or the Scottish isles).

    They do speak English in Dublin. It is modern version of the North Germanic language that was brought there by the "Danes".
    Probably not really by the Danes but by people from Jutland and Anglia which is the Area south of Jutland where the town of Haithabu emerged. In fact they were not Danes although their territories became part of Denmark. The Danir were the people from the Islands. So what you call Scandinavian loanwords may not really be loanwords at all. But there was probably differences in the language of the Danir and of the Jutes. However Danish became increasingly more influence in what later became known as Denmark.
     

    Ben Jamin

    Senior Member
    Polish
    While there certainly has been a lot of talk about China, no one has bothered to answer all these questions, so here:

    The modern Asian states (China, Japan, Mongolia, the Koreas, Taiwan, India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, etc.) did not exist for most of history. Many are fairly young, though that depends on how you define a country. Since I am most familiar with the history of the "Chinese heartland" (plains around the Yangtze and Yellow rivers), I'll focus on China. First, we'll define "China" as the dynasties in general (I will talk about them as a collective whole, since all but two of the twenty "official" dynasties were founded by people of Han ethnicity). Let's get started:
    Would you be so kind as to send the list of the twenty dynasties?
     

    twenty6

    Senior Member
    English - U.S., Chinese - Mandarin
    Technically there are more than 20 (it depends on how you define "dynasty"; some existed at the same time, others weren't founded by Han people, etc.):
    夏,商,周(split into 东周and 西周, the latter of which is split into 春秋and 战国periods), 秦,汉(split into 西汉and 东汉, between which there is the 新潮), 三国(period with three separate kingdoms), 西晋and东晋(the end of 东晋was the 十六国or Sixteen Kingdoms period), 南北, 隋,唐,五代十国(five dynasties ten kingdoms period),宋 (split into 北宋and 南宋, the latter of which existed as a rump state after the Mongol invasions), 辽/西夏/金 existed at the same time, then 宋, 元, 明, and finally the 清.

    In English romanization: Xia, Shang, Zhou (Spring/Autumn and Warring States periods), Qin, Han, Three Kingdoms, Jin, Sui, Tang, Five Dynasties Ten Kingdoms, Song, Yuan, Liao, Western Xia, Jin (not to be confused with the other Jin), Ming, and Qing.

    Brief summary of all military actions during the dynasties (and beyond):
    Xia (possibly mythical): War between Huang Di and Yan Di, with Huang Di winning and establishing the Xia dynasty. Various petty conflicts within the imperial court.
    Shang: Rebellion that overthrew Xia, continuous conquest and expansion until another rebellion that overthrew the Shang to establish the Zhou.
    Zhou: Wars between feudal lords (called 诸侯) leads to the Spring/Autumn period (100+ vassal states) and the Warring States period (7 vassal states).
    Qin: Civil war against other 6 states, unification of China, rebellion against Qin.
    Han: Overthrew Qin, brief period of civil war, endless wars in the West with various central Asian countries and with the Xiong-Nu people.
    Three Kingdoms: Continuous civil war between local warlords leads to the establishment of the three kingdoms, which all hate each other and fight civil war on an even larger scale.
    Jin: The "Eight-King Panic" between the various local administrators appointed by the emperor. Leads to civil war and invasion of the Jin by Xiong-Nu.
    Sixteen Kingdoms: Continuous civil war.
    South-North: See above to Sixteen Kingdoms.
    Sui: Relative peace (still petty conflicts in various places).
    Tang: Expansion to the west.
    Five Dynasties Ten Kingdoms: Continuous civll war.
    (Song/Liao/Western Xia/Jin existed all during the Five Dynasties Ten Kingdoms period)
    Yuan: Mongol invasion. Invasion of Japan, Korea, Vietnam (all led by the Mongols, who used Chinese troops and generals).
    Ming: Rebellion that overthrew the Mongols. Short period of civil war. Even more expansion.
    Qing: Manchu invasion from north that overthrew the rebels that overthrew the Ming. Opium Wars, Revolution of 1911.

    Republic of China (original): Civil war with warlords, World War II, civil war with CCP (no military action after they fled to Taiwan, unless you count the 10 U-2 spy planes they used over the mainland, which were all shot down).
    People's Republic of China: Korean War, various border conflicts with Pakistan, India, invasion of Vietnam (yes, they invaded Vietnam).
     
    Last edited:

    Ben Jamin

    Senior Member
    Polish
    Technically there are more than 20 (it depends on how you define "dynasty"; some existed at the same time, others weren't founded by Han people, etc.):
    夏,商,周(split into 东周and 西周, the latter of which is split into 春秋and 战国periods), 秦,汉(split into 西汉and 东汉, between which there is the 新潮), 三国(period with three separate kingdoms), 西晋and东晋(the end of 东晋was the 十六国or Sixteen Kingdoms period), 南北, 隋,唐,五代十国(five dynasties ten kingdoms period),宋 (split into 北宋and 南宋, the latter of which existed as a rump state after the Mongol invasions), 辽/西夏/金 existed at the same time, then 宋, 元, 明, and finally the 清.

    In English romanization: Xia, Shang, Zhou (Spring/Autumn and Warring States periods), Qin, Han, Three Kingdoms, Jin, Sui, Tang, Five Dynasties Ten Kingdoms, Song, Yuan, Liao, Western Xia, Jin (not to be confused with the other Jin), Ming, and Qing.

    Brief summary of all military actions during the dynasties (and beyond):
    Xia (possibly mythical): War between Huang Di and Yan Di, with Huang Di winning and establishing the Xia dynasty. Various petty conflicts within the imperial court.
    Shang: Rebellion that overthrew Xia, continuous conquest and expansion until another rebellion that overthrew the Shang to establish the Zhou.
    Zhou: Wars between feudal lords (called 诸侯) leads to the Spring/Autumn period (100+ vassal states) and the Warring States period (7 vassal states).
    Qin: Civil war against other 6 states, unification of China, rebellion against Qin.
    Han: Overthrew Qin, brief period of civil war, endless wars in the West with various central Asian countries and with the Xiong-Nu people.
    Three Kingdoms: Continuous civil war between local warlords leads to the establishment of the three kingdoms, which all hate each other and fight civil war on an even larger scale.
    Jin: The "Eight-King Panic" between the various local administrators appointed by the emperor. Leads to civil war and invasion of the Jin by Xiong-Nu.
    Sixteen Kingdoms: Continuous civil war.
    South-North: See above to Sixteen Kingdoms.
    Sui: Relative peace (still petty conflicts in various places).
    Tang: Expansion to the west.
    Five Dynasties Ten Kingdoms: Continuous civll war.
    (Song/Liao/Western Xia/Jin existed all during the Five Dynasties Ten Kingdoms period)
    Yuan: Mongol invasion. Invasion of Japan, Korea, Vietnam (all led by the Mongols, who used Chinese troops and generals).
    Ming: Rebellion that overthrew the Mongols. Short period of civil war. Even more expansion.
    Qing: Manchu invasion from north that overthrew the rebels that overthrew the Ming. Opium Wars, Revolution of 1911.

    Republic of China (original): Civil war with warlords, World War II, civil war with CCP (no military action after they fled to Taiwan, unless you count the 10 U-2 spy planes they used over the mainland, which were all shot down).
    People's Republic of China: Korean War, various border conflicts with Pakistan, India, invasion of Vietnam (yes, they invaded Vietnam).
    Technically there are more than 20 (it depends on how you define "dynasty"; some existed at the same time, others weren't founded by Han people, etc.):
    夏,商,周(split into 东周and 西周, the latter of which is split into 春秋and 战国periods), 秦,汉(split into 西汉and 东汉, between which there is the 新潮), 三国(period with three separate kingdoms), 西晋and东晋(the end of 东晋was the 十六国or Sixteen Kingdoms period), 南北, 隋,唐,五代十国(five dynasties ten kingdoms period),宋 (split into 北宋and 南宋, the latter of which existed as a rump state after the Mongol invasions), 辽/西夏/金 existed at the same time, then 宋, 元, 明, and finally the 清.

    In English romanization: Xia, Shang, Zhou (Spring/Autumn and Warring States periods), Qin, Han, Three Kingdoms, Jin, Sui, Tang, Five Dynasties Ten Kingdoms, Song, Yuan, Liao, Western Xia, Jin (not to be confused with the other Jin), Ming, and Qing.

    Brief summary of all military actions during the dynasties (and beyond):
    Xia (possibly mythical): War between Huang Di and Yan Di, with Huang Di winning and establishing the Xia dynasty. Various petty conflicts within the imperial court.
    Shang: Rebellion that overthrew Xia, continuous conquest and expansion until another rebellion that overthrew the Shang to establish the Zhou.
    Zhou: Wars between feudal lords (called 诸侯) leads to the Spring/Autumn period (100+ vassal states) and the Warring States period (7 vassal states).
    Qin: Civil war against other 6 states, unification of China, rebellion against Qin.
    Han: Overthrew Qin, brief period of civil war, endless wars in the West with various central Asian countries and with the Xiong-Nu people.
    Three Kingdoms: Continuous civil war between local warlords leads to the establishment of the three kingdoms, which all hate each other and fight civil war on an even larger scale.
    Jin: The "Eight-King Panic" between the various local administrators appointed by the emperor. Leads to civil war and invasion of the Jin by Xiong-Nu.
    Sixteen Kingdoms: Continuous civil war.
    South-North: See above to Sixteen Kingdoms.
    Sui: Relative peace (still petty conflicts in various places).
    Tang: Expansion to the west.
    Five Dynasties Ten Kingdoms: Continuous civll war.
    (Song/Liao/Western Xia/Jin existed all during the Five Dynasties Ten Kingdoms period)
    Yuan: Mongol invasion. Invasion of Japan, Korea, Vietnam (all led by the Mongols, who used Chinese troops and generals).
    Ming: Rebellion that overthrew the Mongols. Short period of civil war. Even more expansion.
    Qing: Manchu invasion from north that overthrew the rebels that overthrew the Ming. Opium Wars, Revolution of 1911.

    Republic of China (original): Civil war with warlords, World War II, civil war with CCP (no military action after they fled to Taiwan, unless you count the 10 U-2 spy planes they used over the mainland, which were all shot down).
    People's Republic of China: Korean War, various border conflicts with Pakistan, India, invasion of Vietnam (yes, they invaded Vietnam).
    Thanks! You write that only two dynasties were non-ethnic Chinese, but I have found four: Liao, Jin, Yuan and Qing (Khitan, Jurchen, Mongol, Manchu).
     

    twenty6

    Senior Member
    English - U.S., Chinese - Mandarin
    You write that only two dynasties were non-ethnic Chinese, but I have found four: Liao, Jin, Yuan and Qing (Khitan, Jurchen, Mongol, Manchu).
    True, but Liao and Jin are usually considered kingdoms (ever since Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor of the Qin dynasty adopted the title "emperor" to make himself seem more impressive, "king" and "kingdom" were considered not-as-impressive-or-important as "emperor" and "empire": in fact, during some dynasties some court officials were called "king"), not full-fledged dynasties, since they were only part of the jigsaw puzzle that was the Five Dynasty Ten Kingdoms period. Some consider them to be dynasties, but others don't, and it's all very confusing. There is no exact criteria for defining "dynasty" in Chinese (though the common consensus seems to be that if the ruler of that country called it a dynasty, and if it was large enough, it's an official dynasty).
     

    Ben Jamin

    Senior Member
    Polish
    True, but Liao and Jin are usually considered kingdoms (ever since Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor of the Qin dynasty adopted the title "emperor" to make himself seem more impressive, "king" and "kingdom" were considered not-as-impressive-or-important as "emperor" and "empire": in fact, during some dynasties some court officials were called "king"), not full-fledged dynasties, since they were only part of the jigsaw puzzle that was the Five Dynasty Ten Kingdoms period. Some consider them to be dynasties, but others don't, and it's all very confusing. There is no exact criteria for defining "dynasty" in Chinese (though the common consensus seems to be that if the ruler of that country called it a dynasty, and if it was large enough, it's an official dynasty).
    But the fact is that they ruled over large teritories belonging to the Chinese sphere, and populated at least partly by Chinese (Han?) speakers. Qualifying them as "empire" or "kingdom" is of secondary importance in my opinion.
     
    Top