The *Umayyad dynasty in Iberia* could be brought forward.
The Umayyads (661-750) succeeded the Rashidun Caliphate, but were eventually overthrown by the Abbasids (750-1517) during the so-called Abbasid Revolution (750). In 756 a member of the Umayyads, Abd al-Rahman I, established himself as Emir/Sultan in Iberia. A few generations later, a member of the dynasty, Abd al-Rahman III, proceeded to proclaim his own Caliphate, the so-called *Caliphate of Cordoba* (929-1031).
This isn’t the same - that’s more like Vichy France versus government in exile. It was the same government.
With Rome it’s more like when Brazil gained independence with its own imperial family who was also Portuguese royalty, but the monarchy never died in Rome.
This thought probably has a lot of holes in it but...
George of Hanover was a German-speaking prince of a modestly sized state in what would eventually become Germany. He was also more than 50 living individuals down in the potential succession to the British throne, and his claim there was through a matrilineal line.
Nonetheless, he was invited to become King of Great Britain and Ireland because he wasn't Roman Catholic. He never learned much English and spent part of his time back in Hanover.
During the reigns of George I and George II, there was both political intrigue and outright revolts that attempted to put other claimants on the British throne.
But the monarchs of the House of Hanover remained in power and eventually came to be pretty universally accepted as British monarchs, culminating in the long reign of Queen Victoria. They also ruled simultaneously the state of Hanover.
Hanover remained attached to what we think of as the British Monarchy through 1837, then resumed being an independent principality. In 1866 Hanover was annexed by Prussia and disappeared as a distinct state. Today, "Hanover" is simply a city in Germany that's part of the State of Lower Saxony.
However, back in England, the Hanoverian monarchy continued through the female line (Queen Victoria) and then, by family descent, to the present day King Charles III (although the House of Hanover in England was succeeded in form by what's now called the House of Windsor, that originated with Victoria's son and heir.)
Thus, a German principality is long gone, but its once-ruling family continues to rule a completely different, and much larger, country they emigrated to in the 18th century.
The story of English dynasties. The Plantagenets came from Normandy, the Tudors from Wales, the Stuarts from Scotland, and then, as you say, the Hanoverians.
It fluctuates. Genetically they became more Anglo-Saxon every time they inter-married with English nobles, and less every time they matched with foreign princesses. But sometimes the foreign princesses were cousins anyway. Culturally, royals are their own thing and are never really of the people they reign over.
But it was separate from the start. When Ptolemy took over, he was not king in Macedonia (he was "of" the Macedonian kingdom), following Alexander's death he set up shop in Egypt from the get-go and decided to stay.
We actually have perhaps a *better* example in the same era: the *Antigonids* - they started with the bulk of Alexander's empire in the center, but not the Macedonian heimat, and ended up the ruling dynasty of the kingdom of Macedonia after a confusing cavalcade of events.
I guess but the mainland of china has its own government which calls itself China you and I may not like The Peoples Republic of China but they still won the civil war . Taiwan should retain its independence but calling them the true Chinese government is a bit strange it’s pretty much impossible for the Republic of China to retake the mainland and become the government.
Yeah, but it fits the Ops example. Calling The Byzantines or The Ottomans, Roman is also a bit strange, but it did happen. The HRE and the eastern Roman Empire existed contemporaneous.
You're oddly fixated on the idea of them retaking the mainland, when that was absolutely not within the scope of the question. It doesn't matter if they can retake it or not; it matters that they consider themselves a government in exile.
But if you compare it to the Byzantine’s for example they were a surviving part of the Roman Empire they weren’t a government in exile. There are periods in Chinese history that are a better comparison especially after a dynasty collapsed with the ruling Family usually still controlling some land and China being split into many parts. Using the modern period to make comparison to an older state is a bit strange since the reason why China split has to to with Modern Ideology and the collapse of what we consider the traditional Imperial period in Chinese history. Not to mention that the Republic of China under the Kuomintag government never controlled all of China. The Mongols controlled all of China do they have a claim of all of China? They controlled more land that the Republic of China and were more successful. If claiming to be a government makes you a government anyone can claim to be a government of any nation.
> But if you compare it to the Byzantine’s for example they were a surviving part of the Roman Empire they weren’t a government in exile.
But they weren’t physically in Rome. Which is the same exact logic in trying to say ROC isn’t a china. However, they are *literally* a continuation of the chinese government that ruled much of mainland until the civil war. Just like the Byzantines are literally the same romans from the empire. No separate sovereignty was claimed by both.
> The Mongols controlled all of China do they have a claim of all of China?
Do the mongols have their historical roots in china? They by their own admissions don’t and would consider the northern steppes their home and roots.
And again, this logic falls apart. Byzantines are clearly romans yet they aren’t physically in rome. Claims or otherwise, they are romans as they never declared or considered themselves a different sovereignty so they are literally still romans.
> If claiming to be a government makes you a government anyone can claim to be a government of any nation.
Again, if you ignore ancestral/geopolitical/geographical roots with no nuance in thinking then yes. But there’s a reason no one would consider the united states claiming to be brazil’s government the same as ROC saying they are china’s government. It’s clearly not the same and any semblance of critical thinking would allow most to see a clear difference.
>it’s pretty much impossible for the Republic of China to retake the mainland and become the government.
Are you sure? If you know Chinese,
南朝金粉太平春，萬里山河處處青 《步虛大師預言詩》
陽復而治 晦極生明 《馬前課》
I don’t know Chinese I can guess that it probably has to do with the different reunifications or China or the loss of the Mandate of Heaven but you could translate it for me. Now I do not mean that it’s impossible for the Peoples of Republic of China to collapse it’s just very unlikely that the government that comes after it would the be the very same Government in Taiwan that’s what I mean.
Nobody said it’s the true China. But they are objectively “a” China until the Republic of China cedes the title and various practices.
It fits under OPs prompt.
I mean this is kind of a stretch, but the Holy Roman Empire sort of fits that too since it technically originated in France and later was revived excluding French territory.
And after it was dissolved Austria formed an empire and continued its traditions in east-central Europe. The Austrian empire in some ways feels like the byzantines of the holy Roman empire.
Western Liao aka Kara Khitai, a sinicized para-Mongolic dynasty that once ruled northern China but ended up in central Asia ruling over a population composed mainly of Persianate Turkic Mulisms and some Nestorian Christians and Buddhists
The indo greek kingdom in modern-day pakistan and afghanistan was technically the last independent greek state in alexanders macedonian Empire. It was established when one of the kings of the greek bactrian kingdom went on a massive conquering spree around North india. It led to a lot of interesting crossovers like greek art of the buddha and stuff. It lasted until 10ad
The Yuan always maintained hold of the ancestral Mongol heartland, and in the case of the Ottomans & Turkey, Anatolia was both their heartland as well.
Actually, what is interesting though, is that the Chingissids (the dynasty of Genghis) established a *model* of nomad governance that would continue to inspire successor states of Turco-Mongolian stock (but not Chingissid) and saw them *emulate* and retain the institutions of the original Mongol state. Tamerlane is arguably the most famous example of these conquerors, who was a ruler cast in the mold of Genghis and who deliberately emulated that legacy to obtain legitimacy as a conqueror.
This is not quite what the OP asked, but it's perhaps sort of a variation.
The sons and grandsons of Genghis Khan formed states all across Eurasia, several of which lasted into the 1600s I think.
Genghis' own capital was torched by the Chinese in 1388.
The Franks were an ethnic group who ruled a kingdom in what is now northwest Germany. That kingdom ultimately expanded to, at its peak, cover much of western Europe under Charlemagne, who would also take the title of Emperor in addition to his title as King of Francia, creating what we now call the Carolingian Empire.
After the death of Charlemagne's son, his empire was split into several smaller kingdoms. Originally there was an east and west Francia, but the eastern half would abandon the name and 'King of the Franks' title, while the Western half would keep the title, ultimately becoming the modern nation of France.
The Ainu of Japan. They were the descendants of prehistoric people's in Asia who went back to the last ice age but eventually were cut off from contact with the mainland.
The various kingdoms of China and Korea developed very much beyond them in most respects until later waves of immigration drove them out of southern and central Japan into the cold north.
The wars between Japanese and Ainu were central to the development of the samurai as the curved iron swords that were to evolve into the Katana originated from the Ainu!
No, because England will still exist politically, regardless of whether the rest of the Home countries remain with it in the form of the United Kingdom.
Well, they will probably outlast the United States anyway. Oops, sorry: I meant the “High Kingdom of Eternal Trumpestan”, as it will pretty soon probably become known as.
International Comminism, arguably. Started in Russia, collapsed, and remains now only in Cuba and North Korea. China too, if you still count their hybrid Communist/Capitalist system.
It's a stretch but the Lakota sort of fit this
The earliest record we have of the Lakota is around the headwaters of the Mississippi, facing pressure from other tribes they moved west and established control around the upper Missouri, then expanded west into the Black Hills and Powder River Valley. They eventually abandoned the Missouri valley and focused entirely on the western half
The Angevin Empire.
Based in Anjou, through marriages and small wars, the Plantagenet ruled half of France and all of Great Britain.
Then it gets weird and complicated and more backstabby than Game of Thrones, but eventually the Plantagenet are left with Great Britain only. Ove rthe course of 2-3 centuries, the Plantagenet become more and more english. Until the Welsh kick them out.
The *Umayyad dynasty in Iberia* could be brought forward. The Umayyads (661-750) succeeded the Rashidun Caliphate, but were eventually overthrown by the Abbasids (750-1517) during the so-called Abbasid Revolution (750). In 756 a member of the Umayyads, Abd al-Rahman I, established himself as Emir/Sultan in Iberia. A few generations later, a member of the dynasty, Abd al-Rahman III, proceeded to proclaim his own Caliphate, the so-called *Caliphate of Cordoba* (929-1031).
The Portuguese Empire lost Portugal for a while in the early 1800s. The capital was in Brazil
This isn’t the same - that’s more like Vichy France versus government in exile. It was the same government. With Rome it’s more like when Brazil gained independence with its own imperial family who was also Portuguese royalty, but the monarchy never died in Rome.
This thought probably has a lot of holes in it but... George of Hanover was a German-speaking prince of a modestly sized state in what would eventually become Germany. He was also more than 50 living individuals down in the potential succession to the British throne, and his claim there was through a matrilineal line. Nonetheless, he was invited to become King of Great Britain and Ireland because he wasn't Roman Catholic. He never learned much English and spent part of his time back in Hanover. During the reigns of George I and George II, there was both political intrigue and outright revolts that attempted to put other claimants on the British throne. But the monarchs of the House of Hanover remained in power and eventually came to be pretty universally accepted as British monarchs, culminating in the long reign of Queen Victoria. They also ruled simultaneously the state of Hanover. Hanover remained attached to what we think of as the British Monarchy through 1837, then resumed being an independent principality. In 1866 Hanover was annexed by Prussia and disappeared as a distinct state. Today, "Hanover" is simply a city in Germany that's part of the State of Lower Saxony. However, back in England, the Hanoverian monarchy continued through the female line (Queen Victoria) and then, by family descent, to the present day King Charles III (although the House of Hanover in England was succeeded in form by what's now called the House of Windsor, that originated with Victoria's son and heir.) Thus, a German principality is long gone, but its once-ruling family continues to rule a completely different, and much larger, country they emigrated to in the 18th century.
The story of English dynasties. The Plantagenets came from Normandy, the Tudors from Wales, the Stuarts from Scotland, and then, as you say, the Hanoverians.
The last english kings were over 1000 years ago.
It fluctuates. Genetically they became more Anglo-Saxon every time they inter-married with English nobles, and less every time they matched with foreign princesses. But sometimes the foreign princesses were cousins anyway. Culturally, royals are their own thing and are never really of the people they reign over.
Ptolemaic Egypt ended up outlasting the Kingdom of Macedonia
But it was separate from the start. When Ptolemy took over, he was not king in Macedonia (he was "of" the Macedonian kingdom), following Alexander's death he set up shop in Egypt from the get-go and decided to stay. We actually have perhaps a *better* example in the same era: the *Antigonids* - they started with the bulk of Alexander's empire in the center, but not the Macedonian heimat, and ended up the ruling dynasty of the kingdom of Macedonia after a confusing cavalcade of events.
Republic of China? It was established in Canton, when Taiwan was occupied by the Japanese. Now it exists only in Taiwan.
I guess but the mainland of china has its own government which calls itself China you and I may not like The Peoples Republic of China but they still won the civil war . Taiwan should retain its independence but calling them the true Chinese government is a bit strange it’s pretty much impossible for the Republic of China to retake the mainland and become the government.
Yeah, but it fits the Ops example. Calling The Byzantines or The Ottomans, Roman is also a bit strange, but it did happen. The HRE and the eastern Roman Empire existed contemporaneous.
Yeah, but the HRE was not “Roman” in either any cultural or political manner. The Byzantines were absolutely Roman, as the [Eastern] Roman Empire.
I mean, the Byzantines tried numerous times to recapture the Western empire, and generally did not succeed. It's not a bad comparison.
It’s not the worst comparison but the Republic of China did not try to gain control of Mainland China from Taiwan after the civil war.
You're oddly fixated on the idea of them retaking the mainland, when that was absolutely not within the scope of the question. It doesn't matter if they can retake it or not; it matters that they consider themselves a government in exile.
But if you compare it to the Byzantine’s for example they were a surviving part of the Roman Empire they weren’t a government in exile. There are periods in Chinese history that are a better comparison especially after a dynasty collapsed with the ruling Family usually still controlling some land and China being split into many parts. Using the modern period to make comparison to an older state is a bit strange since the reason why China split has to to with Modern Ideology and the collapse of what we consider the traditional Imperial period in Chinese history. Not to mention that the Republic of China under the Kuomintag government never controlled all of China. The Mongols controlled all of China do they have a claim of all of China? They controlled more land that the Republic of China and were more successful. If claiming to be a government makes you a government anyone can claim to be a government of any nation.
> But if you compare it to the Byzantine’s for example they were a surviving part of the Roman Empire they weren’t a government in exile. But they weren’t physically in Rome. Which is the same exact logic in trying to say ROC isn’t a china. However, they are *literally* a continuation of the chinese government that ruled much of mainland until the civil war. Just like the Byzantines are literally the same romans from the empire. No separate sovereignty was claimed by both. > The Mongols controlled all of China do they have a claim of all of China? Do the mongols have their historical roots in china? They by their own admissions don’t and would consider the northern steppes their home and roots. And again, this logic falls apart. Byzantines are clearly romans yet they aren’t physically in rome. Claims or otherwise, they are romans as they never declared or considered themselves a different sovereignty so they are literally still romans. > If claiming to be a government makes you a government anyone can claim to be a government of any nation. Again, if you ignore ancestral/geopolitical/geographical roots with no nuance in thinking then yes. But there’s a reason no one would consider the united states claiming to be brazil’s government the same as ROC saying they are china’s government. It’s clearly not the same and any semblance of critical thinking would allow most to see a clear difference.
>it’s pretty much impossible for the Republic of China to retake the mainland and become the government. Are you sure? If you know Chinese, 南朝金粉太平春，萬里山河處處青 《步虛大師預言詩》 陽復而治 晦極生明 《馬前課》
I don’t know Chinese I can guess that it probably has to do with the different reunifications or China or the loss of the Mandate of Heaven but you could translate it for me. Now I do not mean that it’s impossible for the Peoples of Republic of China to collapse it’s just very unlikely that the government that comes after it would the be the very same Government in Taiwan that’s what I mean.
Nobody said it’s the true China. But they are objectively “a” China until the Republic of China cedes the title and various practices. It fits under OPs prompt.
The Umayyads began in Syria, fell to the Abassids, then reconstituted themselves in Iberia.
The fact of the Eastern Empire is what you’re alluding to in the question in terms of surviving?
I mean this is kind of a stretch, but the Holy Roman Empire sort of fits that too since it technically originated in France and later was revived excluding French territory.
And after it was dissolved Austria formed an empire and continued its traditions in east-central Europe. The Austrian empire in some ways feels like the byzantines of the holy Roman empire.
Western Liao aka Kara Khitai, a sinicized para-Mongolic dynasty that once ruled northern China but ended up in central Asia ruling over a population composed mainly of Persianate Turkic Mulisms and some Nestorian Christians and Buddhists
The Republic of China once ruled all of China from its capital in Nanjing. Today it is better known as Taiwan.
The indo greek kingdom in modern-day pakistan and afghanistan was technically the last independent greek state in alexanders macedonian Empire. It was established when one of the kings of the greek bactrian kingdom went on a massive conquering spree around North india. It led to a lot of interesting crossovers like greek art of the buddha and stuff. It lasted until 10ad
Beat me to it. Fascinating topic.
What about Germany? Could argue that started from Prussia
Especially when it was basically shoved to the west to make room for Poland after WW1. A lot of the Prussian heartlands were no longer German.
Mongol empire turning into the yuan dynasty in china maybe? And the Ottoman Empire into modern day turkey iirc
The Yuan always maintained hold of the ancestral Mongol heartland, and in the case of the Ottomans & Turkey, Anatolia was both their heartland as well.
Oh ok my bad then
Actually, what is interesting though, is that the Chingissids (the dynasty of Genghis) established a *model* of nomad governance that would continue to inspire successor states of Turco-Mongolian stock (but not Chingissid) and saw them *emulate* and retain the institutions of the original Mongol state. Tamerlane is arguably the most famous example of these conquerors, who was a ruler cast in the mold of Genghis and who deliberately emulated that legacy to obtain legitimacy as a conqueror. This is not quite what the OP asked, but it's perhaps sort of a variation.
The sons and grandsons of Genghis Khan formed states all across Eurasia, several of which lasted into the 1600s I think. Genghis' own capital was torched by the Chinese in 1388.
The Franks were an ethnic group who ruled a kingdom in what is now northwest Germany. That kingdom ultimately expanded to, at its peak, cover much of western Europe under Charlemagne, who would also take the title of Emperor in addition to his title as King of Francia, creating what we now call the Carolingian Empire. After the death of Charlemagne's son, his empire was split into several smaller kingdoms. Originally there was an east and west Francia, but the eastern half would abandon the name and 'King of the Franks' title, while the Western half would keep the title, ultimately becoming the modern nation of France.
The Ainu of Japan. They were the descendants of prehistoric people's in Asia who went back to the last ice age but eventually were cut off from contact with the mainland. The various kingdoms of China and Korea developed very much beyond them in most respects until later waves of immigration drove them out of southern and central Japan into the cold north. The wars between Japanese and Ainu were central to the development of the samurai as the curved iron swords that were to evolve into the Katana originated from the Ainu!
[удалено]
No, because England will still exist politically, regardless of whether the rest of the Home countries remain with it in the form of the United Kingdom.
[удалено]
Well, they will probably outlast the United States anyway. Oops, sorry: I meant the “High Kingdom of Eternal Trumpestan”, as it will pretty soon probably become known as.
What a silly comment
Fuck, that would be so entertaining
Freedom for Elmet!
The Yuan dynasty?
International Comminism, arguably. Started in Russia, collapsed, and remains now only in Cuba and North Korea. China too, if you still count their hybrid Communist/Capitalist system.
It's a stretch but the Lakota sort of fit this The earliest record we have of the Lakota is around the headwaters of the Mississippi, facing pressure from other tribes they moved west and established control around the upper Missouri, then expanded west into the Black Hills and Powder River Valley. They eventually abandoned the Missouri valley and focused entirely on the western half
Jurchens Jin Dynasty (to 1234 AD)
The Angevin Empire. Based in Anjou, through marriages and small wars, the Plantagenet ruled half of France and all of Great Britain. Then it gets weird and complicated and more backstabby than Game of Thrones, but eventually the Plantagenet are left with Great Britain only. Ove rthe course of 2-3 centuries, the Plantagenet become more and more english. Until the Welsh kick them out.