whats the oldest existing nation?

[Vietcong]

what is the oldest existing nation (not civilization) and longest lived nation in history??
since this is nation and not civilization, this rules out china and many others ppl would jump too. modern china, depending on witch government u consider the legitimate one, was formed in 1911*the nationalist* or 1949*the p.r.*

 

[scy12]

I think it's Malta.

 

[Vietcong]

wasnt it ruled by outside powers?? meaning that cant be it

 

[ConanKND]

Nothing in the Americas, Africa and Oceania can qualify then. Maybe the UK? The French Republic (Shouldn't be it). Japan? Thailand? Iran? or Kosovo? lol

 

[aluka]

Do you mean sovereign state rather than nation? The nation is the group of people.

 

[Romanfe]

San Marino 301AD is the oldest uninterrupted independent nation followed by France a hundred years later.

 

[EnlightenmentHK]

Alot of it depends on your definition of 'nation'. Longest consistent political entity? Longest time under the same government. (aka, last time since a successful revolution) Does getting split or conquered for a time reset the clock? Are you considered an independent nation if you spent a few hundred years as a lesser vassal? You've got to define the terms a bit better.

Alot of people trace modern England to Alfred the Great, but its been through a number of revolutions, civil wars, and one outside conquerer since than. I mean is it still the same 'nation' if the entire nobility was replaced by Normans?

Are you gonna trace France to the Merovingians? The Carolingians? From Clovis to the late middle ages, how much of that time was France actually a united Kingdom? Places like Normandy, Flanders, Languedoc and many others may have technically been vassals, but they operated almost completely independently and many were essentially kingdoms in everything but name. Hell, Burgundy and possibly some others were at times substantially more powerful than France itself. It would be a while before France consolidated what would come to be known as France today.


Hmmm...doing some reading and San Marino does seem to fit the bill. But I think the OP might have been looking for something a bit larger when they said 'nation'.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

I'm tempted to vote for Japan. Except for their constant drive northward to Hokkaido and later south to Okinawa there was very little change in their racial composition or territory. Political divisions were always there, but these were based on loyalty to different local leaders, not cultural division.

 

[Sharwood]

Damascus is the oldest continually inhabited city, but as for nations, I'm pretty sure it's San Marino.

 

[Vietcong]

hear are the rules.

thear must NOT have been a secsefull revolution, our outside conquest *thats y china dosent count, nat. china has only been around since 1911 and pr since 1949*.
being split, dosent count, say rome split into east and west, east didnt fall until 1453.
the goverment being ousted, but restored cant be counted.

 

[r_rolo1]

Losing provinces / colonies count? Civil wars count?

 

[Otkell]

Nothing in the Americas, Africa and Oceania can qualify then.

What about Ethiopia?

I dont know much about its history, but ive read somewhere that it's the only part of Africa that wasnt colonize. Except for a couple of years of occupation by Italy duing WWII.

 

[Sharwood]

Under Vietcong's rules, it wouldn't count, as it's been several dfferent kingdoms in that time period; Aksum, Saba (Sheba), Abbysynia, Ethiopia and a few others.

 

[Sharwood]

Nothing in the Americas, Africa and Oceania can qualify then. Maybe the UK? The French Republic (Shouldn't be it). Japan? Thailand? Iran? or Kosovo? lol

Actually, Tonga might qualify. It was unified early, never conquered, and actually occupied Samoa at one point.

 

[Tee Kay]

Nothing in the Americas, Africa and Oceania can qualify then. Maybe the UK? The French Republic (Shouldn't be it). Japan? Thailand? Iran? or Kosovo? lol

Japan was conquered by the Americans in 1945. Thailand lost its independence twice to Burma. Iran was only unified around 1501.

I think San Marino is it.

 

[The Yankee]

I'm tempted to vote for Japan. Except for their constant drive northward to Hokkaido and later south to Okinawa there was very little change in their racial composition or territory. Political divisions were always there, but these were based on loyalty to different local leaders, not cultural division.

And even when there were wars in Japan, even during the Sengoku Jidai, it wasn't aimed at replacing the emperors of Japan...that line has been around for quite some time.

 

[Plotinus]

thear must NOT have been a secsefull revolution, our outside conquest *thats y china dosent count, nat. china has only been around since 1911 and pr since 1949*.
being split, dosent count, say rome split into east and west, east didnt fall until 1453.
the goverment being ousted, but restored cant be counted.

But this is ridiculous - why can't a "nation" be considered to persist through a revolution? Would you say Britain (indeed, England) goes back no further than 1689? Isn't a revolution just a change of government? As for the Byzantine empire, its government was certainly toppled, and the empire ruled by outsiders, in 1204, and it wasn't until some time later that the government in exile (or one of them, anyway) returned.

I think you're just confusing the nation with the government. If Britain were to become a republic tomorrow it wouldn't be one nation replacing another, it would be a single nation getting a new system of government. I wouldn't be changing my nationality.

Under Vietcong's rules, it wouldn't count, as it's been several dfferent kingdoms in that time period; Aksum, Saba (Sheba), Abbysynia, Ethiopia and a few others.

Axsum was the ancient empire which developed into the medieval kingdom. Abyssinia and Ethiopia are just different names for the same place. Saba is in Yemen. Of course Ethiopia has had different dynasties in its history, but I don't see why that is relevant. However, it had a communist revolution, so I suppose by the odd standards of the OP it wouldn't count on that score.

 

[Verbose]

Uninterrupted constitutional continuity:
Perhaps the US. It's an old one, by comparison, and one of the reasons American assumptions about being a "young" country can be kind of grating. Or the UK maybe, except the UKers from time to time pride themselves of not having a written constitution.

Constitutional continuity through gradual reform, i.e. no violent revolutions, coup d'états etc.:
San Marino not a bad candidate. Rolled over a fair number of times by foreign occupation though I imagine. Maybe the UK otherwise?

Sovereign continuity:
No occupation, no foreign rule, probably Sweden. Around as a kingdom since the 10th c., never in fact occupied by a foreign country.
(Did have some issues in the 15th c. when the technically 100% legal sovereign of the Great Nordic Union had to assert his authority against factions of rebellious nobles there. Can't claim gradual constitutional reform since Gustaf Eriksson Wasa constitutionally pissed all over the Great Nordic Union in 1523 based solely of having the men and weapons to do so, and due to the royal coup d'état of 1772, to restore absolutism, and the officers' coup d'état in 1809, to abolish it for constitutional monarchy.)

 

[Arwon]

I have no idea here, but what about Iran or Siam for Sovereign continuity?

 

[Sharwood]

I have no idea here, but what about Iran or Siam for Sovereign continuity?

Both have been conquered in the past. Iran by the Arabs and Mongols, not to mention Alexander a long time earlier, and Siam was part of other empires from time to time. Although it has maintained independence quite successfully.

@ Plotinus: Saba was in both Yemen and Ethiopia, if I remember correctly.