Jump to content

 
Photo

unconquered nations

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#31
Jean-Louis

Jean-Louis

    Ultimate Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 545 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montreal Quebec
  • Interests:In the vast ocean of my ignorance, I have a few bubbles of interests
  • Canada

I say we find out where Geomancer lives and INVADE!
Jean-Louis Rheault
Montreal


#32
DaveB

DaveB

    Hall of Fame

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,054 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Redlands, CA
  • United States

I say we find out where Geomancer lives and INVADE!

Geomancer lists his country as the Independent Republic of Goust. A quick Google search reveals this as a small nominally independent republic in the Pyrenees (but practically, under the jurisdiction of France).

It seems the answer to the question depends greatly on your definitions. By some of the definitions given by various people here you could claim pretty much everybody is in the "conquered" group and by other definitions pretty much everybody is in the "unconquered" group.
Dave Barnes
Esri
Product Engineer
Map Geek

#33
geomancer

geomancer

    Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Olavtoppen
  • Bouvet Island

The most intriguing candidate so far is natcase's suggestion of the Turks. Of course the territory of Turkey (Asia Minor) has been conquered by Persians, by Alexander the Great, by the Romans, etc., but the Turks were the last to arrive, and they have never lost their independence since then, have they? What was their history in Central Asia, where they came from? Were they ever subject to another nation, such as the Mongols?

A parallel (almost) could be made with the Normans. They were the last to conquer Britain, and I don't think they were previously conquered (didn't they originate as viking bands who settled in Normandy as an independent kingdom?). So if they became the ruling class of England, one might consider the UK as the modern Norman nation. But that's stretching it--I don't think there were enough Normans compared to English to say they have survived as a nation.

Hawaii was independent until annexed by the USA in 1898.

Niue was independent until annexed by Britain in 1900 (and by New Zealand in 1901).

The Kingdom of Tonga was independent until annexed by Britain in 1900, and it regained independence in 1970.

Those are pretty good achievements, like Ethiopia's survival except for the Italian occupation. But isn't there a more clearcut example?

#34
A. Fenix

A. Fenix

    Analisa Fenix

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Cascadia
  • Interests:Cartography, PGIS, PPGIS, GIS, Urban/regional Planning, Conservation, Biodiversity/Cultural Diversity, Travel, History, Ecology, Geography, Biking, Gardening, Cooking, Physics, Permaculture, Sky diving, Green Roofs, Music (creating and enjoying), Photography, Carpentry, Film making, Writing...
  • No Country Selected

thank you for a fascinating discussion Geomancer. it shocks me that there are so few examples of "unconquered" nations. i think that i just may try to free up some time to investigate this topic further. my mental wheels are spinning
Analisa Fenix
GIS Manager/Chief Cartographer
Ecotrust

#35
Jean-Louis

Jean-Louis

    Ultimate Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 545 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montreal Quebec
  • Interests:In the vast ocean of my ignorance, I have a few bubbles of interests
  • Canada

it shocks me that there are so few examples of "unconquered" nations.


Actually, your comment made me realize that we are all looking at this the wrong way. The absence of a totally independent nation is a good thing not a bad one.

Nature is a continuum in which everything affects everything else. There are no 'pure' races, nations, peoples, cultures, species or individuals. Nothing can exist in isolation or remain the same for a long period of time. Isolation brings decay. Life is change. Aside from a few exceptions, all conquests (imperial, cultural, economic, demographic) transforms all sides involved.

Everything dies and everything is recast and despite the pain the immediate situation may cause, no doubt it's all unfolding as it should.
Jean-Louis Rheault
Montreal


#36
byzantium

byzantium

    Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Location:Otay Mountain
  • Interests:History, art, typography, design, geography, wilderness, sustainability, and the wisdom of the ancients.
  • United States

What about the Toltec and/or Mayan civilizations?

They definitely suffered a decline, but some evidence shows it was not because of a conquest but environmental change or maybe just a long drought.

The Aztecs on the other hand, were brutally conquested.

bb

#37
frax

frax

    Hall of Fame

  • Associate Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,308 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stockholm, Sweden
  • Interests:music, hiking, friends, nature, photography, traveling. and maps!
  • Sweden

Well, if you are talking about extinct ethnic groups, then how about Easter Island?
Hugo Ahlenius
Nordpil - custom maps and GIS
http://nordpil.com/
Twitter

#38
DaveB

DaveB

    Hall of Fame

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,054 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Redlands, CA
  • United States

Well, if you are talking about extinct ethnic groups, then how about Easter Island?

Weren't they conquered by Chile? I seem to recall something about the Easter Island society going downhill on their own, then eventually being taken over by Chile who transported that remaining population to the mainland of South America.

Then there are groups like the Anasazi. Maybe defeated/destroyed by their own actions rather than being conquered by outsiders?

I think Iceland comes closest. The island was occupied by Allied forces in WWII, but were they conquered (by force and violence)?
The Irish and the Scots and Welsh have had their countries occupied by the English, forcibly, but have managed to maintain their culture through it all. Changing the names of the occupied and occupiers the same could be said of many groups.

It's an interesting question, but maybe no definitive answer.
Dave Barnes
Esri
Product Engineer
Map Geek

#39
natcase

natcase

    Ultimate Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 572 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minneapolis, Minnesota
  • Interests:cartography
    aeshetics
    cartographic design
    John Bartholomew
    road maps
    large-scale mapping
  • United States

What about the Toltec and/or Mayan civilizations?

They definitely suffered a decline, but some evidence shows it was not because of a conquest but environmental change or maybe just a long drought.

The Aztecs on the other hand, were brutally conquested.

bb


The Mayan people language and culture is still around, just not as a nation/state or high civilization. 6 million people in Guatemala, Honduras, Belize and Mexico. They were conquered.

Nat Case
INCase, LLC

Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
maphead.blogspot.com



#40
geomancer

geomancer

    Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Olavtoppen
  • Bouvet Island

For Easter Island and the Anasazi, see "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed" by Jared Diamond. Anyway, they are no longer independent nations.

Iceland was subject to Norway for a long time, and later to Denmark. It did not gain full independence until the end of WWII.

I'm not sure Scotland was ever occupied by the English, but it united with England in 1707 and so lost its independence.

Here are the candidates I think might qualify:

Arabia (now Saudi Arabia)
Bhutan
Liberia
Nepal
Russia
Sweden
Turkey/the Turks

Can anyone provide more information to support or disqualify these suggestions?

#41
rudy

rudy

    Ultimate Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Canada

Arabia - under the rule of the Ottomans for a while?
Bhutan - that's a good one. Cant think of any foreign takeovers here.
Liberia - indiependent since settled by former American slaves but then it would fall in the same category as other colonized nations, wouldn't it?
Nepal - see Bhutan above
Russia - overrun by Mongols, was it not? Maybe it wasn't really Russia then. Significant territorial losses in WW1 and 2 (or don't those count?)
Sweden - that's also a good one. Can't think of any good reasons for it not to be on the list.
Turkey - Alexander the Great, Romans, Persians, or does that go too far back?

My 2 cents.

#42
Hans van der Maarel

Hans van der Maarel

    CartoTalk Editor-in-Chief

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,881 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Interests:Cartography, GIS, history, popular science, music.
  • Netherlands

Arabia - under the rule of the Ottomans for a while?
Bhutan - that's a good one. Cant think of any foreign takeovers here.
Liberia - indiependent since settled by former American slaves but then it would fall in the same category as other colonized nations, wouldn't it?
Nepal - see Bhutan above
Russia - overrun by Mongols, was it not? Maybe it wasn't really Russia then. Significant territorial losses in WW1 and 2 (or don't those count?)
Sweden - that's also a good one. Can't think of any good reasons for it not to be on the list.
Turkey - Alexander the Great, Romans, Persians, or does that go too far back?


Arabia:
Yes, ruled by the Ottomans for some time. Not all of the territory of Saudi Arabia by the way, but the parts that were 'free' at that time were also very low in population (if any), so that might disqualify them.

Liberia:
I agree.

Russia is a good one. It depends on whether or not you qualify the French and the Germans as 'conquering'... Due to its size, it's simply impossible to fully conquer Russia. On the other hand, I guess you could consider the revolution as an event similar in impact to being conquered by a foreign power. Ruling class was totally replaced.

Sweden: Did have a personal union with Norway at one point. Lost territory to Denmark (south Sweden) and south of the Baltic.

Turkey: Would you consider modern-day Turkey to be the logical successor to the Ottoman Empire? (which, incidentally, started considerably smaller than modern-day Turkey and conquered quite some territory...)

I think Sweden, Nepal and Bhutan have some very good claims here.
Hans van der Maarel - Cartotalk Editor
Red Geographics
Email: hans@redgeographics.com / Twitter: @redgeographics

#43
frax

frax

    Hall of Fame

  • Associate Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,308 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stockholm, Sweden
  • Interests:music, hiking, friends, nature, photography, traveling. and maps!
  • Sweden

For Sweden - the union with Norway was more a "conquering" of Norway rather than Sweden - we got it in a peace agreement, and Norway was partially ruled together (with quite some independence) - until they were granted to separate.

But Sweden was part of the Kalmar Union long before that, ruled by Denmark.
Hugo Ahlenius
Nordpil - custom maps and GIS
http://nordpil.com/
Twitter

#44
travelbug

travelbug

    Key Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 54 posts
  • Hong Kong

What about the Toltec and/or Mayan civilizations?

bb


There are plenty of evidence of foreign invasion and occupation in Mayan cities, like in Copan Honduras. I doubt it can be called unconquered by any definition.

#45
Hans van der Maarel

Hans van der Maarel

    CartoTalk Editor-in-Chief

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,881 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Interests:Cartography, GIS, history, popular science, music.
  • Netherlands

How about San Marino? Founded in 301 AD and apparently unconquered until this day. Axis forces did cross its borders in WW2, but that was when they were on the retreat...
Hans van der Maarel - Cartotalk Editor
Red Geographics
Email: hans@redgeographics.com / Twitter: @redgeographics




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

-->