hello haim, am unsure about actually 'explaining' china, but i do note that
(i) however many 'nations' were mostly very-close and immediate branches of the very same tribe, most of the time, and those were most assuredly of the nature whereby they held one belief system, operated in one written language even as pronunciation differences are pronounced, governed by same protocol, and carrying on and on. the mere change of dynasties did not qualify as interruption of civilization, and by their very nature were more akin to change of administration, albeit family administrations
just for example, i sport 14% genetic material from the mongols, and i am guessing that be the absorbed portion of some past invasion, or migration. i suspect more invasion and less migration.
of course i also sport 11% west african dna and 12% aggregated from basque / orkney island and france, and those are more likely than not outcomes of migration rather than invasion, although i understand the orkney island folks started out as invaders from elsewhere.
(ii) during certain periods where there were multiple / concurrent chinese administrations, such as now, the administrations were and are mostly administrating over very-close and immediate branches of the very same tribe, and those were and are most assuredly of the nature whereby the subjects in enough numbers held / hold one belief system, operated / operating in one language, governing by more rather than less same protocol, and carrying on and on. the existence of multiple administrations again do not qualify as interruption of civilization, and by their very nature were more akin to change-of-administration in-progress
(iii) during certain periods when china was invaded, china however defined managed to absorb the invaders, compel adaptation of china ways, or otherwise outlasted the invaders by either outright rout, or rout-in-progress
the emphasis is on 'in-progress', given the time scale 'china' operates under.
china had been invaded many times, or too many times, but never suffered existential danger, imo
according to the history books tibetan empire (meaning an entity where people were not mostly of the same tribe, and did not hold to the same belief system, etc etc) invaded china, first in 635 ad, a bad move, and after that, history did what history did to all invaders against china, and history is still progressing last time i checked.
(iv) i am supposing that what the jewish view is of jews tie to the land surrounding jerusalem, the chinese hold to same ties to china, including the territories of routed invaders.
practicality of time scales used by different groups of people may or may not be arbitrary but in any case is of no relevance, i trust, else the sorting out gets complicated. |
