On the issue of the change of dynasty in European countries

The question is relatively long, and I may not understand some places, so tell me what I know and communicate with each other.

1. First of all, all the names of the countries you mentioned are common names or abbreviations, and it is difficult to verify them carefully, and the Chinese translations are basically set at the end of the Qing Dynasty

Britain had this name in the 5th century AD, and the Germanic people who occupied it at that time had the habit of "following the master", so at that time, England handed over Anglo-Saxon S Land, which slowly became Anglo S Land, and I don't know when it became England;

France is derived from the name Kingdom of the Franks, which was founded in the 5th century AD;

Germany, formerly known as the Kingdom of East Francia and later the Holy Roman Empire, ruled over an area called "Germany" (people's state) in Old Germanic German, which was only a geographical concept, larger than today's Germany. Later, Prussia and Austria competed to unify Germany, and after Bismarck's victory, he preemptively registered the name "German Empire", which translates to Germany in Chinese;

Spain is different from the first three Germanic countries, it was founded by North Africans "Spain" means hare in Phoenician, and the Carthaginians found many hares in the Iberian Peninsula, so they called it so Roman history should say this in detail;

The name "China" is rarely said in ancient times, and it is generally said that "China" is related to the formation of the two concepts of "** country" and "Huaxia nationality", the former was called so in the Yanhuang period, and the latter was probably formed in the pre-Qin period "China" is the abbreviation of "People's Republic of China" to put it bluntly How the West calls us depends on their language, and the pronunciation of "China" in Russian is "Khitan".

Now it can be regarded as a dynasty, but the nation-state has replaced the monarchy, so there is still a difference, and now we are not a family You are right, France, Germany, and Britain are collectively referred to

2. It can be corresponded.

3. There will definitely be, this is the cohesion of culture. Even though Spain was ruled by the Bourbons, it was still Spain, not France, and the monarchy and the nation were becoming more and more separated, which was also the general trend of the transformation of the monarchy into a nation-state.

There is not much difference between the change of dynasty, in essence, one family replaces another family, but there is a difference in the way of replacement You can "Spanish Succession War", I believe there will be a more intuitive understanding

Don't you know it yourself? It doesn't make a difference.

Just like Constantinople in the Eastern Roman Empire was a country, it was divided into three dynasties, and the change of dynasty was done through military coups.

I think the landlord said that China is often reincarnated and perished, and it is difficult to find China's inferior roots.

I only know that Europe will change dynasties only when there is a marriage of heirs, and China is at least a palace coup, a rebellion, an uprising, an invasion. In the Middle Ages, there were no clear national borders, and the sense of national identity was not high, and it was only in modern times that a unified state was gradually formed.

There are so many questions I just want to answer, the UK is just an abbreviation. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is the general term. As for when I think it was after the Glorious Revolution because it was only at that time that the constitutional monarchy was established, and this system is still there to this day, so I think it was at that time (my own analysis) that the latter countries are almost analyzed in this way, such as the People's Republic of China, her representative system is socialism, although this was established in 1956 after the completion of the three major transformations, but before that, it was determined because of the basic national conditions of the country.

Well, this is just my own analysis.

Who said no, like the Napoleonic dynasty of France instead of the Pampo dynasty.

The reason why there were frequent changes of dynasties in ancient China, on the contrary, observing those countries such as Japan and Europe, their dynasties could even last for hundreds or even thousands of yearsThis is mainly because in those countries their monarchs do not have much power, so for such a puppet king, it does not matter if the person who wants to be in power is overthrown or not.

WhileFor China, a centralized ancient country as a monarch, he is a symbol of power, if you want to get absolute rights, then you have to sit on the throne of the monarchSo there were many people in ancient Chinese history. They rose up one after another, ousted the original monarch from his throne, and sat on it again, this is the fundamental reason. And in ancient China, there were many countries that could last for hundreds of yearsFor example, the Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties accounted for 1,800 years of Chinese history, for example, the Xia Dynasty lasted about 471 years, the Shang Dynasty lasted about 500 years, and the Zhou Dynasty lasted 791 years.

The existence of these dynasties can be said to be quite long for other dynasties in ancient China. <>

The main difference between these dynasties and other dynasties is the difference in the methods of governance adopted between themAfter Qin Shi Huang unified the whole country, he began to adopt the county system, which gathered all the rights in ancient China to the ** zone, so that the eyes of the people of the whole country were fixed on the monarch. This will lead to a phenomenon, in the prosperous era of national tranquility, the people will sing praises and respect for the monarch and enter the troubled times, and after the people are not happy, there will be many people who want to rise up and drive down the monarch. <>

In ancient times, a dynasty from prosperity to decline, this is a very natural phenomenon, not long after the tranquility, it will inevitably enter the troubled times, and the dynasty will inevitably change. In those foreign countries, the monarch has no rights at all, so for those who want to be in power, it doesn't matter whether there is a monarch or not, naturally such a monarch will stay for a long time.

First, there is less land, which is easy to manage, and more people will lead to more contradictions. Second, although there are few changes of dynasties, the people in power are also very diligent. Thirdly, they did not unify the two thousand dynasties.

Because ancient China abolished the aristocracy and implemented the bureaucratic system very early. However, Europe and Japan have long practiced aristocratic politics, and the aristocratic group monopolizes political resources, and the class solidification is serious.

Because the divine power of Europe and Japan is higher than the imperial power, and the imperial power of ancient China is above all else, as long as the gods are not changed, Japan and Europe will not change dynasties.

There is no such country. In Japan, the emperor's family is said to be a lineage for all generations, and the bloodline inheritance has been preserved, and it is impossible to distinguish whether it is true or false. However, the experience of the emperor was a decoration in Japan for most of the time, and it was only after the end of the shogunate period that the Meiji Restoration was returned to the emperor, and the emperor had some status, and now the emperor is only a symbol of Japan and does not participate in politics.

That country has a new decline, this one doesn't exist.