Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
TheBalor
Jun 18, 2001
States far less durable than our own survived the Black Death, the 30 year's war, Mongol invasions, and more. We're talking 75%+ people in a country dying horribly and everything getting burned down. But they kept going. If medieval dynastic "states" could survive hammerblows like that, modern ones can survive far more.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

TheBalor
Jun 18, 2001

Cease to Hope posted:

no they absolutely did not. their replacements claimed to be their successors, but each of those things destroyed the order that proceeded them

So continuation of laws, forms of government, tax structures, even keeping the same leaders doesn't count as a state surviving? I didn't say everything was wonderful and it was business as usual, but society survived in highly recognizable fashion despite horribly traumatic events.

  • Locked thread