Thanks for the helpful replies. From these at least, 朝 is clearly used in different compounds to mean the current state / court, maybe current reign era. I don’t think the sense of family “dynasty” is strong.
https://twitter.com/JimMillward/status/1304152359904444416
Many of you intuited what I’m getting at: why not refer to these states as states? English / French “Dynasty” as used for China implies, it seems, that families come and go but the state remains. I don’t think past Chinese usage gave that sense. (More)
States definitely come and go in Chinese historiography. Their names change. Something continues, but not the 國，not the 朝. Yet we use “dynasty” like it’s just changing the batteries in the same device. New wine in the same bottle.
I did a quick and sloppy Ngram search for “Chinese Dynasty” in English books. Earliest eg was an English translation of Voltaire! Usage picks up from mid 19th century. I’m thinking dynasty is one of those trans lingual supersigns, like barbarian, tribute, or “China” itself—
Developed in a global discourse and feedback loop. But I’m ignorant about granular detail of how Chinese writers discuss past “Chinas” — whether that sense of reiterative continuity from one mortal enemy to the next is old, or a conceit of recent nationalism.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
