China's historical grand strategy: defensive or offensive?


The one we know today started from the revolutionaries during the end of the Qing dynasty and yes Sun Zhongshan was one of them.

Can you elaborate on how the modern definition of "Han" is different from the meaning back in the beginning of the Qing dynasty, or even earlier on?


Junior Member
Registered Member
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

The Han identity was definitely NOT created by Westerners. It is a firmly entrenched identity dating back to the Zhou dynasty (when it was called Huaxia instead of Han).

Now, over the millenia, the Huaxia/Han culture absorbed many other ethnic groups: Turks, Xianbei, Khitan, Manchu, etc.

The problem with Westerners is that they do not understand the difference between "Han" and "Chinese". That's why they say things like Yuan was a foreign dynasty, or that Liao was not Chinese.

Well, actually you've explained it perfectly. I'm specifically talking about the identity vs. "ethnicity". Westerners have tried to make it into the latter, when in Chinese history as I always understood it, was the former.


Junior Member
Registered Member
Can you elaborate on how the modern definition of "Han" is different from the meaning back in the beginning of the Qing dynasty, or even earlier on?
The issue with the modern definition is that it more or less is based on the the Western view of the Han ethnic group. To the West, people who are Han are ONLY people from the Yellow River basin and have last names like Li and Liu, but that doesnt make sense since Chinese history just breaks that definition. The Yuan, Qing, Five Barbarians and Sixteen Kingdoms, and other eras prove that the Han definition is basically what you said. The Song tried to pull basically the Western version of Han before the West even thought about it and failed. If I remember correctly, Taiwan still uses the revolutionary version of Han or some sort of derivative that is much more exclusive than the historical one.


Interesting paper and DNA study of Vanuatu people. turn out all the people from western pacific all the way to Hawaii are descendant from Nan man But how come the Melanesian does not look anything like East Asian Well turn out there are mixing with the papuan and depending on the ratio of mixing some look like Papuan, some like Polynesian(Hawaii, Tahiti, etc) look more like East Asian interesting. But the language and culture following the Nanman or Austronesian
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Where Did We Come From? The Origins Of The Ni-Vanuatu
  • By Matthew Spriggs
  • Oct 17, 2020
1 of 4
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Map showing the two earliest migrations to Vanuatu. The first, starting on the southern Chinese mainland 5000 years years ago reached Vanuatu 3000 years ago (3000BP). The second from New Britain occurred sometime between 2800 and 2400 years ago. The third migrations from Polynesia within the last 1000 years are not shown. The inset shows the proportions of East Asian (red) and New Britain Papuan (blue) ancestry in Vanuatu skeletons of different ages. From Lipson et al. 2018 in Current Biology.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Graph to show the mixing (admixture) between East Asians (Green) and New Britain Papuans (Blue) in various populations. Solomon Islands Papuan is pink, New Guinea Highlands Papuan is black. The Kankaneay are a Philippines people and the Atayal are a tribe of Indigenous Taiwanese. From Lipson et al. 2020, published yesterday in Current Biology.

Distribution of the Lapita culture across the Western Pacific. The earliest sites are in the Bismarck Archipelago. Map by Stuart Bedford.

Burial 10 at Teouma Lapita cemetery on Efate showing three skulls and a jaw placed on the skeleton's chest. The skull to the left and the one to the right were analysed in the new study and are almost exclusively East Asian in ancestry. Photo by Matthew Spriggs.

Most of us in Vanuatu know that the first people to arrive here were the ‘Lapita people’ some 3000 years ago. Before then the islands and plants and animals were here, but no people. But where did these Lapita people come from? And are Ni-Vanuatu their descendants?
Archaeologists, such as those of us at the Vanuatu Kaljoral Senta (VKS) and The Australian National University (ANU), have tried to answer the question often asked in the villages and nakamals when people find out who we are: “Where do we come from?”. We used to reply by talking about the very distinctive Lapita pottery decorations and their distribution in the Pacific with a trail back towards Island Southeast Asia where somewhat similar pottery is

It is no coincidence that both the first people to reach Vanuatu in early Lapita times and then the second group of New Britain Papuans both set off from the New Britain area, often called ‘The Lapita Homeland’. The Papuans were probably travelling on Lapita canoes or at least following the same known trade routes avoiding the Solomon Islands to reach Vanuatu directly. Over time the two groups inter-married and the descendants of this mixing are most Ni-Vanuatu of today, although the Papuan genetic ancestry is very much the dominant one. Ni-Vanuatu share 74 to 92 per cent of their genetic inheritance with New Britain Papuans, and only 8-24 per cent with those early Lapita individuals. But the New Britain Papuans were most likely Lapita people too, in the sense that they seem to have adopted Lapita culture and Austronesian languages on New Britain before they ever reached Vanuatu between about 2800 and 2400 years ago.