It’s something I’ve wondered for some time now: What is the oldest country on earth still in existence?
Thank you in advance to all who reply 
I dont know, but I think Iceland is the oldest operating democracy. Going on 1000 years now.
What do you mean by “country”?
One could say that Russia dates back to 988 with the baptism of Rus, or you could say it dates to 1991, with the fall of the Soviet Union and the creation of the Russian Federation.
And China has been around a few years.
I’ll leave that up to each individual making their case.
If you want to use a fairly loose definition, I’d put Greece in the running. They’ve existed in their current form only since the early 1800’s (cite), but there’ve been “Greeks” in some form or another for a really, really long time. According to Wikipedia, Athens was first started out (admittedly as a military fortress, but still) sometime late in the 3rd millennium BC.
San Marino claims to be the worlds oldest republic, having been founded in A.D. 301.
Well Iraq is named for the Sumerian city-state of Uruk which dates arround 2500BC.
wiki-link
This question seems to get asked a few times every year. If you do a search you should find some previous threads. The answers run the gamut of
*Various Northern Australian nations being over 30, 000 years old
through
*Some Pacific Island states like Fiji or New Caledonia being a few thousand years old
to
*Discounting all of mainland Europe because of Nazi/Soviet occupation and most of the rest of the world because of European/Japanese colonialism and invasion. That probably leaves England as the oldest contender since it was last invaded 250 years ago by Scotland.
Basically it’s unanswerable unless you define “country” very tightly. The first thing you need to decide whether it is based on the same exact borders, the same general borders or any part of the same geographic area being held. If the same exact borders then we can discount Germany and Russia for example, since both have changed borders within the last 20 years whereas island nations tend to maintain their integrity very well. But if it’s any part of the geographic area then both European countries would be contenders.
Then you need to decide if we are defining this by name, government or, genetics or ethnicity/culture. Parts of Germany for example were called the same approximate name by the Romans, so it may be a contender on that score and genetically. But ethically/culturally those people were not particularly similar. Governmentally Germany has changed hands numerous times in that period, and at best has only had its current government since WWII.
Then you need to decide at what point a country ceases to exist. Romania for example claims a descent from Rome in its name and history, so does it qualify as the inheritor of Rome, or does the change in geographic location from Italy and various occupations quash that claim. And does modern Greece really have a legitimate claim of unbroken existence from Hellenistic Greece? Similarly you need to decide whether Germany existed as a country while it was occupied by invading forces last century. What is your standard for existence, is it the same name, an independent government, a government in exile, a resistance movement? Can we suggest that ‘Kurdistan’ is an ancient nation despite currently being occupied, and having been occupied for millennia? Did New Caledonia cease to exist due to French occupation? Did Germany exist for the 40 or so years prior to 1990? Did Israel continue to exist for the 2000 years between the Roman occupation and the establishment of the modern state?
And last but not least you need to decide what a country is. Are the American Indian nations countries? They are certainly old in many cases and partially self-governing. What about Aboriginal Australian nations? They are older still, and also partially self-governing. And if they are not nations then was occupied Germany a nation? Is New Caledonia a country even now or is it a territory?
Old thread on this exact topic, for those interested:
- Tamerlane
Without some qualifier explaining what the criterion for “oldest” is, almost any country qualifies for the designation, provided that the definer comes up with a definition that makes it “oldest.”
Scarcely anyone would say that France became a country in 1958. Yet its current form of government dates back only that far. Did Luxembourg become a country in 963, when Graf Siegfried took possession of its castle, or in 1815 when the Holy Roman and French Empires relinquished their suzerainty over it, or in 1890 when it was separated from the Netherlands crown as an independent state? Does India date from the British withdrawal in 1947, or from the establishment of the Mogul Empire, or some other date? Does China date from some ungodly B.C. date that any three historians will have seven different opinions on, or 1949 when the People’s Republic was declared? Does Iceland date from the founding of the Althing or the ending of Danish suzerainty? Does the U.S. date from 1776 or 1789, or some other date? Does Guatemala date from the New Mayan Empire, independence from Spain, or the dissolution of the Central American Federation? What about the Czech Republic: from Premzyl in the 9th Century, 1918 when the Dual Monarchy freed it, 1945 when the Nazis were kicked out, or 1993 when Slovakia finally split? And a similar set of questions about Croatia.
Does continuity count? What if it was conquered for a few years? What if instead of a few years, it was a couple of centuries? Do the Assyrian and Chaldean Empires equal modern Iraq?
What about Egypt: two millennia of independence, then Persian and Macedonian rule, then independence under a Macedonian dynasty, then part of the Roman Empire, the Caliphate, autonomy again, the Ottoman Empire, autonomy again, protectorate of the U.K., independence again under Khedives and Kings, a republic, united with Syria in the U.A.R., then separate again? Where do you consider it a country and where not in that checkered history?
There’s a real problem with terms here.
China.
Egypt dates back to approximately 3200 BC, at least. Granting that it’s had various sorts of government since then, but the concept of “Egypt,” or the equivalent word in other languages - Kemet, or Misr, or what have you - has been clearly understood as being, well, what we consider to be Egypt since that time.
China dates back to at least approximately 1800 BC, the founding of the Shang dynasty; that’s the earliest verifiable point at which a “China” definitely existed.
I’d vote for Egypt. There were earlier civilizations, but none can clearly be attributed to an existing nation or state today.
Why not East Timor? It was first populated 30, 000 years ago and adopted agricultural ~8, 000 years ago. Being an island it can clearly be attributed to the existing nation of East Timor geographically.
Or Bouganville. Or Sri Lanka.
This is where we always run into problems, trying to define at what points a place was or was not a nation. But it’s hard to argue that Egypt has an unbroken history in the same location without being forced to concede that various island states have a far older existence. It’s even harder to argue that Khemet = Egypt without also conceding that the various names for these islands haven’t referred ot that island.
Or are you saying that a country has to have writing to even qualify as a country?
China? The People’s Republic of China was founded in 1949 - there are posters on this board older than China. Even if you count Taiwan, the Republic of China only dates back to 1912.
Antarctica.
The same folks who were running it 250,000 years ago are still running it now
If I may propose a criterion, how about this: First, the country has to have been ruled under the same system of government. So for the US, for instance, we would count since the ratification of the Constitution, and for the UK, we date from the end of Cromwell’s interregnum. Revolutions (even peaceful ones like the adoption of the US constitution) break continuity.
Second, the government has to have maintained continuous control over at least some piece of its territory. So the US civil war does not break continuity, since the Union maintained control of the North. But a government in exile hiding in some embassy can at most claim continuity only back to the founding of the embassy.
Based on the criteria of the duration of the current form of government, here’s how old the twenty five most populous countries in the world are:
China - 1949
India - 1950
United States - 1789
Indonesia - 1998
Brazil - 1988
Pakistan - 2001
Bangladesh - 1991
Russia - 1991
Nigeria - 1999
Japan - 1952
Mexico - 1917
Philipines - 1987
Vietnam - 1992
Germany - 1949
Egypt - 1970 (with significant changes in 1980 and 2005)
Ethiopia - 1994
Turkey - 1982
Iran - 1979 (with significant changes in 1989)
Thailand - 1992
France - 1958
United Kingdom - 1800
Democratic Republic of the Congo - no functional government since 1996
Italy - 1948
South Korea - 1988
Ukraine - 1996
Using the definition above, I think San Marino is the winner. I believe they have had the same government and officially at least remained independent.
I’d actually date that to the reign of Victoria. While the formal structure of government may not have changed since Cromwell, Victoria’s era made a subtle but very powerful alteration: the effective end of the monarchy. That was not the case in Cromwell’s day, and I think it bears mention as a major, if quiet, change.
San Marino was occupied by the Germans in the last few months of World War II.
The thing is if you go back as recently as 1800 and then work your way forward, you quickly find how few countries manage to remain continuously independant. In the last two centuries, pretty much every country outside of Europe was controlled by a European power at some point. And France under Napoleon or Germany under Hitler occupied most of the territory in Europe itself.