A question of nationality?

[sun]

Hi there,

I am wondering if there is any case in history as the sscenario below.

The territory of a region of a country was under a foreign military occupation, and then the people of the region evolved a interim status (a recognised nationality), but not a country. Finally, the occupied territory was returned to monther country, and then the nationality has gone.



Thank you.

 

[Maciamo]

This has happened many times in European history. Belgium alone has switched "overlord" countless times, but the national identity (well, identities, since the Flemish/Walloon dichotomy dates back to the late Antiquity) survived untouched. Culture and national identity can be surprisingly resilient. The southern provinces of the present Netherlands are still closer (or at least intermediary) to Flanders today than to other Dutch provinces, despite four centuries of separate evolution.

 

[Maciamo]

Another example is that of Alsace. It is different from Belgium because Alsace switched many times between French and German nationalities. Both countries claimed that Alsatians were nationals of their country, unlike Belgians who were never considered, say Spanish or Austrian. The result is that today Alsatians feel both French and German.

 

[JFWR]

Hi there,

I am wondering if there is any case in history as the sscenario below.

The territory of a region of a country was under a foreign military occupation, and then the people of the region evolved a interim status (a recognised nationality), but not a country. Finally, the occupied territory was returned to monther country, and then the nationality has gone.



Thank you.

Another example would be the Sudentenland. Historically German, conquered by Germany during WWII, then given back to what is now the Czech Republic and the idea of Sudentenland as no longer representing a German Czech identity is gone with the wind.