Since its publication in 1994, The Cambridge History of China, 6, Alien Regimes and Border States has been considered the classic work on conquest dynasties by the Western scholarship. Volume 6 provided comprehensive coverage of often neglected “alien regimes and border states.” While editors and writers were critical of overt sinocentric perspectives, the volume continued to place the conquest dynasties firmly within “Chinese history.” Such unilinear and “sinicization” framework have often distorted history of “alien regimes” established by northern Asiatic peoples. In other words, Khitans, Jurchens, Tanguts, and Mongols were relegated to the status of “minority peoples” of China, and the states they founded gained historical significance only as one stage in the continuous dynastic succession scheme within Chinese history. Thus, new and fresh perspectives on the conquest dynasties are needed to overcome such presentist tendencies. Through reexamination and critical evaluation of the 6 of The Cambridge History of China, we may look for new clues to break out of antiquated notions about Khitan Liao, Jurchen Jin, Tangut Xia, and Mongol Yuan periods trapped in the anachronistic historical concept of “China.”