Conquest (military)

For other uses, see Conquest.

Warfare Military history
Eras Prehistoric Ancient Medieval Gunpowder Industrial Modern Battlespace Air Information Land Sea Space Weapons Armor Artillery Biological Cavalry Chemical Electronic Infantry Nuclear Psychological Tactics Attrition warfare Guerrilla warfare Maneuver warfare Siege Total war Trench warfare Conventional warfare Unconventional warfare Asymmetric warfare Counter-insurgency Network-centric warfare AirLand Battle Cold war Proxy war Strategy Economic Grand Operational Organization Ranks Command and control Staff Intelligence Education and training Logistics Technology and equipment Materiel Supply chain management Military engineering Lists Battles Commanders Operations Sieges Wars War crimes Weapons Writers
Portal  v · d · e

Conquest is the act of military subjugation of an enemy by force of arms.^[1][2] One example is the Norman conquest of England, which provided the subjugation of the Kingdom of England and the acquisition of the English crown by William the Conqueror in 1066. There are many other examples of conquest throughout military history: the Roman conquest of Britain, the Mauryan conquest of Afghanistan and the entire Indian subcontinent, Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire and various Muslim conquests are just a few.

Ancient conquests

The ancient civilized peoples conducted wars on a large scale that were, in effect, conquests.^[3] In Egypt the effects of invasion and conquest are to be seen in different racial types represented in paintings and sculptures.^[4] Both Assyrians and Egyptians often waged against their less civilized race, or at least of the whole adult male populace and the absorption of the women and children by the conquering race, so as practically to extinguish the conquered tribe.^{[clarification needed]}

Improved agriculture production was not conducive to peace, it allowed for specialization including the formation of ever larger militaries and improved weapon technology. This combined with growth of population and political control, war becomes more widespread and destructive.^[5] Thus, the Aztecs, Incas, African Kingdoms of Dahomey and Benin and the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria and Persia all stand out as more militaristic than the less civilized tribes about them. Military adventures were on a larger scale and effective conquest now for the first time became feasible.

Conquest and plunder

Plunder has in all times and places been a result of war, the conquerors taking whatever parable things of value they find, the desire for it has been one of the commonest causes of war and conquest.^[6]

Subjugation

With subjugation, further class distinctions arise. The conquered people are enslaved; thus the widest possible social classes are produced: the enslaved and the free. The slaves are put to work to support the upper classes, who regard war as their chief business. With effective conquest, subjugation and enslavement the state arises and not before.^[7] The state is in origin a product of war and exists primarily as an enforced peace between conquerors and conquered.^[8] From slavery and from conquest, another result of war, sprang differentiation of classes and occupations termed the division of labour.^[9] Through conquest, society became divided into a ruling militant class and a subject industrial class. The regulative function devolved upon the conquering soldiers and operations side to the serfs and slaves.

Conquest and the state

In the formation of the modern state, the conspicuous immediate causes are the closely related facts of migration and conquest.^[10] The state has increased civilization and allowed increased cultural contact allowing for a cultural exchange and stimulus; frequently the conquerors have taken over the culture of their subjects.^[11]

Conquest leading to migration

Military conquest has been one of the most persistent causes of human migrations.^[12] There is a significant influence of migration and conquest on political development and state formation. Conquest leading to migration has contributed to race mixture and cultural exchange. The latter points influence on conquest has been of far greater significance in the evolution of society. Conquest brings humans into contact, even though it is a hostile contact.

Culture after conquest

After a conquest where a minority imposes itself on a majority, it usually adopts the language and religion of the majority, through this force of numbers and because a strong government can be maintained only through the unity of these two important facts.^[13] In other cases, especially when the conquerors create or maintain strong cultural or social institutions, the conquered culture could adopt norms or ideas from the conquering culture to expedite interactions with the new ruling class. These changes were often imposed on the conquered people by force, particularly during religiously motivated conquests.

Methods of conquest

The Ottomans used a method of gradual, non-military conquest in which they established suzerainty over their neighbours and then displaced their ruling dynasties. This concept was first systematized by Halil Inalcik.^[14] Conquests of this sort did not involve violent revolution but were a process of slow assimilation, established by bureaucratic means such as registers of population and resources as part of the feudal timar system.^[15]

References

1. ^ Miquelon, Dale. 1977. Society and Conquest. ISBN 0773031324
2. ^ Day, David. 2008. Conquest: How Societies Overwhelm Others. ISBN 0199239347
3. ^ Cambridge Ancient History. Vol I pg. 261, 519; Vol III, 99, 100-101 ISBN 0521850738
4. ^ Petrie, W. Races of Early Egypt. JAI XXX, 103.
5. ^ Sumner, W. 1914. War Pg. 3.
6. ^ Spencer, H. 1969. Principles of Sociology I . pg. 631. ISBN 0208008497
7. ^ Gumplowicz, L. 1909. Der Rassenkampf pg. 163-175, 179-181, 219-238, 250-259
8. ^ Keller, G. 1902. Homeric society pg. 248
9. ^ Nieboer, H. 1900. Slavery as an industrial system.
10. ^ Jenks, E. 1919. The State and the Nation. pg. 121, 133, 152
11. ^ Wissler, C. 1923. Man and Culture. pg 42, 179.
12. ^ Howitt, A. 1910. Native Tribes. pg. 185-186, 678, 682-683
13. ^ Smyth, R. 1878. The Aborigines of Victoria. Vol I. pg. 181
14. ^ Pál Fodor (2000), In quest of the golden apple: imperial ideology, politics, and military administration in the Ottoman Empire‎, p. 111 
15. ^ Halil Inalcik (1954), Ottoman Methods of Conquest, http://www.jstor.org/pss/1595144 

See also

• Right of conquest
• Victory