Created by Ajay Kumar
Last edited November 30, 2025
Created a new article
Ā 
small fix
Ā 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Act of forceful subjugation}}
{{short description|Act of forceful subjugation}}
{{Other uses}}
{{Other uses}}
[[File:Peter_Paul_Rubens_-_The_Triumph_of_Victory_-_WGA20328.jpg|thumb|''The Triumph of Victory'' by [[Peter Paul Rubens]]]]
[[File:Peter_Paul_Rubens_-_The_Triumph_of_Victory_-_WGA20328.jpg|thumb|''The Triumph of Victory'' by [[Peter Paul Rubens]] (painted {{circa | 1614}})]]
{{War}}
{{War}}


'''Conquest''' is the act of [[military]] [[wiktionary:subjugation|subjugation]] of an enemy by force of [[Weapon|arms]].<ref>Miquelon, Dale. 1977. [https://books.google.com/books?id=ALkJAQAAIAAJ&q=intitle:Society+intitle:and+intitle:Conquest+inauthor:Miquelon ''Society and Conquest'']. {{ISBN|0-7730-3132-4}}
'''Conquest''' involves achieving control of another entity's territory through [[war]] or [[Coercion (international relations)|coercion]].<ref>{{Cite book |last= Fazal |first= Tanisha M. |url= https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400841448 |title= State Death |date= 2011 |publisher= Princeton University Press |isbn= 978-1-4008-4144-8}}</ref> Historically, conquests occurred frequently in the international system, and there were limited normative or legal prohibitions against conquest.<ref name=":1">{{Citation |last= Gotberg |first= Brook |title= The End of Conquest: Consolidating Sovereign Equality |date= 2008 |work= International Norms and Cycles of Change |editor-last= Sandholtz |editor-first= Wayne |url= https://academic.oup.com/book/2340/chapter-abstract/142497228?redirectedFrom=fulltext |publisher= Oxford University Press |isbn= 978-0-19-538008-8 |editor2-last= Stiles |editor2-first= Kendall}}</ref> Ā 
</ref><ref>
Day, David. 2008. [https://books.google.com/books?id=9jvX0NvSbr8C&q=intitle:Conquest+intitle:How+intitle:Societies+intitle:Overwhelm+intitle:Others+inauthor:Day ''Conquest: How Societies Overwhelm Others'']. {{ISBN|0-19-923934-7}}
</ref>


[[Military history]] provides manyĀ  examples of conquest: the [[Roman conquest of Britain]], the [[Mauryan]] conquest of [[Afghanistan]] and of vast areas of the [[Indian subcontinent]], the [[Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire]] and various [[Early Muslim conquests|Muslim conquests]], to mention just a few.
The onset and diffusion of [[nationalism]] (the belief that nation and state should be congruent), especially in the 19th century, made the idea of conquest increasingly unacceptable to popular opinion. Prohibitions against conquest were codified with the establishment of the [[League of Nations]] following [[World War I]] and of the [[United Nations]] at the end of [[World War II]].<ref name=":1" />


The [[Norman conquest of England]] provides an example: it built on cultural ties, led to the subjugation of the [[Kingdom of England]] to Norman control and brought [[William I of England|William the Conqueror]] to the [[State crown|English throne]] in 1066.
Scholars have debated the strength of a [[Social norm|norm]] against conquest since 1945.<ref name=":2">{{Citation |last1= Goertz |first1= Gary |title= The Development of Territorial Norms and the Norm against Conquest |date= 2016 |work= The Puzzle of Peace |url= https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199301027.001.0001/acprof-9780199301027-chapter-5 |publisher= Oxford University Press |doi= 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199301027.001.0001 |isbn= 978-0-19-930102-7 |last2= Diehl |first2= Paul F. |last3= Balas |first3= Alexandru}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last= Altman |first= Dan |date= 2020 |title= The Evolution of Territorial Conquest After 1945 and the Limits of the Territorial Integrity Norm |url= https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-organization/article/abs/evolution-of-territorial-conquest-after-1945-and-the-limits-of-the-territorial-integrity-norm/E81D1E3F2C34CB00D8501BFDB363A1AD |journal=International Organization |language= en |volume= 74 |issue=3 |pages=490–522 |doi=10.1017/S0020818320000119 |issn=0020-8183 |s2cid= 226467742|url-access= subscription }}</ref> Conquest of large swaths of territory has been rare since the end of World War II.<ref name=":0" /> However, states have continued to pursue annexation of small territories.<ref name=":0" />


Conquest may link in some ways with [[colonialism]]. England, for example, experienced phases and areas of [[Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain | Anglo-Saxon]], [[Viking expansion | Viking]] and [[Normans | Franco-Norman]] colonisation and conquest.
==History==
[[Military history]] provides manyĀ  examples of conquest: the [[Roman conquest of Britain]], the [[Seleucid–Mauryan War|Mauryan conquest of Afghanistan]] and of vast areas of the [[Indian subcontinent]], the [[Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire]] and various [[Early Muslim conquests|Muslim conquests]], to mention just a few.


==Methods of conquest==
The [[Norman conquest of England]] led to the subjugation of the [[Kingdom of England]] to Norman control and brought [[William I of England|William the Conqueror]] to the [[State crown|English throne]] in 1066. Conquest may link in some ways with [[colonialism]]. England, for example, experienced phases and areas of [[Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain | Anglo-Saxon]], [[Viking expansion |Viking]] and [[Normans |Franco-Norman]] colonisation and conquest.
The [[Ottoman Empire|Ottomans]] used a method of gradual, non-military conquest in which they established [[suzerainty]] over their neighbours and then displaced their ruling [[dynasty|dynasties]]. This concept was first systematized by [[Halil İnalcık]].<ref>{{citation|author=PĆ”l Fodor|title=In quest of the golden apple: imperial ideology, politics, and military administration in the Ottoman Empire|page=111|year=2000}}</ref> Conquests of this sort did not involve violent revolution but were a process of slow [[Cultural assimilation|assimilation]], established by bureaucratic means such as [[census|registers of population and resources]] as part of the feudal ''[[timar]]'' system.<ref>{{citation|author=Halil Inalcik|title=Ottoman Methods of Conquest|journal=Studia Islamica|issue=2|pages=103–129|year=1954|doi=10.2307/1595144 |jstor=1595144}}</ref>


==Ancient conquests==
The ancient civilized peoples conducted [[war]]s on a large scale that were, in effect, conquests.<ref>''[https://books.google.com/books?as_q=&num=100&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_pt=ALLTYPES&as_vt=Cambridge+Ancient+History&as_auth=&as_pub=&as_sub=&as_isbn=&as_issn= Cambridge Ancient History]''. Vol I pg. 261, 519; Vol III, 99, 100-101 {{ISBN|0-521-85073-8}}</ref> In [[Ancient Egypt|Egypt]] the effects of invasion and conquest are to be seen in different racial types represented in paintings and sculptures.<ref>Petrie, W. [https://books.google.com/books?id=llIEGwAACAAJ&q=Races+of+Early+Egypt Races of Early Egypt]. JAI XXX, 103.</ref> Ā 
The ancient civilized peoples conducted [[war]]s on a large scale that were, in effect, conquests.<ref>''[https://books.google.com/books?as_q=&num=100&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_pt=ALLTYPES&as_vt=Cambridge+Ancient+History&as_auth=&as_pub=&as_sub=&as_isbn=&as_issn= Cambridge Ancient History]''. Vol I pg. 261, 519; Vol III, 99, 100-101 {{ISBN|0-521-85073-8}}</ref> In [[Egypt]] the effects of invasion and conquest are to be seen in different racial types represented in paintings and sculptures.<ref>Petrie, W. [https://books.google.com/books?id=llIEGwAACAAJ&q=Races+of+Early+Egypt Races of Early Egypt]. JAI XXX, 103.</ref> Ā 


Improved [[agriculture]] production was not conducive to [[peace]]; it allowed for [[Division of labour|specialization]] which included the formation of ever-larger militaries and improved [[weapon]] [[technology]]. This, combined with growth of [[population]] and [[political]] control, meant war became more widespread and destructive.<ref>Sumner, W. 1914. [https://books.google.com/books?id=Jg78GAAACAAJ&q=intitle:war+inauthor:sumner ''War''] Pg. 3.</ref> Thus, the [[Aztec]]s; [[Inca]]s; the African Kingdoms [[Dahomey]] and [[Benin Empire|Benin]]; and the ancient civilizations of [[Egypt]], [[Babylonia]], [[Assyria]] and [[Persia]] all stand out as more [[militarism|militaristic]] than the less organized societies around them. Military adventures were on a larger scale and effective conquest for the first time became feasible.
Improved [[agriculture]] production was not conducive to [[peace]]; it allowed for [[Division of labour|specialization]] which included the formation of ever-larger militaries and improved [[weapon]] [[technology]]. This, combined with growth of [[population]] and [[political]] control, meant war became more widespread and destructive.<ref>Sumner, W. 1914. [https://books.google.com/books?id=Jg78GAAACAAJ&q=intitle:war+inauthor:sumner ''War''] Pg. 3.</ref> Thus, the [[Aztec Empire|Aztec]]s; [[Inca]]s; the African Kingdoms [[Dahomey]] and [[Benin Empire|Benin]]; and the ancient civilizations of [[Ancient Egypt|Egypt]], [[Babylonia]], [[Assyria]] and [[Ancient Iran|Persia]] all stand out as more [[militarism|militaristic]] than the less organized societies around them. Military adventures were on a larger scale and effective conquest for the first time became feasible.
Ā 
The [[Ottoman Empire|Ottomans]] used a method of gradual, non-military conquest in which they established [[suzerainty]] over their neighbours and then displaced their ruling [[dynasty|dynasties]].Ā  This concept was first systematized by [[Halil İnalcık]].<ref>{{citation |author=PĆ”l Fodor |title=In quest of the golden apple: imperial ideology, politics, and military administration in the Ottoman Empire |page=111 |year=2000}}</ref> Conquests of this sort did not involve violent revolution but were a process of slow [[Cultural assimilation|assimilation]], established by bureaucratic means such as [[census|registers of population and resources]] as part of the feudal ''[[timar]]'' system.<ref>{{citation |author=Halil Inalcik |title=Ottoman Methods of Conquest |journal=Studia Islamica |issue=2 |pages=103–129 |year=1954 |doi=10.2307/1595144 |jstor=1595144}}</ref>
Ā 
=== Norms against conquest ===
Scholars have debated the existence of a norm against conquest since 1945.<ref name=":2" /><ref name=":0" /> Conquest of large swaths of territory has been rare, but states have since 1945 continued to pursue annexation of small swaths of territory.<ref name=":0" />
Ā 
The [[Russo-Ukrainian War]] can be considered a contemporary example of a war of conquest, taking into account that during the conflict there was, even if illegally in the eyes of international law, the [[Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation|Russian annexation of Crimea]] and [[Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts|parts of four southeast Ukrainian oblasts]] in 2014 and 2022, respectively.<ref>{{cite news |last1=MacFarquhar |first1=Neil |date=17 March 2024 |title=Five Takeaways From Putin's Orchestrated Win in Russia |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/17/world/europe/russia-election-putin-takeaways.html |work=The New York Times}}</ref> On the Russian precedent, Tanisha Fazal writes,<blockquote>Norms die slowly. Attempted land grabs as big and brazen as Russia’s in 2022 are likely to remain rare, at least for now. But as aggressors go more or less unpunished, states may increasingly act on territorial claims in murky jurisdictions—those least likely to trigger a significant international response. These small-scale attacks may prove most damaging to the norm against territorial conquest. As violence ticks up, the larger web of rules and institutions that make up the international system could begin to come undone. Although far from inevitable, the norm’s demise would leave the world in dangerous terrain.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Fazal |first=Tanisha M. |date=2025 |title=Conquest Is Back |url=https://www.foreignaffairs.com/russia/conquest-back |website=Foreign Affairs |language=en}}</ref></blockquote>


==Leading to migration==
==Leading to migration==
Military conquest has been one of the most persistent causes of human migrations.<ref>Howitt, A. 1910. [https://books.google.com/books?id=jVsgQwAACAAJ&q=intitle:native+intitle:tribes+inauthor:howitt ''Native Tribes'']. pg. 185-186, 678, 682-683</ref> There is a significant influence of migration and conquest on political development and state formation.Ā  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.
Military conquest has been one of the most persistent causes of human [[Human migration|migrations]].<ref>Howitt, A. 1910. [https://books.google.com/books?id=jVsgQwAACAAJ&q=intitle:native+intitle:tribes+inauthor:howitt ''Native Tribes'']. pg. 185-186, 678, 682-683</ref> There is a significant influence of migration and conquest on political development and state formation.Ā  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.


==Plunder==
==Plunder==
[[File:Bayeux Tapestry scene55 William Hastings battlefield.jpg|thumb|[[William the Conqueror]] leads his troops at the [[Battle of Hastings]], 1066, [[Bayeux Tapestry]].]] Ā 
[[File:Bayeux Tapestry scene55 William Hastings battlefield.jpg|thumb|[[William the Conqueror]] leads his troops at the [[Battle of Hastings]], 1066, [[Bayeux Tapestry]].]] Ā 
[[Plunder]] has in all times and places been a result of war, the conquerors taking whatever things of value they find. The desire for it has been one of the most common causes of war and conquest.<ref>Spencer, H. 1969. [https://books.google.com/books?id=MWZ_PgAACAAJ&q=intitle:Principles+intitle:of+intitle:Sociology+inauthor:Spencer ''Principles of Sociology I '']. pg. 631. {{ISBN|0-208-00849-7}}</ref>
[[Looting]] by a victorious army during war has been a common practice throughout recorded history.<ref name=":02">{{Cite journal |last=Sandholtz |first=Wayne |date=2008 |title=Dynamics of International Norm Change: Rules against Wartime Plunder |url=https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066107087766 |journal=European Journal of International Relations |language=en |volume=14 |issue=1 |pages=101–131 |doi=10.1177/1354066107087766 |issn=1354-0661 |s2cid=143721778|url-access=subscription }}</ref> In the wake of the [[Napoleonic Wars]] and particularly after [[World War II]], norms against wartime plunder became widely accepted.<ref name=":02" /> In modern [[Armed conflict|armed conflicts]], looting is prohibited by [[international law]], and constitutes a [[war crime]].<ref name="ICRC">[https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule52 Rule 52. Pillage is prohibited.], ''Customary IHL Database'', [[International Committee of the Red Cross]] (ICRC)/[[Cambridge University Press]].</ref><ref>[[Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907#Hague Convention of 1899|Hague Convention on the Law and Customs of War on Land]] (Hague II), [https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/hague02.asp article 28].</ref>


==The state==
==The state==
[[File:1871 Vereshchagin Apotheose des Krieges anagoria.JPG|thumb|[[Vasily Vereshchagin]], ''[[The Apotheosis of War]]'', 1871; dedicated "to all conquerors, past, present and to come", a pile of skulls in a wasteland.]]
[[File:1871 Vereshchagin Apotheose des Krieges anagoria.JPG|thumb|[[Vasily Vereshchagin]], ''[[The Apotheosis of War]]'', 1871; dedicated "to all conquerors, past, present and to come", a pile of skulls in a wasteland.]]
In the formation of the modern state, the conspicuous immediate causes are the closely related facts of [[human migration|migration]] and conquest.<ref>Jenks, E. 1919. [https://books.google.com/books?id=zryaaMdLEfYC ''The State and the Nation'']. pg. 121, 133, 152</ref> 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.<ref>Wissler, C. 1923. [https://books.google.com/books?id=845sAAAAIAAJ&q=intitle:man+intitle:and+intitle:culture+inauthor:wissler Man and Culture]. pg 42, 179.</ref>
In the formation of the modern state, the conspicuous immediate causes are the closely related facts of [[human migration|migration]] and conquest.<ref>Jenks, E. 1919. [https://books.google.com/books?id=zryaaMdLEfYC ''The State and the Nation'']. pg. 121, 133, 152</ref> 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.<ref>Wissler, C. 1923. [https://books.google.com/books?id=845sAAAAIAAJ&q=intitle:man+intitle:and+intitle:culture+inauthor:wissler Man and Culture]. pg 42, 179.</ref>


==Subjugation==
==Subjugation==
With subjugation, further class distinctions arise. The conquered people are enslaved; thus the widest possible social classes are produced: the [[slave|enslaved]] and the free. The slaves are put to work to support the upper classes, who regard war as their chief business. <ref>Gumplowicz, L. 1909. [https://books.google.com/books?id=OcHwQAAACAAJ&q=intitle:Der+intitle:Rassenkampf ''Der Rassenkampf''] pg. 163-175, 179-181, 219-238, 250-259</ref> The state is in origin a product of war and exists primarily as an enforced peace between conquerors and conquered.<ref>Keller, G. 1902.Ā  [https://books.google.com/books?id=fOg7QwAACAAJ&q=intitle:Homeric+intitle:Society+inauthor:Keller ''Homeric society''] pg. 248</ref> From slavery and from conquest, another result of war, sprang differentiation of classes and occupations termed the [[division of labour]].<ref>Nieboer, H. 1900. [https://books.google.com/books?id=ZHp9QwAACAAJ&q=intitle:slavery+inauthor:nieboer ''Slavery as an industrial system''].</ref> Through conquest, society became divided into a ruling militant class and a subject industrial class.Ā  The regulative function devolved upon the conquering soldiers and operations side to the [[serf]]s and slaves.
With subjugation, further class distinctions arise. The conquered people are enslaved; thus the widest possible social classes are produced: the [[slave|enslaved]] and the free. The slaves are put to work to support the upper classes, who regard war as their chief business.<ref>Gumplowicz, L. 1909. [https://books.google.com/books?id=OcHwQAAACAAJ&q=intitle:Der+intitle:Rassenkampf ''Der Rassenkampf'']{{Dead link|date=December 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} pg. 163-175, 179-181, 219-238, 250-259</ref> The state is in origin a product of war and exists primarily as an enforced peace between conquerors and conquered.<ref>Keller, G. 1902.Ā  [https://books.google.com/books?id=fOg7QwAACAAJ&q=intitle:Homeric+intitle:Society+inauthor:Keller ''Homeric society''] pg. 248</ref> From slavery and from conquest, another result of war, sprang differentiation of classes and occupations termed the [[division of labour]].<ref>Nieboer, H. 1900. [https://books.google.com/books?id=ZHp9QwAACAAJ&q=intitle:slavery+inauthor:nieboer ''Slavery as an industrial system''].</ref> Through conquest, society became divided into a ruling militant class and a subject industrial class.Ā  The regulative function devolved upon the conquering soldiers and operations side to the [[serf]]s and slaves.
Ā 
==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.<ref>Smyth, R. 1878. [https://books.google.com/books?id=wHBQPgAACAAJ&q=intitle:aborigines+intitle:of+intitle:victoria+inauthor:smyth ''The Aborigines of Victoria'']. Vol I. pg. 181</ref>Ā  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 [[Religious war|religiously motivated conquests]].


==Post-World War II==
==Recapture==
Scholars have debated the existence of a norm against conquest since 1945.<ref>{{Citation|last1=Goertz|first1=Gary|title=The Development of Territorial Norms and the Norm against Conquest|date=2016|url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199301027.001.0001/acprof-9780199301027-chapter-5|work=The Puzzle of Peace|publisher=Oxford University Press|doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199301027.001.0001|isbn=978-0-19-930102-7|last2=Diehl|first2=Paul F.|last3=Balas|first3=Alexandru}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Altman|first=Dan|date=2020|title=The Evolution of Territorial Conquest After 1945 and the Limits of the Territorial Integrity Norm|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-organization/article/abs/evolution-of-territorial-conquest-after-1945-and-the-limits-of-the-territorial-integrity-norm/E81D1E3F2C34CB00D8501BFDB363A1AD|journal=International Organization|language=en|volume=74|issue=3|pages=490–522|doi=10.1017/S0020818320000119|s2cid=226467742 |issn=0020-8183}}</ref> Conquest of large swaths of territory has been rare, but states have since 1945 continued to pursue annexation of small swaths of territory.<ref name=":0" />
The [[self-defence in international law|right of countries to engage in self-defence]] against a [[war of aggression]] is enshrined in the Article 51 of the [[Charter of the United Nations|UN Charter]].<ref name="j161"/> [[Military occupation]] can be seen as a continued attack against the [[self-determination]] of the occupied country. Some argue the right to armed recapture of illegally occupied territories increases with the passage of time.<ref name="j161">{{cite journal | last=Akande | first=Dapo | last2=Tzanakopoulos | first2=Antonios | title=Legal: Use of Force in Self-Defence to Recover Occupied Territory | journal=European Journal of International Law | volume=32 | issue=4 | date=31 December 2021 | issn=0938-5428 | doi=10.1093/ejil/chab109 | doi-access=free | pages=1299–1307 | url=https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:09b60629-e627-47f1-8cb1-3f8b9bcf3b88/files/sfx719p271}}</ref>


==See also==
==See also==
Ā 
{{Wiktionary|conquest}}
*[[Decolonization]]
*[[Invasion]]
*[[Invasion]]
*[[Right of conquest]]
*[[Right of conquest]]
Line 52: Line 53:
{{Reflist}}
{{Reflist}}


[[Category:Military terminology]]
==Notes==
{{notelist}}
Ā 
[[Category:Military occupation]]
[[Category:Annexation]]

Latest revision as of 22:56, 30 November 2025


The Triumph of Victory by Peter Paul Rubens (painted c.  1614)

Conquest involves achieving control of another entity's territory through war or coercion.[1] Historically, conquests occurred frequently in the international system, and there were limited normative or legal prohibitions against conquest.[2]

The onset and diffusion of nationalism (the belief that nation and state should be congruent), especially in the 19th century, made the idea of conquest increasingly unacceptable to popular opinion. Prohibitions against conquest were codified with the establishment of the League of Nations following World War I and of the United Nations at the end of World War II.[2]

Scholars have debated the strength of a norm against conquest since 1945.[3][4] Conquest of large swaths of territory has been rare since the end of World War II.[4] However, states have continued to pursue annexation of small territories.[4]

History[edit | edit source]

Military history provides many examples of conquest: the Roman conquest of Britain, the Mauryan conquest of Afghanistan and of vast areas of the Indian subcontinent, the Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire and various Muslim conquests, to mention just a few.

The Norman conquest of England led to the subjugation of the Kingdom of England to Norman control and brought William the Conqueror to the English throne in 1066. Conquest may link in some ways with colonialism. England, for example, experienced phases and areas of Anglo-Saxon, Viking and Franco-Norman colonisation and conquest.

The ancient civilized peoples conducted wars on a large scale that were, in effect, conquests.[5] In Egypt the effects of invasion and conquest are to be seen in different racial types represented in paintings and sculptures.[6]

Improved agriculture production was not conducive to peace; it allowed for specialization which included the formation of ever-larger militaries and improved weapon technology. This, combined with growth of population and political control, meant war became more widespread and destructive.[7] Thus, the Aztecs; Incas; the African Kingdoms Dahomey and Benin; and the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria and Persia all stand out as more militaristic than the less organized societies around them. Military adventures were on a larger scale and effective conquest for the first time became feasible.

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 İnalcık.[8] 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.[9]

Norms against conquest[edit | edit source]

Scholars have debated the existence of a norm against conquest since 1945.[3][4] Conquest of large swaths of territory has been rare, but states have since 1945 continued to pursue annexation of small swaths of territory.[4]

The Russo-Ukrainian War can be considered a contemporary example of a war of conquest, taking into account that during the conflict there was, even if illegally in the eyes of international law, the Russian annexation of Crimea and parts of four southeast Ukrainian oblasts in 2014 and 2022, respectively.[10] On the Russian precedent, Tanisha Fazal writes,

Norms die slowly. Attempted land grabs as big and brazen as Russia’s in 2022 are likely to remain rare, at least for now. But as aggressors go more or less unpunished, states may increasingly act on territorial claims in murky jurisdictions—those least likely to trigger a significant international response. These small-scale attacks may prove most damaging to the norm against territorial conquest. As violence ticks up, the larger web of rules and institutions that make up the international system could begin to come undone. Although far from inevitable, the norm’s demise would leave the world in dangerous terrain.[11]

Leading to migration[edit | edit source]

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.

Plunder[edit | edit source]

William the Conqueror leads his troops at the Battle of Hastings, 1066, Bayeux Tapestry.

Looting by a victorious army during war has been a common practice throughout recorded history.[13] In the wake of the Napoleonic Wars and particularly after World War II, norms against wartime plunder became widely accepted.[13] In modern armed conflicts, looting is prohibited by international law, and constitutes a war crime.[14][15]

The state[edit | edit source]

Vasily Vereshchagin, The Apotheosis of War, 1871; dedicated "to all conquerors, past, present and to come", a pile of skulls in a wasteland.

In the formation of the modern state, the conspicuous immediate causes are the closely related facts of migration and conquest.[16] 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.[17]

Subjugation[edit | edit source]

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.[18] The state is in origin a product of war and exists primarily as an enforced peace between conquerors and conquered.[19] From slavery and from conquest, another result of war, sprang differentiation of classes and occupations termed the division of labour.[20] 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.

Recapture[edit | edit source]

The right of countries to engage in self-defence against a war of aggression is enshrined in the Article 51 of the UN Charter.[21] Military occupation can be seen as a continued attack against the self-determination of the occupied country. Some argue the right to armed recapture of illegally occupied territories increases with the passage of time.[21]

See also[edit | edit source]

References[edit | edit source]

  1. ↑ Fazal, Tanisha M. (2011). State Death. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-1-4008-4144-8.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Gotberg, Brook (2008), Sandholtz, Wayne; Stiles, Kendall (eds.), "The End of Conquest: Consolidating Sovereign Equality", International Norms and Cycles of Change, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-538008-8{{citation}}: CS1 maint: work parameter with ISBN (link)
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 Goertz, Gary; Diehl, Paul F.; Balas, Alexandru (2016), "The Development of Territorial Norms and the Norm against Conquest", The Puzzle of Peace, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199301027.001.0001, ISBN 978-0-19-930102-7{{citation}}: CS1 maint: work parameter with ISBN (link)
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Altman, Dan (2020). "The Evolution of Territorial Conquest After 1945 and the Limits of the Territorial Integrity Norm". International Organization. 74 (3): 490–522. doi:10.1017/S0020818320000119. ISSN 0020-8183. S2CID 226467742.
  5. ↑ Cambridge Ancient History. Vol I pg. 261, 519; Vol III, 99, 100-101 ISBN 0-521-85073-8
  6. ↑ Petrie, W. Races of Early Egypt. JAI XXX, 103.
  7. ↑ Sumner, W. 1914. War Pg. 3.
  8. ↑ PĆ”l Fodor (2000), In quest of the golden apple: imperial ideology, politics, and military administration in the Ottoman Empire, p. 111
  9. ↑ Halil Inalcik (1954), "Ottoman Methods of Conquest", Studia Islamica (2): 103–129, doi:10.2307/1595144, JSTOR 1595144
  10. ↑ MacFarquhar, Neil (17 March 2024). "Five Takeaways From Putin's Orchestrated Win in Russia". The New York Times.
  11. ↑ Fazal, Tanisha M. (2025). "Conquest Is Back". Foreign Affairs.
  12. ↑ Howitt, A. 1910. Native Tribes. pg. 185-186, 678, 682-683
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Sandholtz, Wayne (2008). "Dynamics of International Norm Change: Rules against Wartime Plunder". European Journal of International Relations. 14 (1): 101–131. doi:10.1177/1354066107087766. ISSN 1354-0661. S2CID 143721778.
  14. ↑ Rule 52. Pillage is prohibited., Customary IHL Database, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)/Cambridge University Press.
  15. ↑ Hague Convention on the Law and Customs of War on Land (Hague II), article 28.
  16. ↑ Jenks, E. 1919. The State and the Nation. pg. 121, 133, 152
  17. ↑ Wissler, C. 1923. Man and Culture. pg 42, 179.
  18. ↑ Gumplowicz, L. 1909. Der Rassenkampf[permanent dead link] pg. 163-175, 179-181, 219-238, 250-259
  19. ↑ Keller, G. 1902. Homeric society pg. 248
  20. ↑ Nieboer, H. 1900. Slavery as an industrial system.
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 Akande, Dapo; Tzanakopoulos, Antonios (31 December 2021). "Legal: Use of Force in Self-Defence to Recover Occupied Territory". European Journal of International Law. 32 (4): 1299–1307. doi:10.1093/ejil/chab109. ISSN 0938-5428.

Notes[edit | edit source]