Which historic conquerers assimilated and how did they fare?

[Ser Not Appearing]

Poorly worded passing thought:

One of the things that makes ADWD so obnoxious is Dany's lingering in Mereen... but more than lingering, it's her insistence on trying to have Mereen stay the same absent slaving (though she starts giving concessions on that as well). There are all sorts of pitfalls that she runs into but they're all generally summed up in the 'queen of rabbits must wear her floppy ears' inner dialogue she had going - meanwhile, she abandons her quest for Westeros, her dragons, the advice of trusted advisors.

It's easy to say she is the conquerer and should do what she wants, while Mereen adapts. I tend to agree... but I wonder if history has examples of her general approach having worked?

Dany allowed the former rulers to continue existing with considerable power and even married into them, accepting their religious practices and customs. Her own preferences were set aside. The conquerer assimilated.

Has this worked in the past? Who was it and how'd it work out?

[Faydra]

Aegon and his sisters did the same. The Targaryens of old worshiped other gods (Balerion, Meraxes etc), but the ones that we know worship the seven. Any conqueror keen on surviving has to keep alive some of his country's old traditions.

ETA: I had no idea you actually meant the history of the real world.

[Knight Of Winter]

Alex the Great is probably the best example. His father conquered Greece, but made sure his successor is taught by finest Greek mind (Aristotle). When Alex went to on conquer Persia, Egypt and other lands, he spread Greek culture around, but also adopted many local customs. His adoption of too many Perisan customs even lead to friction and death of one of his generals who argued against it.

Alexander's generals who divided his empire also adopted many of local cultures. Descendants of Ptolomey (Cleopatra, among others) even styled themselves pharaohs.

William the Conqueror is another famous example. He was leader of Vikings from Normandy (already pretty mingled with local French folk) who conquered England and whose descendants totally assimilated into it.

[James Arryn]

Slaver's Bay doesn't matter in and of itself. It's Dany's Driver's Training Car. It's where we get to see she really cares before Fire and Blood confuses the issue.

[James Arryn]

Alex the Great is probably the best example. His father conquered Greece, but made sure his successor is taught by finest Greek mind (Aristotle). When Alex went to on conquer Persia, Egypt and other lands, he spread Greek culture around, but also adopted many local customs. His adoption of too many Perisan customs even lead to friction and death of one of his generals who argued against it.

Alexander's generals who divided his empire also adopted many of local cultures. Descendants of Ptolomey (Cleopatra, among others) even styled themselves pharaohs.

William the Conqueror is another famous example. He was leader of Vikings from Normandy (already pretty mingled with local French folk) who conquered England and whose descendants totally assimilated into it.

Oi.

Macedonian/Hellenistic culture is probably arguable.

To say the Normans completely assimilated is probably wrong; although recent arguments have been raised about HOW dramatic the change was, most agree it was pretty significant. Just the forest laws alone are a complete game-changer.

[Knight Of Winter]

Oi.

Macedonian/Hellenistic culture is probably arguable.

To say the Normans completely assimilated is probably wrong; although recent arguments have been raised about HOW dramatic the change was, most agree it was pretty significant. Just the forest laws alone are a complete game-changer.

Oi. Of course of change was significant - they were conquerors who just conquered whole foreign country and expected to rule it. Hardly one violent change of rulership goes without significant changes, even when it happens among one nation (like coup or civil war). I said that (to my knowledge) William's successors were way more assimilated into English culture than the other way around.

[James Arryn]

Oi. Of course of change was significant - they were conquerors who just conquered whole foreign country and expected to rule it. Hardly one violent change of rulership goes without significant changes, even when it happens among one nation (like coup or civil war). I said that (to my knowledge) William's successors were way more assimilated into English culture than the other way around.

I think it's interesting to look at the Normans in southern Italy and the Crusader States to see where what's left over is the original, and what is the Norman working blueprint.

Feudalism, castle culture, forest laws, stone architecture, Roman abbeys, etc. in my mind suggest that though especially when it came to finances William et al adapted...Henry I more than others out of desperation...I think there was a much greater change with the Normans than let's say the Vikings represented to the Anglo-Saxons.

Edit: bigger picture, too, is that England went from an extension of the Baltic/Scandinavian world/culture to an extension of the Mediterranean world/culture.

[Minstral]

Oi. Of course of change was significant - they were conquerors who just conquered whole foreign country and expected to rule it. Hardly one violent change of rulership goes without significant changes, even when it happens among one nation (like coup or civil war). I said that (to my knowledge) William's successors were way more assimilated into English culture than the other way around.

And yet French would be the language of the court for many generations to come. You might be able to argue that English culture is a combination of the old Anglo-Saxon practices and language blended in with the Norman/French customs (with some french words).

One of the most influential foreign conquerors would probably be the Mongols and the Steppe people that accompanied them. Their impact on the Asian continent really cannot be denied, and many of these rulers would later convert to Islam and found new centers of power in other regions. Like the Mughals on the Indian Subcontinent, or the short lived state in Iran/Persia under Tamerlane that preceded it (he was actually someone that wanted to re-establish the Mongols at the height of their power, but died in a campaign against China). .

[AryaNymeriaVisenya]

Alex the Great is probably the best example. His father conquered Greece, but made sure his successor is taught by finest Greek mind (Aristotle). When Alex went to on conquer Persia, Egypt and other lands, he spread Greek culture around, but also adopted many local customs. His adoption of too many Perisan customs even lead to friction and death of one of his generals who argued against it.

Alexander's generals who divided his empire also adopted many of local cultures. Descendants of Ptolomey (Cleopatra, among others) even styled themselves pharaohs.

William the Conqueror is another famous example. He was leader of Vikings from Normandy (already pretty mingled with local French folk) who conquered England and whose descendants totally assimilated into it.

Alexander both defined and cast aside the concept of East and West (we are all East and West of somewhere!) He went into Egypt, saw their gods and didn't think they were evil or imposters but that they were different visions of the same gods he had. He declared himself the true son of Zeus-Ammon (Amun). Stunning tolerance for his age.

William the Conqueror didn't assimilate. The Normans as a whole didn't mix for a very long time, but there weren't very many. They overtook the ruling classes everyone else was still Saxon. Its estimated that there were 4000 Normans and 2 million Saxons who the Normans thought were beneath them. The first generation didn't speak a word of English. It wasn't until Henry IV in 1399 that the coronation oath was said in English again after 1066. The Lionheart didn't speak a word of English. Henry V was the first to use written English and he leathered the French. Some would argue that the 'Normans' were never fully English until Henry V. The current crop probably won't be considered fully English until William takes the throne, the Hanoverian succession was a sham.

Oi.

Macedonian/Hellenistic culture is probably arguable.

To say the Normans completely assimilated is probably wrong; although recent arguments have been raised about HOW dramatic the change was, most agree it was pretty significant. Just the forest laws alone are a complete game-changer.

That Macedonia/Greece argument will forever be weird to us outsiders. Alexander was completely Greek, just like Aristotle but he and his dad did conquer what is now the FYROM. Macedon culture spread to FYROM but it didn't originate there. But its great that the name Macedonia is still so important. We've lost a load of great ancient Med/Eastern names over time. Come on, Persia is so much better than Iran but rounding back to ASOIAF, the Iranians have conversationally called their country Arya.

[Gibzit]

The westerosi traditions dany is trying to implement are so radiccly diffrent from the ghiscari traditions the meereense still follow, that i don't think dany will be succsesfull of abolishing slavery, dany has to leave for westeros, and when she does, the yunkai'i or the new ghiscari or somebody else who will be glad to take what she left behind, no matter how many olive trees she plants meereen will not be a strong city for a long time, unless she leaves the unsullied to guard the new council she leaves behind meereen will probably be conquered by its neighbors, now im definatly not saying she need to return slavery its a horrible practice im glad she is trying to abolish, but the only way she would really protect her city, is staying there or leaving considerable defences behind and a very capable council, not hidzhar.

[Gibzit]

The westerosi traditions dany is trying to implement are so radiccly diffrent from the ghiscari traditions the meereense still follow, that i don't think dany will be succsesfull of abolishing slavery, dany has to leave for westeros, and when she does, the yunkai'i or the new ghiscari or somebody else who will be glad to take what she left behind, no matter how many olive trees she plants meereen will not be a strong city for a long time, unless she leaves the unsullied to guard the new council she leaves behind meereen will probably be conquered by its neighbors, now im definatly not saying she need to return slavery its a horrible practice im glad she is trying to abolish, but the only way she would really protect her city, is staying there or leaving considerable defences behind and a very capable council, not hidzhar.

[Knight Of Winter]

JamesArryn, Minstral, AryaNymeriaVisenya - point taken in regards to William the Conqueror. At least I learned something new today :)

[Knight of the Teabags]

Any conqueror keen on surviving has to keep alive some of his country's old traditions.

Yes true and arguably some of the most successful conquests in history are the ones where the conquerors do this and ultimately what will emerge a new culture which is a fusion between the conquerors and the conquered. However what the conquerors should be really thinking in terms is providing ways that make it easier and attractive for the conquered and ideas from the conquered culture to assimilate into the conquerors' culture. This takes a bit of good will on both parts and definitely sincerity as well time and patience.

That I think is that was seriously lacking in the case of Dany in Mereen was good will and sincerity on (I think) the vast majority of actors of both parts. From Dany's POV we see she basically views the 'floppy rabbit ears' as fancy dress, though she tries in her heart she simply doesn't take it seriously. Further more I don't think we ever see any aspect of Mereenese/Ghiscari culture that she considers attractive or worthy of being assimilated into her 'conqueror culture'. We don't get a direct POV from the Mereenese but the fact Dany doesn't really sincerely help create the 'bridges' which will attract the conquered Mereenese to assimilate into a fusion Dany/Mereenese culture doesn't bode well for that successful conquest culture emerging anytime soon.

Successful conquerors absorb the cultures they conquer, take ideas from where they conquer and move on and ultimately they become something entirely new which draws heritage from the original conqueror culture and those cultures it assimilates along the way. Talking about the Normans as seems popular so far they seem to take ideas and concepts from pretty much culture they encounter in their wanderings and conquests. Originally as norsemen they acquire the area of Northern France that later becomes Normandy picking up on the way frankish military models and embracing Christianity and church learning (including Latin), then serving as mercenaries for the Byzantines in Italy in the 1040s (which they later conquer), Greece and Asia Minor they learn the crouched lance technique and more sophisticated architecture techniques from the early Italians (who themselves are a fusion culture of the Romans and Frankish tribes such as the Lombards), the Byzantines and the Arabs in Sicily. Some of the Normans stay in southern Italy and form with other cultures the Kingdom of Sicily, first becoming Italeo-Normans, then Sicilian and finally Italians thanks to another conquest by Garibaldi but the Kingdom of Sicily which the Normans found exists well into the 1860s some might even say Sicilian culture is still being assimilated into Italian culture!

Looking at the Normans that go back to Normandy and then conquer Anglo-Danish England (yet another fusion culture!) with William the Bastard in 1066 they certainly see parts of Anglo-Danish culture they like. Particularly the Anglo-Danish bureaucracy which they recognize as superior to Norman ones the concept of the shire as the basic model of English government and English money. More interestingly overtime the thugs at Hastings who are crudely referred to as simply 'horsemen' in norman french take some ideas about oaths and codes of behaviour from Harold's Housecarls on the other side creating a new name for themselves from the old English verb to kneel - yes knight a concept most associated as emerging with the Normans is in origin an Anglo-Danish word! Interestingly one of most quoted first historian on the Norman conquest Orderic Vitalis some forty years or so after 1066 is shown by his name and his own admission to be a product of the fusion of two cultures. Yes there is a cultural and linguistic divide between the Francophone Anglo-Norman nobility and the old English-speaking peasantry they rule for hundreds of years after the conquest but by the mid 13th century (largely thanks Normandy itself being conquered by France in 1204) the concept of England and the English has emerged and that concept is an England which is as much Norman in origin as it is the Anglo-Danish culture it conquered in 1066 and it continues in a form today...

Successful conquering cultures absorb ideas and people and then they evolve into something else, the conquerors and the conquered becoming the shared history of the culture that emerges and continues.

[James Arryn]

Alexander both defined and cast aside the concept of East and West (we are all East and West of somewhere!) He went into Egypt, saw their gods and didn't think they were evil or imposters but that they were different visions of the same gods he had. He declared himself the true son of Zeus-Ammon (Amun). Stunning tolerance for his age.

Agree with most of your post, excepting bold. It seems counter-intuitive, but we as a civilization have gotten much less tolerant of other religions over time. It's mostly monotheism's fault. But Alexander's view was much more normal for the classical world than it would be for ours. Religions all kinda jumbled together, often adapting or co-opting versions of each other. Egyptian gods and Greek gods and Roman gods can all be seen as distinct or as versions of each other, and the same largely goes for other cultures of the region/time.

The sort of 'everyone's gods are welcome' attitude would probably be more clearly evident in the Roman world, but the Greeks and Macedonians saw things like language as a more problematic barrier than religion. Not saying religion wasn't important...though by Alexander's time the Greek world was largely going through something like modern skepticism...just that it wasn't usually an issue of conflict because the nature of polytheism is much more inclusive than monotheism. We tend to think everything advances towards the rational, but that's not always the case.

Macedonians were a bit more provincial than most Greek states, and so it might be more true that Alexander was more flexible than his immediate contemporaries, but his attitudetowards religion wouldn't have been remarkable in the Greek world as a whole, I don't think. His attitude towards other cultural aspects however WAS pretty tolerant, and most notably was an extreme reversal of Aristotle's view, which was fundamental to Alexander for most of his life. It's interesting to try and determine when that break came, and why. Some think he arrived at a pragmatic problem-solving fusion, others think his increased sense of his own divinity made cultural differences seem trivial. And then there's just sheer experiential exhaustion. We'll never know, but it makes for interesting discussion.

[James Arryn]

JamesArryn, Minstral, AryaNymeriaVisenya - point taken in regards to William the Conqueror. At least I learned something new today :)

Cheers, and apologies for tone. When I'm writing I'm usually thinking conversationally, like enjoying the discussion, and then later I'll read what I wrote and it can come off a bit NO YOU ARE WRONG, THIS IS WHY, but that's honestly not how I'm thnking (usually).

[Taenqyrhae]

The Mongols assimilated into Chinese culture after conquering them. They became the Ming dynasty.

[JoeyBanana]

Bringing in (some, not all of) your own traditions/systems and culture (and enforcing it) has worked pretty well for many conquerers, complete assimilation is very rare, i think. If the ruling class is too dependant on local assistance, particularly in administrative and military issues, your dynasty doesn't have the power or influence to prevent being removed when your successors lose the edge (dragons or w/e it is) that gave you the tools to conquer and take over. Even worse if your subjects resent you, which they tend to do when you're considered foreign or savage.

So i'm really against saying that Dany should embrace the culture and traditions of Slaver's Bay, at least not too much. She obviously can't change everything, but simply assimilating is not a good solution. The fighting pits is an example of something she should adopt and maybe modify to her liking, as she did.

But slavery, as it is the basis of power and economy for the old ruling class, would be a mistake to bring back. She needs to establish her own economy and remain in control of whatever it will be. Not that it really matters since she's going to leave for Westeros anyway and we can't spend years of aSoIaF time with that nonsense.

[JoeyBanana]

The Mongols assimilated into Chinese culture after conquering them. They became the Ming dynasty.

The Ming overthrew the Mongol rulers, the Yuan dynasty.

[Minstral]

The Mongols assimilated into Chinese culture after conquering them. They became the Ming dynasty.

Which they did in other areas as well, though all these states/individuals would need bend to the head Khan until their hegemony collapsed. Powers that came out of the Steppes and nobles that traced their descent from Temurjin (Ghengis) would continue long after the collapse of the "Golden Horde". I think even after the Ming collapse the leaders of the military could still claim ancestry amongst the mongols for a time.

Edit: I go by memory half the time when on this board. Thanks JoeyBanana

Bringing in (some, not all of) your own traditions/systems and culture (and enforcing it) has worked pretty well for many conquerers, complete assimilation is very rare, i think. If the ruling class is too dependant on local assistance, particularly in administrative and military issues, your dynasty doesn't have the power or influence to prevent being removed when your successors lose the edge (dragons or w/e it is) that gave you the tools to conquer and take over. Even worse if your subjects resent you, which they tend to do when you're considered foreign or savage.

So i'm really against saying that Dany should embrace the culture and traditions of Slaver's Bay, at least not too much. She obviously can't change everything, but simply assimilating is not a good solution. The fighting pits is an example of something she should adopt and maybe modify to her liking, as she did.

But slavery, as it is the basis of power and economy for the old ruling class, would be a mistake to bring back. She needs to establish her own economy and remain in control of whatever it will be. Not that it really matters since she's going to leave for Westeros anyway and we can't spend years of aSoIaF time with that nonsense.

What is interesting to note is that to an extent Persian/Iranian culture and/or professions was shaped in this manner to support rulers that did not have indigenous origins . With the collapse of the Zoroastrian religion and authority to the Arabic Caliphates many scholars began filling a sort of expertise role for the conquerors. With the region and people conquered by so many over the next thousand years or so this trend would continue to an extent for a long time. You could make a case that they either benefited from this arrangement, or that there culture and people were plundered and forced to bend to varying conquering peoples from the deserts to the steppes.

[Ser Not Appearing]

Interesting discussion. Partial / tailored assimilation is more supported by some of these examples than I'd have thought.

I'd be interested in opinions from the historians among us regarding what Dany is doing wrong. May be hard to do with a work of fiction, but if we treat it as a case study and try to apply successful examples of history... what are Dany's true missteps?