Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

to massacre and being massacred...

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
babyblue View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 06-Aug-2004
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1174
  Quote babyblue Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: to massacre and being massacred...
    Posted: 16-Oct-2004 at 02:17

      one thing that's plagued me for the few months is the phenomonen where men goes to conquer another country and massacres it's civilians. i don't know how to say this...but is it a method somehow of proving a particular race to be superior than another? i don't want superficial and shallow answers like "no, all races are equal" or "no, all human beings are the same, no race is superior or inferior".

             of course i know that everyone human being is equal. but why is it that some people are always the same group who commits these massacres, and some groups have always bore the brunt of it? you guys know what i mean?

           after a successful conquest, be it complete or partial of a nation or a region of many nations...is massacre a method of showing off one's triumph? and the indiscrimate raping of their woman a way to show how the conquerors are reigning supreme and the conquered men are hopeless even in defending their womens?



Edited by babyblue
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2004 at 04:08

Well...Armenia has bore the brunt of conquests and massacres as it has been conquered by every major empire that has ever set foot in the region. Here are just a few things i have learned about conquerors by reading about my country's history.

I would say part of it is a way to show cultural superiority, and that is why many ancient cultures do not exist anymore. Armenia became such a hotspot for invasions, that the entire nation packed its bags and moved a few hundred miles southwest to Cilicia, now in present-day Turkey. They set up a kingdom there that lasted for almost 300 years, until it was..you guessed it...invaded and conquered.

It is also a way to get rid of rebellions. Since many conquered populations throughout history havent been big in number, massacring thousands of them puts fear into the entire nation, it lets them know that their culture is endangered and any further trouble they cause to the ruler could mean their extinction. The conqueror has to let the conquered know who is boss, and that is one way to get their point across if other methods fail. Whats sad is many conquerers used massacres as one of their first methods.

Besides massacres, another way to prove this 'cultural superiority' is for the conquerors to emphasize their religion/culture onto the conquered. That can be seen in a myriad of ways throughout history. So many cultures have been assimilated and lost because of either 1) Weak cultural identity 2) Extremely forceful ruling nation 3) Both.

Another reason for conquering a nation is to use their population as some kind of labor. For example, Armenians have always been great builders, and when they have been conquered, a lot of their artisans and skilled citizens have been moved to capital cities of empires and other major cities in order to build. The Persian Empire for example, moved many Armenian artisans to Persia and set up Armenian artisan communities for them there, many of which still exist today. Their labor proved useful, as there are many beautiful buildings in Iran that were built by Armenians. Conquerors either do this, or simply enslave a large portion of the population, that is the popular alternative.

There is another side to all this conquering though. A lot of times conquered nations, after being repeatedly conquered and massacred and tried being forced to convert to some other religion, see their own culture as the strongest because their people are few in number, and surviving all the adversity makes them proud of what they have, because they feel as if they really earned it. Not in a racist way, but enough to perserve their culture and avoid it from becoming obsolete. Armenia for example, has a strong sense of cultural pride, because quite simply, they had to or else they would have never survived to the present day. They pride themselves in being the world's first Christian nation, being the first to defend Christianity (war of 451 A.D. against Sassanid Empire) having their own alphabet, their own language, their own country and also the fact they are one of the oldest peoples in the world. If it were not for the endless invasions we would not pride ourselves nearly as much as we do. That is one of the results when a nation has been at war and conquered many times, especially when they are small in number. We like to think of the invaders of our lands like this: Here today, gone tomorrow. 

Another reason for the endless invasions of certain nations is their geographical location. That is one of the biggest reasons, as certain nations simply have abundant goods and resources, or they might be wealthy in trade routes. Armenia for example, was the link between Asia and Europe (not present-day Armenia, ancient Armenia. All that conquering greatly reduced the population and eventually the land they held). Also, many of our women did end up getting raped, as you mentioned, and many children of our nation have been given up for adoption to foreign families in order to be assimilated into their culture and reduce the population. All these things have happened to many nations in one form or another, im simply using Armenia as an example because i know its history better than any other history. All the raping didnt help the conquerers, Armenia regained its independence time and time again, winning wars against some of the greatest empires.

Sadly, many obsolete cultures didnt share our fate. I have a growing angst toward conquerers and their territorial lust. But, it did make for some pretty crazy history.

Men will be men, and men are the fiercest animals on earth, so massacres will always be part of the world.



Edited by ArmenianSurvival
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Cywr View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
  Quote Cywr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2004 at 04:58
If its a simple land grab, then you don't care about the people who live there.
But more often than not, its the destruction of a few cities/settlements as a way of instilling a sense of submission on the newly conquered region, or even a way of saying this is what happens when you resist or something.
Also, if you physicly destroy a city (by rights, the centres of a civilisation/culture, politicly speaking, at least alot of the time), you get to replace it with a new one of your own making, a way of stamping your authority on the landscape.

It may be appear to be about race, it may be about class, or religion or language or even sedentry vs nomadic or something, but its always about power.
Arrrgh!!"
Back to Top
Tobodai View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
  Quote Tobodai Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Oct-2004 at 17:16
often it is more productive th eleave the people be, when it is not then a massacre will insue.
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
  Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Oct-2004 at 19:03

I'd say people that inhabit weak and easily-conquered areas are naturally going to get massacred more, and those that inhabit rich and powerful states are going to massacre those they conquer.

Member of IAEA
Back to Top
Kubrat View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 28-Aug-2004
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 339
  Quote Kubrat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Oct-2004 at 20:00
Well, in my opinion, massacres are always committed for a particular reason.

Hitler massacred Jews in order to instill a sense of super-race in his soldiers and followers, causing more people to join his cause.  He also massacred Slavs, albeit not nearly as much as Jews.  I think the reason for massacring Slavs (especially Russians) was not to evoke that feeling of superiority, but rather because of the war going on at the time.  He was conquering Russian (and other Slavic countries) lands with Slavs living in them.  He massacred them because if he hadn't done that, the Russians would have had an ample supply of willing spies and sabotuers in German occupied territory.

So yes, I agree that by massacring the native people in a region, you increase your power in that area.

Not that I think it is morally right...
Hell is empty and all the devils are here.
-William Shakespeare
Back to Top
Tobodai View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
  Quote Tobodai Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Oct-2004 at 21:01
Although massacreing my ethnicity is more common recently, people back int the day often didnt careabout ethnic things as much as we do.  They didnt have people that sat around dtermining how everyone was different due to cheekbone placement and other totally inane "sciences" we have today
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
Back to Top
Jalisco Lancer View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Mexico
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2112
  Quote Jalisco Lancer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Oct-2004 at 13:02
Originally posted by Genghis

I'd say people that inhabit weak and easily-conquered areas are naturally going to get massacred more, and those that inhabit rich and powerful states are going to massacre those they conquer.

 

Was Rome weak and easily - conquered, Jim ?

Every major empire that raises falls eventually.

Some civilizations are more cultural oriented than others, till they are conquered by a Barbarian less culturally developed group, then the barbarians assimilate the culture and get civilized, and then they are conquered by the next barbarian group. History is cyclic , Pal.

 

Back to Top
Kubrat View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 28-Aug-2004
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 339
  Quote Kubrat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Oct-2004 at 16:17
Some civilizations are more cultural oriented than others, till they are conquered by a Barbarian less culturally developed group, then the barbarians assimilate the culture and get civilized, and then they are conquered by the next barbarian group. History is cyclic , Pal.


Wow... one of my old teachers used to repeat that over and over back in the day...

Hopefully it won't happen anytime soon.
Hell is empty and all the devils are here.
-William Shakespeare
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Oct-2004 at 17:31
Originally posted by Kubrat

Wow... one of my old teachers used to repeat that over and over back in the day...

If your teacher says "History repeats itself" every lesson again, he's proving his own statement
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
  Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Oct-2004 at 18:59
Originally posted by Jalisco Lancer

Was Rome weak and easily - conquered, Jim ?

[/QUOTE

Well, at the time it fell, it was, and that's why many Italians died

Well, at the time it fell, it was, and that's why many Italians died.  But over the past several centuries, areas like the Americas and Africa were less advanced, and so naturally they got conquered and massacred.

Member of IAEA
Back to Top
Jalisco Lancer View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Mexico
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2112
  Quote Jalisco Lancer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Oct-2004 at 16:44
Originally posted by Genghis

Originally posted by Jalisco Lancer

Was Rome weak and easily - conquered, Jim ?

Well, at the time it fell, it was, and that's why many Italians died.  But over the past several centuries, areas like the Americas and Africa were less advanced, and so naturally they got conquered and massacred.

[/QUOTE

I can not speak by Africa, Pal.

But America was not less advanced than Europe.

Imagine to build a piramid without wheels and traction animals.

The mathematical and engineering, the knowledge of sciense of materials and the use of mechanical of grounds applied to build a mass

I can not speak by Africa, Pal.

But America was not less advanced than Europe.

Imagine to build a piramid without wheels and traction animals.

The mathematical and engineering, the knowledge of sciense of materials and the use of mechanical of grounds applied to build a massive building like that.

If not by the arabs, the europeans would still counting with rocks instead of apply the Al-gebra.

( well, none of the prehispanic buildings has lost the vertical as certain tower in Italy, just kidding Dario )

Predict the weather , the seassons and elaborate sophisticated calendars just  by the observation of the skies. At the time in Europe people went to the Inquisition Cadalso by denying that the Earth was the center of the Universe.

Imagine build a town in the middle of a Lake like Tenochtitlan and provide fresh water supply from lower lands. Taking in consideration that the Valley of Mexico is located approx. 3000 mts above the sea level and it's surrounded by mountains.  Plus, the city had a sewer system when in most of the european cities disposed the excrement by throwing them thru the windows ( Agua Va, that's what the spaniards used to shout before throwing their disposals ).

Not bad for a bunch of backwards, superticious, cruel cannibals , nomads, hunters and seed recolectors

Just take a look on Teotihuacan. A city designed by the orientation of the sun.

In above of all, the temples, cities, observatoris, pyramids, etc were build with stone tools, because the metalurgic was not developed to build iron tools.

America, a place where the slavery was impossed in others as a punishment for bad behavior or debts. Where the sons of slaves were born free and they could buy their freedom.

The europeans were still argumenting on the centuries XVI to XVIII if the black african slaves had a soul.

What the heck, no way I can't deny the human sacrificies practice, but I strongly doubt about cannibal practices.

Europe had the Inquisition and the hatred toward moorish and jews.

People got sacrificed on ritual wars, but at least they had the chances to defend themselves and kill a guy from the other side.

The sacrifice of children was not useful. Just the brave hearth of a warrior.

Wars of conquer where the city was sieged and ambassadors were sent to negotiate the surrender. if they surrended, the authorities kept the control and a tribute quota was fixed. If not, a campal battle was set up. After their defeat, the temple of the defeated city was sacked as a ritual. But not mass butchering took place.

What marvelous world would be Europe if the steel was never developed to build weapons. Probably the massive slaughters of the " civilized and more cultural advanced " Europe would never ocurr.

I'm not trying to bash agaisnt Europeans or US. Just pointing out that America was far away to be culturally less advanced. We reached developments in other areas, absent of powder and steel, the perdjudice agaisnt other races based on the color and the religion.



Edited by Jalisco Lancer
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.143 seconds.