Most successful cultural/linguistic assimilations?

Can anyone give examples of countries that were most successful at conquering other countries with distinct cultures/languages and assimilating them? Preferably by peaceful methods.
 
After the Akkadians conquered the Sumerians the language and culture of the region formed a Sprachbund. The two cultures merged into one another with the languages borrowing more and more features from one another until Sumerian was subsumed into Akkadian.

You have the Islamic conquests of the Middle East and North Africa where many native cultures, languages and religions were assimilated. There's also the Turkic conversion of Anatolia and the Spanish conquest of Granada. China did this was many peoples around its borders, too.
 
The disappearance of Occitan and other languages in France was remarkably quick in the XIXth, thanks to centuries of diglossic relationship with French where they lost administrative and cultural purpose. At the difference of what happened in other european countries, the assimilation to a French linguistical and political culture did involved social ascencion on a more or less egalitarian footing (transversal class-wise). There's few countries that were this successful structurally : Great-Britain, Netherlands and...well, that's it, and France worked on a much more diverse cultural ground.
It's not to say it was right, but eventually, it was essentially peaceful if with coercive elements.
 
Can anyone give examples of countries that were most successful at conquering other countries with distinct cultures/languages and assimilating them? Preferably by peaceful methods.
Well you have the America Conquest By the Spanish, there is a reason in Mexico they don´t speak Nahuatl languages or that Peru-Bolivia-Ecuador-Chile, aren´t Quechua speaking countries and that Spanish is the Second (or third) most Spoken language in the World, But this conquest definitively fail to fulfill your "peaceful methods" requirement
 
Last edited:
You have the Islamic conquests of the Middle East and North Africa where many native cultures, languages and religions were assimilated. There's also the Turkic conversion of Anatolia and the Spanish conquest of Granada. China did this was many peoples around its borders, too.
Not just around its borders but also vast swathes within what we now call China throughout its history. And it did so repeatedly with wave after wave of people coming through and assimilating the local population only to be assimilated themselves by a different wave of Han migration. The vocabulary of some southern Chinese languages like Hokkien reflects this history with multiple layers of linguistic borrowings i.e. a non-Sino-Tibetan substratum, a core vocabulary derived from Old Chinese, colloquial vocabulary introduced with Han migrations during the Northern and Southern Dynasties, literary vocabulary introduced during the Tang Dynasty, and finally modern loan-words from Mandarin.
 

Brunaburh

Gone Fishin'
Well you have the America Conquest By the Spanish, there is a reason in Mexico they don´t speak Nahuatl languages or that Peru-Bolivia-Ecuador-Chile, aren´t Quechua speaking countries and that Spanish is the Second (or third) most Spoken language in the World, But this conquest definitively fail to fulfill your "peaceful methods" requirement

In Mexico they do speak Nahuatl, and Peru-Bolivia-Ecuador-Columbia are Quechua speaking countries.
 
The disappearance of Occitan and other languages in France was remarkably quick in the XIXth, thanks to centuries of diglossic relationship with French where they lost administrative and cultural purpose. At the difference of what happened in other european countries, the assimilation to a French linguistical and political culture did involved social ascencion on a more or less egalitarian footing (transversal class-wise). There's few countries that were this successful structurally : Great-Britain, Netherlands and...well, that's it, and France worked on a much more diverse cultural ground.
It's not to say it was right, but eventually, it was essentially peaceful if with coercive elements.
Italy sorta managed the same, though not as deeply as France (but arguably more so than Britain, looking at the current juncture). Germany is more complicated I'd guess.
 
Italy sorta managed the same
I'm not sure about this : linguistical minorities are much more viable in Italy (Aoste, Southern Tyrol, etc.) than in France where, with some exception, they're virtually extinguished in a current use. The relative success at standard Italian to get entirely imposed upon the dialectal system is another difference.
 
I'd also suggest modern Iran. Not many Iranians spoke Standard Farsi or indentified culturally with an overarching Iranian identity a century ago. And it was almost entirely peaceful (though with coercive aspects).
 
I'm not sure about this : linguistical minorities are much more viable in Italy (Aoste, Southern Tyrol, etc.) than in France where, with some exception, they're virtually extinguished in a current use. The relative success at standard Italian to get entirely imposed upon the dialectal system is another difference.
Aoste and Sud-tirol may count as "some exception". Though you are generally right that Italy tends to be is a lot more tolerant about dialects and minority languages that France, distinct regional linguistic and cultural identities have been eroded considerably.
 
In Mexico they do speak Nahuatl, and Peru-Bolivia-Ecuador-Columbia are Quechua speaking countries.
Mexico 135 Million inhabitants, Spanish Speaking 135 Million, Nahuatl Speaking 1.74 Million, Mexico is not a Nahutl speaking Country

neither Peru,Bolivia,Ecuador,Colombia,Chile are a Quechua Speaking country, they are Spanish Speaking Countries

4.4 million people in Peru (30 million inhabitants)
1.6 million in Bolivia(8 million inhabitants)
2.2 million in Ecuador (17 million)
60,000 in Argentina (42 million inhabitants)
8,200 in Chile (17 million inhabitants)
There is not data for Colombia
 
Mexico 135 Million inhabitants, Spanish Speaking 135 Million, Nahuatl Speaking 1.74 Million, Mexico is not a Nahutl speaking Country

neither Peru,Bolivia,Ecuador,Colombia,Chile are a Quechua Speaking country, they are Spanish Speaking Countries

4.4 million people in Peru (30 million inhabitants)
1.6 million in Bolivia(8 million inhabitants)
2.2 million in Ecuador (17 million)
60,000 in Argentina (42 million inhabitants)
8,200 in Chile (17 million inhabitants)
There is not data for Colombia

There's a lot more Mapuche language speakers in Chile, though still a tiny minority.
 

Brunaburh

Gone Fishin'
Mexico 135 Million inhabitants, Spanish Speaking 135 Million, Nahuatl Speaking 1.74 Million, Mexico is not a Nahutl speaking Country

neither Peru,Bolivia,Ecuador,Colombia,Chile are a Quechua Speaking country, they are Spanish Speaking Countries

4.4 million people in Peru (30 million inhabitants)
1.6 million in Bolivia(8 million inhabitants)
2.2 million in Ecuador (17 million)
60,000 in Argentina (42 million inhabitants)
8,200 in Chile (17 million inhabitants)
There is not data for Colombia

The Andean countries are both Quechua-speaking and Spanish-speaking. Mexico is a Nahuatl-speaking and a Spanish-speaking country. For the purposes of this topic, the only Latin American countries that we can consider "successful" are Cuba and the Dominican Republic. Everywhere else has failed to completely assimilate its native population.
 
The Andean countries are both Quechua-speaking and Spanish-speaking. Mexico is a Nahuatl-speaking and a Spanish-speaking country. For the purposes of this topic, the only Latin American countries that we can consider "successful" are Cuba and the Dominican Republic. Everywhere else has failed to completely assimilate its native population.
So by your account USA Is a Spanish speaking Country, Canadá Is a French Speaking Country, England Is Welsh Speaking Country, Sweden and Norway áre Sami speaking Countries, Finland Is swedish and Sami speaking Country?

Edit: sorry my bad, Canadá is a French speaking Country
 

Brunaburh

Gone Fishin'
So by your account USA Is a Spanish speaking Country, Canadá Is a French Speaking Country, England Is Welsh Speaking Country, Sweden and Norway áre Sami speaking Countries, Finland Is swedish and Sami speaking Country?

For the purposes of this question, yes. Quechua is an official language of Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador, spoken by 2 million, 3million and 2 million citizens of each. I would doubt anybody could seriously dispute the term "x-speaking" when x is an official language spoken by millions of citizens.

The US is the fifth most populous Spanish-speaking country in the World, so it would be a little perverse to deny it was a Spanish speaking country. Canada is clearly a French-speaking country, constitutionally and in practice.

The languages of smaller national minorities clearly also deserve recognition, especially when they are indigenous, and the term in English "an x-speaking country" does not require language x to be the dominant language of the country. Again this is especially true when we talk of indigenous languages. "Gaelic-speaking countries" gets you lots of hits on google, though one of the "gaelic-speaking countries" approaches the level of non-Spanish speakers found in Chile (1%), and another is even lower.

In any case, semantics apart, the OP was not looking for countries like Bolivia, where 43% of the population can speak another language, Ecuador (10%+) or Peru (20%+), or even Mexico (6%+).
 
Can anyone give examples of countries that were most successful at conquering other countries with distinct cultures/languages and assimilating them? Preferably by peaceful methods.

Turkey.

A lot of people converted to Islam, whether because of the Sufi dervishes, or for status and opportunity. This process was already far advanced as early as the 13th century, with stories such as Yunus Emre in Nallihan on the northwestern part of Anatolia showing a strong spiritual development. Incidentally, I highly recommend the Netflix series of that story. Well worth watching, for those interested in history and especially philosophy.
 
I'm not sure about this : linguistical minorities are much more viable in Italy (Aoste, Southern Tyrol, etc.) than in France where, with some exception, they're virtually extinguished in a current use. The relative success at standard Italian to get entirely imposed upon the dialectal system is another difference.
Aosta is majority Italian speaking actually while South Tyrol was annexed fairly late and its further Italinization was more stopped due to particular set of events rather than an inherent difference in assimilation practices or capability.

The disappearance of Occitan and other languages in France was remarkably quick in the XIXth, thanks to centuries of diglossic relationship with French where they lost administrative and cultural purpose. At the difference of what happened in other european countries, the assimilation to a French linguistical and political culture did involved social ascencion on a more or less egalitarian footing (transversal class-wise). There's few countries that were this successful structurally : Great-Britain, Netherlands and...well, that's it, and France worked on a much more diverse cultural ground.
It's not to say it was right, but eventually, it was essentially peaceful if with coercive elements.
To be fair while it seems a meme that "France destroy regional languages". I don't think that compared to its neighbour it was that much more effective, Low German is virtually dead by now and the only dialects that thrive still in Germany are the ones most similar to Standard German, the UK destroyed Irish, most of Welsh and Scottish Gaelic as well.

What I think explains the quick takeover of French as a widely spoken standard language is the fact France was unified for long, but I mean ultimately other countries like Germany and Italy managed to get similar results starting by a far worse position so all in all I don't think we can take France as a special case.
 
Top