TransWikia.com

Medieval city trading hands frequently over 200 years

Worldbuilding Asked by neo flare on December 5, 2021

In my world there’s this city that is primarily based upon sub-Saharan African Islamic architecture and culture, but it’s on the coast connecting the rest of the world to the continent. It’s the center for trade and is in a somewhat defensible position. Due to this it has traded hands over a lot over a long time.

(The following dates are only meant to convey the frequency of conquest, since this isn’t Earth:)

  • 1000 Taken over by a Roman-ish empire.

  • 1040 taken back by traditional sub-Saharan African Islamic empire

  • 1080 Taken by same Roman-ish empire

  • 1150 rebellion from Roman-ish empire and is now independent with a monarchy

  • 1200 retaken by African Islamic empire

16 years later the city is now under the threat of being retaken again by the same old Roman-ish empire (now with a matriarchal monarchy instead of a senate). How would the people feel about being conquered again and how would the culture in the city be different from everywhere else?

3 Answers

I'll second the other answers about the culture. It will be a mix.

I also would like to address "the conquest" part. It was very common for some cities in ancient and medieval times to change hands and/or be sacked multiple times in a century (see Ephesus) for example. What's remarkable is that those cities didn't do much worse (in terms of economy and population) than their "peaceful" peers - providing there was no outright massacre or enslavement.

A sack of a city, while a very traumatic event for its inhabitants, is getting healed relatively quickly. Even better if a city, through political maneuvering and paying tribute, can avoid being sacked altogether. Generally, a life in old times has no security guarantee. If there is no impeding invasion, inhabitants of a city wouldn't think about going to other city just to give them more security.

Answered by Alexander on December 5, 2021

There are two questions here. I'll tackle the culture question first. In parts of the world that have been under the influence of different cultures, you tend to see a blending. Language, food, art, clothing, etc would pick up influences from the different ruling powers. As a trade center, it would also have influences from its trading partners.

Now for the question about how the people would feel about facing capture. Bad. They would feel bad. If the years in your world are the same length as earth years, your people have been through some tough times. Someone who is in her seventies will remember two different conquerings. This frequent warfare would likely have a bigger cultural impact than the different ruling cultures. The fact that losing wars appears to be a fact of life could stifle economic and scientific development and make people really unhappy.

Answered by Andrew Brēza on December 5, 2021

Given the amount of trade involved, the culture probably is a mix of both sides, and would have been even without the conquests. Much depends on how much the "Islamic" side imposes restrictions (the Romans were pretty cool about most stuff).

As for the conquest, that would depend on the amount of damage they expect. If the soldiers traditionally pillage the city, the inhabitants will dread it. If it's settled by the armies clashing outside the city and no one thinks the worse of you for opening the gates to the victor -- that would depend on the changes of law you expect, which would chiefly be in area of taxes and regulations on trade.

Answered by Mary on December 5, 2021

Add your own answers!

Ask a Question

Get help from others!

© 2024 TransWikia.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP