A world stuck in a perpetual dark ages?

One of the tropes of fantasy is a medieval world that has stayed roughly the same technologically for thousands of years.

In reality the middle-ages at least in Europe was was not really stagnant technologically. There are other cultures on earth however namely hunter-gatherers who have indeed not had any differences in development for thousands of years until relatively recently if at all.

Could there have been a way the medieval era never ended or lasted a thousand years longer than it really did?
 
Less plagues, more Malthusian starvation cycles.
The virulent epidemics have a way of breaking the backs of socio-political power structures (Black Death a la western Serfdom) as they annhilate both rich and poor. This create vacuums of power which are inevitably filled by new elites with different ideals on progress.
On the other hand, famines hit the poor hardest, leaving typical power structures in place - postponing societal changes for decades at a time.
 
Last edited:

DevlPalce

Banned
Less plagues, more Malthusian starvation cycles.
The virulent epidemics have a way of breaking the backs of socio-political power structures (Black Death a la western Serfdom) as they annhilate both rich and poor. This create vacuums of power which are inevitably filled by new elites with different ideals on progress.
On the other hand, famines hit the poor hardest, leaving typical power structures in place - postponing societal changes for decades at a time.
Mostly this, probably mixed with a bit more peasantry fighting agaisnt each other, slaughtering the lower class, and leaving nobles in place.
One way is for the world, at least in Europe, to just be populated by city states. This would lead to more traditional governments in the local areas.
 
Actually, less plagues could do it for you. Without plagues, overcrowding in Medieval Europe led to famines every few years that kept the population at a certain "cap," which happened to be large enough so that farming technology didn't have to be updated because of the sheer number of peasants and that said masses of peasants couldn't rebel against the nobles because they were just focused on feeding their families.
 
Periodic horse nomad invasions ? Developing rather hostile attitudes so the invasions are very destructive?
 

PhilippeO

Banned
Eh, i think the reserve would be better. more endemic diseases.

That would reduce population growth. maintain greater wilderness area. and reduce temptation to explore and settle new land. with poor relatively 'well off' they would reduce temptation to go cities, invent something, or even leave their village. Static population would reduce desire to expand, war, or inventing better food production.

Middle Ages growth and change come mainly because population constantly grow, settling forest, marshland, go to cities. with more cities, more trade and industry develop.

There much less technology progress during 500 to 1000 AD, when several massive plagues, environmental colding, and Migrations cause society to 'hunker down' at their manor and village.
 
Not completly medieval but mongols/nomads conquering all. They have no incentive of technological progress and are ready to destroy things for loot which is quit a setback for civilization. And without technological advencment you cant really beat them.
 
Technological progress in Central and Western Europe resumed in earnest from the late 11th / 12th century onwards. There was a considerable stabilisation of sorts in the 11th century. While I´m really no expert on that matter, I think you`ll have to avoid whatever changed in that time, and preserve the structures of the 6th-10th centuries somehow. If it was the climate, you have small chances, though. If it was something socio-political, then it should be doable. If it was thanks to some foreign influence (I´m thinking of milling technology primarily here), then that`s maybe easiest to avert.
 

samcster94

Banned
Technological progress in Central and Western Europe resumed in earnest from the late 11th / 12th century onwards. There was a considerable stabilisation of sorts in the 11th century. While I´m really no expert on that matter, I think you`ll have to avoid whatever changed in that time, and preserve the structures of the 6th-10th centuries somehow. If it was the climate, you have small chances, though. If it was something socio-political, then it should be doable. If it was thanks to some foreign influence (I´m thinking of milling technology primarily here), then that`s maybe easiest to avert.
Ironically, what we usually picture usually occurs after the stabilization around 1070ish.
 
Have the Mongols take out Western Europe as aforementioned, while remaining in China. They and their successor clans loot anyone who tries to do civilization to the ground in Europe and Asia. Have Mali collapse into feuding states who refuse to get along. And to top it off, throw in massive religious tension that rather cyclically leads to slaughters.

The real issue is that either a.) that system would collapse and sedentary civilization would begin again, or b.) the Native American/Subsaharan/Austronesian peoples advance enough to mop up the slaughter hordes.
 
Have the Mongols take out Western Europe as aforementioned, while remaining in China. They and their successor clans loot anyone who tries to do civilization to the ground in Europe and Asia.

lol wah?
The Mongols, once they had completed their conquering, often ushered in periods of peace and stability as well as trade.
All of which lead to better advancement and more technological progress as ideas can be exchanged in relative safety.
 
lol wah?
The Mongols, once they had completed their conquering, often ushered in periods of peace and stability as well as trade.
All of which lead to better advancement and more technological progress as ideas can be exchanged in relative safety.

I more meant that the Mongol society disentrigrates into a warring series of nomads who consistently depopulate areas over and over again.
 
Another way is for the 'elders' to declare new notions 'taboo' and stomp them. Weekly preaching of the eeevils perpetrated by the fallen Empire with its enduring roads, viaducts etc etc would discourage imitation. Being staked and/or burned alive for developing eg a better mouse-trap would stymie innovation...

IIRC, this is a common post-Apocalyptic theme; stay local, live simple, or the world will end again...

Funnily enough, you could use the Amish as an example of folk who've drawn a line under their tech level and mostly stuck to it...
 

ben0628

Banned
Wouldn't a Mongols screw prevent the reopening of the silk road, thus limit trade and prevent the black death from going west?
 
One of the tropes of fantasy is a medieval world that has stayed roughly the same technologically for thousands of years.

In reality the middle-ages at least in Europe was was not really stagnant technologically. There are other cultures on earth however namely hunter-gatherers who have indeed not had any differences in development for thousands of years until relatively recently if at all.

Could there have been a way the medieval era never ended or lasted a thousand years longer than it really did?
Maybe a Catholic dogma, that doesn't allow change in any aspect of life, technology and society. Maybe even progress in farming, architecture etc.is forbidden in order to maintain a "godly harmony" and see progress as an Babylonic act of indolcence , that angers God. Maybe associating progress with the seven deadly sins.
 
Last edited:
You know, the funny thing is that during the dark ages Europe was stagnating but the rest of the world was advancing and getting more developed. In a perpetual dark ages the world would be less polarized along European lines and everything the Europeans achieved would be achieved by someone else.
 
Top