Technological differences in close proximity

This isn't concerning a specific timeline; rather, it's for a role playing setting--but the people on here will likely have the most relevant thoughts.

In a low tech area of the world, how much of a tech difference could develop between places that are perhaps a month's difficult travel apart, perhaps a we bit less. Could you have high midieval, with knights in shining armor, coexisting with early-mid rennasiance era technology--asuming there's been no major war recently.

I'm trying for a realistic background before I add anything fantastic.

Any thoughts?
 
It depends on how much contact the two societies have with each other.

The one with that's less advanced will try to adopt aspects of the more advanced one in areas considered important if they're in contact
more than once a year or so.
 
Last edited:
?How difficult? Who is doing what little Traveling there is.
The Saddle Maker in A, may notice the Stirrups on the Soldier from B. And consider it a good Idea.
But a Soldier from B, who wears Clam Shell, will not care whether the Soldiers in A are wearing Mail. Or vice Versa. So nether side would change.
By the same token you can have one group using Heavy iron tipped Shoe Board plow while a Different group two villages away still use the light weight V plow.
Unless there is a Merchant moving between the two villages, who thinks there is a profit in introducing the new plow, they could go for generations like this.
 
Unless there is a Merchant moving between the two villages, who thinks there is a profit in introducing the new plow, they could go for generations like this.
Even then the idea might not be adopted; societies can be very conservative at time. Also, people will not necessarily listen to a smarmy outsider who has never done a day's work in his life (although the merchant would disagree.)

Even then, seeing something is not the same as knowing how to make it. For example, seeing cast arrow heads is not the same as knowing how to produce them.
 
The difference between sociewties that are a month's difficult travel apart can be between neolithic and industrial. We've seen this IOTL. The question is rather, how much actual contact is there and how much do both societies want to interact.
 
Some trade

There is a little bit of (difficult) trade, mainly in spices and precious metals. Gunpowder is NOT traded.

The midieval society has plate armor, stirrups, etc..it's high middle ages. A certain amount of medium value items can be traded, at very high prices. Art--the tastes are sufficiently different that not much art is seen as worth trading. Neither side is particularly fond of the other's weapons and armor--teh rapiers are seen as weapons of weaklings (socially) by the midieval sociaty, and the plate armor and swords and maces of the midievals are seen as weapons of brutes. (Some swords and chain are made in the Rennasance society for trade among the midievals, using superior metalurgy, but heavy armor has to be custom made, so is not suitable for trade.)

The social aspects of the weaponry are (currently) more important than the utility among most people. Also, the rapier has become popular with thieves and the like, who go after unarmored people--thus has a serious social stigma among the midieval set.)
 
There is a little bit of (difficult) trade, mainly in spices and precious metals. Gunpowder is NOT traded.

The midieval society has plate armor, stirrups, etc..it's high middle ages. A certain amount of medium value items can be traded, at very high prices. Art--the tastes are sufficiently different that not much art is seen as worth trading. Neither side is particularly fond of the other's weapons and armor--teh rapiers are seen as weapons of weaklings (socially) by the midieval sociaty, and the plate armor and swords and maces of the midievals are seen as weapons of brutes. (Some swords and chain are made in the Rennasance society for trade among the midievals, using superior metalurgy, but heavy armor has to be custom made, so is not suitable for trade.)

The social aspects of the weaponry are (currently) more important than the utility among most people. Also, the rapier has become popular with thieves and the like, who go after unarmored people--thus has a serious social stigma among the midieval set.)

I think this s going tov be problematic for two reasons. the smaller of the two is that if you've got a medieval society, you'd expect them to have a medieval mindset, too, which means they're likely to be innovative and interested in new technologies. You'd have to find some way of preventing travellers from bringing back ideas. Of course, if you've got a society whose military system works for them, they may well not change it. but even a self-sontained and successful society is likeöly top adopt useful innovations.

The second problem is that this is simply not how military innovations went. The finest armours ever created were the products of Renaissance workshops, and no soldier was foolish wenough to take a 'rapier' (to be more precise, what we today refer to as a rapier) onto a real battlefield well into the seventeenth century. There is no one point at which armour becomes useless and tactics change. And even if there was - better metals are of interest to the medievals in any shape. armour can be altered to a considerable degree, and a good smith can make new things from old. But most importantly, a soldier of 1350 would be quite able to manage on a 1450 and even 1550 battlefield. Change was a lot slower than pop science thinks.
 
Top