Mixing up different real-world cultures

[Jabrosky]

We've all heard of Fantasy Counterpart Cultures, but how do you guys feel about fantasy cultures which are mixtures of multiple real-world ones?

Sometimes I am content to take one real-world culture and modify it just enough to fit my personal tastes, but other times I definitely enjoy taking multiple cultures and mixing them up to produce new, fantastical ones. However, the cultures I choose for each mixture are usually ones I perceive as being at least distantly related in some way. Here are some of the various mixtures I have experimented with:

1. Egypt + West Africa + Bantu + Maasai

2. Israel + Arabia + Mesopotamia + North India

3. Greece + Rome + Spain

4. Norse + Celts + Anglo-Saxons

5. South India + New Guinea + Melanesia

6. Australia + Ancient Sumeria

7. Mongolia + North American Great Plains

8. China + Japan (lazy, I know)

9. Plains Indians + Iroquois + Mesoamerica + Inca

That said, the method does have its weaknesses. I often find myself trying to balance all the different aspects of each civilization in a given mixture so that some elements do not dominate others, which can be annoying.

 

[Kahle]

It seems that you are grouping several cultures from the same geographic region (or climate for the Mongols and American Indians) into one, or tracing certain ancestors (Norse => Anglo-Saxons). I think its definitely a good way to set the feel for a new culture, but to use bits and pieces can be tricky as you mentioned. Thats where you can to start building your cultures; by looking back to historical origins. If you can determine the common elements in each culture you take inspiration from, then use that to build an element for your new culture. Take the Mongols and American Indians. Both had access to powerful horses, and were primarily nomadic hunters. A key difference was that the Mongols had access to smiths and metallurgy...and facial hair. Its those differences that can throw a culture in a completely new direction. I think that by taking that common element from inspirational cultures and then adding a "what if" element, you can build from the origin. Personally I find it easier to have that central idea that the culture depends on, then branch out to other defining features and traditions. Religion can obviously play a huge role here.

 

[Jabrosky]

It seems that you are grouping several cultures from the same geographic region (or climate for the Mongols and American Indians) into one, or tracing certain ancestors (Norse => Anglo-Saxons).

That occurred to me too. For some reason I'm fascinated by the idea of sorting all the different cultures of their world into several larger marco-civilizations a la Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations. However, I can see why other people might think it a form of cultural (continental?) stereotyping.

 

[Ireth]

Take the Mongols and American Indians. Both had access to powerful horses, and were primarily nomadic hunters.

Weren't horses brought over to North America from elsewhere in the world?

 

[Ankari]

Modern horses, yes. The Americas did have a few prehistoric horses. They were all dead by the time the Europeans came, though. From what I've read, they died sometime around 13,500 BCE

 

[CupofJoe]

Modern horses, yes. The Americas did have a few prehistoric horses. They were all dead by the time the Europeans came, though. From what I've read, they died sometime around 13,500 BCE

and were probably the size of a large dog...
One argument as to why farming [in an old world sense] was not prevalent in the Americas was the absence of easily domesticate-able animals... [no native sheep, pigs, goats, cows and horses...]

 

[Feo Takahari]

and were probably the size of a large dog...
One argument as to why farming [in an old world sense] was not prevalent in the Americas was the absence of easily domesticate-able animals... [no native sheep, pigs, goats, cows and horses...]

Llamas will spit in your face for forgetting them. (And alpacas, for that matter.)

On-topic, my "Shining City" is an amalgam of France, Italy, and Spain at various points between the Renaissance and the industrial age. They all share certain cultural and linguistic traits, which makes them easier to hybridize than some other combinations might be.

 

[CupofJoe]

Llamas will spit in your face for forgetting them. (And alpacas, for that matter.)

and there I think we have the very definition of an animal not being "easily domesticate-able"

 

[wordwalker]

Llamas will spit in your face for forgetting them. (And alpacas, for that matter.)

and there I think we have the very definition of an animal not being "easily domesticate-able"

:rolleyes2: :rolleyes2: :rolleyes2:

 

[Nihal]

and were probably the size of a large dog...
One argument as to why farming [in an old world sense] was not prevalent in the Americas was the absence of easily domesticate-able animals... [no native sheep, pigs, goats, cows and horses...]

I beg to differ, you should differentiate the North America from the South. Not only there were herds of, yes, llamas and alpacas, but they were vital to civilizations like the Incas. One of their most valuable good was clothing, which came from... tadaaaa, guess what? If I remember well they also were milked and such. Also, those people grew crops, and in all kind of terrains, they were an agricultural society.

They were so successful that they managed to keep an impressive road system, and if I recall it right some of their cities were bigger than the European cities, all while keeping the different tribes of almost all the Andean mountain range under the Sapa Inca's rule.

 

[CupofJoe]

I agree.
The Camelids were very useful and fundamental to many cultures.
Yes the discussion I listened to [that brought up domestication and farming] was primarily centred on North-Eastern North American culture - I should have made that clearer.