2
$\begingroup$

The people of this (fantasy) human race lives in a tribal fashion isolated from the other "normal" humans. This people is highly xenophobic and ethno-purist in which "normal" humans are totally disallowed there and having a mixed race baby means shame for the entire life, and the baby being rejected and expelled from there along with the mother/father.

However, for some reason, they started to miscegenate and the (fantasy, middle-ages style) world started to be populated with this new mixed race.

What reason?

|improve this question
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I deleted the reference to "natives" in your original wording. I can see that English is not your first language, so you are probably unaware that "native" is a politically controversial term. The correct meaning is simply a person born in a particular place. It has sometimes been misused to refer contemptuously to the original inhabitants of places colonized by Europeans. $\endgroup$ – Lostinfrance Jun 11 '16 at 7:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In Babylon 5, the Menbari are very full of themselves as a species, I think. However, Menbari and humans intermarry and (I think) breed. This is massively controversial in both societies, but the Menbari justified it to themselves saying that Menbari souls were being born into human bodies. This story can work for your species, even if it happens to be false. It's just politics. Without appealing to any kind of dualism, species X could argue that species Y is an ancient splintering of their own species. Again, need not be true. $\endgroup$ – SudoSedWinifred Jun 12 '16 at 17:28
  • $\begingroup$ googling miscegenate: "v marry or cohabit with a person of another race. Type of: cohabit, live together, shack up. share living quarters; usually said of people who are not married and live together as a couple." $\endgroup$ – Tom J Nowell Jun 12 '16 at 21:15
  • $\begingroup$ @TomJNowell By "miscegenate" I mean "to have a mixed race breed". As Oxford Dictionary says: "A person born as a result of miscegenation; the issue of a union between people of different races or ethnic groups." Source. $\endgroup$ – Yuuza Jun 12 '16 at 22:26
  • $\begingroup$ I know, but it's a very uncommon word, I felt a definition was helpful $\endgroup$ – Tom J Nowell Jun 13 '16 at 13:31
4
$\begingroup$

A mixed race descendant solved a huge crisis, or mixed race people were necessary for survival (i.e. an illness arose that mixed race people are immune to, or their gene-pool was so small that they had issues similar to those of inbreeding).

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ but how would people know both to be concerened about these things and know that adding to the gene-pool would solve the problem in a "middle-ages style" world as described by the asker? $\endgroup$ – Martine Votvik Jun 11 '16 at 9:20
  • $\begingroup$ First off "fantasy middles-ages style" is extremely broad and doesn't mean humans there don't know the risks of inbreeding on whatever scope. Second of all, in the middle-ages the church prohibited marriages within seven degrees. Even without knowing about genes, problems would still arise. Imagine inbreeding for huge amounts of time and how it would affect health, appearance and lifespan. They'd be a race with smaller lifespan, and at some point they'd notice that mixed-race descendants would not exhibit those issues. $\endgroup$ – InstantMuffin Jun 11 '16 at 11:57
  • $\begingroup$ fair enough, but this is a tribal group that has lived removed from other people. They could have access to the knowledge of a church with a long standing academic tradition, but that doesn't seem very likely. $\endgroup$ – Martine Votvik Jun 11 '16 at 12:40
  • $\begingroup$ The church was merely an example of certain knowledge or hunches of it existing in our middle ages. We're talking about a tribe that already has spent a lot of cultural investment in breeding "science"/ideology to keep their race "clean". Surely they'd know of issues that arise with inbreeding. The most determining factor however is the size of the tribe. Above 20k of people and they would not experience inbreeding issues. However certain disadvantageous genetic traits may still appear. May they be bad in themselves or less favorable compared to other mutations (like lactose (in)tolerance) $\endgroup$ – InstantMuffin Jun 11 '16 at 13:06
  • $\begingroup$ I'd like to add, the 20k relates to the pool of mates available. This is of course depending on things like population density and cultural allowance (status). $\endgroup$ – InstantMuffin Jun 11 '16 at 13:09
4
$\begingroup$

One way that might be interesting to you in the setting you are describing is if a new strong religious/shamanistic leader in the community has a vision which leads him to believe that mixing lineages with other people is now not just sanctioned but also necessary to please the gods/to survive.

One possible twist on this could be if the religious/shamanistic leader preaches/dictates that the seed of the tribe is stronger than the filth of the outsiders, that it will be a way to cleanse the world.

This would probably be one of the easier ways to get a lot of these mixed people.

And then if you still want these mixed people to be shunned and looked down on, maybe this religious/shamanistic leader is cast down after some time and a new leader calls his teachings heretic. Then you could still have some people who mescegenate in secret because they still believe, but over all the tribe would act as if it is a shameful thing to do.

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I like this — maybe the vision could include a great leader with a physical trait uncommon in the insular group (e.g. eye color) $\endgroup$ – Rob Starling Jun 12 '16 at 8:51
2
$\begingroup$

The reverse could also be possible. They had to flee and were forced to share living space with other refugees, from other places attacked by the aggressors. OR some kind of catastrophe like an earthquake forced them to work with outsiders and they could see normal humans weren't that bad.

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

They got conquered or at least invaded by another 'normal' human group and there was a lot of rape, so there are lots of unwilling mixed race births, too many for them to expel.

Or they enslaved a 'normal' human group and slave owners and their slaves reproduced. Perhaps they faced a severe labor shortage or loss in a war, so they were forced to take slaves despite their xenophobia.

A religious epiphany that at least temporarily allowed mixed race mating. Can spin that any way you wish.

I'll add an example. Cortes, when he landed in America, benefitted from a local prophecy about white skinned peoples (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cortes_hernan.shtml) so something similar could apply to a specific group of "normal" humans who encounter this xenophobic tribe. They would essentially be exploiting a loophole in their xenophobia and purity teachings.

Another possibility is that "pure" natives are biologically dependent on something found only on their island, mountain, wherever they live. Kinda like how Jurassic Park dinosaurs were dependent on lycine being added to their diet, something similar could occur with this tribe, so pure blooded natives CAN'T survive away from their homeland. If it was autosomal recessive a mixed blood child wouldn't suffer from it, though THEIR kids might, so they must continually breed a pure blood with another race in order to be sure the offspring can leave. So, in order to sustain trade, they must create a mixed blood caste that CAN survive away from the tribe. Perhaps there is a resource they desperately want and can't make locally. They are xenophobic so they don't trust outside traders, so they need a caste of peoples who can both leave the tribe and still be considered "tribesmen" to some extent in order to facilitate trade.

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Natives (by that term I'm assuming you mean a relatively primitive tribal culture) can still take slaves or be invaded. There are probably quite a few real world examples of your question. $\endgroup$ – Jason K Jun 11 '16 at 2:51
1
$\begingroup$

How about coalition politics?

Say the racist theory is promoted by the conservative clergy. The conservative clergy is allied with a faction in of the court, the great landholders and the army command.

The landholders and the army are opposed by the merchants and the navy. The merchants and the navy need their own courtiers and clergy. So they look for a progressive faction of the clergy, who are slightly less racist than the conservatives.

As the struggle between the merchants and the landholders goes on, both coalitions take more radical positions. The landholders try to deny recruits to the navy. The merchants sabotage the logistics system of the army. If the conservative clergy preach a sermon to uphold racism, they are bitterly denounced by the progressive clergy. Theological opinions or common sense don't matter any more. If the landholders are for it, the merchants are against it, and vice versa.

Then the merchants and their allies win. They have staked their political positions against racism and now they deliver -- anything else would look weak.

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Sex and Death

The young men of any group are liable to put it about a bit given the chance. Sowing a few wild oats as it was known. Given that they're sowing them among the peasant class there's no point taking action to prevent a half-breed now and again. It's not important what sort of trouble the peasants get into and it's easy to pay them off.

It just so happened that one young man of high family, having sown a couple of oats in his youth, then failed to have any surviving relatives after (insert war, plague, child mortality, or other suitable disaster) and the only descendant remaining to inherit the vast wealth of the family was an illegitimate half-caste.

You now have someone with massive wealth and status and a questionable background with the power and position to make others question their position.

If they don't marry this person into the group then the wealth and power moves to the "lesser" group which still upsets the status quo. It ultimately brings us to a simple situation especially among the impoverished upper class

All heiresses are beautiful

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.