AHC: Balkanised Scotland
- Thread starter Pericles
- Start date
In 1130, the the revolt of Oengus of Moray is successful, and Orcadian Norse control spreads to the Scottish mainland. From its beachhead in Moray, this grows into a sprawling Norse-Gaelic state, "Megenland", so called because most of its settlers have come from the Kingdom of the Isles, and they see it as the mainland. Its Gaelic mormaer, based in Elgin and later in Aberdeen, owes fealty to the king of Norway.
To the south is a compact but populous Scots-speaking rump kingdom, "Scotland", centered on the Edinburgh-Glasgow axis. Its survival depends not only on French support, but also on the rivalry between England and Norway with respect to Megenland, where it provides a convenient buffer. As England's power grows, the intra-British realpolitik shifts, and Scotland grows closer to Megenland. However, no reunion is ever attempted, as the two areas have drifted apart culturally and linguistically.
To the south is a compact but populous Scots-speaking rump kingdom, "Scotland", centered on the Edinburgh-Glasgow axis. Its survival depends not only on French support, but also on the rivalry between England and Norway with respect to Megenland, where it provides a convenient buffer. As England's power grows, the intra-British realpolitik shifts, and Scotland grows closer to Megenland. However, no reunion is ever attempted, as the two areas have drifted apart culturally and linguistically.
Last edited:
Bump! I'm curious to hear what other people think of this. I think Northern Britain might easily have become a Scandinavian territory, but perhaps others disagree.
I think your scenario is pretty good. The only issue is that the Norwegians were not able to project power for any length of time. By the 1300's or earlier they really weren't much of a factor. I think any sort of Scotawegian state would be at least quasi-independent by 1250. Also the English would probably have even greater influence on the rump Scotland. It would be far easier to conquer and more culturally similar. In this scenario the English border could be at the Antonine Wall.
Another way to breakup Scotland is do have the Kingdom of the Rock (Strathclyde) never vanish, or prevent the merger of Pictland and Dalraida. 7th and 8th century Scotland had the potential to be divided into four - Saxons in the south, Britons in the South West, Scots in the Islands and Argyle, and Picts in the East. Throw in the Vikings a couple of hundred years later, and you could have (in theory) five squabbling principalities, each with their own culture and religious perspectives. Of course to have them survive, you'd need a balkanized England as well. I don't know enough about Dark Age Britain to do more - but that is a TL I'd read for sure.
And, yes, I did just coin the word "Scotawegian."
England retains control of some lands in the south-east (although possibly not Lothian), Strathclyde becomes an English client-state rather than a Scottish one, we get a Moray/Orkney state in the north as already suggested in this thread, and the weaker Scotland that results from these changes never manages to conquer the Kingdom of the Isles either.
I had an idea where the Norman lords are never able to take control of Moray or Galloway thus driving a wedge between the Gaelic and non-Gaelic areas.
Around the 13th century Scotland has a queen who marries the king of England. But the king of England dies and their children are still young. The Gaelic lords rebel and support a Breton duke backed by France as king of Scotland. They were successful and the former queen was left with the Duchy of Albany. The Breton kings meanwhile rarely set foot on Scotland.
So these Gaelic areas remain quite different from those around them, especially when Protestantism comes along they remain Catholic. Either way they are eventually absorbed into Britain through conquest or their nobility modernizing.
So by now so to speak our Scotland area is called Northern Britain, or simply the Far North. The border with England divides the Lowlands in half with Lothian very much being part of Northern England whilst the area around Dumfries is part of Cumbria.
The "Scottish" part of the Lowlands is Galloway. From Argyll to the coast of Angus is Albany. North of that is Moray which extends to the west coast, but not Skye and a bit further north of Inverness.
So we have Moravians of Moray, Albanians of Albany and Galwegians of Galloway.
Around the 13th century Scotland has a queen who marries the king of England. But the king of England dies and their children are still young. The Gaelic lords rebel and support a Breton duke backed by France as king of Scotland. They were successful and the former queen was left with the Duchy of Albany. The Breton kings meanwhile rarely set foot on Scotland.
So these Gaelic areas remain quite different from those around them, especially when Protestantism comes along they remain Catholic. Either way they are eventually absorbed into Britain through conquest or their nobility modernizing.
So by now so to speak our Scotland area is called Northern Britain, or simply the Far North. The border with England divides the Lowlands in half with Lothian very much being part of Northern England whilst the area around Dumfries is part of Cumbria.
The "Scottish" part of the Lowlands is Galloway. From Argyll to the coast of Angus is Albany. North of that is Moray which extends to the west coast, but not Skye and a bit further north of Inverness.
So we have Moravians of Moray, Albanians of Albany and Galwegians of Galloway.
Wouldn't a Balkanised essentially mean an earlier unification of the island of Britain, sense England would no doubt start conquering these mini-states?