Developments of a Norse/"dane" England.

Greetings, fellows.

The PoD I want to discuss is a complete Norse/heathen conquest of England, including Wessex, in 878. About such scenario, I have some questions:

1) My assumption is that such complete conquest could change the linguistic landscape of the region in a similar way that the Anglo-Saxons changed post-roman Britain, but could this actually have happened? I'm creating a conlang based on this scenario, but I don't know if I should make it a norse-influenced English or a North Germanic language with some english substratum ans influence.

2) what should be this region's name? The conception of an Ængelcyn at that time, but it was still weak for the England was still divided. Even in places where invasions didn't result in complete assimilation of the conquered people, there was a change in name and identity for the locals, like how northern Gallia became France. So could we see "England" become "Daneland" or something similar?
 
I like Daneland.
I kinda do, too. The only problem is the confusion with Denmark, specially the demonym(s). How can we differ these people from the Danes/danish folk on the other side of the North Sea?
Vestrland? (West land)
That's an interesting one too. Though I remember in OTL the name "vestmenn" was generally used for the Irish, but maybe this could change.
Ingland? Englaland? Engleland?
Could be, though it would depend on how ingrained the English identity was.

Also, what about the language? Do you think a complete change would be plausible?
 
One thing to note is that the conquests in 868 weren't conquering the whole region but different kingdoms. In our timeline it was Northumbria, East Anglia, and Parts of Mercia that fell under the control of the Danes. However the Kingdom of Northumbria and the Kingdom of East Anglia remained seperate kingdoms with different focuses. Northumbria had more ties to the kingdoms of Dublin, the Isles, Scotland, and Strathclyde, with even some of the dublin kings also being kings of Northumbria. East Anglia under Guthrum focused on Wessex and Guthrum beating Alfred is a good PoD for all the kingdoms being ruled by danes.

As for language, this is tricky to say. Unlike with the anglo-saxon conquest. Old English and Old Norse were much closer together, I am not sure how mutally intelligable they were but I have read that there was mutual intelligibility between the languages. Assuming that this was the case, my guess is that they would become closer in this timeline. This would especially be true if a king rose that was able to unite the various kingdoms of 'england' together.

As for what it could be called, probably the OTL name. I don't know if the norse would wipe away the old identity, my guess looking at how things were with Northumbria is that they would become aligned with the local nobility, especially if they are ruling there and not in Scandinvia .
 
I like Daneland.
Obviously it would be far too easy to confuse with Denamrk.

You could say the same thing, I suppose, about England given that there was an Anglia/Angeln/Engla land in Europe that the Angles hailed from, but this was very minor province geographically and politically, and indeed the continental Angles all but disappear by the end of the Dark Ages. So it was unlikely to be confused with the much more significant British England.

Thinking out loud, I wonder if this is one of the reasons that "England" prevailed over "Seaxland" or some other Saxon-derived toponym, because Old Saxony was a significant landmass, and the continental Saxons were a significant people for a long time after the settlement of England. As I understand, there were a good deal more Saxons involved in the settlement of England than Angles.
 
As for language, this is tricky to say. Unlike with the anglo-saxon conquest. Old English and Old Norse were much closer together, I am not sure how mutally intelligable they were but I have read that there was mutual intelligibility between the languages. Assuming that this was the case, my guess is that they would become closer in this timeline. This would especially be true if a king rose that was able to unite the various kingdoms of 'england' together.
I've heard about this too. For what I've researched, they weren't immediately mutually intelligible (Spanish and portuguese are to a large extent), but basic dialogue could be made with enough familiarity
(as a portuguese speaker, italian is a good analog for me).

This video here explains a bit about that.

Many theorize that the contact between the two languages may have contributed to the simplification of the English grammar. While both languages had cases, they were different, just like their plurals. The predominance of the -s plural, for example, derives from interactions between the two languages. See the section about "An Anglo-Saxon sells a horse to a Viking".

So, I think that any alternative language in the area would probably still have a simplified grammar, similar to English's modern one.
for what it could be called, probably the OTL name. I don't know if the norse would wipe away the old identity, my guess looking at how things were with Northumbria is that they would become aligned with the local nobility, especially if they are ruling there and not in Scandinvia .
Based on This answer on reddit's r/AskHistorians, it seems like they adopted the identities of the old kingdoms (the Kingdom of Jorvik being called the Kingdom of Northumbria by its natives), they didn't necessarily embraced the English one.
 
Assuming that one of these Norse kingdoms in Britain, whether it's Northumbria or East Anglia, unites the rest of the British Isles, how about Bretland?
 
The Danish had already conquered Anglish and Jutish speaking areas on the Jutish peninsula. The result there was the shift from West Germanic to North Germanic language. In practical terms the end result was that the local dialects saw a similar grammatical simplification as in English, but a shift to Danish vocabulary. I imagine something similar happening to English, a shift to Danish vocabulary but having pretty standard English grammar or one gender and the definite article staying before the word. Of course in Jutish and Angeln-Danish, the resulting sound was “æh” instead of “the”.

Of course we could also see North English turning out this way, while South English stay West Germanic.

As for name I would suggest simply keep using Danelagen (Danelaw), it makes as much sense as Denmark which means borderland of the Danes (while Danes either mean lowland or flow) As for it being to confusing, it’s no more confusing than France and Franconia, or Visigoth and Ostrogoth. To make a distinction between the two you could simply call them Westdane and Ostdane, or Danes (Anglo-Danes) and Denes/ Dænes (Danes).
 
Assuming that one of these Norse kingdoms in Britain, whether it's Northumbria or East Anglia, unites the rest of the British Isles, how about Bretland?
Could work. I actually used the name for the state I'm creating, but this state controls all the British Isles, so I thought an alternative name for the region of "England". However, I may change it.

The Danish had already conquered Anglish and Jutish speaking areas on the Jutish peninsula. The result there was the shift from West Germanic to North Germanic language. In practical terms the end result was that the local dialects saw a similar grammatical simplification as in English, but a shift to Danish vocabulary. I imagine something similar happening to English, a shift to Danish vocabulary but having pretty standard English grammar or one gender and the definite article staying before the word. Of course in Jutish and Angeln-Danish, the resulting sound was “æh” instead of “the”.

Of course we could also see North English turning out this way, while South English stay West Germanic.
I read about at not so long ago, and I completely agree. I think about using the using "sa" as the equivalent for "the".
As for name I would suggest simply keep using Danelagen (Danelaw), it makes as much sense as Denmark which means borderland of the Danes (while Danes either mean lowland or flow) As for it being to confusing, it’s no more confusing than France and Franconia, or Visigoth and Ostrogoth. To make a distinction between the two you could simply call them Westdane and Ostdane, or Danes (Anglo-Danes) and Denes/ Dænes (Danes).
Well, technically the term Danelaw was only used by the english folk outside it. However, yeah, any variation of "Land of the Danes" would fit.
 
I read about at not so long ago, and I completely agree. I think about using the using "sa" as the equivalent for "the".

Well, technically the term Danelaw was only used by the english folk outside it. However, yeah, any variation of "Land of the Danes" would fit.

Whoch was why I used the old Danish term.for it,
 
Angland/England makes sense if it's 100% Norse, for the same reason OTL did it. "No, those are the Danish Danes, we're the Anglo-Danes! Get it right!"
 
What I've often wondered about this scenario -- does it mean there's unlikely to be an "Kingdom of England" as such? That is, would those political institutions, that were already in place OTL when the Normas invaded (like the Shire System, etc) -- those that were first created when the Kingdom of Wessex united the Angles -- even come into existence? What would it mean if this region of the British Isle continued to be politically divided, with only shared linguistic and cultural ties between them (similar to Wales and Ireland)?
 
What I've often wondered about this scenario -- does it mean there's unlikely to be an "Kingdom of England" as such? That is, would those political institutions, that were already in place OTL when the Normas invaded (like the Shire System, etc) -- those that were first created when the Kingdom of Wessex united the Angles -- even come into existence? What would it mean if this region of the British Isle continued to be politically divided, with only shared linguistic and cultural ties between them (similar to Wales and Ireland)?
I think it could go either way. Even if the circumstances are not the same as OTL's, an eventual unification is still possible in my opinion, though one would need to find reasons for that.
 
I think it could go either way. Even if the circumstances are not the same as OTL's, an eventual unification is still possible in my opinion, though one would need to find reasons for that.
Unification would happen for pretty much the same reasons it did in Denmark, Norway and Sweden, a Jarl gaining enough power to be able to lay claim to the whole of the country and make it stick.
 
Last edited:
Unification would happen for pretty much the same reasons it did in Denmark, Norway and Sweden, a Jarl gaining enough power to be able to lay claim the whole of the country and make it stick.
Yes, that would work. There were some precedents for "high kings" in the region, like the Bretwalda. It's not impossible that a very competent one could assert a more complete dominance.
 
Unification would happen for pretty much the same reasons it did in Denmark, Norway and Sweden, a Jarl gaining enough power to be able to lay claim the whole of the country and make it stick.
But likewise, Denmark Sweden and Norway did not unify with each other. Could not England remain divded into 2 or 3 kingdoms?
 
But likewise, Denmark Sweden and Norway did not unify with each other. Could not England remain divded into 2 or 3 kingdoms?
This could have happened both in our TL and this one. However, I think english geography is better for unification than Scandinavia's (the three countries have considerably large barriers between each other, while England is mostly flat).
 
The Danish had already conquered Anglish and Jutish speaking areas on the Jutish peninsula. The result there was the shift from West Germanic to North Germanic language. In practical terms the end result was that the local dialects saw a similar grammatical simplification as in English, but a shift to Danish vocabulary. I imagine something similar happening to English, a shift to Danish vocabulary but having pretty standard English grammar or one gender and the definite article staying before the word. Of course in Jutish and Angeln-Danish, the resulting sound was “æh” instead of “the”.

Of course we could also see North English turning out this way, while South English stay West Germanic.

As for name I would suggest simply keep using Danelagen (Danelaw), it makes as much sense as Denmark which means borderland of the Danes (while Danes either mean lowland or flow) As for it being to confusing, it’s no more confusing than France and Franconia, or Visigoth and Ostrogoth. To make a distinction between the two you could simply call them Westdane and Ostdane, or Danes (Anglo-Danes) and Denes/ Dænes (Danes).
When did this Grammatical simplication happen though? From what I know it happened centuries after Danish took over.
 
When did this Grammatical simplication happen though? From what I know it happened centuries after Danish took over.

We don’t have any evidence, but seeing that Denmark original likely was a term for the newly conquered areas and that term replaced whatever the Danish kingdom was named before very fast, I think it likely happened in the aftermath of the Danish conquest of Jutland, so likely in the 5th to 7th century. It’s unknown when the Danish conquest of the Angles, Jutes and maybe Varni (a third people some believe to have lived in North Schleswig between Jutes and Angles) happened. We know Danes lived on Zealand in the 6th century and we know they controlled Schleswig in the 8th century. We don’t really know when Danes came into being and whether they were a Swedish tribe invading Denmark [1] or some kind of tribal confederation like the Saxon and Franks created from the different tribes living in southern Sweden and on the Danish islands. Danish could also just have been a common term for all the people in that area, similar to how Deutsch/Dutch was the term for all the different continental West Germanic people, and when some tribal king united the tribes, he simply took the common name as name for his new kingdom.

[1] Which is the claim by Gothic historian Jordanes, that Danes were a Swedish tribes conquered the the land of the Herules.
 
Top