Zen9

Banned
There are a number of points to make here.
1. Consider Frisian. Modern evidence in the Netherlands shows that there was a population replacement of some sort. The name stays but the people change. What we think of as Frisian is really .....English.....or more accurately Anglo-Saxon/Inguaevonic.

2. France may now seem home to a relatively uniform language. But this was not always the case. Gaulish was not extent over the entirety of the land.
Aquitani in the south west, rather mixed among the Belgae.in the north east.
Unknown in the Alps. Rhaetic has been suggested as a non-Indo-European language in origin.

3. Language change is the outcome of several different factors. Population change is just one.
Another is prestige and economic benefit. Hence why Irish Gaelic lost out to english only a few hundred years ago.
Or why Egypt is now a mostly Arabic speaking country.
The supposed sophistication of a culture and language doesn't ensure survival, hence why dravidian speakers no longer dominate swathe of India.
 

Zen9

Banned
SO the reason I don't agree that Celtic languages would predominate in western Europe after a Germanic invasion is essentially the same as why they didn't in what we think of as Germany itself.
Celtic culture and language(s) reached as far as near the coast of Germany and it's influence was felt into the Jutland peninsular.
Yet then this went into retreat.
What I see is instead Rome preserved Celtic/Gallic speakers by holding back the Germanic tide for centuries. In the process undermining Celtic with the dominance of Latin.

Another thought.....Arian Christianity, had the Franks been converted to this, the arc of Arian Christian Kingdoms in the west, would hold in check the efforts as resurrecting the Roman Empire.
Gothic could actually have served as a Lingua Frank here, between Goths, Vandals, Alani, Burgundi and Franks.......
 
Could a successful Cnut Empire propagate its influence into parts of France?

I doubt it. The Danes at the time were pretty focused on the north sea, and were overstretched as it was. Even if they did expand further, it would be into the Baltic (including Finland and northern Germany)
 
How about the other direction?

OTL, most of Hungary and Romania was held by German tribes until the Avars took it c550. If they don't come (say they raid Persia or India instead) that area might be permanently germanised. Or if the WRE fares a bit better in the 5C, maybe the Goths have to stay in Illyricum rather than moving west. Iirc that region was more thinly populated than Gaul or Spain, so they may not be absorbed as they were OTL.
 
You'll need to unpack that because as it stands that makes no sense in this thread.
What I am trying to say is that Northern France can get Germanized if the Carolingian Partition is North-South instead.

Redirecting the Drach Nach Osten West.

And another would be the Germanization of Hungary by extinction of Magyars.
 
Last edited:

Zen9

Banned
If the Romans are out or late to Gaul, then while Germanic spread into this territory, it would be held out of Belgae territory. While both areas might end up germanic speaking, they'd retain separate identifies.
 
Top