Challenge: Scotland and Ireland become one country without England and Wales

What would it take for Scotland and Ireland to put aside their cultural differences and become one country so that no American will ever confuse the two again? It can take the form of Scotland conquering Ireland, Ireland conquering Scotland, or a peaceful union between the two. Wales and England are not allowed to join.


Bonus points if you can force tourists to learn Irish, Scots, or Scottish Gaelic if they want to be understood in Scotland-Ireland. Even more nonexistent bonus points if the point of divergence is late enough that they can all wear kilts and play bagpipes together.
 
What would it take for Scotland and Ireland to put aside their cultural differences and become one country so that no American will ever confuse the two again?

This seems like an odd goal. In order to never again mistaken Scotland for Ireland (or vice-versa), we should make them the same? :confused:
 
Not all that difficult because of the many connections between the two.

The Dál Riata were an irish tribe who ruled land on both sides of north channel and that kingdom was the base of modern scotland, if they don't lose their ulster lands, you might see them take ireland.

And the Vikings lingered in ireland and Scotland long after being defeated in england with Dublin and the hebridies often being ruled by the same familys. A more succesful viking age could see a King of Dublin and the Isles rule most of Ireland and Scotland and start a dynasty.

Later on you had a big flow of scottish mercenaries and clansmen into Ireland. Edward Bruce, brother of Robert, flat out claimed the high kingship which would see Ireland being run by the scottish royal family if he'd succeeded.

And during the English Civil Wars, Scottish and Irish troops fought in both countries and were the last resistance to parliaments troops. You could relaistically see the british isles split into a royallist Scotland and ireland and a Parliament run England and Wales.

Same with a jacobite rebellion, I suppose.
 
And the Vikings lingered in ireland and Scotland long after being defeated in england with Dublin and the hebridies often being ruled by the same familys. A more succesful viking age could see a King of Dublin and the Isles rule most of Ireland and Scotland and start a dynasty.

My initial thought. A stronger, longer presence by the Vikings.
 

jahenders

Banned
Not all that difficult because of the many connections between the two.

The Dál Riata were an irish tribe who ruled land on both sides of north channel and that kingdom was the base of modern scotland, if they don't lose their ulster lands, you might see them take ireland.

.

Agreed on that point. People from Scotland originally settled much of Ireland, so if they had maintained power in both areas that'd work.

The Dal Riata, as mentioned, was power flowing the other way (from Ireland to Scotland).

These and other linkages are why it's almost senseless to argue if someone's ancestors are Scottish or Irish -- if you go far enough back they're almost certainly both.
 
I'm thinking a stronger Dalriata with a Viking Takeover like the Normans would do it.
Parts of Pictish Alba and far southern Ireland might end in in Wales like scenarios but most of OTL Scotland & Ireland would be under one sovereign.
 
Wasn't there an attempt by Robert de Bruce's brother to conquer Ireland?Maybe we can start there.

Yep. Following Bannockburn the Scottish crown invaded and held significant parts of Ireland. I find Irish history in that period somewhat confusing - there's a lot of double crossing and inter-familial conflict - but ultimately Edward de Bruce failed because the Pope refused to transfer lordship of Ireland to him (the remonstrance of 1317) and he and his army got caught up in the Great Famine of 1315 - 17, causing significant loss to disease and hunger, the need for morale and support sapping pillaging, and ultimately putting him in a position where he can be defeated in battle.

Maybe a pod is the Pope getting all anti English and agreeing to the remonstrance?

Even so, what's the chance of a peaceful occupation and joining of the nations- the Scottish army was happy to pillage and de Bruce happily burnt out opposing lords after eating all their stored provisions - there's nothing to say that Scotland would treat a subservient Ireland any better than England did
 
Yep. Following Bannockburn the Scottish crown invaded and held significant parts of Ireland. I find Irish history in that period somewhat confusing - there's a lot of double crossing and inter-familial conflict - but ultimately Edward de Bruce failed because the Pope refused to transfer lordship of Ireland to him (the remonstrance of 1317) and he and his army got caught up in the Great Famine of 1315 - 17, causing significant loss to disease and hunger, the need for morale and support sapping pillaging, and ultimately putting him in a position where he can be defeated in battle.

Maybe a pod is the Pope getting all anti English and agreeing to the remonstrance?

Even so, what's the chance of a peaceful occupation and joining of the nations- the Scottish army was happy to pillage and de Bruce happily burnt out opposing lords after eating all their stored provisions - there's nothing to say that Scotland would treat a subservient Ireland any better than England did

Well the monarchs, which by this point had most influence on the Papacy were the king of France and the Holy Roman Emperor. Granted the former had arguably had the advantage by this point.
England coming into conflict with one of them, might see the Papacy being persuaded by either of them to change its' opinion.

France and England had a complicated relation since the Norman Conquest of England, which lead to a French vassal simultaneously being a Sovereign of another realm. The Holy Roman Empire and England had less ties and conflicts of interest; though they might need to be persuaded to stay neutral (that would also apply to other Catholic monarchies).

Either way it's not just the Papacy, which needs to change their opinion. Scotland would need a powerful ally, which can persuade the Papacy and has a conflict with England, so this makes France the most likely candidate. Though France alone might not be enough, if England under this scenario has enough allies, then the Papacy might just opt for the status quo (ends up like OTL).
 
Top