DBWI: The Gaulish never took Britiania?

As we all know, in the year of Chirst 1023, an army of Gaulish landed in Britiania, killing the last Juto-Frisian king, resulting in several centuries of Gaulish Kings on the throne of Juteland. What if this never happened?

OOC: :D
 
Well, obviously without the Gaulish rule in Britannia, you wouldn't have had the Pictish rebellions of the thirteenth century. These were a heavy influence on the later Iberian and Basque rebellions which eventually brought down the Gaulish Empire. You might have seen Massillia remain in power for another two or three hundred years.
 
Well, obviously without the Gaulish rule in Britannia, you wouldn't have had the Pictish rebellions of the thirteenth century. These were a heavy influence on the later Iberian and Basque rebellions which eventually brought down the Gaulish Empire. You might have seen Massillia remain in power for another two or three hundred years.
Interesting. What about culture? How would Britianian culture devolop with less Gaulish influence?
 
It's tough to say, there are so many butterflies. For example, would the British Isles still get converted to Druidism? Would the Gaulish invasion simply be replaced by a Hibernian, Danish, Gaetish or Saxonish invasion?

You have to remember that the Northwest Europe wasn't always as mono-cultural as it is today. The Juto-Frisians had only been dominant for about 50 years when the Gaulish invaded. They didn't even control the whole island: there were still independent Pictish tribes in the far north, and a Brythonic King still reigned in the southwest. And, of course, many of the various Juto-Frisian kings only swore nominal fealty to Overking Guthred, many could easily have switched their loyalties depending on the political climate.

Basically, the Juto-Frisians could have remained in power, or they could have been a flash in the pan. One of the other groups could have replaced them, or the entire island could have remained a hodgepodge of variant cultures trying to survive side-by-side.

Of course, that would probably completely butterfly out the Conquest of the Americas by Europe. The Malians would probably reach it first and have a good hundred or two hundred years there before Europeans would be able to step in.
 
Not sure why y'all are calling the island of Prydein by the Latin name of Britannia. It was only the failure of Julius Caesar's ill-conceived attempt to conquer the Gauls in the mid First Century B.C. which allowed the Gauls to finally unite their disparate tribes and form the Gaulish state which later overthrew Rome and founded the Gaulish Empire.

So the Romans never invaded Prydein, Latin never became rooted there, and the only histories which ever referred to Prydein as Britannia were those written by a few obscure Roman historians before the Gauls came over the Alps and put an end to the Roman menace permanently in 102 A.D.

And as for "converting Prydein to Druidism," the British were already Druidic in belief. Clearly you are reading histories colored by the arrogant belief of the Gauls that their form of Druidism was the only true form. But as we know, Gaullic Druidism was contaminated by the Jewish faith called Christianity, hence why they...and we here in Prydein, since they imposed their contaminated faith on us...reckon time from the birth of the Christian "Son of God." British Druidism was more like the pure, original faith, but sadly, is now lost to us.
 
Last edited:
OOC: Regarding Prydein, I was assuming that English is not spoken in this timeline, and that modern Prydeinic(?) languages would be just as likely to be different, so I was using Brittanic as a "translation" of whatever word would actually have been used.

Regarding the arrogant belief of the Gauls true form of Druidism: yep, that's pretty much what I was going for.
 
But the Juto-Frisians where Odinists where they not? I fail to see how they would be able to convert to Druidism without alienating their Germanic allies on the continent.
 
Not to mention that we really know very little about what religion the original population of Prydein and Eire followed. Yes, it's assumed to be something similar to Druidism, but most of that legend about there having been some sort of "true and pure" Druidism practiced there, without any taints from Roman, Greek, Asian and Mesopotamian religions is probably just a myth created by the neo-Tribalists and Prydeinic Nationalists.

For all we know, they may have had completely different gods and rituals. Just look at the differences that range across all of Odinism, or Wuodanism, Wotenism, and Mercurism depending on what part of Europe you're in. Sure, the names of their gods are similar, but many of their myths are very different. The Eastern European religion of Tiewism, among the Goths, is actually the same group of gods, with a different Chief. And that's just in a culture that diverged from a similar base in the last two thousand years, add in another thousand years or so of divergence among the Celtic peoples, and who knows what you'll get.
 
Top