King David II of Scotland

A What if Scenario, where King Alexander III of Scotland's son Prince David does not die in 1281, and instead is alive when his father dies in 1286.

David is crowned King at Scone on the 15th April, 1286 and instead of having a regency immediately assumes command with some trusted advisers. David tired of seeing the influence Norman England has had on his country and people, begins slowly reintroducing Gaelic ways, such as Gaelic music and songs, the Gaelic language etc. He also sells of the lands his family holds in southern England and saves the money made in an attempt to prepare for war.

David marries Isabel Bruce of the Bruce family one of the more powerful lords in Scotland on the 1st of May 1286, solidifying an alliance with the Bruces and promising to give them a prominent part in his plans for Scotland's future. Their first son named Kenneth is born on Feburary 12th 1287.

When word comes to London and to Edward I of David's new laws, Edward is at first impressed and then concerned, and when southern Scottish nobles send word to London asking for help, Edward sends a missive to his nephew, telling him to swear fealty to him as his overlord. It is also around this time that the Pope fearing a pagan revival in Scotland begins making sermons about the heathen scots, and so a fear of war grows. Edward promises to protect David from the Pope and any army he might send for return of fealty.

David stubborn and confident refuses and sends back the head of Edward's envoy, proclaiming that he needs no help from a norman. He then declares his intention to reclaim Northumbria for Scotland. War begins with England in 1290
 
Last edited:
The first war with Edward I

David calls his men together, and they march south, after beating the more english inclined Earls and Lords at the battle of the Bloody Field on the 3rd of February 1290 David enters England. And thus begins a bloody campaign where the earls and lords of Northumbria are destroyed root and branch and replaced by Gaelic nobles such as Robert de Bruce, and William Wallace a childhood friend of David's.

Edward coming north with some 7,000 men meets David's war hardened host at Deira and so ensues a fierce battle which ends with both sides retreating to their respective strongholds. The fighting continues on like this for another two years, with both sides winning and losing battles along the way until the capturing of York which leads to the capturing of Edward I. Taken in chains to Stirling and with the nobility of Scotland as witnesses, Edward is made to sign the Treaty of Stirling, which makes him acknowledge the seccession of Northumbria to King David, and that the lords appointed during the war will remain as such. The English parliament is then forced to pay a hefty ransom for Edward I's release. Edward bitter and angry swears revenge. He returns to London in 1294.
 
David before the war with his uncle married Isabel Bruce daughter of one of the most powerful Scottish nobles Robert de Bruce Lord of Annadale in 1286, their son Kenneth is born in 1287, and their other children are: Alexander born 1290

Margaert born 1292

Joan born 1296

Marjorie born 1298

Constatine born 1304
During the years of peace following the treaty of Stirling, David continues to reintroduce a Gaelic way of life through bringing in gaelic music, gaelic language etc. Edward, breaks the treaty of stirling when in 1299 he launches an invasion of Northumbria. thus follows another four years of war which ends with the Treaty of Durham in which Edward once again broken and bowed recognisies David's authority over Northumbria and as a separate independent king of Scotland
 
All right, who let the tartan space bats in?

This is straight out of dreamland- the politics are unlikely in the extreme, the cultural bias shows every sign of being the product of whiskey induced brain damage, the logistics, the campaign financing are almost manifesto worthy.

Seriously, as much as this may be a Scot Nat's wet dream, we were never, ever, ever in the economic position to be able to afford to conquer much more of England than the upper half of Northumbria, and that was only on the good days.

MacBeth was actually the last king of Scotland to hail from north of the highland line; the lowlands- south of the Great Glen- were overwhelmingly southern focused, David I actually invited the Normans in. There is no Celtic revival at this date or at any point until we get to drunk men looking at thistles in the 1920's-30's.


Also, when you get right down to it, Scotland is a country of many sides and factions, few of which really get on, and all of which, well, there's a reason George McDonald Frazer described one of his characters once as "the disgruntled claimant of that most hotly contested award, Scottish Traitor of the Year, and currently defending his title". Truth in art, I tell you.
 
All right, who let the tartan space bats in?

This is straight out of dreamland- the politics are unlikely in the extreme, the cultural bias shows every sign of being the product of whiskey induced brain damage, the logistics, the campaign financing are almost manifesto worthy.

Seriously, as much as this may be a Scot Nat's wet dream, we were never, ever, ever in the economic position to be able to afford to conquer much more of England than the upper half of Northumbria, and that was only on the good days.

MacBeth was actually the last king of Scotland to hail from north of the highland line; the lowlands- south of the Great Glen- were overwhelmingly southern focused, David I actually invited the Normans in. There is no Celtic revival at this date or at any point until we get to drunk men looking at thistles in the 1920's-30's.


Also, when you get right down to it, Scotland is a country of many sides and factions, few of which really get on, and all of which, well, there's a reason George McDonald Frazer described one of his characters once as "the disgruntled claimant of that most hotly contested award, Scottish Traitor of the Year, and currently defending his title". Truth in art, I tell you.

That's the thing though, ITTL, what is there stopping a Gaelic revival? Sure it might not be as much of a cake walk as I am painting it to be, but there is a chance that it could happen.
 
Early medieval Scotland was essentially a country of 4 parts.

To the south west you had the Gaelic descendants of the original Irish immigrants who called themselves Scotti.

To the north west in the Highlands and Islands you had an unholy mixture of Picts/Scots/Norse settlers who were largely or recently under the thumb of the King of Norway.

To the north east you had the descendants of those Picts not overrun by the Norse, culturally cleansed over the years since Kenneth MacAlpin massacred the assembled Pictish Great and Good at a banquet.

And to the south east you had the rich lands of the Lothians, an English speaking region that for over 400 years had been part of Anglian Northumbria.

For much of its early history the kingdom that came to be called Scotland was an aggressive expansionist entity expanding in the space of four centuries from an enclave in the south west. The reason why Scots speak English isn’t due to some dastardly English plot but more due to Scottish Kings making their capital the most formidable fortress close to their southern border. The border not only which was not only the most threatening but also the one with the most potential for them. After the Battle of Carham in 1018, which pushed the Scottish border to the Tweed and took final control of the northern marches of Northumbria, the Kings in Edinburgh were quick to exploit any weakness south of the border which might have allowed them to push even further south.

Living in the English speaking area of Scotland and influenced by events to the south (and exiles from the Norman Conquest) the Kings of Scotland became more interested in consolidating their control of the rich, fertile farmlands of the Lothian than in the sparse, less productive lands further to the north. The thanes and freemen of these lands began to relate and identify more with a Scottish King just up the road rather than a remote and distant English King who was far away, rarely came to their neighbourhood and after 1066 French to boot.
 
Early medieval Scotland was essentially a country of 4 parts.

To the south west you had the Gaelic descendants of the original Irish immigrants who called themselves Scotti.

To the north west in the Highlands and Islands you had an unholy mixture of Picts/Scots/Norse settlers who were largely or recently under the thumb of the King of Norway.

To the north east you had the descendants of those Picts not overrun by the Norse, culturally cleansed over the years since Kenneth MacAlpin massacred the assembled Pictish Great and Good at a banquet.

And to the south east you had the rich lands of the Lothians, an English speaking region that for over 400 years had been part of Anglian Northumbria.

For much of its early history the kingdom that came to be called Scotland was an aggressive expansionist entity expanding in the space of four centuries from an enclave in the south west. The reason why Scots speak English isn’t due to some dastardly English plot but more due to Scottish Kings making their capital the most formidable fortress close to their southern border. The border not only which was not only the most threatening but also the one with the most potential for them. After the Battle of Carham in 1018, which pushed the Scottish border to the Tweed and took final control of the northern marches of Northumbria, the Kings in Edinburgh were quick to exploit any weakness south of the border which might have allowed them to push even further south.

Living in the English speaking area of Scotland and influenced by events to the south (and exiles from the Norman Conquest) the Kings of Scotland became more interested in consolidating their control of the rich, fertile farmlands of the Lothian than in the sparse, less productive lands further to the north. The thanes and freemen of these lands began to relate and identify more with a Scottish King just up the road rather than a remote and distant English King who was far away, rarely came to their neighbourhood and after 1066 French to boot.

Indeed and with David having a claim to Northumbria, what is there preventing him from taking that land back as well?
 
Top