Questions

I have some questions about medieval Ireland.

A. What would be the best way for any chief/clan leader to unite the other chiefs/clan leaders under him from a highly decentralised and independent group to a quite decentralised and dependent group.

B. In Irish nobility was there anything like lords under a king or was it just he's the 'king' of Leinster I send him 'tribute'. Was there any sort of tribute anyway?

C. How big would an Irish army of around the 900s really be? From battles like Clontarf and others 4000 - 9000 seems normal with Clontarf having around 13,000 men involved in the battle with around 6000 on both sides. For a smaller kingdom than Brian's 3000 - 4000 seems quite sensible.

D. Can someone give me a name of pseudo-Dublin?

E. When were the unifications of England and Scotland? The dates on Wikipedia and Google seem questionable.

Thanks in advance.
 
A. The biggest issue with this would be:
1) getting the clans to treat your authority as real as not prestigious
2) Succession! Who ever is conquering lands cant afford to have the usual 20 sons, Tanisty succession or not, or his holds would immediately fall apart. For that reason a Hiberno-Norman leader might have a better shot at this if he can balance the traditions of the gaels with Primogeniture succession and Norman institutions.

B. More like the latter, but depending on how much control the "king" has over his surrounding clans in the forms of things like marriage, you could have some more authority acknowledged; Tribute could take, for example, the form of a sheep and other pastoral animals.

C. Not that big, as many of these kings only controlled small amounts of lang; 13000 men is a huge number for Ireland at the time.

D. Not sure on that one unfortunately. It would depend on when your POD is.

E. Do you mean when they joined in a Union or something else? If it is the first one then James the First is the Scottish King who finally got the two Kingdoms in a personal union, but there were a few attempts before by England to get Scotland and the Crowns were not united completely until the Acts of Union 1707.
 
A. The biggest issue with this would be:
1) Getting the clans to treat your authority as real as not prestigious
2) Succession! Whoever is conquering lands can't afford to have the usual 20 sons, Tanistry succession or not, or his holds would immediately fall apart. For that reason, a Hiberno-Norman leader might have a better shot at this if he can balance the traditions of the Gaels with Primogeniture succession and Norman institutions.

B. More like the latter, but depending on how much control the "king" has over his surrounding clans in the forms of things like marriage, you could have some more authority acknowledged; Tribute could take, for example, the form of a sheep and other pastoral animals.

C. Not that big, as many of these kings only controlled small amounts of land; 13000 men is a huge number for Ireland at the time.

D. Not sure on that one, unfortunately. It would depend on when your POD is.

E. Do you mean when they joined in a Union or something else? If it is the first one then James the First is the Scottish King who finally got the two Kingdoms in a personal union, but there were a few attempts before by England to get Scotland and the Crowns were not united completely until the Acts of Union 1707.

A. Thanks.
B. How formalised would this be? Would there be any sort of deference or were the Irish kingdoms not as rigid.
C. 13,000 is the number of all men on the field of the Irish vs the Vikings. The numbers are generally accepted as likely as well. Though I said 3000 - 4000 making more sense.
E. No, I meant when they formed pre-1000AD.
 
Ahhhh I see what you meant @Avalon. The unification of England and the unification of Scotland. Extra words save lives lol.

As for that...

England I would date to 12 July 927. First unification under Aethelstan... even under Danish domination it says intact to this day.

Scotland - 843.
 
A. Thanks.
B. How formalised would this be? Would there be any sort of deference or were the Irish kingdoms not as rigid.
C. 13,000 is the number of all men on the field of the Irish vs the Vikings. The numbers are generally accepted as likely as well. Though I said 3000 - 4000 making more sense.
E. No, I meant when they formed pre-1000AD.

B. There was a term mentioned in my college class for this kind of practice, but from what I remember it wasn't very formal at all. Just an expectation that the King get something. And Irish Kingdoms were not rigid at all, most of society was pastoral and isolated, which is what gave the Normans and latter the English so much trouble. Their very basic institutions between England and Ireland were incompatible with each other.
E. Mental_Wizard seems to have the answer for that, unfortunately my main knowledge of Irish history goes from the Norman invasions to when the Irish crown is integrated into England in 1800, so I am unsure.
 
Thanks for the answers. I got a few more if it's not too much to ask.

F. In medieval Ireland, cattle raids were an anathema. Would threatening complete annexation be too much as a result of peace. On that note could the Irish 'Kings' even attempt such or was a tribute the main reperation?

G. Would there be any records on the Archbishoprical goings on in on the island? Like which diocese and such controlled where?

H. What would some reforms to strengthen government power look like for Ireland?
 
Thanks for the answers. I got a few more if it's not too much to ask.

F. In medieval Ireland, cattle raids were an anathema. Would threatening complete annexation be too much as a result of peace. On that note could the Irish 'Kings' even attempt such or was a tribute the main reperation?

G. Would there be any records on the Archbishoprical goings on in on the island? Like which diocese and such controlled where?

H. What would some reforms to strengthen government power look like for Ireland?
F. It depends on what land and how much is being annex; You had a few kings try to take large amounts of land, noticeably Brain Boru and Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, the latter who deposed the very King of Leinster who then asked the Normans for support. I would say any Pre-Norman leader would have to do this and enforce their authority through many wars and raids if they want their King of Kings title to be anything but Ceremonial.
G. Instead of the usual Catholic order, in Ireland Christianity was mostly run out of Monasteries, which many clans colonized with their many sons. There were a few places of note, especially as the English moved in, but their names elude me unfortunately.
H. Well for starters, getting succession cleared up, and making people see you as a real High King and not merely a Man with a fancy de jure title. Perhaps after some time the Island starts reforming their faith to be more in line with mainstream Catholicism?
 
G. So the invitation for an Archbishop of X would be possible to really tie you together with the church?

H. Would the title of King of Ireland hit that home more than High King of Ireland?
 
G. Yeah it would. It would move Ireland into the mainstream Christianity and give the High King more power so long as he is in good standing with the Church.

H. Remember that places like Munster and Ulster were considered by the Irish as Kingdoms in their own right; The title of High King was considered to be the King of Kings, kind of like Persia; The only issue is the title is merely consider prestigious. However, that could change if you conquer enough of the Kingdoms to enforce power on the rest and if it somehow holds together, the title of High King could have some power behind it. Changing to just the King of Ireland would be considered a downgrade.
Of course, If a Hiberno-Norman ruled of all Ireland, they would be more likely stick to their own rules and make Ireland just a Kingdom depending on how assimilated they are with the native gaels.
 
G. Yeah, it would. It would move Ireland into the mainstream Christianity and give the High King more power so long as he is in good standing with the Church.

H. Remember that places like Munster and Ulster were considered by the Irish as Kingdoms in their own right; The title of High King was considered to be the King of Kings, kind of like Persia; The only issue is the title is merely considered prestigious. However, that could change if you conquer enough of the Kingdoms to enforce power on the rest and if it somehow holds together, the title of High King could have some power behind it. Changing to just the King of Ireland would be considered a downgrade.
Of course, If a Hiberno-Norman ruled of all Ireland, they would be more likely stick to their own rules and make Ireland just a Kingdom depending on how assimilated they are with the native Gaels.

H. Would the title of High King be recognised outside the island though. England also had constituent kingdoms under it but when unified was declared one kingdom. If the under kingdoms were made null and void by royal proclamation and with no challengers would anyone be able to stand in his way if the King said that there was now only one king?
 
H. Now to this I have no idea. Ireland didn't have much contact with the outside world until the Normans showed up. I guess to outsiders it would just be considered a Kingdom. As for nullifying the kingdoms that could cause a lot of unrest as all the hundreds of clans see their rights as being infringed on, so whoever the High King is better have the power to enforce it and crush the rebellions. And if he does that, how would the King then administer the land?

That is actually the one thing I forgot to mention, whoever is leading Ireland is going to have to build some infrastructure, like bridges and roads, as otherwise there are too many parts of the Island isolated from each other to be able to properly administrate them.
 
H. What kind of time period and resources would a medieval architect be happy with for doing so the least minimum level?

I. Would a medieval ruler change the name of a city and such due to a heroic act etc?

J. Anyone have anything for that pseudo-Dublin?
 
Abou the nullification of the kingdoms, would it be possible after say said ruler being the dominant military power on the island and having a sensible amount of allies amongst the Gaelic chiefs already having imposed some authority during the wars of unification does it using examples from outside Ireland and wishing to be sole king just does it as no one can resist, at least for some time?
 
Top