The Dagda and the three Saints

  • Thread starter Deleted member 5719
  • Start date

Valdemar II

Banned
The evolution of "the druidry" into an organised, uniform priesthood could have created a bulwark against christianity but it is difficult to see how this would occur unless linked to a new more united secular power. After all, it didn't happen in Gaul.

Another problem is that polytheism is just too damn tolerant! They tended to accept the existance of their enemies gods, and rarely tried to exterminate their worship... even the Romans who otherwise were utter shits.

Monotheism is a very powerful meme, and tends to win its confrontation with almost anything else religious, unless it is an ideology very solidly locked into a powerful state.

My plan is to have Ireland "innoculated" by Christianity between 400-500, developing institutions and beliefs that are sufficiently robust to withstand later confrontations with monotheism.

Interesting of coyurse the biggest problem are that it need to spread, if you make the British (or the Anglo-Saxon), Franks, Saxons and Danes adopt this faith I think it will be a strong enough baser to survive permanent. I think you're best of if England are conquered by Anglo-Saxons it will replace the Christians with Pagans, which could adopt the Irish framework down over their own Gods, and they would function as a nice mediator to the contignental Germanic tribes.
 

Deleted member 5719

The Evangelism of Patricius in Ireland

Patricius’ mission to Ireland began in the territory of Lóegairos maqui Néilli, son of his deceased former master Neillos of the Nine Hostages. Initially he was welcomed by the Connachta tribal alliance that controlled large territories of the West and Midlands. Using his connections with the local aristocracy, he secured land near Emainos Machai (1), on the edge of the territory of the Uladh.


Christianity already existed in Ireland, especially amongst slaves brought from Britain and Gaul and their descendents. However, it was clearly subordinate to Irish Paganism, especially as the tribal righ (“king” for want of a better word) played an important religious role, and was always the son-in-law or adopted son of a powerful druid or magician. The druid also had an important legal position, entwined with his religious duties. Arbitration of property and land usage disputes usually came down to matters of tradition and legal lore, the only people who had access to this information were a class of druids called Britemanni, who combined their judging with supernatural elements such as reading omens. The ownership of more than one field was determined by the positions of the internal organs of a calf which was born it.


Patricius was aware that converting Ireland would require the submission of this Pagan superstructure to Christianity. From his base in Ardos Machai (2), he sought to create Christian monastic communities which imitated the social structure of Ireland. An elite, comprised of educated literate priests, monks and abbesses, with a menial component below them comprised of illiterate monks and lay brothers. These centres, linked to the seats of powerful nobles, were a direct attempt to usurp the druidic position of keepers of record, using writing, a weapon which the druids did not have at their disposal. Patricius’ writings indicate that this challenge to druidic power did not go unnoticed, the Christians were forbidden from entering the territories of certain Connachta (3) righi by order of local Britemanni.



In 433, the year that Vitalinus Voreticernus ceded Kent to the Saxons, one of Patricius’s aristocratic supporters became the Righ of the Avi Cunogovani tribe. While he had shown considerable restraint in his rhetoric when dealing directly with pagans, “The evangelist of the Gaels” was privately contemptuous of them. Imbued with Patrcius’ righteous zeal, the new Righ’s first official act was to burn the sacred grove at Bailivos. When local druids objected, the warlord, who had been baptized as Séannos, had three of them crucified. Scandalously, local Christian slaves were invited to take part in this sacrilege.


The reaction from the young King of the Connachta, Néillos Maqui Lóegairi was swift and brutal. He marched on the Avi Cunogovani and slaughtered them in battle, down to the last man. What happened next was an indication of how far beyond the pale Séannos’ actions had been. Néillos had the Righ’s family and household, seventy people in all, crucified at the former site of the grove of Baivos. Stepping back to regard his handiwork, Néillos’ comment was darkly laconic.


‘How quick the old trees of Balivos grew back. It must be all the rain.’


Fearing servile insurrection the Righi of Uladh and Connachta expelled the monks and nuns from the seven Christian communities founded by Patricius, and a great number of churches were burned. There was a general exodus of wealthier Christians to the lands of Laigin (4) to the south, and organized Christian life effectively stopped in the north of Ireland, though of course there were small autonomous Christian groups among the slaves. Patrick himself went to Laigin where his increasingly millenarian preaching became wilder and more zealous. Christian sources say he was martyred by an angry mob three years later, at a place called Dubhlinos (Old Irish: The black pool), whose location remains a mystery.

(1) Navan Fort, county Armagh.
(2) Armagh.
(3)The Connachta in the North and Midlands were increasingly known as Avi Néilli, in honour of Neillos of the Nine Hostages. In the West they retained the name Connachta.
(4) Roughly, southern Leinster, North-eastern Munster.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Deleted member 5719

Interesting of coyurse the biggest problem are that it need to spread, if you make the British (or the Anglo-Saxon), Franks, Saxons and Danes adopt this faith I think it will be a strong enough baser to survive permanent. I think you're best of if England are conquered by Anglo-Saxons it will replace the Christians with Pagans, which could adopt the Irish framework down over their own Gods, and they would function as a nice mediator to the contignental Germanic tribes.

Ah Valdemar, I knew you wouldn't be able to stay away from an early middle ages P.O.D for long! :)

I tend to agree, but I'm not sure about how far I need the Pagan Irish religion to spread. I will definitely have an offspin cult spreading, but maybe it'll be very distinct. It all depends on how I work out Europe.

The Irish gave Christendom a 50/70 year bonus in converting the Germanic pagans, if I look at a Viking age starting around 770, how much more pagan is Europe than OTL when christendom suffers a viking setback?

But then we have Spain, evidently it will have been a Germanic successor state (pick a tribe, any tribe) and then the Arabs come...oh wait I've killed Mohamed with a butterfly! :eek:

But still, I don't think even I'm so much of a butterfly fundamentalist to say this P.O.D kills France! There will definitely be a post Gallo-Roman entity speaking a dialect based on Gallo-Vulgar Latin... though it might not stay whole.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Ah Valdemar, I knew you wouldn't be able to stay away from an early middle ages P.O.D for long! :)

What can I say I find the periode interesting.:p

I tend to agree, but I'm not sure about how far I need the Pagan Irish religion to spread. I will definitely have an offspin cult spreading, but maybe it'll be very distinct. It all depends on how I work out Europe.

The Irish gave Christendom a 50/70 year bonus in converting the Germanic pagans, if I look at a Viking age starting around 770, how much more pagan is Europe than OTL when christendom suffers a viking setback?

The question are whether a Viking Age as we know it will start, I tend to agree with Artic Warrior that the Viking Age, started a as response to Frankish expansion into Frisia and Saxony. Here without the Irish missionaring much of the common Franks stay Pagan, and we see a slow collapse of Christianity in Neustria and Cisrhine Austrasia, with the spread of Frankish, while this process likely will be turned in the late 8th Century (but by then most rural population north of Seine are Pagan), it mean that the Irish Religion (let's call it the Old Faith) can spread spread freely to England and Pictland. Especially if they adopt the monastic elements from Christianity in Ireland, the Anglo-Saxon can adopt it as a way to centralise their states, from there it could fast spread to Frisians, Saxons and Danes, and we could see one of the Frankish Northen "succesor" states (the Franks split often) adopt it from there, and permanent split Frankia between a old Faith north and a Christian south, or if *Muslim doesn't conquer Spain we may see the Visigoths regain Aquitaine, while a Christian Frankish succesor state survive in Burgundy.

But then we have Spain, evidently it will have been a Germanic successor state (pick a tribe, any tribe) and then the Arabs come...oh wait I've killed Mohamed with a butterfly! :eek:

I think you can legitimed handwave a alt Muhammed, some kind of *Islam seems unavoidable. But they may not be as lucky or succesfull as in OTL.

But still, I don't think even I'm so much of a butterfly fundamentalist to say this P.O.D kills France! There will definitely be a post Gallo-Roman entity speaking a dialect based on Gallo-Vulgar Latin... though it might not stay whole.

I don't think so the spread of Frankish in the Seine drainage basin was mostly stopped by the strenghting of Christianity, here we would likely see Frankish dominate north of the Seine (and some areas south of it).
 

Susano

Banned
But still, I don't think even I'm so much of a butterfly fundamentalist to say this P.O.D kills France! There will definitely be a post Gallo-Roman entity speaking a dialect based on Gallo-Vulgar Latin... though it might not stay whole.
France is the West Frankish Empire. So, to have France you need teh Frankish Empire to reach cerca the extension it had IOTL, and then hae it be dynastically split. Thats lots of chances to butterfly it away. Of course, a post-Roman Gaul entity may spring up, but it wouldnt be "France", and of course, the Gaulish territory may end up split, too...
 
So the Irish Druids are going to adapt the Christian monastic system for themselves, thus centralizing their own religious authority, and even make proper use of writing by the Seventh Century?

If this does reach the Saxons in England, would they still maintain the old names of their ancestral Gods while adopting the Irish myth cycle and the Druidic caste/religious authority in their own culture?
 
I'd always read that Dublin, as a city anyway, was founded by the Norse, one of the Ragnarssons, I believe.

So, judging by the whole 'location remains a mystery bit,' are we to take it that the vikings don't happen, or just that they don't found Dublin?
 

Deleted member 5719

France is the West Frankish Empire. So, to have France you need teh Frankish Empire to reach cerca the extension it had IOTL, and then hae it be dynastically split. Thats lots of chances to butterfly it away. Of course, a post-Roman Gaul entity may spring up, but it wouldnt be "France", and of course, the Gaulish territory may end up split, too...

You're right of course, I now declare *France renamed as DisputedGallo-RomanEntityLand.
 

Deleted member 5719

The question are whether a Viking Age as we know it will start, I tend to agree with Artic Warrior that the Viking Age, started a as response to Frankish expansion into Frisia and Saxony. Here without the Irish missionaring much of the common Franks stay Pagan, and we see a slow collapse of Christianity in Neustria and Cisrhine Austrasia, with the spread of Frankish, while this process likely will be turned in the late 8th Century (but by then most rural population north of Seine are Pagan), it mean that the Irish Religion (let's call it the Old Faith) can spread spread freely to England and Pictland. Especially if they adopt the monastic elements from Christianity in Ireland, the Anglo-Saxon can adopt it as a way to centralise their states, from there it could fast spread to Frisians, Saxons and Danes, and we could see one of the Frankish Northen "succesor" states (the Franks split often) adopt it from there, and permanent split Frankia between a old Faith north and a Christian south, or if *Muslim doesn't conquer Spain we may see the Visigoths regain Aquitaine, while a Christian Frankish succesor state survive in Burgundy.


I don't think so the spread of Frankish in the Seine drainage basin was mostly stopped by the strenghting of Christianity, here we would likely see Frankish dominate north of the Seine (and some areas south of it).

Thanks for the thoughts, I'm mulling them over and looking at the history at the moment.

My only concern is that I can't think of any region OTL that repaganised after conversion, except possibly Northumbria and Mercia, and then only for 20-30 years.

I'll have a look when my "tendency butterfly net" lifts from Europe in 500.

Evolved Saurian:

OTL, Dublin was a Norse creation, but the name is Irish, probably describing a physical feature that was there before the city. The Norse used this older name but the Irish gave the city a new name Baile Atha Cliath (the fort of the hurdle gate). If the more ancient Norse name hadn't been borrowed into English, the capital of Ireland would be called "Ballyatterclee", "Ballyattercliffe" or possibly just "Bailey".


TTL, the old name is also lost in Irish, but it is not preserved in any other language. And you are right, this was my way of indicating that Uncle Ragnar Skulldrinker will not be coming to dinner.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Thanks for the thoughts, I'm mulling them over and looking at the history at the moment.

My only concern is that I can't think of any region OTL that repaganised after conversion, except possibly Northumbria and Mercia, and then only for 20-30 years.

It's not that Northen Francia repaganised, it that the average Frank stayed Pagan, and like the Anglo-Saxons in Britain they spread (and like in Britain Christianity collapse too), while the Romance population was reduced to the cities (which kept speaking Vulgar Latin until the 11-12th century), that process was turned when Christian missionaries began to convert the average Franks. Beside Norway was a example of state which repaganisated. If the Old Faith offer a alternative and independent bureacracy, I think it's likely that some Frankish kings may see it as alternative to Christianity.
 

Deleted member 5719

It's not that Northen Francia repaganised, it that the average Frank stayed Pagan, and like the Anglo-Saxons in Britain they spread (and like in Britain Christianity collapse too), while the Romance population was reduced to the cities (which kept speaking Vulgar Latin until the 11-12th century), that process was turned when Christian missionaries began to convert the average Franks. Beside Norway was a example of state which repaganisated. If the Old Faith offer a alternative and independent bureacracy, I think it's likely that some Frankish kings may see it as alternative to Christianity.

How much Frankish migration was there? Was it not more of an elite taking over from the old aristocracy, lording it over the Romano-Gallic (or at this date, occasionally still Gaulish) peasantry?
 

Valdemar II

Banned
How much Frankish migration was there? Was it not more of an elite taking over from the old aristocracy, lording it over the Romano-Gallic (or at this date, occasionally still Gaulish) peasantry?

It was a mix, in many area, the Frankish aristrocracy just took over, but there was also quite major Frankish migration to their entire empire, archelogist has found Frankish villages down to the Spanish border. But mostly they settled in the north the entire area between the Rhine and Seine was mix of Romance and Frankish (and Alemannic in Elsass), and Frankish rural enclaves existed in France and Belgium up to end of the Middle Ages. It was only with strenghtening of the Church in the 7th century the collapse of Christianity and Vulgar Latin stopped in Neustria, and it seem that strenghtening was to some point helped by Irish missionaries, which converted the common Frank (and those nobles whom was still were Pagan) and made them integrated into the Gallo-Latin population (and vice versa*). Without the Irish we would likely see the process continue for a century, through I think at som point it will be turned.

*While linguistic the French are mostly descendant of Gallo-Latin, cultural they are close related to the Germanics (of course so are the North Italians), likely Gallo-Latin got an edge because with the Christianity it was the language of prestige.
 
Thanks for the thoughts, I'm mulling them over and looking at the history at the moment.

My only concern is that I can't think of any region OTL that repaganised after conversion, except possibly Northumbria and Mercia, and then only for 20-30 years.

I'll have a look when my "tendency butterfly net" lifts from Europe in 500.

Sweden went back and forth a couple of times, until the 1200s, IIRC. One of the last Heathen kings of Sweden was known as Blot-Sweyn, that is Sweyn the Sacrificer.

EvolvedSaurian:

OTL, Dublin was a Norse creation, but the name is Irish, probably describing a physical feature that was there before the city. The Norse used this older name but the Irish gave the city a new name Baile Atha Cliath (the fort of the hurdle gate). If the more ancient Norse name hadn't been borrowed into English, the capital of Ireland would be called "Ballyatterclee", "Ballyattercliffe" or possibly just "Bailey".


TTL, the old name is also lost in Irish, but it is not preserved in any other language. And you are right, this was my way of indicating that Uncle Ragnar Skulldrinker will not be coming to dinner.

Now the queston becomes just him, or the rest of his countrymen as well? Guess we'll just have to wait and see, eh?
 
If theres no Viking Age, then there still might be Scandinavian migrations into Russia, Britain, France, and to Iceland. In which case the Druidic Old Faith may follow in the wake of the migrations. Or in the case of Iceland, they may even make it there first.

Will Armagh in Ireland attain the same distinction as Palestine as a site of pilgrimages for adherents of the Old Faith?

Is it too early to speculate how the Saxons of Germany, the Wends and the Magyars cope in this TL?
 

Valdemar II

Banned
If theres no Viking Age, then there still might be Scandinavian migrations into Russia, Britain, France, and to Iceland. In which case the Druidic Old Faith may follow in the wake of the migrations. Or in the case of Iceland, they may even make it there first.

Will Armagh in Ireland attain the same distinction as Palestine as a site of pilgrimages for adherents of the Old Faith?

Is it too early to speculate how the Saxons of Germany, the Wends and the Magyars cope in this TL?

The Magyars hasn't arrived yet, and the Wends well their population density compared to their neighbours Denmark and Saxony was around 10-20% of theirs. I think you can guess what will happen.
 

Deleted member 5719

The Romano-Britons become Britons 407-463 AD. Part 1

This is my 3 part anoraky bit about early Sub-Roman Britain. I love the topic, so have gone into medium detail. OTL, nobody has a clue what actually happened, so I’ve taken my opinions about it, and then factored in the butterflies from a pagan Ireland. At the end of part 3, I’ll put a summary of the differences between TTL 463 and OTL 463, if you’re bored, just skip to that. And don't worry, I'll be back to Salmon of wisdom et al soon enough. And I suppose I’ll have to do a bloody map.



Few periods of British history saw such a revolutionary change as that immediately following Constantine’s withdrawal of the legions in 407. In these 56 short years, Britannia degenerated from a unified province, integrated within the Roman Empire, into a crazy mosaic of British, Latin, Irish and Germanic kingdoms. It also provided British history with some of its most recognizable names: Coel Heno, Inegold the Jute, Cunobelo Mapo Murchado and of course, the tyrant Vitalinus Voreticernus.

The Concilium Magistratorum and the Diarchy


In theory, throughout this period, Britain was ruled by the Concilium Magistratorum, a council comprised of tribal, religious and municipal leaders, who nominated officials to fulfill the military offices left over from the provincial government. They were also charged with co-ordinating a strategy for provincial defence against the Picts, Scots and Germanic raiders.

In practice, Coelius f. Tegmanius was effectively tyrant of the North from 410 onwards. Further South, the Concilium Magistratorum remained the dominant institution until 416, when Irish raiders sacked Gleva. Faced with the evident inability of the council to defend even Britain’s cities, the tribal leaders and the bishops conspired to install the Silurian leader Vitalinus as dictator.

While the council continued to meet infrequently, and again technically assumed responsibility for southern Britannia upon Vitalinus’ death in 441, the Roman provincial administrative structures, based in Londinium, had all but disappeared by 430.

This time would come to be seen by the descendents of the largely British-speaking population of 407 as a catastrophe, and from their point of view it is difficult not to agree with this assessment. While Coelius undoubtedly had greater military success, these two tyrants share the responsibility for the breakdown of the defensive system that could have prevented the Saxon and Irish destruction of Britannia. It is therefore perhaps a little unfair that Christian sources always refer to one as Coelius Tegmanius, Rex Britannia Inferior and the other as Vitalinus, Superbus Tyrannus Britannia Superior.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The question are whether a Viking Age as we know it will start, I tend to agree with Artic Warrior that the Viking Age, started a as response to Frankish expansion into Frisia and Saxony.

Some specific raids may have been related to Charlemagne's geopolitics, but Scandinavia was experiencing heavy over-population at the time and the technological and social conditions to drive men to go viking are still there. There is almost certainly still going to be a 'viking age'.
 

Deleted member 5719

Some specific raids may have been related to Charlemagne's geopolitics, but Scandinavia was experiencing heavy over-population at the time and the technological and social conditions to drive men to go viking are still there. There is almost certainly still going to be a 'viking age'.

That's the path I'm looking at, but I think that it'll be less Atlanticised. Scotland may suffer more, but Pagan Ireland will present a tougher target.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
That's the path I'm looking at, but I think that it'll be less Atlanticised. Scotland may suffer more, but Pagan Ireland will present a tougher target.

We will likely see a push into the Baltic and Central Europe instead. I doubt we see much change with Russia, mostly because this change the Swedish expantion very little, through we may see some stronger colonisation of Estonia, Courland and Finland. The biggest change will be what the Danes do, likely we will see a continue military expantion in Saxony and Wendia as they did before the Franks cut them off. Likely we will see Danish settlers in Mecklenburg and Pommern, and maybe along the Oder. While the Norvegian likely do much as in OTL, through with a stronger Ireland, they may go after the weaker Pictland instead. So they may join the as the fourth Germanic tribe of Britain.
 
Top