These Hills Sing of Saxon Kings - Or, The Planning Thread for My Other Next TL
- Thread starter Thermopylae
- Start date
Susano
Banned
Funny thought (mainly inspired by the fact that I saw Susano had posted) - what if England, remaining a primarily Germanic nation, ends up as part of some eventual German unification?
Hm, what were the relations between the Anglo-Saxons and the... Saxon Saxons? Could a common leader emerge?
Wendell: Well, they certainly had their rose wars as well, heh.
The English Church had alreayd for years been accepting the Pope as their leader, so I'm not entirely sure there existed the basis for the formation of something else...
Susano
Banned
I know. Its the source of the term. Dont you have it in English? "Rose Wars" are the conflicts and mud slinging two people might have when divocring, like about who gets the house, the money, the kids, etc...
They may have accepted the Pope as their leader, but how in-line were they with Papal doctrine or structure?
Actually Harold did attack into Wales, to the point that he killed the King of Wales and married his wife, Ealdgyth. (An odd fact is that Harold was already married, to a different woman also named Ealdgyth Swanholz (swan neck).
It is said that after his death at Hasting only Ealdgyth Swanneck was able to identify him by certain marks known only to her.
As I vaguely recall, though, that was not a war of conquest, simply to break up the newly-united Wales which had invaded England- the invasion was not followed up with any attempt to add Wales to the English Kingdom. (at least, not in the same way areas like Wessex or Mercia were part of the English Kingdom- the Welsh kingdoms were usually dependant on England)
Just my two cents, but wouldn't this put England in a great position to take the Vikings place in North America?
And also, if Religion follows similar lines, would this make England accept Lutheranism/Calvinism at a much earlier date? Maybe even Arianism, granted that I'm not that familiar with the subject. At some level, I don't see Eastern Orthodox taking hold in England.
And also, if Religion follows similar lines, would this make England accept Lutheranism/Calvinism at a much earlier date? Maybe even Arianism, granted that I'm not that familiar with the subject. At some level, I don't see Eastern Orthodox taking hold in England.
Actually, the Pope at this time was clearly in the pocket of the Normans, and he had excommunicated Harold and the entire kingdom of England. If Harold had survived Hastings, he might have been PO'd enough to not let the RC church back in.
Also consider that the mutual excommunication that marks the final seperation between the Orthodox and Roman Churches tool place only a few years before (1053??). If Harold decided to form his church under the order of the Orthodox Patriarch, it wouldn't have had to be in Greek, it might even have been in English.
In the first place there were still northern kings or potentates around. Harold would have to suppress these Thandes in order to firm up his control of the country. Something like William's "Harrying of the North" (A violent devastation of the north of England) would have had to take place.
At a local level, England was quite well administered, in accordance with a system codified by Alfred the Great. William used much of this system and so would Harold. The weakness to the system lay in the absense of a central judiciary, to enforce universal laws, backed in the end by the force of the King's army and the usages of the feudal system. Hand in hand with this would be a universal tax system.
Both of these (tax and judiciary) were organised well by the Normans/Plantagenets and Harold would have to do something similar.
The question is, was Harold a good administrator? On the face of it he was, if you look at the organisation of the whole Stamford Bridge/Hastings campaign. But those were military matters and not the same as the slower processes of civilian organisation. There is also the point that Harold's father, Edward the Confessor, was a bad organiser, so maybe this does not prophesy well for the Godwin family.
As for religion, the Celtic church had been declining for a long time in the face of competition from Rome. By that time, it was considered bad form (even by the Vikings) to massacre monks, missionaries etc. I cannot see that this AH timeline would stop the flow of ecclesiastics from Rome to Britain. Britain would remain as part of Roman Catholic western Europe. But the church architecture, well, now, without the Norman influence...
The same goes for castle building.
At a local level, England was quite well administered, in accordance with a system codified by Alfred the Great. William used much of this system and so would Harold. The weakness to the system lay in the absense of a central judiciary, to enforce universal laws, backed in the end by the force of the King's army and the usages of the feudal system. Hand in hand with this would be a universal tax system.
Both of these (tax and judiciary) were organised well by the Normans/Plantagenets and Harold would have to do something similar.
The question is, was Harold a good administrator? On the face of it he was, if you look at the organisation of the whole Stamford Bridge/Hastings campaign. But those were military matters and not the same as the slower processes of civilian organisation. There is also the point that Harold's father, Edward the Confessor, was a bad organiser, so maybe this does not prophesy well for the Godwin family.
As for religion, the Celtic church had been declining for a long time in the face of competition from Rome. By that time, it was considered bad form (even by the Vikings) to massacre monks, missionaries etc. I cannot see that this AH timeline would stop the flow of ecclesiastics from Rome to Britain. Britain would remain as part of Roman Catholic western Europe. But the church architecture, well, now, without the Norman influence...
The same goes for castle building.
Two things.
Firstly, Harold was not the son of Edward the Confessor. Edward had no Children, and even may not have consumated his marriage.
Secondly, why could there not be a renaissance of "Celtic Rite" Churches ITTL, even if in modified form? Certainly, the Roman Church could be seen as hostile considering their ties to William and support for his campaign.
Firstly, Harold was not the son of Edward the Confessor. Edward had no Children, and even may not have consumated his marriage.
Secondly, why could there not be a renaissance of "Celtic Rite" Churches ITTL, even if in modified form? Certainly, the Roman Church could be seen as hostile considering their ties to William and support for his campaign.
I'd think that during this time, the Saxons lacked the longdistance maritime tradition and culture that the Vikings had. As well as the stopover points of Iceland and Greenland.
However, if things went sour for the Normans a bit down the line, with them having been stopped in England, they might look futher afield? Not so much a conquest, that would be aimed at richer targets closer by, but either a migration by surplus sons, or an escape by a losing faction.
Why shouldn't a common leader emerge? At a time an Englishman were Emperor of Germany alongside another guy - damn don't recall their names. In the 9th century Old English and Danish were fairly close and even in 1076 the Danes planned an invasion in Northumbria, so linquistic the Anglo-Saxons, Danes and Saxon-Saxons might still be fairly close.
If the Normans were repulsed we could see ties forming across the North Sea, again, this time going to Saxony. The German Saxons were very catholic, working to force it east and before this time north. That could also be a boost to the emperor in the Investitur conflict with the papacy. That would be a way for Harold or his successor to get at Rome. An occupation of the Saxons in England, could divert their attention from the Baltic coast, making life a little easier for Denmark.
The Normans repulsed from England would be a set-back, but I think they would stirr up things in the Kingdom of France. When they had recovered they might go for the French crown instead! Wasn't William married into the Flemish house? Have the Normans unite Normandy, Flanders and Brittany and you'd have somebody having a go at the Kingdom of France.
Thande
Donor
Firstly,
Secondly, although as I said above Harold WILL have to bring the northern leaders into line and force a centralised government, it won't be anything comparable to the Norman genocide OTL (I hardly think the Anglo-Saxons are going to be bang along with massacring 9 out of 10 of every adult male when it's their own people
)Max Sinister
Banned
"At a time an Englishman were Emperor of Germany alongside another guy"
Richard of Cornwall, Alfons of Castille.
Richard of Cornwall, Alfons of Castille.