Viking France

If anything, it'd just be a larger, more unstable Normandy. Probably won't be able to conquer much more than the northern coastline, so say Brittany, OTL Normandy, and the Hauts-de-France. Wouldn't really last long, either.
 
What if the Vikings had brought in more folks from Scandinavia and conquered France instead of England?

1) I believe France had a lot more population than England or the whole of Scandinavia at the time.

2) When did the Viking (as opposed to the Normans) conquer England (as opposed to Danelagh)?
 
2) When did the Viking (as opposed to the Normans) conquer England (as opposed to Danelagh)?
Cnut

The conquest by the Great Pagan Army came closest before Cnut - Danelaw is a pretty big part of what would become England, the ruler of Mercia was a Viking client and Alfred ruled a few square miles of marshland. I don't know enough about the French state of the time to give an answer as to whether if the furore a normannorum was directed solely at the French they could conquer all or most of that area, but they were aided in the British isles by the divisions both inter and intra-kingdom to allow the invaders to divide and conquer
 

PhilippeO

Banned
if Vikings managed to take Paris and conquered ile-de-france, there is likely no France at all. Aquitaine and Lanquedoc would become independent Kingdom. at that point butterfly would cause change everywhere. there might be several 'france', or enlarged HRE, or any other weird scenario
 

Redbeard

Banned
Even if present day English and England to a larger extent than often acknowledged is a product of Viking presence I think "Vikings conquering England" is a bit of a stretch. Yes, a couple of Danes (Svend (1013-14), Knud (1016-35)and Hardeknud (1040-42) were Kings of England and a lot Vikings settled in England, but all, Kings or "plain" Vikings blended in and soon became more English than Viking.

In France, being much bigger and with a more self-conscious culture, I guess the Vikings would be culturally conquered much before and leaving an even smaller impact.
 
Cnut

The conquest by the Great Pagan Army came closest before Cnut - Danelaw is a pretty big part of what would become England, the ruler of Mercia was a Viking client and Alfred ruled a few square miles of marshland. I don't know enough about the French state of the time to give an answer as to whether if the furore a normannorum was directed solely at the French they could conquer all or most of that area, but they were aided in the British isles by the divisions both inter and intra-kingdom to allow the invaders to divide and conquer

If hypothetically, Paris was conquered and the King and his family dead would France remain France. Would Southern France gell into a kingdom of Languedoc focused at Tours with a separate identity like they almost did otl?

Would Northern France be more Franco-Danish.

Yes, a couple of Danes (Svend (1013-14), Knud (1016-35)and Hardeknud (1040-42) were Kings of England and a lot Vikings settled in England, but all, Kings or "plain" Vikings blended in and soon became more English than Viking.

Remember that the culture of England is better described as Saxon-Danish on the eve of the Norman conquest. We know this from looking at the material culture, reading the reports of the time (Edward the Confessor was a fanboy of Norse sagas). England looked at Scandinavia as cultural kin.

The Norman conquest smooched the culture together and seen as "Saxon".

With the Danes killing Alfred in the swamp we probably have a more Danish-Saxon culture. It probably delays the conversion of Scandinavia (fewer or no Anglo Dane missionaries) at the very least.

Applying it to France, a Northern France as a Scandinavian-Franco state and Southern France as Languedoc is possible.
 
William the Bastard did fight his lord King Henry I of France from 1054 on.
WI instead of invading England, William the Bastard at some point crushes King of France - Henry I or Philip I - kills him in battle or captures him alive and packs off to rot in a monastery, captures Paris and tries to make himself King of France? How would the vassals of Henry/Philip react?
 
William the Bastard did fight his lord King Henry I of France from 1054 on.
WI instead of invading England, William the Bastard at some point crushes King of France - Henry I or Philip I - kills him in battle or captures him alive and packs off to rot in a monastery, captures Paris and tries to make himself King of France? How would the vassals of Henry/Philip react?

Henry I was not part of the royal army which attacked Normandy.
 
If hypothetically, Paris was conquered and the King and his family dead would France remain France. Would Southern France gell into a kingdom of Languedoc focused at Tours with a separate identity like they almost did otl?

Would Northern France be more Franco-Danish.

Tours is in the Loire Valley. I assume you mean Toulouse?

Southern France might well split away, but I don't think the north would be particularly "Danish" in terms of culture. It's more likely that the new king would end up becoming assimilated himself. For one thing, he'd most likely be dependent on the support of the nobility in order to take Paris in the first place.
 
Last edited:

Redbeard

Banned
If hypothetically, Paris was conquered and the King and his family dead would France remain France. Would Southern France gell into a kingdom of Languedoc focused at Tours with a separate identity like they almost did otl?

Would Northern France be more Franco-Danish.



Remember that the culture of England is better described as Saxon-Danish on the eve of the Norman conquest. We know this from looking at the material culture, reading the reports of the time (Edward the Confessor was a fanboy of Norse sagas). England looked at Scandinavia as cultural kin.

The Norman conquest smooched the culture together and seen as "Saxon".

With the Danes killing Alfred in the swamp we probably have a more Danish-Saxon culture. It probably delays the conversion of Scandinavia (fewer or no Anglo Dane missionaries) at the very least.

Applying it to France, a Northern France as a Scandinavian-Franco state and Southern France as Languedoc is possible.

I agree that the Viking/Danish influence was larger than is usually acknowledged, but as much as I as a descendant of said Vikings would like it I seriously doubt that the end product of Danes staying on the Throne of England would be more Danish than English. But BTW I've written (but not yet finished) an ATL about Hardeknud surviving and establishing a dynasty sitting on the Thrones of England and Denmark (and Norway, Sweden, Scotland etc....)

https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...a-thirsty-dog-created-a-mighty-empire.143305/

Here, even if starting with a Dane conquering the Throne of England, the end product is at least as much England conquering Denmark. Around year 1000 Denmark and Scandinavia simply was too remote and culturally too "oldfashioned" to conquer anything like England, let alone France, in a lasting way.

I don't think the Christianisation of Scandinavia would have happened later, but it would most certainly have stemmed much more from British monks than from the OTL German. Anyway, already the widespread introduction of Christianity in these years will ensure that the cultural conquest will go towrads Scandinavia and not from it.
 
Top