What if successful British resistance to Germanic invasions after Roman withdrawal?

After the collapse of Roman rule in the first decade of the fifth century, Britain was divided into a number of kingdoms as shown on this map: http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesBritain/BritishMapAD400#Map .

One of these kings was called Vortigern and he became overlord in AD 425 according to one source. He or Vortigern II invited Saxons from Germania to settle in Britain as foedarati. In circa AD 450 they revolted and killed many of the British leaders. Kent was quickly lost to the Germanic invaders and by AD 700 the Anglo-Saxons ruled all of England except for Cornwall.

If the Saxon revolt had not happened or if it had been suppressed, and if successive British high kings were able to unite their people in successful resistance to Germanic invaders in the fifth and sixth centuries, the historical and cultural consequences of an independent Pridean would have been significantly different from OTL.

An independent Pridean might or might not have been able to resist Viking invasions in the eight, ninth and ten centuries. There might have been Viking conquest of the east and north, perhaps even of the whole country. However would have been no Harold Godwinson, so the events which gave William, Duke of Normandy a pretext to invade England in 1066 do not happen.

With no Anglo-Saxon conquest the language of Pridean would have been Brythonic and Old English would have developed differently than in OTL.

Pelaganism was influential in Britain in the first half of the fifth century, so in an independent Pridean a Pelagian Church could have developed, which did not owe allegiance to Rome. If such a Church survived to the reign of Charlemagne, then Pope Adrian I or Pope Leo III could have asked him to invade Pridean to bring it back to the Catholic communion. There would have been the consequences of the failure or partial or complete success of such an invasion.
 

Philip

Donor
If the Saxon revolt had not happened or if it had been suppressed, and if successive British high kings were able to unite their people in successful resistance to Germanic invaders in the fifth and sixth centuries,

How do you propose that happens? You need to explain how this is accomplished before moving on the the effects.

An independent Pridean might or might not have been able to resist Viking invasions in the eight, ninth and ten centuries.

Assuming the invasions still occur (and that is not a given with a PoD in the Fifth Century), I see no reason to believe Britons would be more successful than the Anglo-Saxons.

However would have been no Harold Godwinson, so the events which gave William, Duke of Normandy

Of course, there will be no William of Normandy either.

a pretext to invade England in 1066 do not happen.

You provide plenty of pretext below.

With no Anglo-Saxon conquest the language of Pridean would have been Brythonic and Old English would have developed differently than in OTL.

Without the Anglo Saxons, there will be no Old English. At least not on the British Isles.

Pelaganism was influential in Britain in the first half of the fifth century, so in an independent Pridean a Pelagian Church could have developed, which did not owe allegiance to Rome.

Such development is highly debatable. If it does develop, it would more likely be semipelagian.

If such a Church survived to the reign of Charlemagne, then Pope Adrian I or Pope Leo III

With a PoD in the Fifth Century, why do you assume any of these three exist? You need to consider the effects a PoD in the Fifth Century will have on the development of Europe (and the rest of the world), not just the Isles. You also need to explain how and why it happens, not just what happens.
 

Germaniac

Donor
First of all, How do they win. There where no legions to protect the British and The Saxons will just just coming back.
 
First of all, How do they win. There where no legions to protect the British and The Saxons will just just coming back.

Until the Yellow Plague the British were quite handily defeating the Saxons if they got rowdy. All you need is to prevent the Plague reaching the British Isles or to have the Saxons get infected, which they were spared IOTL.
 
My intention was not to write a TL in my opening post, but to spark discussion on the possible consequences arising from the feasible scenario of a successful British invasion to an Anglo-Saxons conquest of England. I am little concerned about how it could have happened. Just a couple of ideas: Perhaps the British had better generals and were able to win more battles. Perhaps the Byzantine Empire sent troops to help the British.

There was not a mass Anglo-Saxon invasion and settlement of England, rather the British ruling class was replaced by an Anglo-Saxon ruling class. Though that is an over-simplification. In his book Blood of the Isles Bryan Sykes claims that "[t]he Anglo-Saxons made a substantial contribution to the genetic make-up of England, but in [his] opinion it was under 20 percent of the total, even in southern England." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Sykes .

A possible scenario is Anglo-Saxon settlement of the south-east of England, East Anglia, Lincolnshire and the coastal fringes of Yorkshire. However they assimilate to Pridean culture and their kings are subordinate to the Pridean kings.

In reply to the message by Philip, I agree that the Church in an independent Pridean would more likely be semi-Pelagian rather than Pelagian. I am inclined to be a minimalist as regards butterflies, so I do not think that my scenario would have made any difference regarding the men who become Pope.

Because the Pridean Church would most likely have been Celtic rather than Roman, it would have calculated the date of Easter according to the Celtic, rather than the Roman method. There would have been no Synod of Whitby, but the Pridean Church would eventually have come round to the Roman method of calculating Easter.
 
Top