WI: Germanic Tribes Had a Stronger Sense of Unity

The Germanic tribes/peoples in OTL had a very vague sense of unity that only really showed itself when a massive power like Rome showed itself. Even then it was very unstable. So, what if the Germanic tribes had a stronger sense of unity, similar to the Gallic tribes. The only thing I can think of is if the Germanic tribes all spoke the same language like how the Gallic tribes all spoke Gallic. Any thoughts? Could the Germanic people have been more "civilized"?

(To clarify by Germanic I mean the people of Magna Germania)
 
I think in order to get that you need Rome to try to conquer them, or at least seriously menace them in the long run. And if they somehow united, Proto/Common Germanic would probably have a common standard version as the various dialects evolved, some equivalent to OTL languages, others possibly their own thing.

"Civilized" is a relative term. They were traders and miners, and had villages, just usually small enough Rome didn't care to take them over. Romans in their kingdom and early republic days were very pugnacious. The first Greeks on the historical scene, the Mycenaeans, sacked Troy and might've been the "Sea Peoples" raiders that cris-crossed the Mediterranean pillaging stuff... and their towns in those days probably were no more impressive than late-empire Germanic hamlets in Germany and Denmark, we just think of them as historically important because the Greeks glorified those days and wrote them down.

I find it fascinating that the Germanic tribes DID have that vague sense of kinship at least - insomuch you see them able to pass on heroic tales from tribe to tribe as common stories (English Wayland being famous in the Poetic Edda), or even just names (Anglo-Saxon English's name for 'Vandal' was basically 'Wendel', as in Wendelsae, Vandal-Sea, AKA the Mediterranean).
 
As someone who once tried to do just this in a TL, here are my thoughts: the key to civilization is urbanization, and the key to urbanization is excess food. Germania has difficulties in this regard due to its climate. Germania is colder than Mediterranean Europe and has harsher winters, which naturally demands hardier crops. The region also has harder soil and heavy plows would be needed to till much of it; neither the Romans themselves nor Germanic peoples had such implements. The northern coasts, although pleasantly flat and sporting potentially productive soils, is also swampy in places and has been prone to flooding since ancient times, while the south is hilly and rugged. The land as a whole is also thickly forested compared to Gallia or the Mediterranean. All in all, you can't do much with German soil without more advanced technologies. These technologies are unlikely to be developed in a society that is so decentralized and unable to push itself beyond subsistence agriculture. In short, Germania is just a harder place in which to start a civilization from scratch, and in ancient times no one had the means or will to import civilization.

The Rhine Valley is the one place where you might be able to begin a more sophisticated society. Tacitus reports that the valley was home to the only large Germanic settlement, Asciburgium (which is clearly a Romanized Germanic name). Keep this city or one like it intact, add a few more, avoid disruptions, and you'll have a network of city-states that evolve into larger polities. Preventing disruptions is the hard part. Rome would assimilate any native developments along the Rhine, so the conquest of Gallia must be temporary or averted altogether. The fledgling Germanic civilization might then have to be wary of the Gallic peoples. Lastly, there's the risk that tribes from the east migrate the shit out of them before civilization can really get off the ground. It's not the most likely scenario, but unlikely things do happen and are fair game as long as they're well-explained.

As for languages, I think you have it backwards. A fragmented people will speak a fragmented language. Linguistic homogenization in OTL European states is a fairly recent phenomenon, coinciding with increasing centralization and nationalism.
 
As someone who once tried to do just this in a TL, here are my thoughts: the key to civilization is urbanization, and the key to urbanization is excess food. Germania has difficulties in this regard due to its climate. Germania is colder than Mediterranean Europe and has harsher winters, which naturally demands hardier crops. The region also has harder soil and heavy plows would be needed to till much of it; neither the Romans themselves nor Germanic peoples had such implements. The northern coasts, although pleasantly flat and sporting potentially productive soils, is also swampy in places and has been prone to flooding since ancient times, while the south is hilly and rugged. The land as a whole is also thickly forested compared to Gallia or the Mediterranean. All in all, you can't do much with German soil without more advanced technologies. These technologies are unlikely to be developed in a society that is so decentralized and unable to push itself beyond subsistence agriculture. In short, Germania is just a harder place in which to start a civilization from scratch, and in ancient times no one had the means or will to import civilization.

The Rhine Valley is the one place where you might be able to begin a more sophisticated society. Tacitus reports that the valley was home to the only large Germanic settlement, Asciburgium (which is clearly a Romanized Germanic name). Keep this city or one like it intact, add a few more, avoid disruptions, and you'll have a network of city-states that evolve into larger polities. Preventing disruptions is the hard part. Rome would assimilate any native developments along the Rhine, so the conquest of Gallia must be temporary or averted altogether. The fledgling Germanic civilization might then have to be wary of the Gallic peoples. Lastly, there's the risk that tribes from the east migrate the shit out of them before civilization can really get off the ground. It's not the most likely scenario, but unlikely things do happen and are fair game as long as they're well-explained.

As for languages, I think you have it backwards. A fragmented people will speak a fragmented language. Linguistic homogenization in OTL European states is a fairly recent phenomenon, coinciding with increasing centralization and nationalism.

Wow! Thank you for all this information. Can you tell me anything else on Asciburgium? Cause as your explaining it, it seems like the people of Asciburgium were going down the route that the Greeks were had they been given more time.
 
I think in order to get that you need Rome to try to conquer them, or at least seriously menace them in the long run. And if they somehow united, Proto/Common Germanic would probably have a common standard version as the various dialects evolved, some equivalent to OTL languages, others possibly their own thing.

"Civilized" is a relative term. They were traders and miners, and had villages, just usually small enough Rome didn't care to take them over. Romans in their kingdom and early republic days were very pugnacious. The first Greeks on the historical scene, the Mycenaeans, sacked Troy and might've been the "Sea Peoples" raiders that cris-crossed the Mediterranean pillaging stuff... and their towns in those days probably were no more impressive than late-empire Germanic hamlets in Germany and Denmark, we just think of them as historically important because the Greeks glorified those days and wrote them down.

I find it fascinating that the Germanic tribes DID have that vague sense of kinship at least - insomuch you see them able to pass on heroic tales from tribe to tribe as common stories (English Wayland being famous in the Poetic Edda), or even just names (Anglo-Saxon English's name for 'Vandal' was basically 'Wendel', as in Wendelsae, Vandal-Sea, AKA the Mediterranean).

Yeah by civilization I mean urbanization. The Germanic people had very few actual cities let alone large villages.

That vague sense of unity is absolutely fascinating, after all their infighting they had some shared sense of cultural and/or religious unity even before the Romans.
 
Wow! Thank you for all this information. Can you tell me anything else on Asciburgium? Cause as your explaining it, it seems like the people of Asciburgium were going down the route that the Greeks were had they been given more time.

The scenario that I described is highly speculative. They might go down the route of the Greeks (The comparison is weak because we're not talking about maritime peoples here). Little practical information is available about the city other than what I've told you. Asciburgium was located west of the Rhine, near the Ruhr tributary if this map is to be believed (and I'm not certain that it should be). I suspect it was still small compared to Roman settlements on the Rhine, e.g. Colonia Agrippina. The city itself is not very important beyond the fact that it existed before Roman conquest and hints that civilization arising along the Rhine is possible with some luck.
 
Asciburgium? I can at least figure out what the name means!

If I know my proto-Germanic and Old English, that Asci- may be Ask-, aka "Ash" as in ash-tree. The soft 'sh' sound was once a harder 'k' in the two languages I spoke of, similar to the word 'English' having a harder sound as Old English 'Englisc'.

Which means it literally just reads "Ashborough" if we just de-bastardize it from Latin then use the modern English descendants of Ask- and -Burgz. And looks like a perfectly normal and lovely English name the way using modern Dutch or German or Scandinavian would render it perfectly normal in those tongues.

Ah, I love studying Germanic languages, the Norman bastardization of English makes it feel more rewarding when I dig into the others and recognize them as cognate to a native English word.
 
How could the heavy plow have an early introduction to Germania? And could the Danube region (north of Roman Noricum) be a conduit to development of the lands beyond it like the Rhine was?

Which means it literally just reads "Ashborough" if we just de-bastardize it from Latin then use the modern English descendants of Ask- and -Burgz. And looks like a perfectly normal and lovely English name the way using modern Dutch or German or Scandinavian would render it perfectly normal in those tongues.

Escheburg?
 
Top