WI: No vikings in the west

WI the Scandinavians never get into raiding westwards in a big way?
Say they somehow unite earlier into a bunch of kingdoms and start fighting each other.
Or they decide Russia looks like a rather nice place.
Whatever, Scandinavia isn't the issue. Lets have a ASB plague if it takes that.

In particular here I'm thinking of Britain...A undisturbed continuation of the anglo-saxon kingdoms. But of course Normandy would also be a huge deal...
 
no vikings no normandy atleast, and then no normans. Has effects for sicilly too. The viking raids was a major catalys of forming england into one kingdom. And norway and denmark became unifed, during the viking age, this did not stopp the rading and imigration.
 
There are some not so evident knock effects in Spain too. The Viking attacks are though to be one of the reasons why the Muslims left Galicia, for example. It's true too that their control there was very loose and that the Berber garrisons left there revolted because they didn't like the climate, though, so they could leave it anyway at some point. But more important is the fact that without the Viking sack of Lisbon and the incursions in the Guadalquivir river in 844 (the Norse were able to get up to the gates of Seville, although they failed to take it) Abd-al-Rahman II and his successors will not invest on a war navy, so they will not invade the Balearics in 903 (leaving them to the Byzantines) and Al-Mansur will not have a powerfull fleet sailing from Porto to support his campaign against Santiago in 997. In the same way, there will not be Andalusian razzias against Sardinia.
 

Thande

Donor
England won't unite for much longer, maybe not ever to the extent we know (though there could perhaps be a less centralised federation of English nations, probably still dominated by Wessex but with Northumbria and Mercia as heavy hitters).

Significant effects on Scotland and Ireland as well but I'm not entirely sure what. One thing, Welsh Strathclyde might survive, or at least retain the same degree of Brythonic culture as Cornwall after absorption by whoever.
 
Say they somehow unite earlier into a bunch of kingdoms and start fighting each other.

They did - only problem that Denmark came to be the top dog early on. Have that remain fragmented and you have achieved part of your objective.
But then there's Norway as a strong second. :D

Or they decide Russia looks like a rather nice place.

Oh - they did indeed. ;)

In particular here I'm thinking of Britain...A undisturbed continuation of the anglo-saxon kingdoms. But of course Normandy would also be a huge deal...

As already pointed out this would have that disired effect on the british isles.
AND no Normandy for sure.

And no Normans in Southern Italy as also pointed out. And effects in Spain.

Probably no Harold Bluetooth to christen Denmark and open the gate for the Church. Crusades in the north, anybody?

So quite a different Europe altogether.

Now you got the facts lets see a TL!
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Make the Frankish Empire conquer Jutland (and maybe Fuen) in the early 9th century, what would turn the focus of the rest of Denmark east, and could result in Danish overpopulation emigrating east to Norvograd, Finland and the Baltic states.

While it would stop the westen Viking raids completely, it would limit them to a level where Danelaw and Normandy isn't established.
It would likely result in a England split in 3 states and a Scandinavian speaking Finland, Latvia, Estonia and northwest Russia.
The Norvegian raiding wiould still happen but it unlikely that they could conquer the area which later turned into Danelaw, you would likely see them take a few northen coastal area over, but not much more.
 

ninebucks

Banned
It would be fascinating if the Norsemen focussed their attention purely on the Rus'. They could very well establish a permenant colonisation. And then of course, being the prominent power closest to the Urals puts you in the ideal position to build an empire spanning all the way to the Pacific Ocean!
 
acctually the best way to stopp viking rading would bee to get scandinavia christian. You would still have the overpopulation, lack of farm land and desentralisation (maby not in denmark but in sweden and norway). Bigger focus on colonazation on icleand and greenland bye norway, maby even vinlad, more focused swedish colo of russ and less rading, but you could have pragmatic christian "warriors" attacking enemys of the church, hitting muslim and paga land harder.
 
acctually the best way to stopp viking rading would bee to get scandinavia christian. You would still have the overpopulation, lack of farm land and desentralisation (maby not in denmark but in sweden and norway). Bigger focus on colonazation on icleand and greenland bye norway, maby even vinlad, more focused swedish colo of russ and less rading, but you could have pragmatic christian "warriors" attacking enemys of the church, hitting muslim and paga land harder.

Depending on the time period, Christian Scandinavia would mean more Vikings, initially. If a Christian (maybe Rorik of Dorestad, who had a claim to Denmark in OTL) invades Denmark and attempts Christianization, a great number of pagan Danes would flee the country by ship. Many might sail to England and become Vikings, or go to Russia or Ireland. But after this initial torrent, Vikings would subside because the Danes would increasingly adopt Christianity.
 
Probably not - getting Scandinavians christian began in about 200!
That didn't stop them from becoming Vikings.
The trick is to get rid of the Kingdom of Denmark and keep the Norwegians down so as not to take that place.

Denmark wasn't that overpopulated at the time - it was mainly a nobility drive to fund their warriors and enable them to keep up their client system that fuelled the Viking raids. Later on the Kings joined in to get their slice.

The perception is the nobility hirds made up the ca. 6000 men forming the nucleus of the Great Heathen Army.

Only later and probably following the loss of control of England was the leidang (royal call-up) instituted in Denmark enabling the Kings to control the warrior forces and make for the abortive go at York in 1069-70 and the assembly of forces 1085 that doomed Cnut II - the Holy.
 
Now you got the facts lets see a TL!

I already knew the facts, no timeline intended from me here. Just a discussion thread.

acctually the best way to stopp viking rading would bee to get scandinavia christian. You would still have the overpopulation, lack of farm land and desentralisation (maby not in denmark but in sweden and norway). Bigger focus on colonazation on icleand and greenland bye norway, maby even vinlad, more focused swedish colo of russ and less rading, but you could have pragmatic christian "warriors" attacking enemys of the church, hitting muslim and paga land harder.
Now this could be cool, christianity wouldn't remove their teeth too much.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Denmark wasn't that overpopulated at the time - it was mainly a nobility drive to fund their warriors and enable them to keep up their client system that fuelled the Viking raids. Later on the Kings joined in to get their slice.

Interesting, in most books I have read about the subject, the authors blame overpopulation for the migrations in 800-1000. Of course most of those are of older date, and many of the authors also think that conversion to Christianity is the reason the raids and conquests stopped (something I disagreed with).
 
Norway at least as fare as i know, did have problems of overpopulation, there is only about 3 places her one can farm, as the county is basicaly a big craked rock in water whit som moss on it. That is why the potato was and is such a big deal her. Fish and potatos was the maine souce of food from the 1600`s. In norway the lack of farm land and the hugh cost of clearing and runnig what could bee farmed is part of the reason for the raids.
 
Norway at least as fare as i know, did have problems of overpopulation, there is only about 3 places her one can farm, as the county is basicaly a big craked rock in water whit som moss on it. That is why the potato was and is such a big deal her. Fish and potatos was the maine souce of food from the 1600`s.

Tell me about it, I grew up on the damn stuff!
 
Interesting, in most books I have read about the subject, the authors blame overpopulation for the migrations in 800-1000. Of course most of those are of older date, and many of the authors also think that conversion to Christianity is the reason the raids and conquests stopped (something I disagreed with).

Look up someone like Niels Lund - quite interesting stuff and very well founded.

The older date are quite fun reading but much coloured by the perception of the post-WWII world.

Oh- christianity. Svend Forkbeard was a christian like his father as his son Cnut the Great and his sons. Didn't stop them from conquering England. :D
 
I already knew the facts, no timeline intended from me here. Just a discussion thread.

Pity though - its been done so many times. And peoples are still engulfed by the old works like mentioned by Valdemar II.
Problem is that the newer works are mostly printed in Scandinavian languages and only with abstracts in English in the scholarly works. ;)
 
Top