WI: Vortigern does not invite the Saxon in

What might be the impact on Britain if Vortigern had not brought the Saxons to Britain as mercenaries?
How does this affect the Britons battle against Picts and Hibernians?
Is it possible for Romanized Britain to survive?
Is Britain doomed to splinter into dozens of states or can it remain unified?
 
What might be the impact on Britain if Vortigern had not brought the Saxons to Britain as mercenaries?
How does this affect the Britons battle against Picts and Hibernians?
Is it possible for Romanized Britain to survive?
Is Britain doomed to splinter into dozens of states or can it remain unified?

Well, the idea that the Saxons were invited in is often regarded to be just a legend. They'd been raiding off the coast of Britain since the Roman period, and so it's likely that after Rome fell, without a powerful influence in the area, they started to settle, and formed their little kingdoms.
 

Morty Vicar

Banned
What might be the impact on Britain if Vortigern had not brought the Saxons to Britain as mercenaries?

Firstly the language, instead of being closely related to Frisian would be more Scandinavian or Germanic I'd imagine, assuming the Normans effectively assumed the role of the Saxons. Otherwise perhaps we'd still have widespread celtic languages, albeit influenced by Norse and Viking culture.

How does this affect the Britons battle against Picts and Hibernians?

Not a huge amount imo, I'd imagine left to their own devices they continue to fight against each other and themselves for eternity. The borders may be redrawn from time to time but I'd guesstimate the power balance between gaels and britons to be fairly even. Whatever role the picts play is uncertain but they didn't do much to halt the invasion of the gaels.

Is it possible for Romanized Britain to survive?

Not in that form, there are endless threats to the British Isles, the Saxons lessened those threats by uniting England but without that they lie even more vulnerable.

Is Britain doomed to splinter into dozens of states or can it remain unified?

Ireland was divided into five states, Scotland is debateable because the emergence of Scotland as a nation was influenced by the existence (and threat) of England. I'd say that except the brief emergence of Mann and Dalriata etc, generally the regions would be divided into the five provinces in Ireland, The Highlands and Islands of Scotland, an Independant Isle of Man perhaps, Pictland (maybe encompassing Strathclyde and the lowlands too) Northumberland, and England and Wales as one entity, without the Anglo-Saxon/ celtic divide in OTL.
 
What might be the impact on Britain if Vortigern had not brought the Saxons to Britain as mercenaries?

Likely the stuff of myth that loosely based on a historical event. It doesn't change much since Germanic peoples have been busy raiding Britain for centuries.

How does this affect the Britons battle against Picts and Hibernians? [/QUOTE]

The Britons did not have much to offer in terms of fighting men hence their appeal to the Roman Empire two times to come help them. It'll be worse for them in the short term though maybe they can get some sort of military tradition if they do the fighting themselves.


Is it possible for Romanized Britain to survive?

Of course. It wasn't so much the Germanic attacks but the Plague of Justinian that wiped a lot of the Romanized Briton population in the southeast where there was the most heaviest amounts of Romanization. Even so in OTL, you had pockets of Romanized Britannia existing in places like Verulamium for several centuries past the fall of the Western Empire. So yes, it's possible.

Is Britain doomed to splinter into dozens of states or can it remain unified?

I think it could go either way.
 
A little off-topic, but what exactly were the differences between Picts and Scots -assuming there were any?
 
For one thing, they spoke totally different languages. The Scots spoke Gaelic (at this point in time, there wouldn't be much difference between Irish or Scottish Gaelic, the Scots were Irish), whereas the Picts spoke Pictish. There have been many theories about just what language family Pictish belonged to, but modern evidence seems to indicate it being a Celtic language of either the Brythonic branch (a la British/Welsh/Cornish), or closer to the Continental Celtic family (e.g. Gaulish).

The Scots were Irish migrants who settled in Dal Riata, then spread out from there to eventually overtake the Picts, who had already settled the area since before the arrival of the Romans to Brittania.
 
For one thing, they spoke totally different languages. The Scots spoke Gaelic (at this point in time, there wouldn't be much difference between Irish or Scottish Gaelic, the Scots were Irish), whereas the Picts spoke Pictish. There have been many theories about just what language family Pictish belonged to, but modern evidence seems to indicate it being a Celtic language of either the Brythonic branch (a la British/Welsh/Cornish), or closer to the Continental Celtic family (e.g. Gaulish).

The Scots were Irish migrants who settled in Dal Riata, then spread out from there to eventually overtake the Picts, who had already settled the area since before the arrival of the Romans to Brittania.

So how different is Scottish Gaelic from Pictish? And how is it that their language eventually prevailed instead of being absorbed into the native dialect? And bear in mind that I am assuming that the Scots who lived in Scotland through subsequent centuries to the present day were essentially Picts speaking Scottish Gaelic.
 
It's hard to tell exactly how different or alike the two languages are since Pictish is a dead language. Most of the clues WRT its classification are due to their place-name conventions, with use of "Llan-", "Pen-", "-carden" and "pefr" prefixes and suffixes (apart from the unique examples of "Aber-" and "Pit-") being examples of possible linkage to Brythonic languages.

As I understand it, Gaelic prevailed due to it being a prestige language of transplanted Gael nobility being in charge for quite some time, combined with the influence of the Celtic Church and its subsequently higher level of literature in Gaelic (vice that of Pictish).
 

Morty Vicar

Banned
A little off-topic, but what exactly were the differences between Picts and Scots -assuming there were any?

Celtic language is divided into Q and P celtic, otherwise known as Goidelic and Brythonic. Goidelic includes Irish Gaelic, Manx (from the Isle of Man) and Scottish Gaidhlig (I probably spelt that wrong, even though my forebears were gaelic speakers). Brythonic includes Welsh, Breton, Cornish, and probably Pictish. Scots, contrary to their name, were actually a tribe from Ireland, who at no point covered the entire area of modern day Scotland. Pictland is probably similar to the modern area of Grampian in the north east, the gaelic speaking regions are essentially the highlands and islands. People in the lowlands are technically Brythonic, or 'Britons' although a lot of them would bite your head off for saying so!
 
For all that we're talking about Gaelic becoming the language of the Scots, it has never been the language of Scotland. The West coast of the Highlands and the Isles are the only places where it was ever a vernacular language, though it existed as a prestige language elsewhere. Scotland has never quite lost that element of variation from the different cultures that combined to make it up. Many in the lowlands and borders had a closer affinity to Northumbria and England than they did to Scotland for a long time, but the behaviour of English monarchs changed that during the Middle Ages.

So, as has been said already it's possible for Scotland to develop in a different way with a Romano-Brythonic culture/state in 'England' rather than Anglo-Saxon. As for whether a Romano-Brythonic united state can exist in Britain, of course it can. But it would definitely collapse initially, and the process of uniting it would take time.

And if one avoids the Anglo-Saxons, there are still the Vikings to consider; i'd consider it extremely likely that they'd still take an interest in Britain when they begin to flex their muscles.
 
Top