Would a continuing Anglo-Saxon England invade Ireland?

Suppose that Harold Godwinson defeated William of Normandy at Hastings. Would a continuing Anglo-Saxon England invade Ireland as the Normans did in 1169 OTL?
 
I doubt it, to be honest; up until that point, what relations between A-S England and Ireland that did exist seemed fairly benign (or at least, hardly adversarial) when compared to the Lordship of Ireland period, and given contemporary practices I can’t see that deviating too much without some sort of instigating factor. Even then, it wasn’t until Henry VIII that serious effort towards conquering and subjugating the Irish, with the Hiberno-Normans becoming quickly Gaelicized (“more Irish than the Irish”) in general, occurred.

Note that a conflict COULD arise between A-S England and Ireland (especially if they develop some sort of rivalry over some geopolitical McGuffin), I just don’t see it as an inevitability. Most of what we know about English relations with its immediate neighbors comes through an filter of Anglo-Norman attitudes and motivations, after all.
 
Last edited:
I doubt it, to be honest; up until that point, what relations between A-S England and Ireland that did exist seemed fairly benign (or at least, hardly adversarial) when compared to the Lordship of Ireland period, and given contemporary practices I can’t see that deviating too much without some sort of instigating factor. Even then, it wasn’t until Henry VIII that serious effort towards conquering and subjugating the Irish, with the Hiberno-Normans becoming quickly Gaelicized (“more Irish than the Irish”) in general, occurred.

"More Irish than the Irish" seems to have been a phrase made up by a later Irish nationalist politician, but I agree with the rest of what you said. Most English kings didn't really care about Ireland even after the initial invasion; English control of everywhere outside the Pale had lapsed by the late 15th century, without much effort made to reverse the decline. Ireland didn't have much in the way of either natural resources or strategic interest for the English (except for the possibility of its being used as a staging-post for an invasion of England, although I'd question how realistic that actually was), so absent Henry II's empire-building, I don't think an English invasion is particularly likely.
 
"More Irish than the Irish" seems to have been a phrase made up by a later Irish nationalist politician, but I agree with the rest of what you said. Most English kings didn't really care about Ireland even after the initial invasion; English control of everywhere outside the Pale had lapsed by the late 15th century, without much effort made to reverse the decline. Ireland didn't have much in the way of either natural resources or strategic interest for the English (except for the possibility of its being used as a staging-post for an invasion of England, although I'd question how realistic that actually was), so absent Henry II's empire-building, I don't think an English invasion is particularly likely.

Meh, it felt like the phrase had some relevance here even despite its historical accuracy...or not. In any case, on top of those factors, there's also the fact that an Anglo-Saxon England surviving 1066 would likely see butterflies in the Briton kingdoms (Gwynedd, Powys, *Strathclyde) that may render that potential invasion from Ireland even less plausible. If there's a string of buffers between the two polities (and that's assuming Ireland either coalesces into a unified and hostile state, or even assuming a unified Ireland would be hostile to England to begin with), it's much less of a threat to worry about since the Irish and Britons didn't really have any tendency to ally with each other.
 

Kaze

Banned
They would first deal with the problems of Scotland and Wales first - it might take a long, long time before they decide the Irish would become part of the Empire. The Irish could not survive as independent - unless they have a powerful allay such as France, Italy, or Scotland. But, considering marriages and alliances might change with the new leadership, Ireland might unite under a king who might marry into the English so you might get a union of Kingdoms situation.
 
They would first deal with the problems of Scotland and Wales first - it might take a long, long time before they decide the Irish would become part of the Empire. The Irish could not survive as independent - unless they have a powerful allay such as France, Italy, or Scotland. But, considering marriages and alliances might change with the new leadership, Ireland might unite under a king who might marry into the English so you might get a union of Kingdoms situation.

I don't know, if Ireland manages to unite before the English start looking that way, I think they'd have a pretty good chance of keeping their independence. It would be harder to find a casus belli if there are no feuding local kings to invite you over, and without a base on the island supporting an invasion would be a logistical nightmare.
 
Well, they had vassalized wales, and scotland was regularly paying tribute (or at least it did to Alfred I and his son whose name escapes me at the moment) so it's certainly on the table to establish tribute states in Dublin and Ulster. But, here's the thing: otl england was content with vassals for a while until they revolted. When they revolted, the English outright started conquering them and the plantations came to be to prevent revolts (ironic) so frankly:

why wouldnt they eventually? If anything it would be easier because scotland may well fall sooner if they dont have an alliance with France, which is entirely likely since Anglo-Saxon England wouldn't have the bad blood with France that Norman England does
 
Well, they had vassalized wales, and scotland was regularly paying tribute (or at least it did to Alfred I and his son whose name escapes me at the moment) so it's certainly on the table to establish tribute states in Dublin and Ulster. But, here's the thing: otl england was content with vassals for a while until they revolted. When they revolted, the English outright started conquering them and the plantations came to be to prevent revolts (ironic) so frankly:

why wouldnt they eventually? If anything it would be easier because scotland may well fall sooner if they dont have an alliance with France, which is entirely likely since Anglo-Saxon England wouldn't have the bad blood with France that Norman England does

The plantations are well 600 years after the POD (1066 being the most realistic) and so it really can't factor into this discussion.

AS England certainly attempted to get tribute from it's neighbors and maybe even claims of fealty (Wales under the Godwinsons being the most prominent example, but it was a part of English-Scottish relations as well). But, except for the case of Wales, there were few attempts to seriously militarily undermine other states. And this wasn't for the Anflo-Saxon period, but extends to Norman and Plantagenet England up til the invasion of Scotland by Edward I (and even he was, at least initially, following the traditional form of getting the Scottish Kong to declare the English long superior. Though it did quickly become more).

So, following the historical model, it seems as if England would likely play the Irish states agaisnt one another and attempt to establish some form of fealty - likely in the form of a pledge of support and tribute - on the stronger Irish states.

Should a rebellion occur, there is unlikely to be a massive response because, once again, that was a patter established only after Edward.

Now, this doesn't mean that AS England can't change it's policy or that it is honorbound to keep doing things the same way as the Harold Godwinson and his predecessors. Bit it's also not helpful to read 17th Century English policy backward or sideways on time.
 
See my post in a similar thread back in 2018:-
The Scots had penetrated and settled Antrim and the McDonnell family had achieved hegenomy overy the north of that county by the late 1400s and that was with the English actively supporting the efforts of the O'Neill and O'Donnell clans to keep the Scots out. Once the Stuarts took over England as well as Scotland the Ulster Plantation took place.
England had better land than Ireland and a bigger economy so there was only elite settlement - e.g. The O'Gorman Mor gets beheaded for opposing the Crown and some English courtier is granted his estates and becomes Earl of Dunlough. However ,other than a few key servants and henchmen, his tenantry remain native Irish and life for the ordinary peasant goes on much the same.
Scotland has poorer and more marginal land than Ireland so, if Sir Walter Johnstone gets a grant of Irish land, there is wholesale resettlement with most tenants of the deposed Irish aristocrat being driven out or even killed and their farms allocated to tenants of his and allied Surnames (which is what they called their clans down in the Scottish Borders). They have a huge incentive to come with him and get better farmland as a reward.
The English courtier is probably a younger son with few or no tenants and they have very little incentive to come to where there are smaller farms and poorer land. So the new Earl of Dunlough brings over a steward and a chaplain (who would have had much more junior positions at home and are incentivised by the promotion) and a dozen hard men to act as rent collectors/enforcers/bodyguards (middlemen) -who would have been not terribly well off ex soldiers and who have each suddenly become tenant in chief for 4,000 odd of the Earl's 50,000 acres. However he wouldn't be able to raise 5,000 English peasants to take ten acre tenancies each in place of his native tenants whereas the Scots Laird could -and usually did.

Ireland's problem is that it sits on England's (and Scotland's) flank and (once it is discovered) between England and the New World. Doesn't matter whether Ireland's neighbour in any TL is Prydain, Anglelond, Great Mercia, Le Royaume Uni de France et Angleterre etc. etc. Any continental rival will try to draw Ireland into their camp or conquer her outright and "England" will react accordingly. If "England" is weak and divided then a continental power will seize/puppetise Ireland in some of TTL's power struggles. If "England" is stronger she will do the same as a defensive reflex.
 
I don't think it really is about the ruling class. If England is more powerful than Ireland, we can predict that it will eventually try to conquer or vassalize the latter. It may fail, but it will try.
 
Suppose that Harold Godwinson defeated William of Normandy at Hastings. Would a continuing Anglo-Saxon England invade Ireland as the Normans did in 1169 OTL?

My two cents:
When Earl Godwine and his family were exiled from the Confessor’s England in 1051, two of his sons, Earl Harold and Leofwine, took refuge in Ireland, specifically with the King of Leinster, Diarmait mac Máel na mBó. Said king had recently taken Dublin and was able to provide Harold and Leofwine with ships and men to aid in their return to power the following year. Post-Norman conquest, the sons of Harold took refuge with the same king who once again provided ships and men for their less successful ventures in 1068/9. Does this indicate a ‘special’ relationship with the Godwine family?

Consider, when Earl Ælfgar (a rival of Harold) was exiled in 1055, it was to Ireland he went first where he received ships and men from King Diarmait before teaming up with King Gruffydd ap Llywelyn ap Seisyll of Wales for his return to power later that year. Further, just to take two post-1066 examples: Gruffydd ap Cynan ab Iago in his first bid for power in Wales in 1075 used Irish ships and men from Dublin. In his second bid in 1081 they came from Waterford. In his third bid in 1098 the men from Dublin were bought off by the Normans. Or Rhys ap Tewdwr ap Cadell after being forced to flee from Wales in 1088 returned to power the same year with the help of ships and men from Waterford.

Yes, I’m aware that I’m painting a very one-sided picture and that the relationship between Ireland and the rest of the British Isles was more complex. However for men of power and influence (or those that wished to be) in England (and Wales) it seems Ireland was a means to an end. More, that it was the Hiberno-Norse (or perhaps more accurately, the Hiberno-Scandinavians) that came (mainly) from Dublin that were the actual tool. An additional factor to be aware of is that the Kings of Norway intermittently sought to re-establish their hegemony in the area – control of Dublin was crucial to this. It was an actual Norse fleet that assisted Ælfgar on his return from exile in 1058 and assisted Gruffydd ap Cynan in his successful third bid for power in 1098. It may happen that Harold Godwineson or one of his successors may wish to end Irish succour of any future rebels. Taking control of Dublin may be a course of action that would have to be seriously considered.
 
Top