The challenge is to make Scotland have a hegemony over the British nations; making it the premier cultural, economic, etc force in Britain. Per the OTL, this is rather more England's case.
AHC: Scotland as Hegemon of Britain
- Thread starter Emperor Norton I
- Start date
Dirk
Banned
That's hard, Scotland has less open and arable land than England, and experiences less warmth/sunlight throughout the year. Since an area's measure of success was usually due to agriculture, this means that the Scots would have to take over Northumbria/some of northern England (that being called Scotland in an ATL).
Oof. The problem here is population. Today Scotland has a population about a tenth the size of England's, while in 1600, I've got Scotland having 800,000 to England's 4.11 million. A closer ratio, but still dwarfed by England more than five times over. It's actually quite similar to the "superpower Canada" problem, how do you keep "Scotland" Scotland and still have it outpace its southern neighbor?
1) Lord Murray convinces Charles Stuart to head for London in 1745 causing George II to flee to Hanover. A token force of 1500 is defeated by Murray at the Battle of Kensington wins over the British just as word of the French landings at Maldon under Marshal Saxe distract Lord Howe and force him to be in two places at once. While Howe acquits himself extraordinarily well by all sources, George II is captured while trying to flee to Hanover and Charles Stuart is crowned Charles III. His reign lasts only eight months during which time he becomes very ill with consumption, permitting his Roman Catholic Cardinal brother Henry to return to London as Henry IX. He uses his influence in the church to have the marriage of a very unhappy Hanoverian Princess Mary annulled in exchange for the right to marry her himself. Although neither had planned for a family (she being 36 and he 34 at the time and allegedly homosexual), they began the "New Stuart" dynasty. Henry, as well as his crown prince/future king James III, wear tartans about the capital and spend a great deal of time lauding Scottish culture. James III in particular (reign 1799 - 1836) solidified the Scottish trends with leadership during the Napoleanic Wars by constantly wearing his Tartan about. That pattern of yellow, blue, and finely woven colorings (OOC "Prince Edward" style) became synonymous with higher culture. Once football was taken as a Scottish pastime it rapidly spread to England, as did other elements of Scottish culture. While Hagas and other choice cuisines remained uniquely Highland, the evolving "American" influence from the Colonies and their Celtic roots reinforced the trends accordingly. The "Deathbed" Act of Confederation that released the 35 colonies to form the Union of North American States (out of Philadelphia prior to the move to Liberty City in 1888) only heightened the Scottish influence, especially as the post-mortem remembrance prior to the coronation of Arthur I (1836 - 1878) noted.
2) William Wallace smashes the English at Falkirk and sets the stage for a gradual takeover of much of the rest of England under various successors. By 1660 all that remains of England is Derby and farther south, eventually a civil conflict is used to bring the whole under Scottish control.
2) William Wallace smashes the English at Falkirk and sets the stage for a gradual takeover of much of the rest of England under various successors. By 1660 all that remains of England is Derby and farther south, eventually a civil conflict is used to bring the whole under Scottish control.
Have Alfred die early in his reign. From there, butterflies abound but with a string of capable monarchs the Scots could expand the Lowlands to include Northumbria. If the south remains divided, the reverse of what occured during the OTL middle ages could happen, Scottish suzerainty over the various English petty Kings. However, I don't see this as a TL where Great Britain emerges as a viable polity, as the power base of Scotland is still too small to effectively dominate the entire island when contrasted with the Anglo-Saxon (and Welsh) lands.
Well, you could try and have Scotland be more powerful around 800 so they can take over more of the English Lowlands easier, giving them more power in the North. From there they can make England weaker, maybe invade Ireland so that way, from a military standpoint Scotland is more powerful. Then from there, with England as a smaller nation, when the two end up uniting, the Scottish King remains in Edinburgh as opposed to London. The Scottish kings can maybe push Edinburgh to be the sort of trading hub between Scandinavia and the New World, giving it more power.
Basically weaker England, stronger Scotland
Basically weaker England, stronger Scotland
Derek Pullem
Donor
Most of these (all?) scenarios do not create a situation of Scotland vassalising England but rather a different Great Britain. It is analogous to the Normandy-England situation in 1066. Normandy conquered England but England ended up Anglo-Norman and arguably the dominant force in the Angevin Empire.
A Scots take over of England would provide for a large number of Scottish landowners but no significant difference in the character of the nation (witness Scotland in OTL)
A Scots take over of England would provide for a large number of Scottish landowners but no significant difference in the character of the nation (witness Scotland in OTL)
GdwnsnHo
Banned
I apologise if this comes across as a more "Middleland" hegemony than Scottish, but I figured it may be the easiest way.
1) Don't have Ragnar Lodbrok killed by the Northumbrians - preventing the Great Heathen Army invading
2) Have the king of scotland form either a personal union with Northumbria (with Scotland being the first throne of the king) / Cause local lords to switch allegiance by offering greater independence and to defend them - giving them control over greater arable lands south of Hadrians wall, and denying them to England
3) Conquer Ireland, and build a peaceful relationship with the Norse, perhaps even using some knowledge to colonize Newfoundland independently of the Norse - and perhaps survive (which would be nice)
4) Using Irish, Norse, and Northumbrians as additions to Scotland, either conquer the resulting victor between Essex, Wessex and Mercia - or vassalize each in turn.
TL;DR - Simply butterfly the Great Heathen Army, and Scotland has huge options as long as it can manipulate Northumbria and make nice with the Norse.
1) Don't have Ragnar Lodbrok killed by the Northumbrians - preventing the Great Heathen Army invading
2) Have the king of scotland form either a personal union with Northumbria (with Scotland being the first throne of the king) / Cause local lords to switch allegiance by offering greater independence and to defend them - giving them control over greater arable lands south of Hadrians wall, and denying them to England
3) Conquer Ireland, and build a peaceful relationship with the Norse, perhaps even using some knowledge to colonize Newfoundland independently of the Norse - and perhaps survive (which would be nice)
4) Using Irish, Norse, and Northumbrians as additions to Scotland, either conquer the resulting victor between Essex, Wessex and Mercia - or vassalize each in turn.
TL;DR - Simply butterfly the Great Heathen Army, and Scotland has huge options as long as it can manipulate Northumbria and make nice with the Norse.
I think that England has had a "south facing" outlook since William's invasion, befoer that it was far more "east facing". This means that the merchants all set up shop in the South of England, which has very little in the way of resources compaired to the midlands and the north.
So have William fail at Hastings and have Harold promote an alliance with Scandinavia. More train flows through the eastern ports (Grimsby, Harrwick, Newcastle etc.) and these towns rather than Dover / Winchelsea / Portsmouth become the important trading towns.
The population follows the jobs and far more people choose to live in the North and East.
Once the importantance of London is dimminised then York could become the Royal city and Parliment moves there to be near the King.
Then something like the Stewart sucession come to pass and the King in Edinburgh becomes the King of the UK. It would be far more acceptable for the King to live in Edinburgh and force his ministers 200 miles north than 400 miles from London.
Power gradually leaks north and stays there, without the draw of a powerful and populus south it may have a chance to stay there.
So have William fail at Hastings and have Harold promote an alliance with Scandinavia. More train flows through the eastern ports (Grimsby, Harrwick, Newcastle etc.) and these towns rather than Dover / Winchelsea / Portsmouth become the important trading towns.
The population follows the jobs and far more people choose to live in the North and East.
Once the importantance of London is dimminised then York could become the Royal city and Parliment moves there to be near the King.
Then something like the Stewart sucession come to pass and the King in Edinburgh becomes the King of the UK. It would be far more acceptable for the King to live in Edinburgh and force his ministers 200 miles north than 400 miles from London.
Power gradually leaks north and stays there, without the draw of a powerful and populus south it may have a chance to stay there.
Possibly make the various anglo-saxon duchys remain seperate. E.g - wessex, york, Mercia, etc.
Have scotland take small pieces from Mercia and York/Northumbria and make them Scottish. During this have Scotland slowly but surely take over ireland, but at the same time make Edinburgh the trade hub between Scandinavia and the British isles. With this Scotland is the largest power, has a good sized population and a strong economy that allows them to economically and militarily Britain.
Have scotland take small pieces from Mercia and York/Northumbria and make them Scottish. During this have Scotland slowly but surely take over ireland, but at the same time make Edinburgh the trade hub between Scandinavia and the British isles. With this Scotland is the largest power, has a good sized population and a strong economy that allows them to economically and militarily Britain.
Geography is destiny.
Remember that the personal union between England and Scotland was initially the Scottish king becoming English monarch. Scotland is naturally poorer and more remote. By sheer willpower (and massive luck) Scotland could have dominated the islands politically, but if that government is stable and survives for a few generations, it will gravitate back to London.
Moray and Scotland did not submit to Cnut but further south lay more interesting and richer territories. Danish ravaging of England has already led to major fighting, now Dane law returns in force. York is in an unsuitable location to be a major trade center and London is sacked by Vikings repeatedly. Northumbria marries into the Scottish royal line as does Moray and Ireland with consolidation of the above coming with time. Wales and Cornwall are added to the realm by the early 12th century while accepting tributary status during the age of William the Conqueror. A daughter of William is married to the Scottish king and when all four of William's sons are dead (henry dying in 1101 shortly after taking the throne), Edinburgh becomes the capital of Brittania. With holdings eventually extending into northern France, the Brittania Empire began its gradual expansion to control Scandinavia that resulted in London being burnt repeatedly by Vikings until seven total rebuilds were necessary. The recent discovery of the old Tower of London excited archeologists but the mass Graves reveal just how brutal those wars were