How much of Europe could have been Germanized?

[Mr_Fanboy]

...with a point of divergence no earlier than around 300 AD. It was not long after this point that the Migration Period began in earnest, after all, and the Germanic peoples played prominently into this upheaval.

But then again, they did a fairly poor job of actually expanding their language and culture. Though Germanic tribes split essentially the entirety of the Western Roman Empire between them - Franks in Gaul, Ostrogoths (and later the Lombards) in Italy, Visigoths in Iberia, and Vandals in North Africa - with the exception of the Anglo-Saxons in Britain, these conquerors largely assimilated into the culture of their new homelands.

To the east, those Germanic tribes that had not fled before the Huns were largely assimilated by the advancing Slavs, who actually seem to have done a much better job of spreading their culture through migrations. By the time of Charlemagne, even much of what is today eastern Germany was inhabited by Slavic tribes. While the slow process of Drang nach Osten eventually reestablished significant German populations in much of Central and Eastern Europe, this was largely undone by their flight and expulsion from places such as Poland and Czechoslovakia after the Second World War.

The Norse also saw a period of serious expansion, with traders, raiders, and settlers positively bursting out of Scandinavia during the Viking Age, they, too, failed to permanently (North) Germanize many new lands beyond a few exceptions such as Iceland (which, notably, was unpopulated before they showed up).

So... how could the Germanic migrations have had a more lasting ethnolinguistic impact upon Europe? How much of the continent could have plausibly been Germanized?

 

[Zucculent22]

To get a larger germanicisation effect you would need only one thing. The complete and total breakdown of Latin society, culture, and written language. The Germanic tribes such as the Franks, Goths, Scirians, Suebi etc etc were assimilated due to the persistence of Latin society, culture, and written language. Instead of making the lower class take in their traditions, they took in the traditions of the lower class. To prevent this, You’d need something to push the population out of the cities and the collapse of central church authority, generating a true Dark Age.

To prove my point we should look at the single successful case of a large region being Germanicised by Migration Age Migrants; Anglo-Saxon England. In England the written language was breaking down and so was urban roman life. Cities were being abandoned en masse, The “Romanised” elites were rapidly dropping the few romanised things they did, and their society was no longer prestige. Then the Anglo-Saxons came in, in the form of a warrior elite in several places and the presence of ~200,000 Migrants across the island. This is an equal amount of migrants as two major group; The Visigoths and the Ostrogoths.

In short, Most of the Western Empire could be Germanicised if the right conditions were present. If you can make the authority of the Chalcedonian Church break down and the urbanised society break down as well, You can make vast swathes of land Germanic. The entire Germanic Kingdoms of the West could become Germanic populated in such a situation. In short, Western Europe, the North African Coast, Italy, and Pannonia could too have become Germanicised.

 

[Gloss]

To get a larger germanicisation effect you would need only one thing. The complete and total breakdown of Latin society, culture, and written language. The Germanic tribes such as the Franks, Goths, Scirians, Suebi etc etc were assimilated due to the persistence of Latin society, culture, and written language. Instead of making the lower class take in their traditions, they took in the traditions of the lower class. To prevent this, You’d need something to push the population out of the cities and the collapse of central church authority, generating a true Dark Age.

In England the written language was breaking down and so was urban roman life. Cities were being abandoned en masse, The “Romanised” elites were rapidly dropping the few romanised things they did, and their society was no longer prestige. Then the Anglo-Saxons came in, in the form of a warrior elite in several places and the presence of ~200,000 Migrants across the island. This is an equal amount of migrants as two major group; The Visigoths and the Ostrogoths.

In short, Most of the Western Empire could be Germanicised if the right conditions were present. If you can make the authority of the Chalcedonian Church break down and the urbanised society break down as well, You can make vast swathes of land Germanic. The entire Germanic Kingdoms of the West could become Germanic populated in such a situation. In short, Western Europe, the North African Coast, Italy, and Pannonia could too have become Germanicised.

The Arabs didn't need the collapse of the Middle East to assimilate the locals and frankly neither did the Turks, considering they rebuilt a urbanized and organized societies within a few centuries at most.

To prove my point we should look at the single successful case of a large region being Germanicised by Migration Age Migrants; Anglo-Saxon England.

Rhineland, Flanders, Toxandria, Raetia.

and the urbanised society break down as well,

It effectively did, the idea that the small surviving cities are what made Latin survive is honestly non-sense.

 

[CommieScum]

The Arabs didn't need the collapse of the Middle East to assimilate the locals and frankly neither did the Turks, considering they rebuilt a urbanized and organized societies within a few centuries at most.

Rhineland, Flanders, Toxandria, Raetia.

It effectively did, the idea that the small surviving cities are what made Latin survive is honestly non-sense.

How do you mean? Just in Italy, Rome, Milan and Ravenna were all cities of tens or hundreds of thousands upto the 6th century

 

[kasumigenx]

Normandy is possible, given the right POD.

 

[Gloss]

...with a point of divergence no earlier than around 300 AD. It was not long after this point that the Migration Period began in earnest, after all, and the Germanic peoples played prominently into this upheaval.

But then again, they did a fairly poor job of actually expanding their language and culture. Though Germanic tribes split essentially the entirety of the Western Roman Empire between them - Franks in Gaul, Ostrogoths (and later the Lombards) in Italy, Visigoths in Iberia, and Vandals in North Africa - with the exception of the Anglo-Saxons in Britain, these conquerors largely assimilated into the culture of their new homelands.

To the east, those Germanic tribes that had not fled before the Huns were largely assimilated by the advancing Slavs, who actually seem to have done a much better job of spreading their culture in their migrations. By the time of Charlemagne, even much of what is today eastern Germany was inhabited by Slavic tribes. While the slow process of Drang nach Osten eventually reestablished significant German populations in much of Central and Eastern Europe, this was largely undone by their flight and expulsion from places such as Poland and Czechoslovakia after the Second World War.

The Norse also saw a period of serious expansion, with traders, raiders, and settlers positively bursting out of Scandinavia during the Viking Age, they, too, failed to permanently (North) Germanize many new lands beyond a few exceptions such as Iceland (which, notably, was unpopulated before their showed up).

So... how could the Germanic migrations have had a more lasting ethnolinguistic impact upon Europe? How much of the continent could have plausibly been Germanized?

1. No Christianity, the Roman empire falls while being religiously decentralized.
2. Faster fall of Rome in the frontier with fewer deaths among Germanic tribes, stable post-Roman situation with alliances between Germanic kingdoms.
3. Fewer very deep migrations, have East Germanics stay in Pannonia, Dacia and the Balkans while only West Germanics migrated to Gaul, Iberia and Africa.
4. Stronger replacement of Roman nobility.
5. Possibly have Romano-Germanic kingdoms in southern territories that while not themselves being a vector for Germanization can encourage and bring settlers continuously from other areas.
6. No Hunnic invasion means less depopulation in Central Europe which could allow Germanic tribes from keeping control of all Pannonia, Eastern Germany, Bohemia and Dacia/Western Sarmatia.

 

[August II Mocny]

A plague that kills 50% of Rome but has a much lower mortality in Germania...?

 

[Gloss]

How do you mean? Just in Italy, Rome, Milan and Ravenna were all cities of tens or hundreds of thousands upto the 6th century

I strongly doubt Milan and Ravenna had more than 100k people by 500 and by 550 CE certainly not and the Lombards conquered and controlled that region for 2 centuries afterwards, without seeing any strong Germanization.

 

[Gloss]

with the exception of the Anglo-Saxons in Britain, these conquerors largely assimilated into the culture of their new homelands.

The areas that were Germanized in the West in mainland Europe were together as large as England's.

who actually seem to have done a much better job of spreading their culture in their migrations.

They didn't encounter many locals and their population were very low, I've seen estimates that say that there were more West Germanic speakers than West+South Slavic during the early middle ages up to maybe the end of the high middle ages.

By the time of Charlemagne, even much of what is today eastern Germany was inhabited by Slavic tribes. While the slow process of Drang nach Osten eventually reestablished significant German populations in much of Central and Eastern Europe, this was largely undone by their flight and expulsion from places such as Poland and Czechoslovakia after the Second World War.

In respect to such an early pod this is obviously all circumstantial, one can easily imagine a timeline where all of Czechia and most of Slovakia is Germanized from a post-Charlemagne timeline let alone a pre-migration era one.

 

[Gloss]

To be more specific let's analyze some areas where arguably with small changes we could have seen a stronger Germanic speaking presence:

Picardy, OTL the linguistic border went as far as south of Boulogne-sur-mer and places like Lille were right on the border:

Spoiler: Map of Picardy

I think the border here can be definitely be pushed as far as the Somme or at least the up to the Somme basin, thus cities like Lille, Arras and Tournai could become Germanic.

In Wallonia there was a relative important Bilingual zone that could become Germanic as well and that could lead to all of the Ardennes becoming Germanic within centuries:

Spoiler: Map of Wallonia

In Lorraine there isn't much to work with in theory, the early modern linguistic border was a bit more West than the 19th century one, not sure what the situation was in the middle ages:

Spoiler: Map of Alsace-Lorraine:

Given the populaiton density pattern of France I think Lorraine is "isolated" enough from the rest of Romance communities that it could be assimilated, at least cities like Verdun, Metz and Nancy:

Spoiler: Population density map of 15th century France:

I'll add more later.

 

[Arkenfolm]

Rhineland, Flanders, Toxandria, Raetia.

Just how Romanised (linguistically) were they when other areas long ruled by the Roman Empire like North Africa still had active Punic-speaking traditions in parts in the 5th century as well as much usage of Berber practically everywhere (based on epigraphy). Cultural Romanisation was never linguistic Romanisation. As for those areas in particular, my understanding is that there, a significant amount of the population fled and never returned (or died off and was never replenished by immigration from elsewhere) leading to Germanisation.

To be more specific let's analyze some areas where arguably with small changes we could have seen a stronger Germanic speaking presence:

Picardy, OTL the linguistic border went as far as south of Boulogne-sur-mer and places like Lille were right on the border:

Spoiler: Map of Picardy

I think the border here can be definitely be pushed as far as the Somme or at least the up to the Somme basin, thus cities like Lille, Arras and Tournai could become Germanic.

In Wallonia there was a relative important Bilingual zone that could become Germanic as well and that could lead to all of the Ardennes becoming Germanic within centuries:

Spoiler: Map of Wallonia

In Lorraine there isn't much to work with in theory, the early modern linguistic border was a bit more West than the 19th century one, not sure what the situation was in the middle ages:

Spoiler: Map of Alsace-Lorraine:

Given the populaiton density pattern of France I think Lorraine is "isolated" enough from the rest of Romance communities that it could be assimilated, at least cities like Verdun, Metz and Nancy:

Spoiler: Population density map of 15th century France:

I'll add more later.

Since most of that area was Germanic-speaking, it's not a Migration Era POD so much as how to stabilise the linguistic border in its early medieval state.

 

[Mario]

In the case of Spain, the fact of the Visigoths sticking to Arianism for 150 years made the Catholic population to associate the Gothic language to Arianism and this prevented the Gothic language to spread out of the Arian elites.

If we compare this scenario with Northern France, the fact of the Franks directly converting to Catholicism, allowed the Frankish dialects to spread across the former Neustria and survived in a bilingual situation with Vulgar Latin/Old French for 400 years (maybe it could have survived longer if post-Verdun history had developed differently i.e. dividing the Empire north/south instead of west/east).

This reflects that, apart of other factors, where the Germanic tribes stuck to Arianism, their language was widely tied to that faith and Catholic Roman population rejected it by association. This also means that when Visigoths and Lombards finally embraced Catholicism it was too late for reverting that association and they completely adopted Latin/Romance as a 'logic step' for integrating into their new faith.

 

[kasumigenx]

Perhaps preventing Reconquista in the south might do the trick since parts of Northern Spain are still Celtic speaking, they could be Germanized and have Verdun stay in the 806 borders, wherein the Occitan parts of France stay separate.

 

[Mario]

Perhaps preventing Reconquista in the south might do the trick since parts of Northern Spain are still Celtic speaking, they could be Germanized and have Verdun stay in the 806 borders, wherein the Occitan parts of France stay separate.

No, by the time of the Reconquista it was too late for that.

IOTL many Visigothic nobles fled to the Northern areas not controlled by the Muslims but this did not produce any kind of Germanization as they have abandoned the Gothic language for more than a century. Only some anthroponymy survived and little more.

 

[kasumigenx]

France, north of the Joret line could be Germanized.

 

[August II Mocny]

In Britain the Roman society collapsed completely. This allowed the Anglo Saxons to move in and take the place of Roman elites. In France the old Roman onstitutions remained to some degree and assimilated the Germanic invaders

 

[Mario]

In Britain the Roman society collapsed completely. This allowed the Anglo Saxons to move in and take the place of Roman elites. In France the old Roman onstitutions remained to some degree and assimilated the Germanic invaders

This is only partially true.

In old Aquitaine it was true, but not in Neustria, where Frankish survived along with Vulgar Latin/Old French for more than four centuries. There are several factors which explains this fact, both demographic (there were more Frankish settlement in Neustria than in central and southern France, apart of the fact of being closer to the Frankish core lands in the Rhine valley) and political (cities like Paris, Soissons, Laon or Rheims were political centres of the Frankish power, while Aquitaine remained peripheral for long time). The Franks accepting Nicene Christianity from the beginning prevented the association of Frankish dialects to the Arian faith as it happened in Spain and northern Italy, so it was more socially accepted from non-Frankish population and allowed more intermarriage between Romans and Franks since earlier.

At the end, the conservation of the Roman institutions played a significant role in assimilation, but it was not the only factor and certainly not enough for causing it; other factors were required. In Northern France assimilation was not complete until the lands were split from the Frankish core by the Verdun times and tied to the rest of Gaul, which was overwhelmingly Romance-speaking.

 

[longtimelurker]

So... how could the Germanic migrations have had a more lasting ethnolinguistic impact upon Europe? How much of the continent could have plausibly been Germanized?

If we describe Germanness, as some combination of genetic and cultural/linguistic factors: R1A and R1B haplogroups, speaking a germanic language as a first language, and a cultural X-factor - all of it, but it would require a combination of moderately unlikely events (which are implausible when taken together) With the understanding that this is an improbably scenario, here's mine

The (first) POD is Arminius being more successful in his wars against the Romans, with Idistaviso being a decisive victory. He manages to parley this success into solidifieing his confederation into a "German Empire", on something similar to Roman lines. Though it falls apart quickly after his death, he manages to both create a stronger sense of unity among the different tribes, and lead to the proliferation of technologies among the tribes. By 150 AD or so, the major confederations bordering Roman Gaul are roughly as technically and organizationally advanced as they would be around 250-300 AD. Population pressures, and the jostling of tribes mean that the big migrations which smash into Rome start much earlier - which means that Germanic settlement of the area of past the Danube frontier happens earlier as well.

As a second POD, Rome fails to adopt any major axial age religion, continuing their persecutions of the Christians, Jews, etc. Some of the Christians manage to escape to the "Germania" (in TTL, a region bounded by the Rhine in the west, the Danube in the south, and the Dnieper in the East), where they eventually make converts. Strategically, Rome is bordered in the north by peer confederations, which are sometimes allies and sometimes enemies (working together Rome and a Bunch of the Confederations are able to beat Attila early), and do so much earlier than OTL. Along with the lack of a major unifying religion, and no division of Rome between east and west, this has the effect of accelerating Rome's problems. However, Rome's collapse is actually slower than in OTL, taking , but far more complete. (In Gaul, the loss of Roman authority to Frankish kings working in tandem with church authorities was so gradual, that the average peasant had no idea it was going on at all). By the 500s AD There's essentially a Romano-Britain style collapse-and-replacement as far as Italy. (something that most people miss discussing the fall of the Roman Empire is that the common peasants actually welcomed the "Barbarians", as they were better leaders - they asked for less and did more - than the Roman Central Government) Roughly speaking, TTL is roughly convergent with the OTL early medieval period, but for a few differences:

• The process of state formation started earlier, so there are many more Germans than OTL (so instead of a small aristocratic class like in Italy, its more like mass-settlement)
• The Slavs were forced to migrate east, putting them in the area of OTL European Russia
• There's a Germanic Christian church which is as German as the Tewahedo Church is Ethiopian, so the cultural pressures to assimilate happen the opposite of OTL

History happens, and while not identical to OTL, it rhymes fairly well. Nomads still smash into Europe, under the leadership of great Khans, and are only barely beaten back (Not Genghis, but demographics - population boom when there's a good climate, followed by migration when it returns to normal. Plus, Central/Western Europe is far too distant, mountainous, and full of rivers for steppe armies to get far). The Scandinavians still go raiding and trading. Religious zeal and population pressures force !crusades east into OTL Russia, North Africa, and the Middle East. (Some are successful, most aren't). Eventually what we end up with is a Europe similar to ours in broad strokes, except there's no Romance or Slavic speakers. Maybe all the pieces are in place for something like the enlightenment or Industrial revolution, maybe they're not. Perhaps !Cossacks (democratic, ethnically mixed, essentially horse tribes) drive into the east, maybe they don't

 

[kasumigenx]

I think a POD would be not giving the Aquitaine to Visigoths and the WRE survives South of Loire and instead they use them against the Franks, which would cause North of France and those areas that were lightly Germanized I.E. the Oil and Rhaetians to Germanize completely.

 

[August II Mocny]

It might be off topic but...

... What if Jews start migrating to Germania in 1st century AD?