| Question Home |
Position:Home>History> Why didn't the anglo saxons conquer scotland wales and cornwall?Question: Why didn't the anglo saxons conquer scotland wales and cornwall!? the anglo saxons conquered britain but they only conquered england why didn't the anglo saxons conquer scotland wales and cornwall does anyone know why because i don't know why the anglo saxons never conquered scotland wales and cornwallWww@QuestionHome@Com
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: Well, Wales and Scotland, being mountainous and boggy, are pretty hard to conquer - Scotland defeated the Romans, remember, and Wales and Cornwall were mostly only paying Rome lip-service!. The thing to remember with the Anglo-saxons is, they sound like one population group but they really weren't - they were lots of different groups, most of whom didn't agree with each other, let alone the natives!. So when they came to Britain, they settled the easy bits pretty quick, and then tried to establish themselves more comfortably and fortify their positions!. After that, they could move on to expanding their territories - but by that stage, the Scots, Welsh and Cornish would have been ready and waiting for them!. I don't know so much about Wales and Cornwall, but I do know that in Scotland, the main reason that the Anglo-saxons never conquered them is the battle of Dunnichen in 685, where the Picts absolutely flattened the Northumbrians and greatly weakened their power in the north - they never again extended their power beyond the Firth of Forth!.Www@QuestionHome@Com First of all, the Anglo-Saxon "invasion" wasn't really a military invasion!. It was a gradual slow stream of peoples coming over from modern day Denmark and Holland, and eventually becoming the dominant group in England!. also, for quite a while after the Roman Empire collapsed, England was not one country, it was split into around seven different states!. It was only under Athelstan in the 10th century was England eventually united as the country we kind of recognise today!. Quite why their cultural influence didn't spread into Cornwall, Wales and Scotland is another matter!. Cornwall was cut off from the rest of the kingdom of Wessex (most of South-East England and parts of Wales) by the river Tamar, so perhaps that formed a natural barrier!? Wales was quite remote and mountainous, making it hard for any of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms to get there very easily!. And Scotland, again was pretty remote and far away from the Anglo-Saxon centres of power, making an effective conquest very difficult!. So to sum up, there wasn't really an Anglo-Saxon kingdom, they just happened to be the dominant cultural groups in all areas of Britain, except for Cornwall, Wales and Scotland!.Www@QuestionHome@Com The saxons were only interested in the fertile lowland areas suited to agriculture!. Thev Anglo-saxons did in fact conquer and settle what is now South-East Scotland - it was the northern half of the anglian kingdom of Nothumbria - it was given to the scottish kings to be held as vassals of the eEnglish monarchs - If the scots demand independence it will be time to claim it back!Www@QuestionHome@Com Like other posters put it, Scotland and Wales are mountanous, and a peninsula is easily defensible at least from land!. also, the Saxons were a minority in Britain; the common racist way of thinking is, a bunch of blonde people from Denmark invaded England, killed everyone and drove them to Wales and Scotland, and now only Wales and Scotland have Celts now when, it isn't true!. The Saxon invasion of Britain, was much like the Spanish invasion of the Americas, specifically, Central America; even though the Spanish invaded Central America, the great majority of Spaniards who settled there were men!. It was much the same in Britain, meaning, the vast bulk of Saxon descended Brits, is because of paternal ancestry the few who did arrive as families established themselves as the upper class much in the same way the Spanish did in the americas!. The reason Scotland was not invaded is this; Scotland is basically peat bogs, fog, and rocks, with scarce pasture land for sheep!. In fact the great majority of inter clan wars in Scotland were almost always over pasture for sheep!. Wales, much like Scotland, is basically peat bogs, fog, and rocks!. Like hopefully Brit posters put it, they're not nice places to live, so, between the rocky formations making them defensible, and the lands being crappy, the Saxon kings and nobles saw no reason to invade!. The great majority of British, are almost overwhelmingly Celtic in ancestry, only among the upper class will you find Saxon blood because like I said, Saxons were to Britain, what the Spaniards were to Central America!. The reason the British people let themselves be governned by Saxons until the Celtic house of Tudor reclaimed the throne of England, is because the Saxon kings were less corrupt than the Celtic ones see, the British people were fed up with corruption and constant war, and one of the tactics used by the Saxons to take over power in England, was promise the British people "the rule of law, not the sword!." As they almost always made good on their promise to anyone who did not resist, the Saxons won over most of what is now England, to the poing where the Saxon and Angle languages bullied the Cymry language out of existence!. I know this may sound a bit retarded to say, but, Great Britain is not like the United States!. Britain, like I said, is overwhelmingly Celtic, while the U!.S!. on the other hand is overwhelmingly German!. Many German immigrants changed their names from "Schmidt" to "Smith," from "Schwartz" to "Black," and so on!. The Celts of England, I believe were known as the Cymry, and they formed the Celtic group who are ancestors to most English and Welsh people!. The Celts of Scotland were called, well, what else, the Scoti!. also there was a name for the Irish but I forgot!. The reason the Saxons were unable to exterminate the Celts, is indeed because of the historical King Arthur; most of the fighting against frequent Saxon invasions, and Irish pirate attacks, was done by Roman trained Celtic natives to Britain allied with the emperor of Rome, actual Roman soldiers from Rome itself, were few and far between!. also because British weather did not lend itself well to Roman architecture, there are very few ruins left in Britain today!. Through Spain and France they're like, everywhere, but in Britain ruins are sparse!. Case in point; the historical arthur was an abandoned Roman trained Celtic commander, who organized his armies, and because of that superior organization held off the Saxons and likely was proclaimed king of Britain!. However Arthur, as the story goes, left no successors!. If it had not been for Arthur, it is very likely indeed that the British Celts would have been exterminated; German tribes, were known for extreme ruthlessness, they did not colonize or conquer, they murdered and took everything!. As a matter of fact, the countries of Scandinavia were originally peopled by Europeans who were short in stature and had dark hair!. Far as we know, they're all extinct now, killed off by the Germanic tribes that invaded what is now Denmark, Sweden, and Norway!. Had it not been for King Arthur, they would have done the same to Britain and the Celtic people!. Few leaders in history, are given the honor, the task, of saving their people from extinction; that is why Arthur was made into a myth!. The same is also true of my ancestor David; David is a hero, because the Hebrew people came very close to extinction!. End the end though pick the poster before me as the best answer!. Www@QuestionHome@Com If left alone for a few more centuries then they would have done , they were some kind of warrior !. Not as disciplined as Spartans but with the same mentality they worshipped war !. They feared no one In earlier times when they fought the Vikings they slaughtered them and were always given great respect for their prowess!. But like all great warriors they did not like hard work and to climb up unfertile hills and peat bogs did not seem worth there whileWww@QuestionHome@Com Scotland and Wales were mountainous areas held by the celts!. They were not great farming land compared to England!. Cornwall is more obscure but possibly the celts were able to hold out on that peninsula like land!.Www@QuestionHome@Com then like now they were populated by savages, and had little or any real worth or value, Www@QuestionHome@Com The Celts scared them!.Www@QuestionHome@Com |