A different Anglo Saxon england?

Was reading about Englands Heptarchy, after a CK3 game, and this got me wondering, in the heptarchy there were 3 main kingdoms, Mercia, Wessex, and Northumbria. However there were lots of other kingdoms that rose and fell to make these kingdoms such as Hwice, Lindsay, Deira, Bernicia, and then there were the other smaller kingdoms that survived until the time of the Vikings such as Kent and East Anglia.

My question is, does anything think that one of these other kingdoms ever had a chance of becoming one of the top kingdoms on the island, that things could have gone differently perhaps instead of a Mercian supremacy we had a Dieran Supremacy or anything along those lines. Perhaps instead of the 3 main powers we get a true heptarchy. And if you do think this is possible would anyone be interested in seeing one of these scenarios in a timeline?
 
Not even Northumbria lasted much beyond 850. If they couldn't last, not much chance for the rest
Thats like saying Northumbria couldnt survive so then Wessex should have fallen as well. Yes its highly probable they still would have fallen but Just like Wessex its not a guarantee.
 
Perhaps instead of the 3 main powers we get a true heptarchy.
What are you proposing exactly? Some kind of steady-state-system – a (forced) equilibrium that maintains seven Old English kingdoms?

I like the idea but Essex, Sussex and Kent are going to find it difficult to survive when the other states are larger. Being stuck in the south-east corner means they have no room to expand. They are always going to be at a disadvantage.

If the heptarchy does survive until the mid-860’s, how many of these OE kingdoms are going to survive the first Viking Age?
And if you do think this is possible would anyone be interested in seeing one of these scenarios in a timeline?

If you write it, I will read it!
 
What are you proposing exactly? Some kind of steady-state-system – a (forced) equilibrium that maintains seven Old English kingdoms?

I like the idea but Essex, Sussex and Kent are going to find it difficult to survive when the other states are larger. Being stuck in the south-east corner means they have no room to expand. They are always going to be at a disadvantage.

If the heptarchy does survive until the mid-860’s, how many of these OE kingdoms are going to survive the first Viking Age?


If you write it, I will read it!
It would probably be something like a forced equilibrium, there may be short periods of supremacy as a good leader becomes king perhaps a Wessex Supremacy and a Mercian supremacy but much shorter time frames than otl with the smaller kindgoms teaming up to end these supremacies. With perhaps as we close into the Viking age one of these kingdoms entering a supremacy age, perhaps something like Deira, or an altered form of it becoming the Supreme kingdom at the time. Which leads to butterflies of how England is formed.

No i definitely dont think all of the heptarchy would survive the viking age. Kent Sussex and Essex would probably be the hardest hit kingdoms at first maybe becoming this timelines alternate Danelaw, or being conquered outright by one of the other kingdoms.

Otl however Northumbria and Mercia were in weakened states as the Vikings began their conquest of england and Wessex was only just begining its supremacy age, this almost caused Anglo saxon England to fall before it even began. Perhaps with say a Deiran Supremacy beginning 20 years before the Vikings begin their mass conquest the Anglo Saxons auctually stand a chance of holding off the Norse. Maybe we even see something along the lines of Normandy form in Britain with the Norse being slowly settle onto some lands peacefully.
 
Perhaps you have a system where there is an elective Braetwalda, who rules from London or another former Roman seat of power, but does not have their own kingdom bar the hinterland? There could be a law that they may not come from the same kingdom as their immediate predecessor, and each kingdom has one vote. Their role would be as an arbitrator/chairperson and they can do the equivalent of calling a secular crusade if needed. A system like that could be established to break deadlock between the kingdoms during a protracted period of conflict. Then, come the viking age, the braetwalda calls a secular crusade against the norse, meaning they cannot pick the kingdoms off piecemeal.
 
Perhaps you have a system where there is an elective Braetwalda, who rules from London or another former Roman seat of power, but does not have their own kingdom bar the hinterland? There could be a law that they may not come from the same kingdom as their immediate predecessor, and each kingdom has one vote. Their role would be as an arbitrator/chairperson and they can do the equivalent of calling a secular crusade if needed. A system like that could be established to break deadlock between the kingdoms during a protracted period of conflict. Then, come the viking age, the braetwalda calls a secular crusade against the norse, meaning they cannot pick the kingdoms off piecemeal.
That would definitely be a different way of going, it would almost be like a HRE style Britain
 
My question is, does anything think that one of these other kingdoms ever had a chance of becoming one of the top kingdoms on the island, that things could have gone differently perhaps instead of a Mercian supremacy we had a Dieran Supremacy or anything along those lines.
Not sure if this is what you're going for, but East Anglia was top dog during the early 7th century under Raedwald (he of Sutton Hoo fame).
 
Well wrt a bernician or dieran supremacy, thats just a slight rehash of how Northumbria gets formed. It eventually played out that the bernician royal family ultimately won out that struggle and incorporated the dieran royal family into themselves, but if Edwin's dieran family won out many of the same dynamics will still be at play.
 
Top