A truly peaceful Iceland probably would have invaded somebody in CK2's timeframe. It probably would have fought the Norwegian King when he showed up and declared himself their liege-lord and Christianizer in 1262.
Did you forget a "not" there ? Anyway, when Sturlungaöld had began Iceland was so centrlized the farmers pretty much had to follow their nearest goði to battle, and goðar wanted to expand their power just as much as other powerful men. And Iceland became christian in 1000 AD, not in 1262.
The problem with Iceland was they were all convinced they were warlords. In France a Private War was a conflict between two great Nobleman, with hundreds or thousands of troops on a side. In Iceland Private Wars were just what happened when Johan "borrowed" Sven's goat and refused to give it back even after the lawgiver declared him an Outlaw.
Most of the battles that were fought in Sturlungaöld were actually fought for power. There were some family feuds, but many of them began with a powerstruggle. Around two thousand men did not meet in Skagafjörður and fought because Kolbeinn stole Sturla's sweater, but because Sturla had promised the Norwegian king to bring Iceland under the king, and if he had managed that he would probably be given a jarl title. Taking over Skagafjörður and a part of Húnavatnssísla was his second step towards that (that area had around 12 % of Iceland's population), and he had a good claim, his grandfather on his mothers side had ruled the area and that ruler was also grandfather to Kolbeinn ungi, that ruled the area at that time.
And these rulers I have been talking about were not little men that gathered many allies and fought battles, and again, these battles were not fought over small issues. Sighvatur Sturluson, father to the earlier meantion Sturla and brother to Snorri Sturluson, ruled about 23 % of Iceland's population just before Sturla came back from Norway. Sturla ruled about 4 % of Iceland's population, Snorri Sturluson (and his sons) ruled around 20 % of Iceland's population and Þórður Sturluson, brother to Snorri Sturluson, ruled about 6 % of Iceland's population.
Now to the other clans, the Haukdælir ruled around 13 % of Icelands population, Ásbirningar, ruled by Kolbeinn ungi, ruled about 12 % of the population, the Oddverjar ruled about 8 % of the population and the Svínfellingar ruled about 14 %.
When Sturla came back from Norway he took over the lands of his uncles (and their sons), and he did have to fight a battle with Snorri where close to 1100 men fought. Then the Haukdælir, Ásbirningar and the relunctant Oddverjar went on an campaign against him, I will talk better about that campaign later in this post, later that year came the battle between Sturla and Sighvatur on one hand against the Haukdælir and Ásbirningar. There over 2000 men fought.
So you see in Iceland there were plenty of battles, campaigns and wars, but Iceland did not see major battles until Sturlungaöld.
I've never had a problem with Iceland's provinces having the ability to spew out lots of fighters. My problem is that that in CK2 every fighter a province spews out is a soldier in the Jarl/Doge/etc.'s army.
And in the highly decentralized state I just described there'll be plenty of fighters, but they'll all have better things to do (ie: take sides on the issue of Johan's goat, steal some fourth guy's goat, etc.) then spend six months in England.
When Iceland became as centrialized as it did in the Sturlungaöld the leaders could muster great armies against one another and a leader that would rule all of Iceland, like Þórður kakali, son of Sighvatur, did, that leader could have gathered men and transported at least 650 men accross sea (there was a naval battle between 450 men and 200 men, and I higly doubt that was all of Iceland's ships).
Holdings start at 700 gold each. At one gold a month that's a build-rate of one every 58 years 4 months, but as Iceland you should be getting more like two a month. You should have two castles, not one, so it should be more like one holding every 30 years.
Oh, so that is not a good solution. It is probably better to have Iceland stronger but as a democracy until Sturlungaöld.
They didn't centralize much.
I disagree, centralization allowed these big battle I have been talking about to happen. Iceland was maybe not as centrialized in Sturlungaöld as some other countries, but much more centrialized then it was before Sturlungaöld.
From what I've read the difference between independent Iceland and Norwegian Iceland was that Norwegian Iceland said it was Christian and frequently told the Norwegian King he couldn't do stuff.
As for Sturlungaöld, that's not really comparable to leaving the island. The English Kings had a much more centralized state then any Icelandic ruler of this period, frequent wars that the English fought France, and strong feudal oaths guaranteeing them troops.
Yet the English nobility made a point of dragging it's heels on French campaigns, creatively re-interpreting it's rights so it could stay away. Going on campaign in a foreign country is a big deal.
In Iceland, where the typical response to somebody complaining about rape or murder was "you should kill that guy, the Althing will declare him an outlaw so he won't be able to legally kill you back" actually leaving the island meant leaving your entire family open to rape/murder.
OTOH staying on the island to fight the very people most likely to rape/murder your family because you're allied to the other clan...
There is a difference between a nobleman powerful refusing to send troops accross, and a farmer refusing a goði or a jarl because he risks making an enemy with a man that can drive him and his family off his land or do him harm in other ways. There are examples of goðar driving farmers off their lands because he did not trust the farmers.
And again, Iceland became officially christian in 1000 AD, and a few decades most probably had converted. Certainly when Sturlungaöld began everyone was christian, I even doubt there were any pagans left in 1066.
The Norwegian kings most likely tried to take over Iceland for decades because Iceland was inhabidet by people of Norwegian decent and they were quiete many.
And one could be made an outlaw for killing only one man or raping a women if you were rather poor and powerless and broke against a rich and powerful man (or with rich and powerful friends), but normally you would pay a fine for that. And if you killed a man you maybe payed a "manngjöld", a normal fine for killing a man, or a little less or more depending on how the case went. You would normally have to do more than killing man or raping a women to be made an outlaw.
Goðar very rarely were outlawed by alþingi, I at least can't name a single example, but according to a book about goðar it was possible. And it was very hard for a goði that had many goðorðs, like most goðar did in Sturlungaöld, to be made an outlaw by Alþingi, since goðar served in alþingi as jury and if you held many goðorðs you had more votes.
That's exaclty what I mean by holding.
Even two more is a lot more then Iceland deserves. For the greatest war in Icelandic history a couple thousand men fought. As Jarl you can raise 3,500 with the click of a mouse.
Nick
I have two reasons.
1) Iceland's full force was higher than 2000. For example, in july 1238 an 1600 men army from 3 clans (one of those clans were forced to help) followed Sturla Sighvatsson until he and his army stopped at Kleifarvirki (Kleifar fort). The allied army then backed, probably because that fort was considered untakable. Those three clans only ruled about 1/3rd of Iceland's population, which suggests Iceland could at least muster 4800 men.
Later that summer Sturla Sighvatsson and his father fought 2 of the clans that had followed Sturla and Sturla and Sighvatur fell.
So a man that ruled all of Iceland, and at least one man did, could most likely raise 4800 men.
2) I think Norway's levy's are much higher than they should be. In ck2 Norway has 35 860 men in max levy in 1200 and in 1337 the number has reached 45 840. But according to what I have read Norway's total population at that time was less than 300 000 and maybe around 250 000. Males are only half of that number and you also have to account for boys, old men and so on.
It would be interesting to see a situation similar to Ireland in a lot of ways. One of the reasons Iceland was never truly involved in foreign politics is because the nobles ((Or what could be construed as close to nobles)) in Iceland at the time were too busy fighting amongst themselves in their own realm. Why fight with other countries when you have enemies at home to destroy? In history none of the war chieftans were able to take out the rest of the factions and secure peace within Iceland, so the Iceland lower classes submitted to the Nords in the 1200's. But if history is changed a little bit and one of the chieftans gains a leader along the lines of a Khan who decides to not give a crap about traditions and destroys his enemies rather than let them live out of honor and Christianity...maybe he successfully unites Iceland and creates his own state?
Needless to say, there is room for expansion here. You can't add too many provinces to Iceland at the risk of buffing them too much, but Iceland could be doing a lot better then they are right now! They had a lot more potential for power and military might in CK2, it's just that it wasn't exercised historically!
Good reading can be done here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Iceland
Read kids. It's good for you.
Nice article. I learned a few things from it.
I agree, Iceland is similar to Ireland in these matters. And it is strange that Iceland and Ireland have so many things in common.