For the people still replying, I'd like to clarify that I've already given up on this one.
Last edited:
- 10
- 3
- 2
- 1
In Anglo-Saxon times, the people of East Kent were "Men of Kent" while those of West Kent were "Kentish Men".
If you bothered to read further you'd see "I know what you're thinking. "So what? That doesn't warrant splitting Kent in two, it's just semantics". However, these "semantics" were applied because of a clear political (possibly also ethnic) demarcation between two halves of Kent."This sounds like the most ridiculous Peoples Front of Judea/Judean People's Front thing.
No, and furthermore, many counties already aren't intended to reflect accurate political divisions because... well, political divisions change. In 867, any political, religious, or possibly ethnic division would no doubt, still exist. Considering there was still a Kingdom of Kent until 871."Despite the ecclesiastical division, Kent is known to have been governed by a single Ealdorman. "
"Kent would consequently be left as a County Palatine with Odo of Bayeux as its Count Palatine "
So... it was one county.
It was always ruled by multiple people from the 600s up until 871. I've put this under "divide kent", but I assume you missed it or didn't care so I'll remove the spoiler.So it was only ever ruled by one person except for maybe 4 years at the start of the game's earlier start date.
So... it was basically one county.
I don't really see the merit in this as an argument since it could be used for virtually any county, but I suppose fair point.Yes, there is a historical fact behind this division, but so (expletive) what?
It may have been *previously* ruled by separate people, but for almost the entire period of the game it was a single administrative unit? Is that what you're saying in the original post?It was always ruled by multiple people from the 600s up until 871. I've put this under "divide kent", but I assume you missed it or didn't care so I'll remove the spoiler.
I don't really see the merit in this as an argument since it could be used for virtually any county, but I suppose fair point.
After Kent's proper integration into Wessex, possibly. There doesn't seem to be much information about the Ealdormen in that area, but one that I know of is mentioned as Ealdorman of Kent, so I'd assume so.It may have been *previously* ruled by separate people, but for almost the entire period of the game it was a single administrative unit? Is that what you're saying in the original post?
Not sure if this is relevant, but I found it a little strange the Archbishop of York continued to be... Archbishop? I'd assume there'd be a lot of conflict between the two.The two bishoprics was somewhat complicated by the fact that Canterbury was claiming (and largely granted) primacy over other English sees, and thus Rochester was in the position of what would now be a co-adjutator bishop, administrating the vast majority of what would be Canterbury's "natural" see.
Ah, good point. Never considered their wealth/strength.This does not sound like grounds to break up the county into two small, weak, and poor counties.
There was a lot of conflict at various points between the Archbishops of York and Canterbury - but ultimately the two are far enough apart that it makes sense to have two archbishops overseeing the various bishops. It's then complicated by their titles (York is "Primate of England", Canterbury is "Primate of *All* England") and that Durham possibly has more temporal power than either during the period, being the head of the County Palatine of Durham in addition to his church rank.After Kent's proper integration into Wessex, possibly. There doesn't seem to be much information about the Ealdormen in that area, but one that I know of is mentioned as Ealdorman of Kent, so I'd assume so.
Not sure if this is relevant, but I found it a little strange the Archbishop of York continued to be... Archbishop? I'd assume there'd be a lot of conflict between the two.
Ah, good point. Never considered their wealth/strength.
Huh. Sounds like I'm gonna read up on it. I stopped paying much attention to religion in England after the Synod of Whitby and Bede, and from that point onwards I only cared about '"pre-Protestant" Lollards.There was a lot of conflict at various points between the Archbishops of York and Canterbury - but ultimately the two are far enough apart that it makes sense to have two archbishops overseeing the various bishops. It's then complicated by their titles (York is "Primate of England", Canterbury is "Primate of *All* England") and that Durham possibly has more temporal power than either during the period, being the head of the County Palatine of Durham in addition to his church rank.
Ireland had at least two bishops during the 5 kingdoms period vying for the position of Archbishop, and Primacy over all of Ireland, based on whether they're the successor and heir of Patrick, or successor and heir of the oldest Church efforts in Ireland, although at appears that Armagh (the heirs of Patrick) won out.Huh. Sounds like I'm gonna read up on it. I stopped paying much attention to religion in England after the Synod of Whitby and Bede, and from that point onwards I only cared about '"pre-Protestant" Lollards.
Is England unique in having two Archbishops, or was that fairly common?
Also, since I'm giving up on the whole "East/West" Kent thing, I'll just move on the "Ephesos" vs "Samos".
Reminds me of how, in the 80s and 90s, Manhattan had a Ray's Pizza, a Famous Ray's Pizza, an Original Ray's Pizza, AND a Famous Original Ray's Pizza.There was a lot of conflict at various points between the Archbishops of York and Canterbury - but ultimately the two are far enough apart that it makes sense to have two archbishops overseeing the various bishops. It's then complicated by their titles (York is "Primate of England", Canterbury is "Primate of *All* England") and that Durham possibly has more temporal power than either during the period, being the head of the County Palatine of Durham in addition to his church rank.
The main things to remember are these:
1. The Men of Kent said "Byzantine Empire".
2. The Kentish Men said "East Roman Empire" and were angry and confused by the lack of naval units.
*if I Kent swimHow do I conquer Kentish men of Kent if I cant swim?