Grand Welsh Expansion Mod

[Zebedee]

I will read thoseto be sure! I agree the Welsh were clearly not a feudal society and mich of their law was secular in nature, but they did have a heriditary ruling class. And it seems natural that certin offices become heriditary and the responsibilities grow or contract. Princeptus did not mean heriditary prince that we know it today, so too one might see twysog change over time, from one meaning to another. Was not eldig also a word for prince? I knew it as heir.

The ruling class wasn't hereditary. The actual power was not in the bloodlines of the four kings but derived from whoever 'controlled' the most commotes. The only people tied to land or bound to specific person in Wales were the lowest of the low who were probably not in the majority. That's why you'll find few large settlements at this time - most of the people were semi-nomadic to a great extent. Herdsmen and part-time raiders for the most part. This pushes against the idea of a hereditary class as the very independance of the people being ruled could overthrow a twysog, as well as a king. Look at how many Welsh rulers died at the hands of their own people or were betrayed by them when the people had had enough. (NB: I'm not arguing that it was a democracy, just a different mindset to the Anglo-Norman view of how the world is ordered). There were attempts to make the rule of the commotes hereditary but they were fiercely resisted by the people themselves. And with there being no set succession order, the people could always find themselves a new hereditary king who wouldn't behave like his predecessor or a new twysog who would not behave in such a manner. The class known as bonheddig may now get translated as gentry but its origins lie firmly in being Welsh and knowing your ancestry. Hence Gerald's rather biting comment on the Welsh being able to name the entire history of their family. It was merely the difference between being able to prove you were a freeman and not a bondsman/serf (however you want to translate aillt).

By eldig do you mean edling? That's just a named heir with powers derived from the king who has named him. It could be any of the king's sons, legitimate or a recognised bastard. It also didn't mean much if the edling couldn't get the support of the people he wanted to be king over.

If Breton is too far removed then we can have seperate events for them. But I do know they shared a simular bardic tradition as well as musical. Also Bretons did encourage people to take pilgramages to St. David's. I dont remember the source, but supposedly three pilgramages to St. David's was equal to one pilgramage to Jerusalem.


The events I am thinking are:

"This courtier feels compelled to take a pilgramage to St. David's in Dyfed!" with a bonus to piety.

I was just thinking of the law codes. I'm not certain whether by the time of CK, Breton and Welsh would be similar enough to be very comparable. Brittany didn't go over to Frankish law until quite late in the CK time period (and then not totally) but Brittany was very much a feudal duchy by 1066. Will get some time next week to have a proper look I guess.

 

[Drachenfire]

The ruling class wasn't hereditary. The actual power was not in the bloodlines of the four kings but derived from whoever 'controlled' the most commotes. The only people tied to land or bound to specific person in Wales were the lowest of the low who were probably not in the majority. That's why you'll find few large settlements at this time - most of the people were semi-nomadic to a great extent. Herdsmen and part-time raiders for the most part. This pushes against the idea of a hereditary class as the very independance of the people being ruled could overthrow a twysog, as well as a king. Look at how many Welsh rulers died at the hands of their own people or were betrayed by them when the people had had enough.

I respectfully disagree with this. While I can agree that there was a large free element of Welsh society well until the Edwardian Conquest, there were indeed a landed nobility in Wales. The four major dynasties were indeed heriditary, and these princely houses placed great stock in their decent from a certin ancestor. The Gwytherian dynasty of Powys based their right to rule from decent from Vortigern and Princess Severa (grand daughter or daughter of Emperor Magnus Maximus). The Rulers of Gwynedd placed their decent from Cunedda.

In the 200 years before 1066 author John Davies writes "the greater part of the inhabitants of Wales became the subjects of a single ruler," and "it was through marriage rather than through conquest that the kindoms of Wales were united."

The Heir of one kingdom married the heiress of another, although it is probable that there would have been fewer heiresses had there not been considerable slaughter among their male relations. A chain of marriages begins around 800 when Gwriad, of the linage of the Men of the North married Esyllt of the line of Maelgwen (the Great); their son, Merfyn, became king of Gwynedd in 825 on the death of Esyllt's uncle, Hywl ap Rhodri. Merfyn married Nest of the house of Powys, and their son, Rhodri, married Anghered of the house of Seisyllwg."

Rhodri the Great would inherit his realms of Gwynedd and Powys, and his primary holding of Gwynedd went to his eldest son Anarawd ap Rhodri who would found the House of Aberffraw of Gwynedd, whereas his second son Cadell would establish a second dynasty of Dinefwr to rule over Deheubarth. Additionally, while it is true a patromony was divided among the heirs of the father, the majority went, under Welsh law, to the eldest. The other sons were given a portion of the remaining land.

Davies: "It is the landholding system which gave the society of early Wales its equlibrium, for dispite often erratic behavior of its kings that society had a marked stability. A man's right to land depended upon his status, for all men were not equal in the sight of the Law of Wales, any more then they were in the sight of the other law systems in Europe. In law, the basic division were the free and unfree. Those of the free status were the king and his relations, along with the bonheddwr -those who had bon or ancestry (compare gens in gentelmen), Those of unfree status included the taeogion (villeins), who had rights protected by law, and also the caethion (slaves), who were wholy lacking in rights.

"According to the law-books, each commote had its maerdref, where the taeogion laboured under the direction of maer y biswail (the mayor of the dunghill) to supply the needs of the king and his court.

Additionally, the Law Books assume a larger bonheddwr and taeogion class, and few slaves.

It should be pointed out that when the princely house was displaced, it was often at the hands of a rival cadat branch. And the dynaties would recover their patromony, usually in the person of the senior most claiment, and usually within a generation. The dynastic struggles between house Aberffraw and Dinefwr is really the the story between the rival sons of Rhodri the Great to extend their influence in all Wales. By this time Powys was a satalite of either Gwynedd, but usually Deheubarth. These dynastic struggles was no more or less the case for most other realms in Europe, where rival branches of the same dynasty jockeyed for prominance in their realms.

At least this is where all my research has led me. If you have different source material I would gladly read it. I do love Welsh history. We might have different views of Welsh history, but for the context of the game, I think we can work on making it a rich and rewarding realm to play in.

 

[Drachenfire]

Welsh Geography. I feel strongly the set up is not represenitive of Welsh geography. Here is the current and the proposed. Please review and discuss, hehe.


Gwynedd = Hills change to Mountain*
Perfeddwlad = Hills change to Forest
Powys = Plains change to Hills
Glamorgan = Plains change to Hills
Gwent = Plains change to Forest
Dyfed = Plains... can remain the same.


* I know the Monument, yr Wyddfa, is not as tall as mountains in the Alps, but it is the second tallest in Brtain. The effect would be the same for armies marching in Gwynedd as it would for the Alps. This change would also mean changing Moray in Scotland from Hills to Mountain too, but I am sure that would not be objected to.

 

[Drachenfire]

discuss this list of sirnames. I know I know, it takes the flavor of ap so and so away. But it was more glaring that Dafydd was the son of Bleddyn, but his sirname was ap Rhys! So.. I updated the naming list. Its not perfect, and yes... there are Ellis, Morgan and even a Perry. Llewellyn is spelt as is, so as to be different to Llywelyn, and because its my maternal name :rofl: ! And Irwin (seafriend) is added as it is my paternal inheritance. Any other recommendations I welcome them! I did add Seiont in defference to the river next to Caernafon Castle, and Llansteffen, Llandewi, and a few others. As Wales did not develope sirnames until well into the modern times, I relied on some tradesmens names like Sutor and Melinnith (Shoemaker and Miller)

dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14250 }
name = "Madoc"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14251 }
name = "Eynon"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14252 }
name = "Iarward"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14253 }
name = "Groneu"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14254 }
name = "Wynn"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14255 }
name = "Gof"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14256 }
name = "Gwyn"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14257 }
name = "Ryrid"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14258 }
name = "Griffiths"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14259 }
name = "Tewdwr"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14260 }
name = "Meilyr"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14261 }
name = "Llansteffan"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14262 }
name = "Llandewi"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14263 }
name = "Llewellyn"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14264 }
name = "Seiont"
province = { 64 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14265 }
name = "Heilyn"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14266 }
name = "Ellis"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14267 }
name = "Madin"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14268 }
name = "Meuric"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14269 }
name = "Llywarch"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14270 }
name = "Llwyd"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14271 }
name = "Iocyn"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14272 }
name = "Perry"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14273 }
name = "Sutor"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14274 }
name = "Bledri"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14275 }
name = "Saer"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14276 }
name = "Meredith"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14277 }
name = "Morgan"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14278 }
name = "Seysild"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14279 }
name = "Deheuwynt"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14280 }
name = "Wasdewi"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14281 }
name = "Leget"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14282 }
name = "Crouther"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Gogan"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Cynith"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Melinnith"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Scynith"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Irwin"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Morys"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Clynog"
province = { 17 18 19 20 60 64 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Llyn"
province = { 64 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Meirionnedd"
province = { 64 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Presli"
province = { 18 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Builth"
province = { 19 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Meifod"
province = { 65 }
}
dynasty = {
id = { type = 12 id = 14283 }
name = "Dinbych"
province = { 60 }

 

[Drachenfire]

Hello! Help! I am getting this message, and I am trying to troubleshoot but cant find the error. The message is:

Unknown lhs in scemaro file (dynasty)'dynasty = { ' Line = 700005.file = db\dynasties.txt

Where can I find this error?

Ok, I think I corrected above, now I get file mismatch. ??

 

[jordarkelf]

The error tells you where...

Line 700005 (!) of dynasties.txt.

Most likely you have used ( ) instead of { } somewhere.

 

[Drachenfire]

The error tells you where...

Line 700005 (!) of dynasties.txt.

Most likely you have used ( ) instead of { } somewhere.

I think I found the dynasties error, but now i get a files mismatch error, i cant think of where though. any thoughts?

 

[Zebedee]

Terrain first

Deheubarth was known for its forests, but Perfeddwlad should be hills - if you enter NE Wales, you'll see the Clwydians dominate the small coastal plain and valleys which are the only real avenues for invasion.

I'm guessing you are quoting from John Davies' Hanes Cymru in translation. I'd also recommend Huw Pryce's works as they mention in passing where the C12th and C13th developments were coming from. The Welsh Historical Review also has occasional papers showing the latest thoughts. I'm really not sure about some of your points as they don't seem related to my remarks - or perhaps you are confusing the power of the king (ie non-existant in itself) with that of the twysog? I certainly agree with most of your points. But it doesn't follow that a king has any more power than a twysog If the power in Wales is at a local level, and the leader of the local community is not a hereditay position then the ruling class cannot be hereditary. The ability to claim kingship is (although that's not to say it was particularly difficult for a powerful man to find some link to one of the royal lines) but that's not where the power lies.

Briefly, I think your view of C11th is being distorted by assuming an Anglo-Norman top down view of society. Society just wasn't functioning in that way at that time - we see elements of it creeping in before 1066 and the process certainly was accelerating after 1094 in both state and church.

Power wasn't concentrated in the hands of the king and a few powerful lords. Power came from the tribal structures at a local level. For example, take the war between Gruffydd ab Llywelyn and Hywel ab Edwin. Hywel lost his kingdom (Deheubarth) in his first defeat in 1041. He lost support and some power but he retained control of his own commotes of Dyfed and Ystrad Tywy and was still able to fight on for a further three years until his death in 1044. Replacing Hywel was Gruffydd ap Rhydderch who then also proceeded to challenge for control of Deheubarth based on power derived from the commotes he ruled over. If you go through the red book, you'll see that it is primarily the freemen who topple rulers they dislike.

We see the same in the church with the dominance of the clas until the C12th. Local level religion which resists attempts to put power in a central authority.

Later on we start to see the rulers of Gwynedd starting to accumulate power based on the Anglo-Norman model, but in C11th we still see the old Welsh local level approach to governing the country where the foremost family in a cammotes or cantref can make a bid for power, no matter how convoluted or tenuous a claim they can make to being of royal blood.

As for how it effects the game, I think it will make a difference in the starting techs/advances which Wales has in 1066

 

[Drachenfire]

Wow! I so do not agree with your view of the society of Wales in the mideival period. I have nothing to say other then that. Wow!

We can work on other aspects of this mod. But, wow. I dont even know if we are talking about the same country!

 

[Zebedee]

Wow! I so do not agree with your view of the society of Wales in the mideival period. I have nothing to say other then that. Wow!

We can work on other aspects of this mod. But, wow. I dont even know if we are talking about the same country!

Interesting I really would recommend reading outside of general histories and delving into the specialist works and essays dealing with this time period. Huw Pryce offers a good entry into this.

One essential question which assuming that landowner = noble ignores is the lack of a landless freeman class in Wales. Was everyone in Wales either 'nobility' or 'serf'? Or is the translation into Anglo-Norman terms faulty?

Welsh medieval society was based upon the cenedl (an interesting aside is how the modern use of the word cenedl is 'nation' where the medieval use is the seven generation immediate family group) and gwelygorddau (the institutions were dying out by the C13th) - cf Settlement and Society in Wales ed. D. Huw Owen. But we'll leave it there as we're unlikely to agree it would seem - for you C11th Wales is a land of powerful kings who fight each other and their brothers, not a land of various clannish groupings shifting allegiances to the leader of the royal line most likely to favour them (that's if they wanted a king) and making and breaking such kings and princes at will.

In any case, good luck with your mod but I don't think I would wish to spend time on something which I would not be using myself

 

[Drachenfire]

Look, Zebedee, I really do not want you to absent yourself from this mod. We disagree on a point of view outside the realm of what you and I can do in the game. I do value your opinion, and apologize if I sounded harsh in my prior post. You simply... stunned me with your position. I will get that material and read them, tust.

But please do not absent yourself from this project, for your imput is invaluable and greatly desired. I will need a sounding board with knowladge of the history.

 

[Drachenfire]

Update: I have a good part of 1066 Hastings completed. House Mathrafal and Aberffraw has been completed for this scenario. Need to work on Dinefwr, and a few more. But, all looks good thusly.

 

[Drachenfire]

Emma, Havoise/Hedwig, Eudes/Odo!

I can not find the Breton varients of these names! I have found the varients for all of the other 1066 Breton cultural courtiers.


Are there any other varients of these names that I might be able to cross reference? I will leave them as their names are, until I can find some other reference that will ahve them.

 

[Drachenfire]

I have decided that I shall publish various mods, each building on the origional. The reason for this is that the origional mod shall be the most universal, and only affecting Wales and Brittany, and the one I shall offer the beta team for consideration for updating those regions, and only affecting those regions. This origional expansion will not include any alterations to outside realms, thus eleminating any contraversies (as much as I wish to remove certin castles! :rofl: )

I plan the following mods in this order:

Welsh Expansion offered to 1.06 beta team to correct the state of Wales (completing the last scenario by this Weekend.)
Grand Welsh Expansion: inclusion of Welsh cultural events, a bit more 'contraversial' changes (loss of castles in England in favor of Normandy, Saxon Dukes with rebelious traite, William gets realm duress, that kind of thing.) Also, the inclusions and modifications of traits to include chilverous and homosexual traits.
Magna Celtia: The G.W.E with mods pioneered by the C.K. masters of Scottish and Irish history!
Fantasy Kingdoms:Lothringen, Aqutainia, Brittany added to the above

 

[Beauclerc]

I shall take note of all the changes, as I trample over the principality during my game... in true English style!! Well, it's in the blood you see?

Incidentally, I notice you live in the US. Are you from Wales, or are you descended from Welshmen/women... or do you just have a softspot for Wales for some other reason?

 

[Sarmatia1871]

I have decided that I shall publish various mods, each building on the origional. The reason for this is that the origional mod shall be the most universal, and only affecting Wales and Brittany, and the one I shall offer the beta team for consideration for updating those regions, and only affecting those regions. This origional expansion will not include any alterations to outside realms, thus eleminating any contraversies (as much as I wish to remove certin castles! :rofl: )

I plan the following mods in this order:

Welsh Expansion offered to 1.06 beta team to correct the state of Wales (completing the last scenario by this Weekend.)
Grand Welsh Expansion: inclusion of Welsh cultural events, a bit more 'contraversial' changes (loss of castles in England in favor of Normandy, Saxon Dukes with rebelious traite, William gets realm duress, that kind of thing.) Also, the inclusions and modifications of traits to include chilverous and homosexual traits.
Magna Celtia: The G.W.E with mods pioneered by the C.K. masters of Scottish and Irish history!
Fantasy Kingdoms:Lothringen, Aqutainia, Brittany added to the above

Looks good! Could all this be developed into a more general mod of the British setup having Harold winning at Hastings, and England still being ruled by Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms?

A lack of Norman consolidation might make the survival and expansion of Wales much more likely, and also make games in England much more interesting!

 

[Drachenfire]

Looks good! Could all this be developed into a more general mod of the British setup having Harold winning at Hastings, and England still being ruled by Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms?

A lack of Norman consolidation might make the survival and expansion of Wales much more likely, and also make games in England much more interesting!

This would indeed be a great Varient Hastings Scenario!. The lay of the land in Wales was established in 1063 with the death of King Gruffydd ap Llywellyn and the rise of his half-brother Bleddyn ap Cynfyn Mathrafal over Gwynedd, and the return of the historic Dinefwr dynasty to Deheubarth. So yes, all the changes I make for Wales that are effective for 1066 would be the same regardless of the victor in Hastings.

When you say Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, do you mean simply the whole of England under Harold Godwinson yes? So a Godwinson dynasty over England, with the Norman duke (William either dead or alive) then a vassle of France but still with a claim on England? Incidentially, Gruffydd's widow Ealdgyth of Mercia, was forced to marry Harold Godwinson in 1063. Ealdgyth is the only woman in history to be both Queen of Wales and Queen of England. In the current Hastings set up you can find her in Denmark, IIRC. edit: just checked, her marrage to Gruffydd ap Llewellyn is uncredited, as is her two daughters and two sons by him.

 

[Drachenfire]

I shall take note of all the changes, as I trample over the principality during my game... in true English style!! Well, it's in the blood you see?

Incidentally, I notice you live in the US. Are you from Wales, or are you descended from Welshmen/women... or do you just have a softspot for Wales for some other reason?

o





Well, lets hope that a corrected Wales gives you as much a challange as it did the three Henries and the Longshank, lasting the better part of 200 plus years after Hastings, rather then an easy early crown to England! What fun is there in that?

Hehe. Tennesseeian by birth, but my family, the proud Llewellyn's and Irwyn's of Knoxville, hail directly from Wales. A boyhood facination with the name Llewellyn (meaning Lion-Likeness, or Leader-Like, depending on Llew or Llyw)) led me to discover the most Enchanting of people. It didnt help that our family name Llewellyn was shared by the most illustrious princes, Llewellyn I and Llewellyn II, When I was ten or eleven I thought we were related! :rofl: So proud are the Llewellyn's of their Welsh heritage they have the coat of arms for Aberffraw-Llewellyn emblazoned on their mail box!

So much for Romantic Musings.

 

[Beauclerc]

o
Well, lets hope that a corrected Wales gives you as much a challange as it did the three Henries and the Longshank, lasting the better part of 200 plus years after Hastings, rather then an easy early crown to England! What fun is there in that?

To be fair, the Norman/Angevin kings didn't really make a consolidated effort to invade Wales. The early Norman barons in what was to become the marches did invade areas - but they were nothing more than armed thugs, not under the banner of the king. While they weren't actively stopped by the king, they weren't sanctioned either.

Henry III (or rather his barons who held land in Wales) lost a lot of land at the hands of Gruffyd (I think, I don't have my references) - the last native Prince of Wales' father.

It's a huge misconception that the English as a nation were overly aggressive towards Wales and Scotland before Edward I (sorry, I can't abide the term longshanks since it's use in the British history raping Braveheart). Actually, the Scots Kings and Welsh Princes were far more aggressive in terms of subjugating smaller states. The Kings of Scotland asserted their authority of the Highland clans and islands (plus various attempts to acquire Northumberland), while the various Welsh princes were constantly fighting each other and jostling for supremecy.

The reasons for Edward I's invasion of Wales is also not as clear cut as him being an imperialistic megolomaniac... as is often depicted. The 1284 war was forced on both him and Llewelyn by the actions of Llewelyn's brother (again, this is a simplistic statement).

The Struggle for Mastery by David Carpenter is a particularly good book for describing the relationship between England, Scotland and Wales along with their respective histories during this period.

Anyway, I am thoroughly English - not even a drop of Welsh or Scottish blood, which is rare really for an Englishman. But I have always been interested in medieval history for all the mainland countries in Britain. I have a healthy respect for Welsh and Scottish history too.

 

[Drachenfire]

To be fair, the Norman/Angevin kings didn't really make a consolidated effort to invade Wales. The early Norman barons in what was to become the marches did invade areas - but they were nothing more than armed thugs, not under the banner of the king. While they weren't actively stopped by the king, they weren't sanctioned either.

I disagree wholeheartedly, but with respect, with your view here. Directly after William's victory in Hastings, he let loose his Norman's on the Welsh borderlands, tis true. From 1081 but most intensly from 1093 and 1096 the Normans conqured much of Wales. But in 1095 and again 1097 William II had to direct Royal Armies into Wales to suport the losing baronial armies. Dispite this, Norman lords lost their conquests from 1096 to 1100. When William II died most of Wales was back in native Welsh control.

As for Gwent and Glamorgan, Historian Jon Davies writes "If the Welsh leaders were faced only with the forces of the border lords, it is likely that they (the Welsh) would have restored the whole of Wales to their rule." And that the King of England was increasingly drawn to Wales because of (marcher) losses.

According to Davies, Angivne kings lacked both the resources or political will, and at times both at the same time, to expend on a war of Conquest that would be needed for a Welsh conquest. It did not help any that England was thrown into a dyanstic civil war following the death of Henry I. Henry II would lead Royal Armies into Wales in 1157, and again in 1165 but was ineffective against Prince Owain of Gwynedd, who allied himself with Louis VII of France in 1168. According to Daivies this was an act which could have led to a relationship between Wales and France as was between Scotland and France.

Henry III (or rather his barons who held land in Wales) lost a lot of land at the hands of Gruffyd (I think, I don't have my references) - the last native Prince of Wales' father.

Yes, indeed. The historic Aberffraw dynasty, whose line stretched back to Rhordri the Great, Maelgwn (Malcom) the Great, and Cunnedda, became the focus of successful Welsh resurgance throughout the 13th century. Dafydd ap Gruffydd married Henry II's daughter Emma, but his nephew Llewellyn I claimed his patromony and became Prince of Gwynedd and eventually forced Henry II to recognize him as feudal lord of all Wales (Prince of Aberffraw and Lord of Snowdon), the first true Welsh Prince of Wales since King Gruffydd ap Llewellyn. Great Marcher families such as Mortimor and de Broes were his allies, as was the Earl of Chestor (John the Scot). His grandson would be the last Welsh prince of Wales, Llewellyn II.

It's a huge misconception that the English as a nation were overly aggressive towards Wales and Scotland before Edward I (sorry, I can't abide the term longshanks since it's use in the British history raping Braveheart). Actually, the Scots Kings and Welsh Princes were far more aggressive in terms of subjugating smaller states. The Kings of Scotland asserted their authority of the Highland clans and islands (plus various attempts to acquire Northumberland), while the various Welsh princes were constantly fighting each other and jostling for supremecy.

Hehe, again a different view. The Welsh and Anglo-Saxons came to terms of sorts by 1066, with recognized boundies and minor border raiding on both sides. The Normans were their common enemy, and both Welsh and Anglo-Saxon were allied throughout the first decades after the conquest. Bleddyn ap Cynfyn invaded the marches, and allied with Northumbria and Mercia against William I, and II. The racial tension between the Normans against the native Welsh and Anglo-Saxons was fierce. And on review, whose land were those Normans colonizing afterall :rofl:

The reasons for Edward I's invasion of Wales is also not as clear cut as him being an imperialistic megolomaniac... as is often depicted. The 1284 war was forced on both him and Llewelyn by the actions of Llewelyn's brother (again, this is a simplistic statement).

Also, Edward I denied Llewellyn II his feudal rights as set forth in the Magna Carta, which Llewellyn I had co-arthored. Special provisions in Magna Carta granted the Welsh prince special rights. That Llewellyn was feudal lord prince of Walsh vassles (Pura Wallia), and Edward denied this. Also, Edward harbored fugitives against Llewellyn, namely Dafydd I. Edward denied Llewellyn safe conduct through England to visit his court at various times. Edward also imprissioned Llewellyn's wife Princess Eleanor for almost 7 years. There was genuine ... animosity between Edward and Llewellyn.

The Struggle for Mastery by David Carpenter is a particularly good book for describing the relationship between England, Scotland and Wales along with their respective histories during this period.

I will have to read this indeed! I also recommend John Davies History of Wales, and J.E. Lloyd's History of Wales as well.

Anyway, I am thoroughly English - not even a drop of Welsh or Scottish blood, which is rare really for an Englishman. But I have always been interested in medieval history for all the mainland countries in Britain. I have a healthy respect for Welsh and Scottish history too.

I too have a healthy respect for England and its history. For "England did carve half the world into the British Empire," a phrase I read somewhere. For ill or good, it is so. And England learned its techniques on the Welsh and Irish and indeed, sometimes the Scots. But it was a hard lesson too. Anyway, I do love Shakesphear and Shopshire, and Big Ben (built by a Welshmen you know! )


I do hope we can do a multi-player sometime, you in England and I in Wales, maybe a few others in Scotland and France? A Western Europe campaign of somekind.