I have to admit, I am sort of concerned at the way the developers have decided to depict Ireland for the 867 start-date. In all the screenshots given so far, there seems to be no indication that there will be a king tier title, or even a duke title held when the game starts.
Firstly, this troubles me because with the new Viking coastal CB, Ireland is ripe for the taking. Only three Irish counties lack a coast, and as it stands, Viking invaders will only have to contend with independent count realms in order to swipe these away. For those who think this was a historically accurate reflection of actual events, it was not. Viking territorial control was minimal, and from 840 to 900 it never went beyond holding outposts or longphoirt (such as Dublin) from which they could raid, trade and pirate. Even after 900, their largest territorial possession was Dublin, which would only have made up half of the province you see in game. That province should not be under viking control in 867, as all they would have held was the city/fortress itself. That province was coterminous with Brega which was an important part of the kingdom of Meath, whose ruler was technically a contender for the high-kingship in 867.
The reason why Viking expansion was so limited (and virtually no viking outposts survived in the North for example), is because in their battles with Irishmen, they lost the majority. Howard Clarke claims that in the 20+ or so battles listed between Vikings and Irishmen during the period, the Irish won 15. There was no great Viking conquest like there was in England. It may have been a mere question of manpower, the Irish managing to recruit more men than viking raiders relying on mercenaries over seas, but this is because there were complex hierarchical kingships in Ireland that could command the manpower of numerous different "count-level" titles. Thus, Maelseachnaill mac Maíle Runaidh could summon Connacht, Munster, Leinster and Meath to battle (and thus was the first to realise the Irish high-kingship). His successor, Aed Findliath (who would have been considered high-king in 867) could command Connacht, Meath and the Ulster in his campaigns against Viking and Irish competitors.
For these reasons, I really don't think there is justification for placing Irish rulers in charge of their local county only. It will not serve balance as they shall be swallowed up by Viking rulers, and it shall not serve historical accuracy. If they don't want to give anyone a high-kingship, fine, but historical provincinal kings should still be given command of their province, even if the other constituent county/counties is/are independent.
Firstly, this troubles me because with the new Viking coastal CB, Ireland is ripe for the taking. Only three Irish counties lack a coast, and as it stands, Viking invaders will only have to contend with independent count realms in order to swipe these away. For those who think this was a historically accurate reflection of actual events, it was not. Viking territorial control was minimal, and from 840 to 900 it never went beyond holding outposts or longphoirt (such as Dublin) from which they could raid, trade and pirate. Even after 900, their largest territorial possession was Dublin, which would only have made up half of the province you see in game. That province should not be under viking control in 867, as all they would have held was the city/fortress itself. That province was coterminous with Brega which was an important part of the kingdom of Meath, whose ruler was technically a contender for the high-kingship in 867.
The reason why Viking expansion was so limited (and virtually no viking outposts survived in the North for example), is because in their battles with Irishmen, they lost the majority. Howard Clarke claims that in the 20+ or so battles listed between Vikings and Irishmen during the period, the Irish won 15. There was no great Viking conquest like there was in England. It may have been a mere question of manpower, the Irish managing to recruit more men than viking raiders relying on mercenaries over seas, but this is because there were complex hierarchical kingships in Ireland that could command the manpower of numerous different "count-level" titles. Thus, Maelseachnaill mac Maíle Runaidh could summon Connacht, Munster, Leinster and Meath to battle (and thus was the first to realise the Irish high-kingship). His successor, Aed Findliath (who would have been considered high-king in 867) could command Connacht, Meath and the Ulster in his campaigns against Viking and Irish competitors.
For these reasons, I really don't think there is justification for placing Irish rulers in charge of their local county only. It will not serve balance as they shall be swallowed up by Viking rulers, and it shall not serve historical accuracy. If they don't want to give anyone a high-kingship, fine, but historical provincinal kings should still be given command of their province, even if the other constituent county/counties is/are independent.
