Why were the Irish so much better at repelling the Vikings than the English were? Was Ireland more advanced at the time?

Why were the Irish so much better at repelling the Vikings than the English were? Was Ireland more advanced at the time?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Clontarf
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

They weren't more advanced, and they repelled them precisely because they were less advanced.

England faced a far more serious Viking threat

Look at where Ireland is in relation to England and Scandinavia.

They didn't repel them. Look at Ireland's Major Cities, many were founded by the Norse.

Yah but they ended any sort of Norse rule.

They founded a few mud huts but hardly a new invention, nothing like the Danelaw

They where poor,small, and irrelevant
Nobody cared about them
Englans was big and splintered, thus easy pickings and rich tobboot

If the Vikings 'founded' mud huts what did the Irish do before? Live under trees? Dublin was an extremely important Norse settlement.

paganism and incest

There's nothing comparable to the great heathen army ever setting off to try and conquer all of Ireland, like they tired to do in England.
Even then they didn't conquer Wessex. Wessex would reconquer all the English land lost and and Alfred the great's grandson Æthelstan would be the first king of England.
Granted that wouldn't be the last England saw of the Norse.

Foe the same reason Finns managed to repel vikings even tho they lived right next to each other; there was nothing worth stealing there. England on the other hand was rich and prosperous. The Irish never beat the vikings, the vikings just didn't want to tie down so many men for so little loot.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Clontarf

Fucking retards dont know what youre talking about, probably dumb fucking Americans. Ireland was very prosperous back then.

>Ireland was very prosperous
Not what I was talking about retard.

I already fucking knew about that battle. It's not comparable to the heathen army.
There's Irishmen on the Vikings side and the Vikings weren't invading for the sole purpose to try and conquer all or as much of Ireland as possible.
I'm English.

As a history student, yes they were. That expedition was intended to destroy the Irish in one big battle then conquer as much as they could.

Ireland was prosperous when compared to the shithole it has been any other time in history, but still nothing compared to England.

And i did know about the battle, i just don't see the point you are trying to make.

Everything I have ever read or heard about that battle has said it wasn't as cut and dry as Vikings deciding to try and conquer Ireland.
Maybe you know something I don't fair enough.
But even then I still feel confident in saying it doesn't compare to the multiple times the Vikings invaded England In an attempt to conquer England.

The decentralised nature of Irish society made it easier to stamp out small-scale incursions like the attempted Viking raids and settlements were.

Reading about the early history of Scandinavian settlement in Ireland is like reading a narration of a game of whack-a-mole. For every town that the Norse did eventually establish the Irish burned a dozen more down.

Drunken monkey kung fu

Literally not true, the viking army was at least two or three separate contingents with different goals.

They feared the gaelic warrior

These two posts answer the question.

The Irish already raided their own monasteries, so they didn't find it shocking like the Anglo's did when the Vikings raided monasteries in England. As such the Irish were more willing to work with the Vikings for their own political ends, which the Vikings were happy to provide as they were largely happy to function as mercenaries.

there were norse-gaelic clans