Divide and conquer. The Swedes would shore up support by being more accomodating to the German's of Schleswig-Holstein.
AHC/WI: Sweden remains a major power
- Thread starter The Forty-Eighth Rōnin
- Start date
Divide and conquer. The Swedes would shore up support by being more accomodating to the German's of Schleswig-Holstein.
I don't see neither Denmark, Norway or Sweden alone being lasting great powers, for Scandinavia to house a great power that will last as long as the other European powers it really needs to not be divided. As long as Sweden has Denmark/Norway in its west it will almost always be fighting on 2 fronts in any war. Same thing goes for Denmark, but to a lesser extent of it could incorporate and "Danish...ize?" parts of Northern Germany early on, perhaps before it was even German? Does Denmark stand much of a chance at keeping the conquests made by Valdemar I & II?
Also, all of Scandinavia even if united still has a very low population. But divided a great power in Scandinavia will have even less and will heavily rely on not losing any major wars that it can not recover from, with too small a population and too many fronts, enemies and interests aligned against her such a power would be incredibly fragile compared to the continental powers. Eventually something goes wrong, a few major defeats in battle, one or two lost wars and it's over.
I think the best part to boost the chances of a lasting Scandinavian great power is to screw either the German region or the Russian region, or both. Make them unable to develop into large centralized states and hopefully "Nordicize" some major population center. But the only potential starting targets I can think of is the Southern Jutland peninsula that many mentioned, Pomerania, Finland, maybe the Baltics (as in Est, Lat, Lit) and by an even larger stretch maybe possibly northwest Russia extremely early on, but my regional knowledge there is lacking. But I would guess that it's very unlikely. Not certain when Northwest Russia went from having a majority Finno-Ugric/Uralic population to a Russian one, does anyone here do? Is there a way for it go other ways? Does it need a East Slav Screw or can it happen without it?
Also, all of Scandinavia even if united still has a very low population. But divided a great power in Scandinavia will have even less and will heavily rely on not losing any major wars that it can not recover from, with too small a population and too many fronts, enemies and interests aligned against her such a power would be incredibly fragile compared to the continental powers. Eventually something goes wrong, a few major defeats in battle, one or two lost wars and it's over.
I think the best part to boost the chances of a lasting Scandinavian great power is to screw either the German region or the Russian region, or both. Make them unable to develop into large centralized states and hopefully "Nordicize" some major population center. But the only potential starting targets I can think of is the Southern Jutland peninsula that many mentioned, Pomerania, Finland, maybe the Baltics (as in Est, Lat, Lit) and by an even larger stretch maybe possibly northwest Russia extremely early on, but my regional knowledge there is lacking. But I would guess that it's very unlikely. Not certain when Northwest Russia went from having a majority Finno-Ugric/Uralic population to a Russian one, does anyone here do? Is there a way for it go other ways? Does it need a East Slav Screw or can it happen without it?
In the Swedish empire, the Germans would be the majority, not a minority. The Danes could afford to marginalize the Germans because they weren't a threat to the stability of Denmark. But if Sweden marginalizes the Germans, their empire is pretty much finished. In most other empires with a minority ruling class ruling over a majority group, the minority class takes some steps to appease the lower class, and I don't think Sweden would be such a different case.
Not to mention that Germanophobia had a very, very old tradition in Denmark. One of the oldest books written in Danish (during the high middle ages, IIRC) was noted by historians to be extremely Germanophobic. I don't know of a similar tradition in Sweden, which doesn't share a direct border with any German states and isn't as likely to be prejudiced as a result.
If we're talking about a Swedish empire where Germans are a minority, however (like a Poland-Sweden union with East Prussia or something), the Swedes will have no reason to pander to the Germans, although they may use them as a privileged minority population to help suppress others within the empire.
Have Charles X Gustav succeed in storming Copenhagen in 1659. Frederick III is killed in the vicious plundering following the Swedish seizure of the Danish capital, leaving the would be successor (OTL's Christian V) stranded in Paris.
After Charles manages to beat the allied relief force outside Nyborg on Funen, Corfitz Ulfeldt proceeds to win over the weary Danish nobility into accepting Charles as king of Denmark. Charles acts the part of a benevolent conqueror and signs a haandfæstning respecting most of the nobility's privileges and demesne.
Isolated from Denmark and bereft of foodstuffs, Norway too is also conquered by the Swedes.
If Charles manages to stay alive long enough to implement a working plan for integrating the new kingdoms into Sweden proper (and fight off the Emperor, the Dutch and the English and the Oldenborg pretender) we might see a united Scandinavia under the Vasa dynasty.
LOTS of butterflies and parameters have to come together for this to succeed of course, but I don't think it's all that far fetched.
However, that only really kicked off after 1848. German dominated the Danish (and Norwegian) government for pretty much the entire 18th century, IIRC.
After Charles manages to beat the allied relief force outside Nyborg on Funen, Corfitz Ulfeldt proceeds to win over the weary Danish nobility into accepting Charles as king of Denmark. Charles acts the part of a benevolent conqueror and signs a haandfæstning respecting most of the nobility's privileges and demesne.
Isolated from Denmark and bereft of foodstuffs, Norway too is also conquered by the Swedes.
If Charles manages to stay alive long enough to implement a working plan for integrating the new kingdoms into Sweden proper (and fight off the Emperor, the Dutch and the English and the Oldenborg pretender) we might see a united Scandinavia under the Vasa dynasty.
LOTS of butterflies and parameters have to come together for this to succeed of course, but I don't think it's all that far fetched.
However, that only really kicked off after 1848. German dominated the Danish (and Norwegian) government for pretty much the entire 18th century, IIRC.
Sweden simply had made enemies everywhere, and friends nowhere at the time of Second Northern War
As for the earlier question about Denmark/Norway being Salic Law ... strictly speaking they were elective all the way up to 1848 (the elective monarchy was disbanded at the same time as the constitutional monarchy replaced absolute monarchy), but it only rarely didn't follow the salic laws, mainly when the ruling male line died out (which it did 2 or 3 times), where the danish nobles shopped around in protential heirs, figuring out who had the best claims (and promises of monetary gifts counted)
As for the earlier question about Denmark/Norway being Salic Law ... strictly speaking they were elective all the way up to 1848 (the elective monarchy was disbanded at the same time as the constitutional monarchy replaced absolute monarchy), but it only rarely didn't follow the salic laws, mainly when the ruling male line died out (which it did 2 or 3 times), where the danish nobles shopped around in protential heirs, figuring out who had the best claims (and promises of monetary gifts counted)
Norway is taken over by Sweden, rather than by Denmark.
Sweden (+Norway+Iceland+Greenland) looks west.
Norwegian and Icelandic fishermen and settlers start exploiting, first the Grand Banks, and then what's now eastern Canada. This happens, oh, say, by 1400
Vinland (under firm central control) grows, with sizable numbers of farmers/peasants fleeing Europe every time there's a famine. (And remember, much of Scandinavia is somewhat marginal for agriculture, especially during the Little Ice Age.) (So we have some 10-20 thousand in the New World before 1600).
By 1700, Vinland is bigger than Norway in population, and growing much faster than the rest of the country.
By 1800, none of the individual duchies in the New World are bigger than Sweden, but combined there are more 'Swedes' in the New World than in Europe. Massachusetts (OTL New England, a Swedish duchy) is as big as Edwardsland (the British colony, essentially Virginia). Ontario is smallish yet, but population is growing FAST. Erie and Michigan are established.... The formerly disputed territory of Ohio is now finally Swedish.
Iroquoia and New Netherlands serve as a helpful buffer between the Swedish duchies and the British ones.
By 1900, Sweden is one of the Great Powers, on par with Britain or France
----
There, how's that?
Sweden (+Norway+Iceland+Greenland) looks west.
Norwegian and Icelandic fishermen and settlers start exploiting, first the Grand Banks, and then what's now eastern Canada. This happens, oh, say, by 1400
Vinland (under firm central control) grows, with sizable numbers of farmers/peasants fleeing Europe every time there's a famine. (And remember, much of Scandinavia is somewhat marginal for agriculture, especially during the Little Ice Age.) (So we have some 10-20 thousand in the New World before 1600).
By 1700, Vinland is bigger than Norway in population, and growing much faster than the rest of the country.
By 1800, none of the individual duchies in the New World are bigger than Sweden, but combined there are more 'Swedes' in the New World than in Europe. Massachusetts (OTL New England, a Swedish duchy) is as big as Edwardsland (the British colony, essentially Virginia). Ontario is smallish yet, but population is growing FAST. Erie and Michigan are established.... The formerly disputed territory of Ohio is now finally Swedish.
Iroquoia and New Netherlands serve as a helpful buffer between the Swedish duchies and the British ones.
By 1900, Sweden is one of the Great Powers, on par with Britain or France
----
There, how's that?
Driftless
Donor
Impressive!
The Vinlanders haven't found any gold (to amount to anything), so the Spanish aren't interested. They have found iron, coal, and some copper in volume, along with other useful minerals. Of course they've found some good farmland and other local resources.
I'm not so sure the French, English, and Dutch sit on the sidelines though.
If all of Scandinavia unites under the Swedish throne, it could become at least a respectable colonial power, if not also a European one. The Nordic countries have a solid seafaring tradition and in the 19th century, sent a large number of emigrants to the New World. If the crown can find a way to start that emigration 100-150 years earlier, there could be some *Swedish-speaking countries in the Americas.
(*Swedish in this case might be more of a Scandinavian koiné language though.)
(*Swedish in this case might be more of a Scandinavian koiné language though.)
Why would Vinland stay attached to Sweden if it's plainly more powerful than Sweden and has a completely different set of strategic and economic interests?
Driftless
Donor
That could take time.... If you use the comparison of the colonial US and Great Britain, there was a long stretch of time where having both the power of the home country's navy & army was a useful deterrent to would be invaders.
*edit* To be fair too, Mr Thofinnson may have been tweaking our noses a bit with his plan too.....
What about some sort of butterfly that gets the Russians a Black Sea port early? ALT- St. Petersburg at Sevastopol, Rostov or somesuch? Keeping the Russian focus southward (which I think is still a "richer" region in the 17th century) could go a long way toward keeping peace between the Swedes and Russians.
Sweden needs Denmark-Norway's population to stay a major/regional power, it will have the added benefit of removing the constant struggle between the two kingdoms, making room for a larger population in the long run without all the damaging wars on Swedish/Danish lands.
It is my understanding that Stockholm was a rather minor city in the early years atleast compared to cities like Copenhagen and Bergen.
A Sweden around the thirty year war that also conquerors Denmark-Norway. Would realistically move its capital to Copenhagen. Since Copenhagen is better suited for keeping the larger Danish population (Denmark in this period had a larger population if i remember correct) it is also better placed to control North German provinces and it have the added benefit to sit on the Sound Dues.
It is my understanding that Stockholm was a rather minor city in the early years atleast compared to cities like Copenhagen and Bergen.
A Sweden around the thirty year war that also conquerors Denmark-Norway. Would realistically move its capital to Copenhagen. Since Copenhagen is better suited for keeping the larger Danish population (Denmark in this period had a larger population if i remember correct) it is also better placed to control North German provinces and it have the added benefit to sit on the Sound Dues.
don't think they would go all out and move their capital to a recently conquered capital.
Göteborg might be a reasonable suggestion through, as its approximately in the middle of their realm, on a narrow strip of traditionally Swedish land between the Norwegian Bohuslän, and the Danish Halland, so it could easily be seen as a unified capital between the three countries. Even if Göteborg is quite young at this stage, that might merely be a bonus since the would be able to systematicly build the city organized instead of being builded on a kludge of older city plans and organic growth/decline
Göteborg might be a reasonable suggestion through, as its approximately in the middle of their realm, on a narrow strip of traditionally Swedish land between the Norwegian Bohuslän, and the Danish Halland, so it could easily be seen as a unified capital between the three countries. Even if Göteborg is quite young at this stage, that might merely be a bonus since the would be able to systematicly build the city organized instead of being builded on a kludge of older city plans and organic growth/decline
That's a good question. Vinlanders probably would seek independence fairly early, creating some difficult decisions for the Swedes: either fight to keep Vinland part of the Empire or decentralize the Swedish Empire to the point it would become more of an alliance of Nordic states rather than a true empire.
Britain weathered the loss of its most populous and developed American colonies and remained a global power because it had numerous Imperial interests elsewhere and because Britain itself had a large population and a strong industrial base. Sweden (even if one includes all of Scandinavia as part of "Sweden") didn't.
Will be expensive to build a new capital compared to taking over another one. On the other hand the Swedish king will be having more money than ever before in the sound dues.