Great Britain conquering Norway.

[AussieHawker]

Was there any possible POD that has Great Britain conquering and annexing Norway?

While Great Britain didn't really want to get involved on the Continent Norway can mostly only be attacked by sea routes and so could be protected by the navy.

 

[Sian]

they'd have to get a claim on Norway somehow ... Margaret the maid, surviving giving Scotland a reasonable claim on Norway, which can be pushed 100 years later when Norway entered a Personal Union with Denmark, followed by Scotland and England at some point uniting (although butterflies all around then so its hard to guess at what would happen).

 

[Avrorrange]

Not exactly a conquest:Christian V dying without his heir,with his brother,the Prince Consort of Britain ascending to the throne.Meanwhile,his son with Anne survives.There you have it.

 

[Derek Pullem]

Was there any possible POD that has Great Britain conquering and annexing Norway?

While Great Britain didn't really want to get involved on the Continent Norway can mostly only be attacked by sea routes and so could be protected by the navy.

Not quite what you want but Harald Hardrada wins at Stamford Bridge and defeats William.

Job done.

 

[Escape Zeppelin]

Not exactly a conquest:Christian V dying without his heir,with his brother,the Prince Consort of Britain ascending to the throne.Meanwhile,his son with Anne survives.There you have it.

I would really like to see a timeline on this. A United Kingdom that includes Norway would radically alter history.

 

[Westphalian]

Protecting Sweden's independence will become very important. Sweden will probably be some kind of puppet/client state to protect the overland approaches to Norway.

 

[Georgie Porgie]

I can only envisage something like this happening if England didn't have a Norman king and remained linked somehow to Scandinavia rather than France.

I have been trying to think of a reason why England / GB would WANT to invade however and am coming up blank, excepting a for a king who didn't suceed when they thought they should and managed to get enough nobles to back him that an invasion would be sucessful. The closest I could come up with is that English forests take a bigger hit than in OTL and wood for ships is in short supply in England.

One thing I did think of is that in OTL Ivan the Terrible thought about marrying Elizabeth I, could a scenario of a Russian land force and British naval force taking and sharing northern Scandinavia between them work? Again however what does Norway offer that England doesn't for Elizabeth.

 

[raharris1973]

So, what does Norwegian nationalism end up looking like? Angry Irish, less angry Scottish or Welsh? Assuming there is a Reformation are Norwegian denominational Loyalties Lutheran, Catholic, Calvinist or Anglican over the long-term?

 

[The Professor]

I agree that conquest of Norway is unlikely but via alliance and inheritance could work.

 

[Alt History Buff]

I don't think an occasion ever came up for a conquest. British-Danish relations were usually stable over the centuries. By the time Britain became overpowering, there was little friction between nations. The worst case of friction usually came due to Danish neutral trade with their enemies during wars (Napoleonic wars, 7 Years War) but Britain was usually a little busy at these times to conquer Norway. Also, I'm not sure if Britain had the firepower to conquer anything until around 1700. The Danish Navy was historically strong. Plus, one also had to worry how Sweden or/and Russia would think of the matter. Maybe their agreement might be gained by eliminating the sound tolls.

More likely is a personal union via dynastic marriage.

The absolute last chance of unifying crowns would be the Napoleonic Wars.

Norway was stripped from Denmark (largely as punishment for siding with France) and handed to Sweden. If Sweden hadn't switched sides and stayed loyal to France as well, then perhaps it would have been given to the King of England, not necessarily England itself. Very unlikely. Norway might have agreed if it was assured they'd have their own functional Parliament and would not be Britain's subordinate.

Parliament was always resentful of the perceived costs of helping the Georgian Kings keep their ancestral duchy of Hanover safe and were jealous of their kings time with other domains. However, Norway was still Britain's primary source of timber all the way to the age of steam and a joint crown might have been viewed in more positive light by the people as this was a strategic necessity and would open new markets there were highly protected by Danish tariffs.

Other than that, then the son of Queen Anne surviving and uniting the thrones of Britain and Ireland to Denmark-Norway in Personal Union in the same manner than Britain and Hanover were united in Personal Union by the Georgians. Either way, there would be significant friction between countries that the monarchs would have to constantly address. Hanover was a 3rd rate power. Denmark-Norway would demand far more of the King's time. It is possible a monarch may be forced to abdicate one or the other throne to a sibling of 2nd son.

There should be a timeline on this. Maybe I'll write one someday.

 

[Draeger]

Not conquest outright, but dynastic union/influence is certainly doable. Just look at England's pull on Denmark due to the marriage of Albert and Alexandra.

 

[Simon]

Was there any possible POD that has Great Britain conquering and annexing Norway?

While Great Britain didn't really want to get involved on the Continent Norway can mostly only be attacked by sea routes and so could be protected by the navy.

It's not a conquest but if Frederick II of Denmark's son and eldest daughter were to pre-decease him without any heirs then the arrangements he had made for the throne to pass via his daughters kicks in and his second daughter Anne of Denmark who was married to James VI of Scotland becomes Queen of Denmark-Norway. Assuming no major changes 15 years later when Elizabeth I dies James becomes James I of England and Ireland with Anne Queen consort, their son Charles I becoming Charles I of Denmark-Norway when his mother dies in 1619 and Charles I of England, Ireland and Scotland 1625 on his fathers death.

Not exactly a conquest: Christian V dying without his heir, with his brother, the Prince Consort of Britain ascending to the throne. Meanwhile, his son with Anne survives. There you have it.

Huh, another inheritance option I hadn't thought of.

Norway might have agreed if it was assured they'd have their own functional Parliament and would not be Britain's subordinate.

Certainly possible, IIRC Hanover was mostly left to its own devices with a fair amount of local autonomy until Ernest Augustus I rocked up and made a mess of everything. Assuming that Norway was given to the person of George III then Great Britain wouldn't legally have any way of annexing the country, provided that they didn't have to fund it and the potential trade opportunities I think the British parliament would have been more than happy with a personal union.

 

[sarahz]

I agree that conquest of Norway is unlikely but via alliance and inheritance could work.

Canute has an heir with a less than solid claim, that is recognised in England, but not the scandanavian nations. England invades to put such heir on the throne. Yes its England not Great Britain, but still.

 

[EternalAnglo]

I would love to see a timeline about this!