A picture in the "Things that look like Alternate History but aren't" thread, featuring blacks in the Polish-Soviet War but titled "Polish Colonial adventurers in Africa," made me think. Under what circumstances can we have Poland develop an overseas colonial Empire comparable to that of, if not Spain and Britain, then maybe France or Portugal. Poland having major Polish-speaking colonies in the New World, Africa, and maybe some trading posts in the Indian or Pacific oceans. Bonus points if Polish becomes a major global language, the way English is IOTL.
AH Challenge: Poland as colonial power
- Thread starter Polish Eagle
- Start date
That`s quite cliche thinking about Poland - most European countries willing to expand faced many powerful neighbours.
But yeah, I can`t see Poland having colonial empire - it is too simple to blockade Polish access to the seas using Baltic straits. I can imagine some small possessions here and there (Courland - Polish vassal actually had small colonies in Tobago and Gambia). However - it would be very hard to hold them for long in case of war with some naval power.
That`s quite cliche thinking about Poland - most European countries willing to expand faced many powerful neighbours.
Yes, but which one tends to get shafted every time their powerful neighbors start getting grabby? Obviously there have been a lot of wars in Europe and a lot of chunks of land changing hands, but ephemeral conquerors like Napoleon aside, the powers of western Europe tend not to vanish as political entities and get partitioned among their neighbors.
It's not a cliche to point out how unfortunate Poland was to have Germany and Russia as neighbors. Its history of being divided up between them bears it out. As big a regional power as it has been during some periods, if Poland has any hope of surviving as a world power, at a bare minimum Germany and Russia have to be crippled somehow.
Yes, but Poland vanished in late 18th century, so it didn`t 'vanish all the time as political entity'. It existed as such for about 850 years before partitions. No offence intended - but I think that Americans seems to focus on 18th-20th century too much.
They were. In 16th century HRE was a myriad disunited fiefdoms - politically and religiously, while Russia consisted of few northern principalities, tributaries of Golden Horde.
Poland fared badly because of degeneration of central power in favour of nobility (which started at the same time, with Jagiellonian dynasty), not because of being surrounded by Russia and Germany. By no means were partitions of Poland inevitable.
Maybe a personal union with Denmark could overcome the sea access issues? The government has to be centralized, as well. It's impossible to get a colonial empire on the scale of Britain's or Spain's, though, because Poland has too many land enemies to devote a lot of resources to gaining a colonial empire.
Get them to the Adriatic! Like this:
Started as a Kingdom of Tondo wank and just kinda butterflied from there but for this purpose I direct you to Poland and its northeastern African holdings.
Started as a Kingdom of Tondo wank and just kinda butterflied from there but for this purpose I direct you to Poland and its northeastern African holdings.
Yes. There is no way around getting them good sea access.
I notice that at the time the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth was formed, Poland was allied to Denmark in the Northern Seven Years war. And they continued to have a common enemy in Sweden?
Perhaps Denmark can be drawn into the formation of the Commonwealth somehow? If Frederick II, whom I believe was childless at the time, dies in the war, or something? Or perhaps some kind of association that deepens over time?
A union with Denmark would have several positive effects for both, especially if they got hold of the territory along the Baltic between them, but I could see the smaller Denmark eventually swamped. Even in a situation without Norway, it would be a good setup for colonies though.
Why would Poland, or Poland-Lithuania, want overseas colonies? Remember that setting those colonies up was a risky and costly endeavor. Furthermore, you have the on going naval costs to retain control over the overseas colonies; especially if they are valuable colonies.
What is more believable is for a powerful Poland to expand into the Eurasian steppes and Siberia like Russia did in real life. Russia expanded like this IRL because this was the practical way to expand. It's easier to simply march your colonists down the road to the town you've just conquered than it is to put them on a ship and send them to the Bahamas or Trinidad. Furthermore, it's quicker to put some supplies on a cart and send it down the road then stocking a ship for a four month journey after its already taken several months to notify the homeland about the need for supplies.
Finally, one must take into consideration that a driving force behind overseas expansion in the west was to get around the Muslims. Eastern Europeans can't avoid dealing with the Muslims because they're neighbors.
What is more believable is for a powerful Poland to expand into the Eurasian steppes and Siberia like Russia did in real life. Russia expanded like this IRL because this was the practical way to expand. It's easier to simply march your colonists down the road to the town you've just conquered than it is to put them on a ship and send them to the Bahamas or Trinidad. Furthermore, it's quicker to put some supplies on a cart and send it down the road then stocking a ship for a four month journey after its already taken several months to notify the homeland about the need for supplies.
Finally, one must take into consideration that a driving force behind overseas expansion in the west was to get around the Muslims. Eastern Europeans can't avoid dealing with the Muslims because they're neighbors.
I Blame Communism
Banned
I agree absolutely with the point you're making, but I have to point out an anachronism there - this is Ivan the Terrible country, the Tatar Yoke is long gone and Kazan and Astrakhan fall in the 1550s; by 1600, Cossacks are deep in Siberia and heading south too.
Of course, Ivan's attempts to confront Poland whilst his domestic situation steadily deteriorated ended in complete disaster and, IIRC, Polish gains; but that's no reason not to be precise.
Could Wladyislaw III (spelling like Wikipedia does, anyway) have made a difference? Suppose he chooses not to break the 10-year truce against the Ottomans? (He was, reportedly, ambivalent about it.)
The problem, of course, is that they might have been attacked by the Ottomans later, but if they can withstand that, and he survives to have children...perhaps you have the creation of an alternative to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and eventually, a Polish-Lithunian-Hungarian conglomerate that raises very interesting butterflies.They coud, at least, get to the Adriatic, and perhaps some African clonies later, getting them away from the Ottomans. (Polish Egypt would be a stretch, but a weird butterfly.)
Of course, it's hard to say how good this king would have been, considering he was only 20 when he died. In 40 more years, he could either have made the thing very strong and sturdy...or totally destroyed it.
The king after him did well enough, too, but if he's sort of the military part of a tandem, maybe they can do something; or maybe the POD is more around 1500. It'd have to be pretty early, though, yeah; though poland wasn't touched much in the Thirty Years' War, I don't know if they can really take advantge.
The problem, of course, is that they might have been attacked by the Ottomans later, but if they can withstand that, and he survives to have children...perhaps you have the creation of an alternative to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and eventually, a Polish-Lithunian-Hungarian conglomerate that raises very interesting butterflies.They coud, at least, get to the Adriatic, and perhaps some African clonies later, getting them away from the Ottomans. (Polish Egypt would be a stretch, but a weird butterfly.)
Of course, it's hard to say how good this king would have been, considering he was only 20 when he died. In 40 more years, he could either have made the thing very strong and sturdy...or totally destroyed it.
The king after him did well enough, too, but if he's sort of the military part of a tandem, maybe they can do something; or maybe the POD is more around 1500. It'd have to be pretty early, though, yeah; though poland wasn't touched much in the Thirty Years' War, I don't know if they can really take advantge.
Last edited:
Well, these are my two cents, and I admit I'm no expert on this field, so should be taken with a pinch of salt.
1. Stop Poland from becomming an elective monarchy. This caused wayyy too many problems, especially when certain Swedes and Saxons got the throne, and when anyone could become a noble. Let us not forget the infamous blocking power the Sejm had.
2. Have Poland play a different diplomatic game. As has already been pointed out, the Holy Roman Empire was on it's way to decline anyway. Poland could find good allies in Sweden, Denmark, and if they reconcile the relgious differences and things play out differently, the Ottomans.
3. Have Poland become a major naval power. Though this one is kinda obvious.
I think this is difficult, but would not go as far as some have suggested impossible. Good luck, I would love to see this as a tl!
1. Stop Poland from becomming an elective monarchy. This caused wayyy too many problems, especially when certain Swedes and Saxons got the throne, and when anyone could become a noble. Let us not forget the infamous blocking power the Sejm had.
2. Have Poland play a different diplomatic game. As has already been pointed out, the Holy Roman Empire was on it's way to decline anyway. Poland could find good allies in Sweden, Denmark, and if they reconcile the relgious differences and things play out differently, the Ottomans.
3. Have Poland become a major naval power. Though this one is kinda obvious.
I think this is difficult, but would not go as far as some have suggested impossible. Good luck, I would love to see this as a tl!
Might suggest Conrad Stargard as Duke of Poland and the one man who can give Poland the world
Yep. Also, P-L was allied with Lubeck - quite important imperial city, BTW. That`s quite interesting idea, though historically Denmark chose Muscovy as a strategical ally against Sweden. This was shown during siege of Danzig (1577) when Stephen Bathory was elected for new king, and Denmark supported rebellious Danzigers. Nonetheless - this could work, but you will need to have a strong king, able to centralise his power. Extension of the Commonwealth to Denmark would unfortunately mean something opposite - Danish nobles gaining more privileges, similarly to their Polish-Lithuanian counterparts.
HistorianofAlt said:
Yep - there was open steppe right next door. Indirectly such colonisation took place, in form of Zaporozhian Sietch consisting of Ruthenian, Polish, Tatar, Turkish and Wallachian adventurers/fleeing peasants. But yeah - in case of highly centralised /absolutist Polish throne emerging in late 17th century pontic steppes would surely be subjected to some colonisation plan.
I Blame Communism said:I agree absolutely with the point you're making, but I have to point out an anachronism there - this is Ivan the Terrible country, the Tatar Yoke is long gone and Kazan and Astrakhan fall in the 1550s; by 1600, Cossacks are deep in Siberia and heading south too.
Of course, Ivan's attempts to confront Poland whilst his domestic situation steadily deteriorated ended in complete disaster and, IIRC, Polish gains; but that's no reason not to be precise.
Yeah - I kinda oversimplified this, without giving specific dates, to get my point across - sorry for that.
Well, we can`t be sure how Władysław Warneńczyk would rule. He died at young age, and it seems that he was easily influenced by others - it was clergy, John Hunyadi, and his own immaturity that made him to brake truce with Ottomans. But should he win against Ottomans (which borders ASB), it could be interesting.
By the time of 30 years war Poland was strong militarily, but i`m afraid that only some miracle or exceptionally strong king could reverse degeneration of political system at this point.
Cuāuhtemōc
Banned
I could see Poland having a small colonial empire should they expand into lands that aren't really contested by the major colonizers, perhaps in the Caribbean?
You need to solve three major problems:
The first point is obvious and has been discussed here already.
But I think Poland has never mastered the second and third times at the same time (before 1989, that is) ...
Nevertheless, I don't think it is impossible.
My best guess is: Sigismund III. somehow manages to get accepted as king in Sweden.
(Only problem with that is religion.)
This leads to a Polish-Lithuanian-Swedish realm with the Baltic as a domestic "lake" starting from 1592.
It also nearly stretches to the Black Sea; and if Sweden alone develops only nearly as well as IOTL, then it will be able to wrest access to the North Sea from Denmark.
However, I do not yet see how (an alternate) S. should achieve that.
Convert to Protestantism? That would at least endanger his position in Poland.
Found yet another national church - the Polican Church - and switch sides as he likes?
Return to the old Polish tolerance in all directions - with the obvious risks of domestic discord?
Moreover, if that new state should retain its South-Eastern parts, then it has to cope with Russia and the Ottomans at the same time. But it wouldn't hurt too much losing these areas - in terms of later colonization.
But how large that empire would grow, and how high a status Polish would then have -
this is a very nebulous topic.
- Free unblockable access to the open sea (Baltic and Black Seas don't count);
- sufficient authority/power basis of the institution which pursues colonization (might be the king, might be part of the aristocracy, might be merchants, might even be the church);
- sufficient economic and demographic resources.
The first point is obvious and has been discussed here already.
But I think Poland has never mastered the second and third times at the same time (before 1989, that is) ...
Nevertheless, I don't think it is impossible.
My best guess is: Sigismund III. somehow manages to get accepted as king in Sweden.
(Only problem with that is religion.)
This leads to a Polish-Lithuanian-Swedish realm with the Baltic as a domestic "lake" starting from 1592.
It also nearly stretches to the Black Sea; and if Sweden alone develops only nearly as well as IOTL, then it will be able to wrest access to the North Sea from Denmark.
However, I do not yet see how (an alternate) S. should achieve that.
Convert to Protestantism? That would at least endanger his position in Poland.
Found yet another national church - the Polican Church - and switch sides as he likes?
Return to the old Polish tolerance in all directions - with the obvious risks of domestic discord?
Moreover, if that new state should retain its South-Eastern parts, then it has to cope with Russia and the Ottomans at the same time. But it wouldn't hurt too much losing these areas - in terms of later colonization.
But how large that empire would grow, and how high a status Polish would then have -
this is a very nebulous topic.