What's the latest possible POD for Denmark-Norway to be the dominant power in Scandinavia?
- Thread starter Gugu
- Start date
You can't get much later than Frederik VI not losing Norway. He just has to side with someone other than Napoleon (IIRC Prins Christian Frederik kept trying to tell him that allying with Napoleon was a bad idea, but Frederik VI didn't listen). Sweden wasn't exactly in great shape at the time, if my memory serves, but taking Norway helped soften the perception they were in decline. Others may disagree, but I don't think Denmark has to do much more than keep Norway to keep ahead of Sweden in the 19th century and beyond.
mattep74
Kicked
1656 with the march over the ice. If the weather gets warmer and the ice is gone the whole swedish army including the king could be trapped on a island or drowned.
More importantly, it integrated Sweden into the concert of Europe. Since the Great Powers imposed an indefinite moratorium on military expansion within the Concert, Sweden could rest easy in the knowlede that anyone who attacked her would inevitably face the wrath of the Quintarchy.
Allying with Napoleon wasn't something that the Swedes did of their own volition, but rather to counter the threat of Russia afaik. They had a choice between the UK and the French as their protector, and of the two, only the latter had the boots on the ground to ensure Russia's good behavior. And Nappy cut them a pretty good deal, as Sweden retained much of her autonomy and became an honored ally.
Bernadotte was a pretty good diplomatic player. He got that support from the UK in large part because he was willing to contribute a significant number of men to the Sixth Coalition, which Denmark-Norway joined too late to impact the outcome at all. Sweden's betrayal of France was the pivot that made them a favorite of the UK, since they could now leverage the fact that they had actually put significant skin in the game of defeating 'Ole Nappy.
Imo, to counter the Danish decline, you'd have to get them to take a much stronger, anti-Napoleon stance way earlier, instead of vassilating between the Empire and Coalition. But that, of course, would expose Denmark to a French invasion which it was in no position to repulse without significant coalition supprt.
1801 Denmark-Norway knew the game was over with the Battle of Copenhagen Roads - it would only be a matter of time before the British would demand the Danish Royal Navy handed to them.
The desired alliance was with Britain - to be able to keep the Navy.
Without the only means to try enforce Neutrality and secure the prosperity of the Nation which depended upon seaborne trade there was only the choice to try balancing which was tried. Placing the main Army in Holstein 1805 initially along the Crown Prince (de facto Ruler) and Foreign Minister to show the British that Denmark-Norway was guarding its border with Napoleon the hope was that it would be allowed to retain its Navy. Denmark actually had a stand-off with the French in Holstein 1806 during the war with Prussia.
The British was being contacted and informed of the Danish position 1807 but the decision had been made.
It has to be some other time following the loss of Scania-Halland-Blekinga 1658. Perhaps a Swedish defeat at Lund 1676.
The desired alliance was with Britain - to be able to keep the Navy.
Without the only means to try enforce Neutrality and secure the prosperity of the Nation which depended upon seaborne trade there was only the choice to try balancing which was tried. Placing the main Army in Holstein 1805 initially along the Crown Prince (de facto Ruler) and Foreign Minister to show the British that Denmark-Norway was guarding its border with Napoleon the hope was that it would be allowed to retain its Navy. Denmark actually had a stand-off with the French in Holstein 1806 during the war with Prussia.
The British was being contacted and informed of the Danish position 1807 but the decision had been made.
It has to be some other time following the loss of Scania-Halland-Blekinga 1658. Perhaps a Swedish defeat at Lund 1676.
Was it? I've always been under the impression that Sweden remained like barely ahead of Denmark-Norway, even after. Not disputing per se but more asking for elaboration.
I somehow think we need to go further back.
Christian IV got into the 30-year war. Not a great idea. In essence: Denmark was too small to make a great impact and got bankrupted instead.
It was at this junction Sweden got to flex its muscles and outsmart (and conquer) Denmark.
it is hard to see that Denmark could have recovered to former glory after Chr IV
The Napoleon wars were not good either, but at that stage I believe Denmark was not 'top drawer' anymore.
The final straw was of course 1864 and the war with Prussia.
My vote therefore goes to the end of Chr IV - 1648
Christian IV got into the 30-year war. Not a great idea. In essence: Denmark was too small to make a great impact and got bankrupted instead.
It was at this junction Sweden got to flex its muscles and outsmart (and conquer) Denmark.
it is hard to see that Denmark could have recovered to former glory after Chr IV
The Napoleon wars were not good either, but at that stage I believe Denmark was not 'top drawer' anymore.
The final straw was of course 1864 and the war with Prussia.
My vote therefore goes to the end of Chr IV - 1648
Russia basically mauled Sweden as badly as it could get. Sweden lost about half of its areas (Finland). So I don't think that it could be even worse for Sweden unless the country fall to full revolution and instead just ousting king Gustaf IV Adolf and replacing him by his uncle and then evntual rise of the Bernadottes Sweden becomes radical republic.
But I agree that it could be done with pretty late POD. It hardly is need to go back to Thrity Years War since Denmark-Norway was exiting yet about 170 years after end of the war.
I guess my thought was Russia could actually force Sweden to cede back Norway to Denmark if you trumped up a scenario where they came to blows.
Sweden took Norway only just in 1814 when Napoleonic Wars were already almost over. I don't really see this happening.
I don’t think it’s an extremely likely course of events, but with a POD in 1814 I think you could have Russia at some point at war with Sweden over the course of the next 100 years.
The problem then was that Sweden was much better at prosecuting war at this time and became one of the major players of the TYW. Denmark was left at the receiving end!
During 1676 Denmark might have had some luck defeating Charles XI to win that war or 1708 - problem being that Britain and Netherlands by 1660 had decided that the Baltic was of importance of maintaining their Navies and their trade so engineered the peace of that year making the Sound the Danish-Swedish border not to be moved.
Even if Sweden didn't get Bernadotte as its King and Denmark not losing Norway 1815 it would then have to face two external possible enemies - Germany AND Russia! That would overtax the economy of Denmark-Norway as Norway was always seen as a possession of Denmark's. Sure something could be done to have the Norwegians pay for defences like letting them have their own Bank and University though as long as Sweden was a threat Denmark didn't do so in order to minimize possible losses!
Any inter-Scandinavian Conflict would be dependant upon Great Powers not having an interest in area.