AHC: Have a Swedish colony surviving by 1750

birdboy2000

Banned
Sweden is too small, got started too late, and has too many interests elsewhere to hold territories on the North American continent in the face of opposition from any other colonial power. (I assume you mean the continent - grabbing a Caribbean island a few decades earlier doesn't seem that challenging, or that intererstig.)

The trick, then, is IMO to avoid said opposition. If the Dutch lose New Netherland in the first Anglo-Dutch War, than New Sweden will have some breathing room, although it will be surrounded by English territory to the north and south, and given the relative sizes of the colonies, it is likely to eventually be to the west as well. But Sweden and England were often on friendly terms in this period due to Dutch support of Denmark-Norway and Swedish-Danish rivalry.

While the Swedes could not hold New Sweden in any war with England, they might be able to preserve their colony through a mix of friendship and appeasement and prevent any such wars from occurring in the first place.

This probably means a lot less support for France, who was both Sweden's patron/close ally and England's colonial rival OTL - and that's probably the biggest hitch in the process - but if New Sweden becomes important enough to change Swedish foreign policy in other areas, and England provides more of the subsidies France did OTL, New Sweden might be able to persist. It's probably not the likeliest course of events given the PoD, but it seems to me a plausible one.
 
Perhaps New Sweden could have been located in another place, further from other colonies, thus making it less prone to get involved in conflicts.

Another thing would be to have a larger number of settlers. There were very few people in New Sweden during its short existence.

So, if we have a stronger colony that would be able to defend itself, it might have lasted longer.
 
Part of the issue was that Swedens geopolitical geography lead them towards focusing to the east and to a lesser extend south, not west which were quite blocked by Denmark-Norway and more distantly Britain. Hence even if they had the raw capability to holding onto a North American Colony, they would channel that extra power into the baltics battling with Russia, PLC and assorted North Germanic duchies, leaving New Sweden not much better off.

In terms of projecting power into the new world, Sweden was only very slightly better off than Austria-Hungary would be.
 
Part of the issue was that Swedens geopolitical geography lead them towards focusing to the east and to a lesser extend south, not west which were quite blocked by Denmark-Norway and more distantly Britain.

They had trouble enough within the Baltic, so having the freedom to send colonists would have been difficult to achieve.
 
You do realise that Sweden owned Saint Barthélemy in the Caribbean since the 18th century, since 1784 in fact ?

They bought it from the French in exchange for trade rights in Gothenburg. To this day, the capital town of the island is called Gustavia. Sweden returned the island to France in 1878, following an 1877 referendum among the locals.
 
You do realise that Sweden owned Saint Barthélemy in the Caribbean since the 18th century, since 1784 in fact ?

They bought it from the French in exchange for trade rights in Gothenburg. To this day, the capital town of the island is called Gustavia. Sweden returned the island to France in 1878, following an 1877 referendum among the locals.

I meant Mainland North America. I wasn't aware that Sweden owned a Caribbean colony but that seems like a cheapo way out.
 
I meant Mainland North America. I wasn't aware that Sweden owned a Caribbean colony but that seems like a cheapo way out.

Yes, it seems so. I am not sure where Sweden could gain a North American foothold in an ATL. Maybe somewhere in eastern Canada, perhaps creating an "alliance of convenience" with the French against English/British colonists, allowing for a fairly prolonged survival of ATL New Sweden, in a "symbiotic" relationship with ATL New France ?

I remember Jared's Lands of Red and Gold has had less success for the English (and British) in North America during the 17th century, leading to several smaller countries forming in North America instead of the eventual US and Canada we had in OTL (in-universe, the concept of NA countries as big as our OTL ones is even ridiculed at their ATL AH discussion forum :p). In addition to a few anglophone countries, there is at least one Dutch-speaking or English and Dutch speaking country, as well as a country roughly around OTL Maine and Nova Scotia that was once the Swedish colonies of that ATL. IIRC, it's still either culturally/linguistically Swedish or has been partly anglified. I'd have to reread those parts of the timeline where it's mentioned in greater detail. If you yourself are interested, try PMing Jared.
 
Well thats easy dont sell St Barts and Guadeloupe

For that to happen the Swedish economy would need to be stronger in the mid/late 1800s because the main reason Saint-Barthélemy was returned to France was because of disappointing profits. Also, you probably need to have have more Swedish speakers emigrate to the island so that the local population look more favorably towards being part of Sweden. There was only 1 vote for remaining Swedish in the referendum, after all.
 
For that to happen the Swedish economy would need to be stronger in the mid/late 1800s because the main reason Saint-Barthélemy was returned to France was because of disappointing profits. Also, you probably need to have have more Swedish speakers emigrate to the island so that the local population look more favorably towards being part of Sweden. There was only 1 vote for remaining Swedish in the referendum, after all.

Well in the OP there is nothing about being profitable,desirable or even useful.

Have it being a prestige thing "if the bloody danes have colonies then we shall damn well have some as well"
 
Top