As I'm a swede, I'd say that if we won the war against... Well, all of our neighbours(Don't know what it's called, really) we'd stand a good chance of making some colonial things. We had a small colony in North America, and we were also the owners of a small island outside Africa or something like that.
Could the pope send out a colonizing mission to convert the natives? That would be interesting...
All I can say is: this is not a DBWI!England, Scotland, Ireland, France, Argon, Castile, Leon etc.
I think the trouble there is providing a prosperous enough economic base to finance colonial ventures. You need to bankroll the colonies themselves and also provide enough military muscle to protect them (or get chummy with someone who does- like the Dutch who basically got handed back the Dutch East Indies at the end of the Napoleonic wars only because Britain didn't want them badly enough to fight a war over). If not you run into problems like the Scots did at Darien- not enough cash to properly finance the venture and vulnerability to anyone with bigger guns who wants to screw you over.
This is the trouble with places like Greece and Ireland- they wouldn't have the economy to sustain colonies.
Genoa, Sicily and Greece.
Sweden DID develop New Sweden in Delaware, yanno.
Keeping and expanding it will be the challenge.![]()
They also controlled
the Caribbean island of St. Barth for 93 years. They took over the French island of Guadeloupe for one year during the Napoleonic wars.
So who knows they could have taken most of Frances territory in the Americas.
Luxembourg!!!!!!
Belgian adventure in Congo proves that, once great Colonial powers stopped to use brute force to prevent others from having colonies (roughly post-1800), any adventurous and fiscally sound power can have a piece of pie. In addition to OTL latecomers Italy, Belgium, German Empire, the list includes:
- Austro-Hungary;
- Russia;
- Bigger Apennine Peninsula kingdoms pre-unification;
- Romania (extremely unlikely, especially taking into account Black Sea Straits problem, but not impossible);
- Prussia pre-unification;
- Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (providing that they somehow pulled themselves from a mess they plunged themselves into in 17-18 centuries);
- Sweden-Norway;
- Poland (if 1830 uprising is successful, which isn't impossible);
- Denmark.
Yes, warm water Ruskie port was always the ultimate nightmare for British Empire. However, IOTL both Russia nd German Empire (which was hardly ever thought of as friend of British) possessed some overseas territories. Do Port Arthur and German colonial empire ring a bell? Granted, likelyhood of Russian Namibia isn't that great, but it isn't ASB. I would say that IOTL internal political considerations always played bigger role in Russians unwillingness to go on colonial escapade than any British pressure.The Congo is a pretty outlying example - and actually it was it's lack of power that made the Congo possible. Russia would never, ever have been allowed an African or any other colony by the British.
Yes, Romania probably has to fare a bit better economically than IOTL to get a credible chance on colonies, but still, we're far from ASB territory yet.Romania is too poor to maintain any colonies, too much debt to the Powres, with no power to hold them, hence it wouldn't be allowed.