Alternate European Colonial Powers

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. Plus, we had kinda this exapnsionist drive. If you just pull out Russia as a threat, we could control the entire Baltic Sea. Which in turn means that we're on the road to greatness... And, oh, Gustavus Adolphus musn't die. If he did(As in OTL) we'd be screwed.

/Starleaf
 
United Scandinavia (yes, new Kalmar union, but this time more effective one), Novgorod Republic (would it survive Muskovite onslaught and get guarantees of unimpeded transit through Baltic Straits), Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (same transit guarantees required), or Russia (would it develop Arkhangel and Murmansk earlier) could create much more successfull Canada than French. I mean, it was brutal to throw French in Quebec climate and expect them to colonize the land properly, that's why they fell to British-American onslaught. Any of aforementioned countries/unions has enough population able to operate comfortably in Quebec climate to maintain serious population base. I would say that Kalmar's and Novgorod's chances are flimsy (they are at peak of their power either too late or too early), but PLC and Muskovites could pull the trick. Russia even possessed seafaring population (Pomors) which could crew Russian trade ships (those guys routinely travelled from White Sea area to Svalbard and Kara sea). So, butterfly Times of Troubles away and give Russia a bit of knowledge that it is actually faster to travel from Moscow to Quebec than to Siberia (advantage of sea travel) and that American beaver is in great demand in Europe, and you would have New Arkhangel (Quebec City) and Kholmogory Dalnie (Montreal) with tens or even hundreds of thousands farming settlers living around it by 1700 AD. Average Russian farmer would feel himself right at home in Quebec.
 
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.

It was the Great Northern War. By this time the Swedes had long lost their modest colonial empire, consisting of New Sweden and some forts on the Gold Coast. You need to go back many decades to make Sweden a colonial power.

Could the pope send out a colonizing mission to convert the natives? That would be interesting...

Why would the Pope spend money doing what the Spanish, Portuguese and French are doing for him?
 
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.


Long Live the Irish CONGO!!:D
 

Fatal Wit

Banned
What about Albania:D?

More seriously, I see the various possible states that could emerged in alternately fragmented Iberias' as a possibility.
 
Sweden DID develop New Sweden in Delaware, yanno.

Keeping and expanding it will be the challenge. :eek:

The Swedish Empire sounds nice. They controlled from Delaware to Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) to New Jersey. 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.

Map of St. Barth:
250px-Saint_Barthelemy-CIA_WFB_Map.png
 
Last edited:
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.

St Barthélemy (St Barts) was sold to them. Guadeloupe they got from the British who were occupying it. Not in a million years will France lose its American colonies to Sweden.
 
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:
  1. Austro-Hungary;
  2. Russia;
  3. Bigger Apennine Peninsula kingdoms pre-unification;
  4. Romania (extremely unlikely, especially taking into account Black Sea Straits problem, but not impossible);
  5. Prussia pre-unification;
  6. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (providing that they somehow pulled themselves from a mess they plunged themselves into in 17-18 centuries);
  7. Sweden-Norway;
  8. Poland (if 1830 uprising is successful, which isn't impossible);
  9. Denmark.
 

trajen777

Banned
Byzantium if they had not had Plague and had held Spain --- Rome if Marain had destroyed the Vandals in africa -- then recaptured Spain and had a Roman empire of Italy / Spain / Africa --- with a friendly Frank France

Ireland
 
ok, guys, let's create a TL with Venice, Byzantium, Prussia / Hansa, Sweden / UberKalmar, Scotland, Aragon, Al Andalus, Genua, Novgorod, Moscovia still in their places and busy colonizing, instead of the banal Brits, Castillians and French !!
 
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:
  1. Austro-Hungary;
  2. Russia;
  3. Bigger Apennine Peninsula kingdoms pre-unification;
  4. Romania (extremely unlikely, especially taking into account Black Sea Straits problem, but not impossible);
  5. Prussia pre-unification;
  6. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (providing that they somehow pulled themselves from a mess they plunged themselves into in 17-18 centuries);
  7. Sweden-Norway;
  8. Poland (if 1830 uprising is successful, which isn't impossible);
  9. Denmark.

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. of the others, 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. The rest are fine.
 
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, 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.

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.
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.
 
Top