What is the best pod to create a unified scandinavia that can last longer than the Kalmar Union did historically?
In the simplest terms, it seems there are two parties that the Danish king needs to mollify: The Swedish peasants and the Swedish nobility.Have Margareta's son survive, rein in the Danish nobility and reverse the Danish steady march towards serfdom (the Swedish peasants feared Danish nobles doing the same in Sweden worse than death itself), and weaken the Hansa (and later the Dutch and English) and perhaps have the Danes retain their Estonian possessions, so that Sweden and Denmark have a common enemy in Novgorod and later Russia, and you might have a chance at having the Kalmar Union survive.
Is there any chance of the Danish crown using the Swedes to break the power of the Danish nobility? Admittedly it's a big gamble, but if it worked it would surely show the Swedes that the Danish king was serious about respecting their rights, when he has reformed Denmark to be much more like Sweden. Paying off Swedish nobles with lands confiscated from resisting Danish nobles might be an idea. Besides being a good incentive for the Swedish nobles to help the king, it would also bind the two countries closer together, as the nobles would be opposed to splitting the union and thereby risk losing half their possessions.Yes. In 1377 the Danish crown tried to ban the nobility from refusing their tenants the right to move and taking the right to deciding who their peasants could marry, to little avail
....
This socioeconomic difference is the main problem with the Kalmar Union and you need to adress it to create any realistic scenario for a lasting union.
Considering the changes required to make the union last, it seems to me that no union would really be OTL's union. At best, maybe the principal actors are the same, but so much else would have to change around them that you wouldn't really recognize the union as the same anyway.That's going to be tough. Not impossible, but tough.
Especially as having the 1241-1332 period dramatically altered butterflies the OTL Kalmar Union completely - not to say that the Scandinavian Kingdoms can't unite, as they intermarried a fair amount, but it wouldn't be OTL's union.
You have to weigh that with the political cost of going against the Church though. Perhaps it's better to tread lightly around it while the union is consolidating? Eventually, a Protestant Reformation* would make seizing Church lands easier, and could be the catalyst for uniting the crowns properly as royal power surges.Breaking the land hold the Church has seems like it would also be useful. Not as directly relevant, but having about a third of the kingdom held by Church means a sizable amount of land is not available to the crown directly (to make crown lands or gifts) or indirectly (since when did the Church carry its share of the financial and manpower burdens?).
Considering the changes required to make the union last, it seems to me that no union would really be OTL's union. At best, maybe the principal actors are the same, but so much else would have to change around them that you wouldn't really recognize the union as the same anyway.
You have to weigh that with the political cost of going against the Church though. Perhaps it's better to tread lightly around it while the union is consolidating? Eventually, a Protestant Reformation* would make seizing Church lands easier, and could be the catalyst for uniting the crowns properly as royal power surges.
The earlier the better I suppose, just to solidify the idea of a united Scandinavia while potential rivals are still weak. Take too long, and you have bastards all over the place wanting to make sure the union falls apart. The Hansa should be easier to deal with than the Netherlands and England.True enough, but with butterflies viciously attacking from 1241 onward, you might see the hypothetical Three Crowns Union much earlier - or much later.
Yeah, stopping the Church from ever getting the land in the first place would be good. Once it does have it, it becomes much more difficult to take it back again. At least until Church authority corrodes enough.That would probably be best. I'm just thinking that if there's a way to avoid the Church getting that much land in the first place, it would be in the crown's best interest.
True. Kings that realize that the choice is between a small amount of Swedish gold, or none, would be really useful. Just getting rid of a major rival alone should be enough really, but the historic Danish kings were never very good at that kind of math.It's hard to have the Danish kings making policies that don't increase tensions with their new subjects when the Danish kings are craving revenue that Denmark isn't providing, after all.
In 1658, or maybe 1645, if the Swedes decide not to take any territories from Denmark, and instead force the Danes into a Scandinavian Union, where both states will have complete internal independence and their own monarchs, but the military and foreign politics are governed by a new combined Danish-Swedish Senate.What is the best pod to create a unified scandinavia that can last longer than the Kalmar Union did historically?