1. Sweden is not going to be totally destroyed (that would make no sense), but the terms will be nastier than IOTL mainly in terms of territory lost. Not to mention, Stockholm got wrecked when the Russians sacked it, which will really hurt the Swedish.
2. Hmm, I didn’t know August and Peter signed an agreement. I now have a new idea for what the post war map will look like.
3. Russia won’t take all of Finland, but they will take more than IOTL. It’ll help them secure the Gulf of Finland.
4. If Britain was pro-Sweden, why did Hanover IOTL declare war on Sweden?
#1. Yes, but Russia has almost a decade less for destroying the Swedish economy by raiding the coastal area.
#2. Of course they signed an agreement when they made an alliance: there was a need to define who is going to get what. But in 1700 Saxony/PLC was a leading partner and by the end - junior. Still, Peter and his diplomacy were too inexperienced for a simple “screw you” approach. 🤪
#4. Britain was not openly “pro Sweden” except for the last period of war but the economic interests could not be completely ignored. Just as when the British position switched to pro-Sweden, the Russian component of the trade could not be ignored either and the British naval commander in the area remained quite passive. In both cases this was seemingly a “cabinet war” rather then one involving real national interests.
 
#1. Yes, but Russia has almost a decade less for destroying the Swedish economy by raiding the coastal area.
#2. Of course they signed an agreement when they made an alliance: there was a need to define who is going to get what. But in 1700 Saxony/PLC was a leading partner and by the end - junior. Still, Peter and his diplomacy were too inexperienced for a simple “screw you” approach. 🤪
#4. Britain was not openly “pro Sweden” except for the last period of war but the economic interests could not be completely ignored. Just as when the British position switched to pro-Sweden, the Russian component of the trade could not be ignored either and the British naval commander in the area remained quite passive. In both cases this was seemingly a “cabinet war” rather then one involving real national interests.
1. Good point, though remember that the capital of a country being destroyed is never good for the society or economy. Still, you do have a point on that one.
2. Interesting.
4. Britain is going to be passive ITTL but will still make sure the Russians don’t just take everything they occupy.
 
Last edited:
Very interesting, I don't know enough about the period to comment, but I'm here to give my opinion on the form of the story.
Maybe adding illustrations (tables and maps) could help understanding even if for the moment the story is understandable for those who know the main lines of the period.
Your writing is good even if it is slightly partisan (is it voluntary? will it have an impact for later?). Can't wait for the rest!
Subscriber.
 
Very interesting, I don't know enough about the period to comment, but I'm here to give my opinion on the form of the story.
Maybe adding illustrations (tables and maps) could help understanding even if for the moment the story is understandable for those who know the main lines of the period.
Your writing is good even if it is slightly partisan (is it voluntary? will it have an impact for later?). Can't wait for the rest!
Subscriber.
Thanks for the response and thanks for subscribing
I don’t know how to make maps, unfortunately, though I do have an acquaintance who I will soon ask for a map for an upcoming chapter.
Though what exactly do you mean by partisan? Just curious.
 
Thanks for the response and thanks for subscribing
I don’t know how to make maps, unfortunately, though I do have an acquaintance who I will soon ask for a map for an upcoming chapter.
Though what exactly do you mean by partisan? Just curious.
If you need help to do cartography I can help you even if I am not a great master in the field.
What I meant by "partisan" is that the story seems to highlight the martyrdom of Sweden in the face of a very belligerent Russia (at least that's the impression I had while reading). So I was wondering if this form of narration had a purpose that will reveal itself later or just because the narrator you play is pro-Swedish?
Either way, it doesn't bother the narrative in any way.
 
I am a fan of heading the updates with a picture of the vital actor, place or the like if there is one in the update. Eg Charles, Peter, but eg the Russian/Swedish Army/Flag/Ship of the era, just some flavoring. But I haven’t truly missed it either
 
@dunHozzie & @Comte de Dordogne
I will try to include more pictures in future chapters, it'll depend on the country or event depicted by the chapter.

And @Comte de Dordogne , do not worry I am not Sweden-biased, its just that history shows that Russia is not exactly merciful to those who wrong it, and this timeline is no different. In fact, Russia is the one that's going to be much stronger than IOTL by the early 20th century. Sweden's future is going to be... interesting. It's hard to argue if what I have planned for Sweden ITTL would be better or worse (though this will take at least a century before it truly happens), but I will let you decide that when it comes.
 
If you need help to do cartography I can help you even if I am not a great master in the field.
What I meant by "partisan" is that the story seems to highlight the martyrdom of Sweden in the face of a very belligerent Russia (at least that's the impression I had while reading). So I was wondering if this form of narration had a purpose that will reveal itself later or just because the narrator you play is pro-Swedish?
Either way, it doesn't bother the narrative in any way.
Well, actually, his depiction of what was going on on both sides is rather mild. Swedes had been routinely killing the Russian POWs while Russian strategy for forcing Sweden out of war was a deliberate destruction of the territory. This was going on starting from 1701, Sheremetev’s first campaign in Swedish Livonia. “I destroyed everything except for few fortresses and took so many prisoners that my camp is overloaded. Please order to send them to Russia...”. (*) In Sweden the raids had been destroying, among other things, the ironworks, which was a serious hit for the Swedish economy (at that time Sweden was the biggest supplier of iron to Britain).
1588691803434.png

____
(*) But the cities had been generally getting a much better treatment, especially Riga and Revel (both capitulated on conditions). Narva suffered seriously because it was taken by storm after a stubborn resistance (nothing unusual by the standards of time). Still, it does not look like the local nobility hold a grudge: after becoming the Russian subjects with all their privileges being confirmed, they went to the new service en mass including former Swedish officers (the best known was Schlippenbach, an officer who was after the 1st Narva left in charge of defending Livonia and had been captured at Poltava).
 
I am a fan of heading the updates with a picture of the vital actor, place or the like if there is one in the update. Eg Charles, Peter, but eg the Russian/Swedish Army/Flag/Ship of the era, just some flavoring. But I haven’t truly missed it either
Hopefully, this would help:

Russian battleship “Poltava”
1588693216960.png

Frigate “Standard”
1588693289167.png


Russian galleys
1588693354576.png

GNW operations of 1709-21 (very close, even if not identical, to this TL)

1588693649762.png
 
@dunHozzie & @Comte de Dordogne
I will try to include more pictures in future chapters, it'll depend on the country or event depicted by the chapter.

And @Comte de Dordogne , do not worry I am not Sweden-biased, its just that history shows that Russia is not exactly merciful to those who wrong it, and this timeline is no different. In fact, Russia is the one that's going to be much stronger than IOTL by the early 20th century. Sweden's future is going to be... interesting. It's hard to argue if what I have planned for Sweden ITTL would be better or worse (though this will take at least a century before it truly happens), but I will let you decide that when it comes.
It's not a reproach at all, it's more of an observation. In addition, it can also be interesting to make chapters taking the cause of a belligerent, it can open up many possibilities.
And I suspect that the Russians do not have a monopoly on civilian massacres. 🤪
 
Hopefully, this would help:

Russian battleship “Poltava”
View attachment 545166
Frigate “Standard”
View attachment 545168

Russian galleys
View attachment 545169
GNW operations of 1709-21 (very close, even if not identical, to this TL)

View attachment 545170
I love the pictures, and the map is accurate except there was no attack on Norway, no Ottoman intervention due to no Pruth War, and Prussia didn’t join the GNW which is why Denmark is (Spoiler) gonna get some sweet Pomeranian land.
 
Hey guys, I do plan on making another chapter soon! Sorry for a month of nothing but I have a lot going on right now!
Little spoiler, there will be a war of succession that is not IOTL at all...
 
Treaty of Copenhagen New
1593290057098.png


On December 4, 1714, the diplomats of the nations of Denmark-Norway, Poland-Lithuania, Saxony, Russia, and Sweden all met at the capital of Denmark-Norway (Schleswig-Holstein was not invited to the negotiations), to discuss the terms that would decide the fate of Northern and Eastern Europe. Needless to say, Swedish diplomats were not feeling optimistic about what the demands of their enemies would be, and these fears were for good reason.

First was Denmark-Norway, who intended for Sweden to suffer for centuries of conflict. The first term (which surprised nobody) was the return of Scania to Danish rule, although they also demanded the return of the Bohuslän region as to cut of Sweden from the Skagerrak sea. However, Denmark then made a rather bold demand of the return of the Jämtland region which had been taken from Norway roughly 7 decades prior. It then demanded the annexation of Schleswig-Holstein, along with Swedish Pomerania and Bremen-Verden (and all other German territories that Sweden owned). Sweden also forfeited her right to duty-free passage of Øresund. In return for all this, Denmark-Norway would pay 1.2 million Riksdaler to Sweden.

Next was Russia, who shared Denmark's goal of weakening Sweden as much as possible. The Russian Empire seized Estonia, Livonia, Ingria, Southeast Finland (Kexholmslän and all of the Karelian Isthmus), and the southern part of "Western Finland" along with the majority of the Lakeland region in exchange for 6 million silver thaler [1]. While Sweden still owned the vast majority of Finland, the annexation of southern Finland gave Russia complete control over the Gulf of Finland, and let them establish themselves as a rising power in the Baltic Sea.

Poland-Lithuania did not demand much compared to the previous 2, just asking for Swedish Courland as a vassal state.

And with the signing of the treaty just as 1714 reached a close, the Great Northern War was truly over.

Meanwhile, the rest of Europe had just finished the War of Spanish Succession, with France managing to successfully insert a Bourbon ruler in Spain and annexing the southern half of the Spanish Netherlands (helped in large part by the Danish withdrawing their tens of thousands of volunteers due to their own war against Sweden). [3]

The northern half was given from Spain to Austria, and was only saved from annexation by the fact that the Bishopric of Liege split it from its southern counterpart.

Needless to say, with the end of 2 large-scale conflicts just as 1714 ended, the fate of millions of Europeans was changed forever...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dun dun dun! That's right, I'm back! I apologize for the long hiatus but countless AP exams along with me preparing for my upcoming freshman college year (not to mention my new summer job) have all kept me busy as heck. I will now try to devote as much time as I can to this TL for the next 2 months.

[1]: As you can no doubt tell, Russia has annexed quite a bit more from Sweden than IOTL, mainly due to Sweden having less of an army (and thus less will to fight along with less diplomatic power), this will have some ramifications on the Finnish people in the future while also giving Russia more naval control. The amount they paid Sweden hasn't changed from OTL. Denmark also took a huge chunk of land, but instead of Sweden paying for their return, Denmark is the one who pays ITTL, paying double what Sweden paid them IOTL.

[2] This is the minor ramification I told you guys about that resulted from Denmark withdrawing its tens of thousands of volunteer forces from the WoSS, as the loss of troops on the side of the Anti-French alliance let France take the aforementioned southern half of the now-Austrian Netherlands. Btw, the rest of the WoSS ends the same, with Habsberg Italy being given to Austria to control.

Also little btw, France will be far stronger and more populated by 1900 ITTL than IOTL, for all you people who like France.
 
Last edited:
Very interesting. The Swedish have a big loss and plenty of cash. Now they have to make a decision: mercenaries or merchants (investments).

Poland - Lithuania is now the next target for the Russians, the Danish might have to deal with some unrest. The balance of power in Europe is very different now...
 
Very interesting. The Swedish have a big loss and plenty of cash. Now they have to make a decision: mercenaries or merchants (investments).

Poland - Lithuania is now the next target for the Russians, the Danish might have to deal with some unrest. The balance of power in Europe is very different now...
The amount of cash is indeed more than what they got IOTL... but the loss of German territories like Bremen means more money in the short run but less in the long run. Besides, a lot of that money is going to be used fixing the sacked capital.

As for the decision... the smart heads in Sweden will likely choose merchants, but the irrational (and popular) voices will likely choose to beef up the army for round 2.

Russia will target P-L for sure...after they improve their economic situation (which will take some time). Besides, there will be a war within a few decades that will either accelerate or delay a Russo-Polish war.
 
Top