Christian and Edward; or, the Union of Kalmar FTW

It's 1468, and King Christian I of Denmark has arranged for the marriage of his daughter Margaret to sixteen-year-old James III, king of Scotland. Christian wants the Scottish alliance in part as a check against England; the two nations are rivals in trade, and they're drifting towards a small but nasty war over fishing rights around Iceland.

So an alliance with Scotland makes sense... but Christian has to pay through the nose for it. The Norwegian-controlled Orkney and Shetland islands will be mortgaged to Scotland to help pay for Margaret's dowry, and the annual rent Scotland pays for the Hebrides Islands and the Isle of Man will be cancelled.

The alliance will turn out to be a fiasco for Denmark. Edward IV of England, that wily fellow, won't be intimidated at all. And Christian's endless wars will leave the country bankrupt, and the Scottish kingdom will eventually foreclose on all the former Danish possessions. The Orkneys, Shetlands and Hebrides -- Norse for more than five hundred years -- will ever after be Scottish islands.

(One could perhaps argue that one good thing comes of it: all future kings of Scotland -- and after 1603, England too -- will be descendants of James and Margaret. But this was little comfort to King Christian.)

So, the POD: Christian decides that the price of the Scottish alliance is too high, and shops his daughter around a bit more.

A year and a bit later, Edward IV of England is overthrown by the Warwick the Kingmaker and forced into exile in France. Christian guesses correctly that this will only be temporary, and seizes this opportunity. Sending messengers to France, he offers Edward an allliance. He'll give the Yorkist cause money, men, and diplomatic support, if Edward will withdraw English traders and fishermen from Iceland and guarantee Denmark's possessions in the British Isles.

Edward agrees. He returns to England a few months later, much as in OTL. His ultimate victory over Warwick and the Lancastrians is speeded a bit by Danish support -- some money, a few ships, a few soldiers. And Edward keeps his word: he ends the simmering Anglo-Danish conflict and prohibits English traders from going to Iceland.

The Anglo-Danish entente serves both monarchs well, at least in the short run. Edward gets a threat in the rear of the always annoying Scots, and Christian gets a powerful friend.

In 1471, as in OTL, Christian faces a Swedish revolt. Without having to pay Margaret's dowry, Christian has more money on hand. He can also call on Edward for troops (who will be forthcoming -- after the latest round of the Wars of the Roses England is full of dangerously underemployed soldiers) and diplomatic support.

OTL, Christian was defeated by the Swedes at the battle of Brunkeberg. There's a description online at:

http://members.tripod.com/Strv102r/battleof.htm

This defeat fatally crippled the Union of Kalmar, although later Danish kings would make determined efforts to keep it going.

Brunkeberg was very close-fought, though, and a handful of gold or a few more soldiers could have made all the difference. In this TL, with a bit more money and a few companies of English footmen added to his forces, Christian converts a narrow but decisive defeat into a narrow but decisive victory. Sten Sturre is crushed and the Swedes are brought to heel. Christian is able to pay his debts with booty and ransoms, and enforce a new and more cohesive union.

A generation later, it's Danes and Norwegians and Icelanders -- not English -- who are competing with the Basques for the rich fishing off the Grand Banks. John Cabot sets sail from Copenhagen, with a stopover in the Shetlands.

By the mid-1500s there are temporary settlements (for drying fish and such) in Newfoundland. The Danish crown starts handing out grants a bit later, and the first permanent colony is founded around 1600.

We've somewhat kneecapped the development of British North America, and probably eliminated British Canada completely. But surely nobody's going to mind that...

Oh, and the Shetlands, Orkneys, Hebrides, and the Isle of Man are still Scandinavian.

Thoughts?


Doug M.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Maybe... I can see how it's possible to keep Kalmar together through a English alliance, but I can't see Scandinavians as a major colonial player. One reason; population. The Scandinavian countries had and has far fewer people than the major colonizers.
 
Policy tended to change from King to King and circumstance to circumstance. I think given the ascendancy of the Tudors to the English throne, the English fishing ships will be back in the Atlantic and the British North American "destiny" is back on track.
 
Maybe... I can see how it's possible to keep Kalmar together through a English alliance, but I can't see Scandinavians as a major colonial player. One reason; population. The Scandinavian countries had and has far fewer people than the major colonizers.
Major player or not, they can still have an impact. Besides the fishing settlements, i think they'd start trapping inland. I'd see their colonies mostly going up the St. Lawrence, maybe some New England. Depending on diplomacy, they might even keep it.

Even if they can't keep it, they can hold it long enough to influence culture, hence politics, of the region. Just how and when and to whom they lose it can cause plenty of complications.

IMO as soon as the English hear of the new world, they'll come running. An important indicator of the success of the Scandinavian colonies would be whether relation with the English remain good.

Would there even be a Great Britain ITTL?
 
Doug M

Interesting idea but too many butterflies to say so far ahead. Might well make for a more powerful Denmark/Scandinavia but then if Denmark keeps Sweden and Finland it will be drawn into conflict with Poland and Russia. Not to mention a monopoloy of the Baltic trade will generate a lot of wealth but also a hell of a lot of resentment.

Given that you have Scotland looking over its shoulder at the Danes it might be less aggressive related to England or if there is a conflict you might see an earlier union based on conquest rather than inheritence. Although that could be a bloody and costly period. Alternatively Scotland finds allies elsewhere. [Could even in theory end up triggering a big war that draws in every major power in western and northern Europe!:eek:]

In the longer run I think England would still become a significant player in trans-Atlantic colonisation, simply because of its geographical location. Whether this might be delayed or advanced and in what areas would depend so much on developments.

Steve
 
Top