Conquest of Denmark by the HRE (in the Middle Ages)

So, I was thinking here... how plausible is the conquest of Denmark (Jutland and the islands, perhaps Scania as well) by Kingdom of Germany/HRE before the formation of the Kalmar Union?

I don't know if it's a forced comparison, but Charlemagne, with the resources at his disposal, managed to subjugate the Saxons and convert them to Christianity, after a long war. I guess that Saxony had a more numerous population and a more difficult terrain for waging warfare (I mean dense forests and marshes) than Denmark, at least on the Jutland peninsula.

IOTL Schleswig-Hostein was considered Imperial territory, wasn't it?

Let's suppose the Holy Roman Emperor doesn't have his focus on Italy or on the Magyar raids (most likely Henry the Fowler or Otto I), and decides to force the Danes into Christianity by the sword, on the wake of the Viking invasions (late 10th Century). From what I've read about Denmark's geography, the Jutland peninsula is a mildly forested and swampy lowland, but it's territory is farly small. After securing the mainlaind, annexing Sjaeland will be easier. Kingdom of Denmark might even survive as a rump State in Skane, before the Swedes or even Norwegians inevitably conquer it.

Another scenario: after the Christianization of the Scandinavian peoples, when maritime trade flourishes anew, wouldn't it be interesting to the HRE to incorporate the "middle-man" that was Denmark, between the North and the Baltic seas... perhaps we get an earlier "sound toll" to fulfill the Imperial coffers ;)
 
Denmark

Charlemagne was on his way to conquer it, but the Danish King died on his way there, so Charles thought that the ensuing civil war would solve to problem without his intervention. Either have the king live or have Charlemagne keep going anyway.
 
Interestingly, Googling what you mentioned, one of the first results was a thread on this forum... from 10 years ago :D

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=25309

I'm thinking how the annexation of Denmark would impact on Norway and Sweden. Would they united quicker? Perhaps the Christianization process would be faster due to the closer Frankish/German presence. I imagine Norway becomes the paramount Scandinavian country until the effective rise of Sweden.
 
Denmark were a vassal under HRE under Ottonian rule (from 950 where Otto the Great forced Gorm the Old (first historical king of Denmark) to accept the Emperors overlordship, and it was first in 983 following the early death of Otto II and the concurrent Great Slav Uprising, that Denmark (now under Harold Bluetooth) pulled themselves loose

PoD away the early death of Otto II, and Denmark might well become more and more of a HRE province, prehaps not unalike Bohemia as it has claims on a King's Crown.
 
Denmark were a vassal under HRE under Ottonian rule (from 950 where Otto the Great forced Gorm the Old (first historical king of Denmark) to accept the Emperors overlordship, and it was first in 983 following the early death of Otto II and the concurrent Great Slav Uprising, that Denmark (now under Harold Bluetooth) pulled themselves loose

PoD away the early death of Otto II, and Denmark might well become more and more of a HRE province, prehaps not unalike Bohemia as it has claims on a King's Crown.

Thanks for the information :)! I wasn't aware about Gorm's vassalization. I read about the Great Slav Uprising a couple weeks ago, but didn't realize it caused Denmark to become independent. I'll be checking this out.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Very interesting and original what-if!

A Charlemagne conquest of Denmark would have the most interesting effects as it is prior to most of the Viking age and has major knock-ons for English history (England safer from Danish Viking invasion, no "Danelaw".)

Of course Charlemagne's empire wasn't permanent, so Denmark will probably break free and be reconquered by the HRE several times.
 
Of course Charlemagne's empire wasn't permanent, so Denmark will probably break free and be reconquered by the HRE several times.

The point is then to consider if Denmark, staying enough into the HRE in the Middle Ages enough to become a "core region", then could be regarded more as part of Germany (on a geographical bases, it could have been enough easily, but ethnically? Maybe considering gradual waves of German settlers in successive ages?) rather than of Scandinavia?

However I agree an early Danish incorporation into the HRE could have preserved England from a lot of raids from Scandinavia and agevolate the conversion of Norse and Swedes. I don't know however if it could have been enough to prevent the Norman expansion later.
 
Very interesting and original what-if!

A Charlemagne conquest of Denmark would have the most interesting effects as it is prior to most of the Viking age and has major knock-ons for English history (England safer from Danish Viking invasion, no "Danelaw".)
Of course Charlemagne's empire wasn't permanent, so Denmark will probably break free and be reconquered by the HRE several times.

That's the idea... even if Denmark itself breaks away from the Frankish realm, some later ruler (probably a German Emperor) will be keen on reclaiming its territories, which, to my knowledge, didn't happen IOTL.

I actually had not considered the conquest by Charlemagne himself. This surely would have some interesting butterflies, wiping away the Danish conquests. However, I doubt this impacts on Swedish Russians and Norwegian Irish :p

About England itself, ironically it might slow down the unification, because, AFAIK, Alfred's conquests were spurred by the turmoil of the Viking invasions.

The point is then to consider if Denmark, staying enough into the HRE in the Middle Ages enough to become a "core region", then could be regarded more as part of Germany (on a geographical bases, it could have been enough easily, but ethnically? Maybe considering gradual waves of German settlers in successive ages?) rather than of Scandinavia?

However I agree an early Danish incorporation into the HRE could have preserved England from a lot of raids from Scandinavia and agevolate the conversion of Norse and Swedes. I don't know however if it could have been enough to prevent the Norman expansion later.

Butterflies might sweep Norman entirely conquest away, if we consider that it pressuposes an exile English King who had his throne taken by a Danish King (i.e. Canute the Great).

Anyways, I'm currently sketching a timeline in which the Kingdom of Germany and Kingom of Lombardy (while the HRE never comes to pass, as Otto I never invades Italy) stay united as medieval polities and rise to become National-States during the 15th century. One of the butterflies I was working with in this scenario is an early conquest of Denmark by the Ottonians, and an even earlier Christianization of the Scandinavian peoples.
 
Is it actually even known for sure where on the North Atlantic coast that the Normans origined? Dudo of Saint-Quintin suggests that he was son of a Danish nobleman that got in a feud with the king of that time (if prehaps only king over parts of Denmark), while Norwegian and Icelandic historicans believe that they identified Rollo with Ganger Hrolf - Hrolf the Wanderer. A second son of Rognvald Eysteinsson, Earl of Møre (and key figure in establishing the Earldom of Orkney), their sources dating back to 12th century

If the first one is correct (son of Danish nobleman), then the Normans (as we know them) just might be butterflied... even if it was actually a norwegian second son, it just might also be butterflied as the lesser pressure due to lack of Danish raiders sailing around just might mean that the Franks can hold the fort without paying a group to protect the Seine esturary
 
How would Denmark solve it over population that led to some of the vikings raids/settlements in England, it can hardly accept any German settlers.

could the Frankish empire/HRE used the Danes to stop the Norwegian from raiding there coast.

A rather interesting idea
 
Top