Does it matter if one nation controlled the Baltic

So an idea I have for a project I'll probably never do, would be for a United Kingdom of Scandinavia. This nation would control the Scandinavian peninsula, the Baltic duchies, Finland, Karelia and Denmark, In effect making the Baltic a Scandinavian lake. For a caveats sake, and my lack of knowledge, lets say that it takes shape from about the end of the napoleonic war onwards. So what would be the effect of a nation, basically surrounding the Baltic? Could they in theory blockade Eastern Europe, or would sea trade die off completely once the Scandinavians start building railways?

Please discuss
Luath.
 
Last edited:
Lots of wars with Germany and Russia would be the result I imagine. I think after the Napoleonic wars is a bit late for it to happen, as by then the Russians have already taken Finland and are in a pretty strong position. Same with Prussia, which by now is probably too tough for the Scandinavians to completely destroy (which would be necessary for them to take the entire Baltic coast). You'd need an earlier POD I think.
 
Lots of wars with Germany and Russia would be the result I imagine. I think after the Napoleonic wars is a bit late for it to happen, as by then the Russians have already taken Finland and are in a pretty strong position. Same with Prussia, which by now is probably too tough for the Scandinavians to completely destroy (which would be necessary for them to take the entire Baltic coast). You'd need an earlier POD I think.

Okay, if the go with the earlier pod, then how long would it be said to be resonable to form the Kingdom? Also, I was thinking of Balkanising Tsarist Russia in the 1850s, what would this require?

Edit: D'oh!, when I said Baltic coast, I meant the Russian Baltic, Poland and Prussia wouldn't be affected territorially.
 
Russia is very unlikely to balkanise in the 1850s, it's already built up a shared identity by then. I agree with Gurroruo, Novogrod has a good shot at achieving it if it survives. You're looking more at the High and Late Middle Ages as the period when this Baltic Empire starts to get a hold of all these territories. If it's strong enough (which it has to be to achieve all this), Russia may never unite, or at least not for centuries longer than it took in OTL. Especially if Novogrod is the state that does it.
 
The Kalmar Union led by Denmark did control the Baltic. Problem was the Swedes weren't really into being second or rather third.
You need something to either ease Dano-Swedish conflict over who's top dog or make one or the other the premier.
And you have to do it before the Peace of Westphalia. Post that Netherlands and England have too big interest's in the Baltic area to accept a single nation ruling it.
Piece a cake - right! :D
 
Russia is very unlikely to balkanise in the 1850s, it's already built up a shared identity by then. I agree with Gurroruo, Novogrod has a good shot at achieving it if it survives. You're looking more at the High and Late Middle Ages as the period when this Baltic Empire starts to get a hold of all these territories. If it's strong enough (which it has to be to achieve all this), Russia may never unite, or at least not for centuries longer than it took in OTL. Especially if Novogrod is the state that does it.

Right, any good sources on Novogrod?
 
the Baltic Sea was a more or less De Facto Danish lake before from ~1180 (give or take) and until ~1350s where Denmark all but bankrupted, and after an extended shuffling around between Denmark (including under the mein of Kalmar Union), Hansa and later on Sweden, where no one really got a solid grip (although Hansa was probably closest, but lacked the unified leadership and raw manpower to go the whole distance), it was a De Facto Swedish lake from around the ascension of Gustavus Adolfus in 1611 till Sweden lost the Great Northern War in 1721.
 
Right, any good sources on Novogrod?

You may have to go even further, if you don't want a Russian state in the Baltic, Novgorod isn't really the best state for uniting Russia, It couldn't play the the Golden Horde's system over the Rus principalities, like Muscovy was able to.

Livonia seems to be the biggest hurdle, if a Scandinavian state can control all of Livonia before the Northern Crusades, or there are no Northern Crusades. I don't see any future problems. Otherwise A lot of powers would come to have a very serious interest in the area depending on the time period.
 
Right, well this butterflies pretty much everything else I had in mind, I've really bitten off more that is even recommended to consume. But keep the ideas coming, at what point would a united Scandinavia be impossible without unsustainable conflict?
 
You might not even need to Balkanize Russia - have Russian campaigns to take the Crimea succeed earlier than OTL under Catherine and they'll have the warm water ports they in OTL conquered the Baltic to obtain. St.Petersburg may be on the Don River rather than the Neva.
 
Unite/wank Scandinavia-Denmark in sometime around the start of the Kalmar Union and make them into a Northern empire/superpower that wants to turn the Baltic into its own lake a la the Roman Mediterranean. Taken together, they'd have less of a manpower problem that the Swedish did by themselves though they'd always be outnumbered in Germany and Russia.

Effects may include consolidation of neighbouring territories (Germany or just Prussia-Brandenburg, Russia, Poland, the Low Countries, Britain) into stronger states due to the threat/pressure of the Scandinavians. Alternatively one or some of these might be crushed. Austria, France, Hungary, Ukraine, maybe even the Ottoman Empire can stand to gain from the pressure on their northern rivals.

In particular if the Scandinavians stomp on the Novgorod Republic, Moscow might have an easier time, but then they're next.
 
Last edited:
You could start basically here:
391px-Swedish_Empire_%281560-1815%29_en2.png


And then add Brandenburg-Prussia by (for example have Gustav II Adolf live a bit longer and marry his daughter Christina to the Brandenburg heir Friedrich Wilhelm). In 1650, the Swedish Crown is estimated to have had 2 million to 2.5 million subjects, with B-P just having 0.6 million people. So It would certainly be a Swedish dog and a Brandenburger tail, not the other way round. This adds Prussia and Hither Pomerania. and removes the permanent casus belli of "who owns Stettin and Rügen?" In an alt-Westphalian Peace, you might remove the acquisition of Bremen-Verden as more trouble than it is worth. You might even spin off Ceve-Mark to a Hohenzollern cadet branch.

The same time you can hurt Russia - not by balkanizing it but by giving Tsar Alexis a string of successors (Peter the Great is never born) who are just strong enough to cling to the throne, but do nothing to reduce the power of the noble families. Then the House of Romanov dies out and in the early 18th century the Boyar Duma decides to make the crown elective and copy the Liberum Veto that works so well in the PLC. :eek:
 

Interesting, a Scandinavian Prussia, I'm unfamiliar with the Stettin and Rugen question. How long could Tsarist Russia last without the Romanovs? Also, could a Scandinavian Kingdom, of the like I've described, turn democratic successfully?
 
Last edited:
Alternate Second Northern War ending in Sweden wank:

Denmark is annexed into the Swedish empire, which is perilously close to OTL

The Polish-Lithuanian affair is more sanely handled, ie the Swedes actually stick to the war plan instead of going on a wild goose chase.

Finally, a personal union with Brandenburg.

Why does it matter? A giant cash cow in the form of tolls on the massive Baltic trade is now in the kingdom's hands. The Dutch and English might not be amused.
 
Alternate Second Northern War ending in Sweden wank:

Denmark is annexed into the Swedish empire, which is perilously close to OTL

The Polish-Lithuanian affair is more sanely handled, ie the Swedes actually stick to the war plan instead of going on a wild goose chase.

Finally, a personal union with Brandenburg.

Why does it matter? A giant cash cow in the form of tolls on the massive Baltic trade is now in the kingdom's hands. The Dutch and English might not be amused.

The other major alternative but surely the Dutch and English wouldn't be amused! ;)
 
Dominium maris baltici was probably the biggest cause of the Great Northern War and the fall of the Swedish Empire. Sweden had an effective control over the Baltic for sometime and I don't think any of the European powers in the region would've put up with a Sweden which had monopoly over the entire Baltic.
 
Sweden has to small of a population to hold onto domination of the Baltic, nor are they wealthy enough to counter the interests of the Dutch/English. I think you count devise a small period of time where they control most of the Batlic, but I don't see how it could last.
 
Top