From the North Sea to the Arctic

Thinking about the Kiel Canal made me wonder what would have changed in history if :-
  • The Jutland peninsula became an Insula (island) with a channel at least as wide as the Store Baelt between Jutland and the German Coast;
  • A channel as wide as the Gulf of Bothnia links the Baltic to the White Sea (Beloye More) from between Estonia and Finland.
Obviously, that makes Scandinavia an island and the Baltic far more saline, but probably with a pack-ice 'bridge'. And it's not ASB, because there are several huge lakes (e.g. Ladoga/Ladozhskoye) on that Baltic/White Sea line. Jutland could conceivably have been breached by an outpouring of Ice Age glacial melt. So, an island Denmark.

Anybody care to make this into a TL? I don't have time...
 
Well, it would look something like this (note the break-up of south Jutland).

We can presume that lower sea levels mean that people get to Denmark and Southern Sweden at about the same time as OTL anyway. The new straits increase mobility, while at the same time will serve as natural boundaries for some time. Certainly *Finland appears to have a secure natural border that will be a significant barrier to *Russian expansion.

flood.png
 
Thanks, Alex...

...Remember that the channel between Finland and Russia is the width of the Gulf of Bothnia between Finland and Sweden...

Otherwise, just great. Means my ancestors from Angeln and Friesland all lived on islands - explains my nutty interest in insularity.:)

German and Russian influence on Finland, Denmark and Sweden might be a lot less, Swedish influenmce considerably greater.

And we see a saline Baltic.

With a natural 'Kiel Canal', maybe poor Denmark can be a bit more independent...

...Will Christianity still dominate Scandinavia? What will happen with the Hanseatic League? What about Gustavus Adolphus? Would Finland be independent earlier? What will happen in the World Wars?

Any answers, folks?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Valdemar II

Banned
First of tthis will change history quite early, even if we look away from butterflies. the Teutons, Cimbries and the Ambrones most likely originated in Jutland, Jutland as a island will develop a lot ddifferent, while the Germanic people are likely to develop anyway, we doesn't get the infusion of Celtic culture and technology as we did in OTL. Which mean that these people are going to quite different, we are more likely to see them follow the Gothic expansion by travel to Vistula and down it. So imagine a Roman Republic without Gaius Marius succeses against these people. While the Republic lived on borrowed time, we would likely not see Augustus make his way to power, if he's even born, we may not even see the Gallic Wars. The Roman Empire are going to be quite different.
 
Jutland being an island should not be that bad...

...Even in the Bronze Age, they probably had boats able to cross to the mainland and back. Otherwise, how could you get from Jutland to the other islands? In fact, limited island resources could force early migrations due to overpopulation - and so on. No Dannevirke, though...
 
Jutland as an island is certainly possible - Britain used to be a peninsula until the 'north sea lake' ripped out the connexion at Dover.

However, getting the seaway south of Finland seems... massively improbable to me. If you're just going to wave a magic wand, then this goes in ASB; if not, then you've got to come up with some rationale.
 
Jutland as an island is certainly possible

If you change geology so that the south of Denmark will sink faster than OTL and hence the northern part raise higher - isostasis.

The map below show the 0-line through Denmark. Land north of it has risen since the last ice-age, land south of it sunk.

image006.jpg


Another possibility could be the Baltic Ice Lake making its drain across the southern part of the Jutland peninsular instead of or in addition to the Sound and Baelts.
 
Jutland as an island is certainly possible - Britain used to be a peninsula until the 'north sea lake' ripped out the connexion at Dover.

However, getting the seaway south of Finland seems... massively improbable to me. If you're just going to wave a magic wand, then this goes in ASB; if not, then you've got to come up with some rationale.

Perhaps the glaciers scoop out some deeper depressions in that area that eventually get flooded by the sea when a thinner bit of land than normal breaks?
 
Nice point, Alex...

...I was thinking of Ice Age meltwater breaking the channel from the Sub-Arctic to the Baltic, with this and a bit of isostasy giving us the Jutland Baelt.

ASB not needed on voyage.:p
 

Valdemar II

Banned
If you change geology so that the south of Denmark will sink faster than OTL and hence the northern part raise higher - isostasis.

The map below show the 0-line through Denmark. Land north of it has risen since the last ice-age, land south of it sunk.

image006.jpg


Another possibility could be the Baltic Ice Lake making its drain across the southern part of the Jutland peninsular instead of or in addition to the Sound and Baelts.

Both are good ones

But I must admit I like the first one best, especially because we can let that happen rather late changing as little of European history as possible. If the sinking of Holstein happens in the 6th-7th century, we would have more or less OTL recognisable playes on the scene and it would happen at a time when we have a good idea of local history. So let's say that we have a little geographic difference. The Saxons has mostly moved from Holstein into Lower Saxony at this point, so it leave enclaves of Saxons on the islands. But most live south of the Elb.

This likely mean that Holsteins Saxons go the same way as OTL continental Angles and Jutes, ending up part of the Danish tribal confederation*, through. the Dithmarschen island will likely go Frisian. So when the Franks come in on the scene Denmark are a island kingdom. This may make Denmark stronger, there are little doubt that Danish mobility in war was based on a strong navy, but it also weaken the Danes, by giving Frisians, Saxons and Franks easier access to naval attack on Denmark, by not having to take the long route around Jutland.

We are going to look on a quite different 8th to 10th century

*The meaning of Dane (flatlanders/lowlanders) and our adoption of Jutish (Amlet) and Anglish (Uffe hin Spage) myths indicate that Danes are a tribal confederation as the Franks and Saxons was.
 
The first could be interpreted in that manner. Which would make for recognizable Danes etc. Probably the southern Isles would be a shifting area of Frisian/Saxon/Danish influence/power with the Danes (probably) coming out on top.
And still make for seafaring Danes but perhaps for Saxon Vikings. :D:eek:

A river/channel barrier would be much better than Dannevirke in the long run and would certainly change the face of Danish history; might do away with a lot of the Danish entanglement in North German affairs. The Danes would simply retreat across the channel when things start to get hairy and cross it in better times. The Germans would be in a much worse position to go north.

Thus the Christening of Denmark could be off-set by a few centuries keeping the Arch-Bishop of Hamburg Bremen off Scandinavia/Nordic affairs being taken over by York or Novgorod! :)
Oh and our capital might end up on the bank of the channel! Constantinoble of the North! :D:D:D

The second POD makes for a much changed Scandinavia/North. Of course migration of proto-Germans would still take place into Scandinavia once the channel is crossed but from then on things might take on quite another spur. :confused:
 
OK, so by 8th Century Jutland and Finland are very definitely islands...

... So do we see the Swedish Vikings still invading parts of Russia, settling at Novgorod, Old Ladoga, Moscow and points south towards the Black Sea?

Do the Sami (Lapps) manage to achieve a state of their own?

As Islanders, do the Scandinavians manage to control the British Isles?

Could we see Celtic Christianity (not Roman Christianity) as the dominant missionary sect in Scandinavia? In OTL, missionaries from Britain did a lot of work on the Continent (see St. Gall).

Denmark's ancient capital was Roskilde on Sjaelland. Maybe we'd see Odense or Middelfart (both on Fyn) as being more important, or Arhus (in Jylland) as the better site for a capital. To have the Danish capital facing Germany across the Jyllands Baelt - NO, NO, NO!:eek:
 
... So do we see the Swedish Vikings still invading parts of Russia, settling at Novgorod, Old Ladoga, Moscow and points south towards the Black Sea?

Quite possible.

Do the Sami (Lapps) manage to achieve a state of their own?

Probably not - they'll still be too few in numbers and the Scandinavian princes will want to control the trade in the area.

As Islanders, do the Scandinavians manage to control the British Isles?

Quite possible.

Could we see Celtic Christianity (not Roman Christianity) as the dominant missionary sect in Scandinavia? In OTL, missionaries from Britain did a lot of work on the Continent (see St. Gall).

And were so in Denmark at least urged on by Swein Forkbeard as a counter to the Arch-Bishop of Hamburg Bremen.
Willibrord did go to Denmark OTL.

Denmark's ancient capital was Roskilde on Sjaelland. Maybe we'd see Odense or Middelfart (both on Fyn) as being more important, or Arhus (in Jylland) as the better site for a capital. To have the Danish capital facing Germany across the Jyllands Baelt - NO, NO, NO!:eek:

The natural site of the Danish capital is at the Sound due to being in the middle of the Kingdom Scania being the easternmost part.
But ITTL with a channel south of the Kingdom tying up trade from the Baltic with the North Sea and being the natural gate-way to Scandinavia it might just be right in place there! ;)
 
Heck, in terms of Denmark we could even see two states emerging, one based in Scania and Sjaelland, the other in South Jutland and Fyn, with North Jutland swapping hands between the two.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Heck, in terms of Denmark we could even see two states emerging, one based in Scania and Sjaelland, the other in South Jutland and Fyn, with North Jutland swapping hands between the two.

Unlikely, with the migration of much of the Jutish and Anglish population to England, there was a void the Danes was able to fill. There also the element that Danish Scania and Zealand had a bigger population than Jutland which was split between Angles and Jutes (and Saxons in Holstein). That together with the fact that the population centres of Jutland lay on a thin coastal strip (while the Old Danish population lies spread over the entire Zealand and westen Scania), make Jutland a lot less defensible for a enemy with a stronger navy.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
To give a idea of population density here's a map for 1855. It should be said that the high population density of East Holstein are something which only developed after the 10th century.

13_2_1_fo_populationskort18.jpg
 
Impressive demographic map...

... But I had heard about the Danish Heath Society and admired their tenacious transformation of rough heathland to farmland between 1866 and the 1950s. It's hard to reconcile modern Jylland with the wastelands of the past. It also surely argues for Odense as the most suitable location for Denmark's modern capital if Jylland is an island.

Haithabu (Hedeby) would remain an important coastal town of Jylland or Angeln, rather than declining, assuming that the channel - the Jylland Baelt - is south of the Eider. The second city of Denmark? But vulnerable (as in OTL) to German and Viking attacks.

Thoughts, friends?
 
Top