No GNW (or “Peter goes South”)

[von Adler]

One needs to remember that while Karl held the overall command and decided whether or not to push for battle or not, he actually let his more experienced officers plan the battles early war. Stuart planned the landing at Holbaek and Rehnskiöld planned Narva, Düna and Kliszow, with the young King in close attendance to further his (already very good) military education. Rehnskiöld acted as the King's de facto chief of staff until December 1702, when he was placed on an independent command in Poland-Lithuania, probably because both he and the King thought the King old and experienced enough to not need Rehnskiöld looking over his shoulder.

I must say, I like your writing style. It makes for a fun read.

 

[Valena]

Another Peter’s favorite, Feodor Golovin (“brilliant” diplomat: consequences of the Nerchinsk Treaty he signed with China had been remedied only in the second half of the XIX), fieldmarshal who did not lead the troops in any war, admiral-general who never commanded a fleet, head of Peter’s diplomatic service, the 1st Count in Russia (the title had been granted by the Hapsburg Emperor on Peter’s request) , the first recipient of the Order of St. Andrew… even OTL Peter was not naive enough to give him an active command.

I like your diss of Golovin, completely to the point.
The falling for China bluff at Nerchinsk is a reason why I had Ivan "Bolshoy" Sheremetev (father of the above-justly-praised-Boris from whom his son inherited many good qualities) be in command at Albazin/Nerchinsk in Feodor III survives TLs.

Though he had SOME administrative talent, so was not a complete idiot, but nevertheless, the emphasis is on "some".

 

[X Oristos]

While I agree with @Jürgen, that the great prize in Royal Prussia is Danzig, I doubt the rest of the province won't receive significant investment by the Crown. In OTL, after Frederick gained Royal Prussia, he moved 12,000 settlers in the area and embarked upon improving infrastructure (e.g. draining Netze's swamps). It seems that it was a productive agricultural region and that it would improve food security in the realm. Underdeveloped certainly, but how much good agricltural land did Sweden have?

When it comes to additional income, Royal Prussia paid in taxes 1,700,000 thalers the first year after its annexation. It is worth noting that Danzig was not included in the 1st Partition of Poland but was annexed during the 1nd Partition.

Overall, it would be of significant benefit to Sweden.

 

[alexmilman]

One needs to remember that while Karl held the overall command and decided whether or not to push for battle or not, he actually let his more experienced officers plan the battles early war. Stuart planned the landing at Holbaek and Reskiölhnd planned Narva, Düna and Kliszow, with the young King in close attendance to further his (already very good) military education. Rehnskiöld acted as the King's de facto chief of staff until December 1702, when he was placed on an independent command in Poland-Lithuania, probably because both he and the King thought the King old and experienced enough to not need Rehnskiöld looking over his shoulder.

I must say, I like your writing style. It makes for a fun read.

Thanks for the compliment.

As for the first part, yes, you are right but important part is that Charles was getting the credit, especially when, as Narva and Duna, he was personally engaged in some spectacular (if not necessarily meaningful) way: young, dashing king riding at the head of his troops comparing to the "old" (in their early 50s) generals who did the boring part called "planning".
What is important for this TL is that neither Charles nor his top generals are considering their ally as a serious military factor worthy of being taken into an account (neither do the Saxons), which means that Crossing of the Duna is being planned as a purely Swedish-Saxon confrontation with a complete disregard of what is going on at the flank, which is, anyway, a strategic rather than operational factor because the Russians are pursuing their own goal and just do some contribution to the chase of the retreating Saxon army without any spectacular (and unrealistic) results: anyway, what can be expected from the few cavalry regiments chasing an army retreating in a good order? In OTL Charles with the Swedish could not prevent the Saxons from reaching Prussia and addition of couple thousands Russian dragoons would not produce any miracle. The only purpose of mentioning them is establishment of at least a minimal "comradery in arms" attitude.

 

[alexmilman]

I like your diss of Golovin, completely to the point.
The falling for China bluff at Nerchinsk is a reason why I had Ivan "Bolshoy" Sheremetev (father of the above-justly-praised-Boris from whom his son inherited many good qualities) be in command at Albazin/Nerchinsk in Feodor III survives TLs.

Though he had SOME administrative talent, so was not a complete idiot, but nevertheless, the emphasis is on "some".

I know that you don't like Golovin () and he really looks quite unremarkable person but it seems that for Peter a personal loyalty was the main consideration. Golovin could be trusted with performing the assigned tasks with some results and this was enough, just as in the case of Lefort.

But, as far as Nerchinsk goes, let's be fair. In theory, it was probably possible to achieve better results but this would require a serious Russian military presence in the area as a pre-requisite for the talks to balance the Manchurian military presence. In OTL the only "tools" in Golovin's disposal were presents to the Chinese officials, which did not change their position so he definitely can be blamed for not following the golden rule "money in the morning, chairs in the evening". Anyway, it looks like his main assigned task was to achieve at least something that the Regency could present as a success on a background of the failed Crimean campaigns. Objectively, at that time trade with China was considerably more important than a border by the Amur and kept being so all the way to the mid-XIX when a serious danger of the British-French attack on the Russian Far East at least somewhat changed government's mindset (even then Muraviev was acting to a great degree on his own and sometimes even against the explicit orders of NI and opinion of most of his cabinet). Needless to say that by that time the general framework already was quite different: circumnavigations by the Russian ships, a detailed naval research of the region, Manchu regime suffering defeat in the Opium War and being technologically backward, availability of the steamship(s) on the Amur River. So, yes, Golovin's performance at the talks was not impressive but did he really fail the mission?

Anyway, him being made a fieldmarshal and admiral-general was rather laughable.

 

[Valena]

But, as far as Nerchinsk goes, let's be fair. In theory, it was probably possible to achieve better results but this would require a serious Russian military presence in the area as a pre-requisite for the talks to balance the Manchurian military presence. In OTL the only "tools" in Golovin's disposal were presents to the Chinese officials, which did not change their position so he definitely can be blamed for not following the golden rule "money in the morning, chairs in the evening". Anyway, it looks like his main assigned task was to achieve at least something that the Regency could present as a success on a background of the failed Crimean campaigns. Objectively, at that time trade with China was considerably more important than a border by the Amur and kept being so all the way to the mid-XIX when a serious danger of the British-French attack on the Russian Far East at least somewhat changed government's mindset (even then Muraviev was acting to a great degree on his own and sometimes even against the explicit orders of NI and opinion of most of his cabinet). Needless to say that by that time the general framework already was quite different: circumnavigations by the Russian ships, a detailed naval research of the region, Manchu regime suffering defeat in the Opium War and being technologically backward, availability of the steamship(s) on the Amur River. So, yes, Golovin's performance at the talks was not impressive but did he really fail the mission?

How much did he fail is a huge question, and Amur-wank become the staple of any "No Peter TL". I remember the TL written by me back in 2013 which was the over-optimistic BS in this regard.
After this I learned that ANY Amur-wank needs a PoD not in 1674 but in 1650ies (butterflying away Khabarov would help greatly, though would do little in general considering Siberia was very low on the list of priorities, at least until expeditions sent by said Ivan Sheremetev successfully found silver, and what is more important, lead (which was as strategic as finding uranium and other rare earth metals would be in 20th century); and then it was too late - the relations damage was already done).

 

[alexmilman]

10. Polish morass

On August 9, 1702 Charles, who was staying in Courland, issued to official letters one of which had been addressed to “all Poles” [1] and another to Cardinal Primate of Poland, Augustyn Michał Stefan Radziejowski, the second (after August) most important person in the PLC and definitely the first one as far as understanding and control of the situation goes [2].

g
In both letters Charles was talking about a need to dethrone August who caused an immense damage to the Polish liberties by flooding country with the Saxon troops and starting a war with his Swedish cousin. Sweden is ready to provide all help that may be needed. It seems that this was Charles’ own idea and all attempts to dissuade him just made him more firmly set on its implementation. Just as century later Napoleon got “Spanish disease”, Charles got the “Polish” one. The task did not look excessively complicated to Charles due to his a blissful ignorance of the realities of the Polish politics and the PLC reputation as “a cemetery of the armies”. Of course, the PLC was practically an ideal ground for the relaxed military strolls of pretty much any army and for living off the land but achieving some definite results was a completely different story due to the never-ending political turmoil. Bengt Gabrielsson Oxenstierna [3] sent to Charles a ling memorandum in which he strongly recommended to abstain from invading the PLC and especially from the idea of installing a new king. He was especially afraid of the consequences of August’s dethroning based upon mentality of the Polish nobility and an abyss existing between their promises and concrete actions. But Charles finally got a political idea of his own and stuck to it because his proposals were logical. To his surprise, the letters produced no enthusiasm from the recipients [4]. Everybody agreed that August was a lousy king but there was no precedent for a king to be overthrown and if such a thing is going to happen, it should happen without a foreign interference. Even those who sympathized to the Swedes did not agree to the Charles’ proposals.

Peter, who had a somewhat better understanding of what the PLC looked like (after all Russian diplomacy had a long record of dealing with it) and already got some knowledge of Charles’ modus operandi, fully expected that sooner rather than later Charles is going to push his idea down the Polish collective throat by invading the country. For the Poles’ own good, of course.

This would give Peter a free hand in his own actions which could be two-fold (Peter was quite opportunistic in picking one if the options or both):

1. By the obvious geographic reasons, it was tempting to expand annexation from Dynaburg all the way up the Dvina flow to Witebsk thus ending with a nice “natural border” by the river and securing the new territory from the PLC attempts to get them back [5]. But this had to wait until Charles is going into “the morass” so that Peter’s activities will fit into “brotherly help” category.

2. For the second option he needed Charles’ agreement much less if not at all. It was the Right Bank Ukraine owned by the PLC and in a meantime in a quite fragile peaceful status due to the conflicting interests of the Cosssacks (generally loyal to the throne) and the Polish nobility that considered the Cossacks as an abomination and was pressing the crown for cutting their privileges. The intelligent monarchs usually managed to navigate these treacherous waters with a certain degree of success but not August. Even before Charles sent his letters, August came with his own “touch of a genius” by issuing in the January of 1702 “universal” by which all Cossack lands of the Braclaw, Kiev and Fastow “regiments” (Polish-held Right Bank Ukraine) had to be returned to the Polish nobility and the Cossack troops disbanded. Temporary Hetman, colonel Samus, had to deliver his attributes of power to the royal representatives. Comparison with an exploded bomb is inadequate [6] so how about effect of the yeast being thrown into a latrine? In March the Cossack Rada had been assembled on which Colonel Palij publicly rejected protection of the Polish King, declared the Right Bank Ukraine “free Cossack area” and swore loyalty to Peter and Hetman Mazepa [7] in which he was fully supported by Samus. In September the Cossack army besieged Polish-held fortress White Church, Polish relief force had been defeated and the things proceeded as usual [8]. In November White Church had been taken by storm and all its defenders killed. This opportunity can’t be missed and situation must be exploited before the Poles raise an army and crush the rebels. The helpful part was that formally Peter could keep pretending that this is strictly a Cossack business in which Russia is not directly involved [9]. Well, maybe a little bit, just to keep the excesses down. Mazepa’s army, 40,000 strong (accompanied by 10,000 Russian troops) crossed the border to help the rebels, Samus formally passed his insignia to Mazepa returning to his old status of a colonel. And the Polish army of 15,000 had suffered a crushing defeat losing everybody who could not run fast enough and all its artillery (44 pieces). Peter’s troops occupied White Church and few other more or less fortified places. The first step of the “go South” plan: control of the territory between the Dnieper and Bug rivers with a stronghold of White Church in between, was made while Charles was still amusing himself playing diplomacy with the Poles.


In a meantime Charles spent the whole year in Courland trying his hand as a diplomat but gradually running out of patience….
_______________
[1] Or rather to “200,000 sovereigns”. Who would care about the peasants and burghers?
[2] Is it just me or cardinal’s hat on a portrait does look like a bow? Anyway, he was plotting against Jan Sobiessky, then supported candidacy of his then until switched his support to Prince Conti and became leader of the pro-French party and even led a rokosz in his support against King August until getting from August a considerable bribe and guarantee of an important role in the government. Which did not prevent him from a being in a permanent conflict with August. In OTL, after trying for a while to play intermediary between August and Charles, went to the Swedish side but after Charles refused to put on the PLC throne either Prince Conti or Ferenc Rakoczi, broke with Charles, fled to Danzig and tried to get back to terms with August in a process of doing which he died in 1705 at the age of 60. Probably due to the distress caused by running of the new sides to switch to (siding twice with the same king should be boring).
[3] During the Deluge he was governor of the Great Poland, then governor of Livonia and between 1680 and accession of Charles XII a de facto head of the Swedish foreign politics.
[4] In OTL he was promising to the Polish nobility as a reward return of the Ukrainian lands lost to Russia but in this TL he has no bonus to offer so enthusiasm is even smaller.
[5] Taking into an account the general situation within the PLC, this excuse was not labeled as “invasion of the hostile ASBs” only because these creatures were not known, yet.
[6] The contemporary bombs simply were not powerful enough.
[7] Mazepa was Hetman of the Russian-held Left Bank Ukraine and did not mind at all to became Hetman of All Ukraine. However, not to get on Peter’s wrong side, he refused to help the rebels and even forbade them to flee on the Left Bank.
[8] Which means a wholesale massacres of the Poles, Jews, and the Uniates. In OTL this uprising is referenced as “Second Khmelnitchina”. In OTL , in 1703 the Polish army managed to reconquer part of the rebellious territory, impaled known supporters of the rebellion and cut the right ears to 70,000 suspected ones, population of some places was totally massacred. Peter ordered the leaders of uprising to make peace with August and in 1704 they joined Mazepa’s army but soon enough (probably just to be on the safe side) he arrested the leaders. They were released only after Mazepa’s treason became known. In this TL Peter’s alliance with August does not exist, with the obvious “adjustments”.
[9] As Don Cesar de Bazan from “Ruy Blas” who did not directly participate in a robbery but just “helped with an advise”.
[10] Of course, Peter trusted Mazepa but only within a paradigm that he formulated as: “Every Ukrainian Hetman is a traitor”. Anyway, for all intended purposes, creation of a functioning unified Hetmanate was not exactly Peter’s favorite idea.

 

[von Adler]

This is starting to look like a second Deluge. Poor Poland-Lithuania.

You have an impressive rate of writing. My compliments.

 

[alexmilman]

This is starting to look like a second Deluge. Poor Poland-Lithuania.

Cynically, this can be defined as “self-inflicted wounds” and what did happen in OTL probably was quite close to the 2nd one as well. What do you expect with the whole system being rotten to the core? Thanks to the cherished “liberties” the country did not have an army, had a government which constitutionally did not have power, had elected (with some caveats but nonetheless) head of a government who was a complete imbecile, could not unite even at the face of enemy’s invasion (I’ll get into some details later but at the time in question there was an ongoing war in Lithuania between the Sapega family and their opponents which Charles happily joined in a somewhat bizarre fashion).

Of course, it was the ordinary people who ended up on a receiving side because both their noble “defenders” and the Swedish invaders lived at their expense and never hesitated to punish the disloyal ones. But it is rather difficult to feel any sympathy for the nobility.

Well, anyway, I did not yet finalized my plans on who is going to get away with what and Charles may end up with less than was proposed so far (😉). Honestly, the guy keeps getting underfoot every time I’m trying to get back to alt-Peter and his adventures and it starts looking quite tempting to get him killed during one if his escapades (😂). Unfortunately, this would mean that, instead of going South Peter would have to go West with all that he has and find himself in the same situation as Charles, spending all of his time running all over the PLC and trying to nail that jelly to the wall. So Charles has to stay alive for a while. 😂

BTW, I have two questions for you. What and for which type of the help can in your opinion Peter realistically expect from Charles in two areas:

1. Better trade arrangements for the Russian imports/exports coming through the Swedish ports (lower custom dues, permission of setting businesses in or nearby the Swedish ports, etc.)? Of course, this can go both ways.

2. A chance to get a piece of a coastal land (say, Nien) even with some limiting conditions, whatever they can be? We know the answer for OTL but in this TL Charles may (by trying to implement some of the most ambitious conquests proposed so far, yes, I’m paying attention 😉) make himself really unpopular in most of Europe with Peter as a pretty much the only consistent ally of a substance. For Peter this is not vitally important but reasonably useful in the terms of increasing the state revenues. Charles, of course, is not going to allow conquest of his land but what about a gift (of an absolutely useless land) to a loyal friend?

Thanks in advance.

You have an impressive rate of writing. My compliments.

 

[von Adler]

Cynically, this can be defined as “self-inflicted wounds” and what did happen in OTL probably was quite close to the 2nd one as well. What do you expect with the whole system being rotten to the core? Thanks to the cherished “liberties” the country did not have an army, had a government which constitutionally did not have power, had elected (with some caveats but nonetheless) head of a government who was a complete imbecile, could not unite even at the face of enemy’s invasion (I’ll get into some details later but at the time in question there was an ongoing war in Lithuania between the Sapega family and their opponents which Charles happily joined in a somewhat bizarre fashion).

Of course, it was the ordinary people who ended up on a receiving side because both their noble “defenders” and the Swedish invaders lived at their expense and never hesitated to punish the disloyal ones. But it is rather difficult to feel any sympathy for the nobility.

Well, anyway, I did not yet finalized my plans on who is going to get away with what and Charles may end up with less than was proposed so far (😉). Honestly, the guy keeps getting underfoot every time I’m trying to get back to alt-Peter and his adventures and it starts looking quite tempting to get him killed during one if his escapades (😂). Unfortunately, this would mean that, instead of going South Peter would have to go West with all that he has and find himself in the same situation as Charles, spending all of his time running all over the PLC and trying to nail that jelly to the wall. So Charles has to stay alive for a while. 😂

BTW, I have two questions for you. What and for which type of the help can in your opinion Peter realistically expect from Charles in two areas:

1. Better trade arrangements for the Russian imports/exports coming through the Swedish ports (lower custom dues, permission of setting businesses in or nearby the Swedish ports, etc.)? Of course, this can go both ways.

2. A chance to get a piece of a coastal land (say, Nien) even with some limiting conditions, whatever they can be? We know the answer for OTL but in this TL Charles may (by trying to implement some of the most ambitious conquests proposed so far, yes, I’m paying attention 😉) make himself really unpopular in most of Europe with Peter as a pretty much the only consistent ally of a substance. For Peter this is not vitally important but reasonably useful in the terms of increasing the state revenues. Charles, of course, is not going to allow conquest of his land but what about a gift (of an absolutely useless land) to a loyal friend?

Thanks in advance.

Better trade arrengement should be pretty easy. A Russian trade city/market town at the mouth of the Neva could be constructed, for example, as long as it is not garrisoned with Russian troops. It could even be fortified by Russia (as Swedish cities with city charter often finances their own fortifications manned by a burgher militia). Sweden has a long tradition of encouraging trade by inviting foreign merchants (Walloon, German and Dutch, mainly) to build cities that was granted city charters. Cities were responsible for their own local laws and law enforcement as well as justice system - ie they had their own "police" (often conscript burghers taking turns patrolling the streets) and court (manned by elected elder burghers) and were free to conduct their business in any language they wanted.

Ingria is the easiest place for this, as it was not part of the Kingdom of Sweden and thus not under the Estates Parliament or Swedish law - the King of Sweden ruled directly by decree there. Estonia and Livonia have their own parliaments, Kexholm lacks access to the sea and Finland is under the Swedish Estates Parliament and Swedish laws. Likewise, it should be possible to grant a similar concession on the south bank of the Düna (I agree with you, this river has so many names!).

In general, the Swedish state was interested in reliable, non-fluctuating sources of real coin. A fixed yearly fee instead of tolls would be completely acceptable. The tolls being forced on someone else - say the Dutch or English purchasers of Russian naval supplies (such as hemp, lumber and tar) and luxuries (such as Chinese goods and furs) would also be a-ok to Karl and other influential Swedes. Having the same amount of money despite wars or bad harvests or other bad times was considered more important than having more money in good times, so fixed money was considered better than fluctuating money, even if fluctuating money meant more money over time.

Other ports are a bit harder, due to the Swedish laws at the time - the lands under the Estates Parliament (ie modern Sweden and Finland plus Viborg) was under the Swedish church law, while it had been liberalised somewhat in the 1600s to allow people of other faiths to practice it (although not publically and certainly not by inviting Swedish protestants to such heretic things) in the cities, non-protestants were not allowed to own property in Sweden and not construct places of worship. I have a hard time seeing Russian merchants accepting this - in general, orthodox people of this era were proud of their religion and actively resisted any attempts at conversion - nearly the whole orthodox populations of Kexholm and Ingria (not that many of them, but still) up and left those territories when Sweden conquered them 1617 rather than face any Swedish attempts at converting them to lutheranism. Some convoluted way around this could of course be found if both sides were willing, such as a merchant company or the Russian state/crown owning the property in name only and orthodoxy was practised in private.

An orhtodox church could be constructed in Ingria, but not in Stockholm.

Since Peter has shown that Russia is becoming both 'western' (ie non-Asiatic and non-Barbaric, mostly by behaving in a honourable way in diplomacy) and is both reliable and honourable in the eyes of Karl, it COULD be possible for Karl to grant Ingria, or at least the relevant parts of it to Peter as a gift from a grateful ally - if Sweden gets a much bigger prize. If Peter helps Karl nail the jelly to the wall (I love this expression, by the way, it describes the situation quite well) in the Commonwealth - with enough nails, it is tedious, but possible and Sweden gains Courland and Danzig out of it (Danzig was a Swedish pipe dream at this point - controlling the tolls on the Vistula would be EXTREMELY profitable, much more so than the tolls on the Neva).

Edit: I should add, any Polish King, Swedish or Russian puppet or not, signing away Danzig would have extreme problems with his legitimacy after that, so it will take a LOT for that to happen. OTL Prussia did not get Danzig until the second Polish partition 1793.

 

[X Oristos]

To add my two cents, I would like to add another possibility: Peter to sweeten the deal by giving Sweden the recently conquered Polish Livonia. It can be seen as an exchange of "gifts" between allies and Karl can control all of Old Livonia. Perhaps he could make a Kingdom of Livonia to add to his titles. Moreover, Riga gains additional strategic depth and security. After all, Peter is a honorable man and ally, but what about his heirs? Dyneburg upon Daugava could be used in the future as a highway to invade Livonia.

At the same time, I can see Peter annexing Polotsk and Vitebsk. It is not that they look nice and make the border "natural". By proximity to Daugava they can easily and cheaply export grain and naval supplies to Riga.

Likewise, if Peter is looking forward to wage war against the Ottomans, I can see him annexing all the east bank of the Dnieper down to Kiev. The best way to support a campaign in the mouth of Dnieper against the Ottomans and the Tatars, is by being able to utilize the river to ship men and supplies from Smolensk to Kiev and then ATL Kherson.

 

[alexmilman]

To add my two cents, I would like to add another possibility: Peter to sweeten the deal by giving Sweden the recently conquered Polish Livonia. It can be seen as an exchange of "gifts" between allies and Karl can control all of Old Livonia. Perhaps he could make a Kingdom of Livonia to add to his titles. Moreover, Riga gains additional strategic depth and security. After all, Peter is a honorable man and ally, but what about his heirs? Dyneburg upon Daugava could be used in the future as a highway to invade Livonia.

At the same time, I can see Peter annexing Polock and Vitebsk. It is not that they look nice and make the border "natural". By proximity to Daugava they can easily and cheaply export grain and naval supplies to Riga.

Likewise, if Peter is looking forward to wage war against the Ottomans, I can see him annexing all the east bank of the Dnieper down to Kiev. The best way to support a campaign in the mouth of Dnieper against the Ottomans and the Tatars, is by being able to utilize the river to ship men and supplies from Smolensk to Kiev and then ATL Kherson.

Interesting ideas, especially one about the territorial swap, thanks. The main problem, as I see it now, is that while Dyneburg (Dvinsk) is relatively conveniently located relatively to Pskov, which had a major fair (used in OTL mostly for trade with Estonia, merchants, IIRC), Vitebsk is nothing in a middle of nowhere as far as the Russian trade lines are involved and its only value is that it can be a convenient crossing point for the Russian attack on the PLC (something about Charles does not have to worry). Which would make the trade aspect of the schema pretty much meaningless leaving just a political one: unlike Dyneburg, Vitebsk falls in a category of the “old Russian cities” lost in the past and in this sense the swap looks as a big political coup for Peter, especially if he also gets a piece of the left bank of the Dnieper which he still does not own: one with Mogilev. Together with the returned piece of Ingria, this would warrant a huge celebration with a theme of “return of the ancestral lands”: salute, a huge parade with the allegoric figures, massive (even by Peter’s standards) drinking party and the fireworks which are causing a huge fire in Moscow providing Peter with an opportunity to play one of his many favorite roles, one of a firefighter, and issue an ukaz permitting only stone/brick construction in Moscow (for the “descent” people). 😂

An additional advantage of the schema is that, besides a supply route by the Dnieper, a corridor Dnieper - Bug allows a much shorter marching route to the Perekop than approach from the East (Azov - Cherkassk line would keep the Nogays isolated and squeezed between the Russian fortresses and the Kalmuks.

 

[X Oristos]

Vitebsk falls in a category of the “old Russian cities”

I would argue that the same applies to Polotsk as well.

If it is a swap of territories without fixed payments, or at least an once-a-time payment, in the middle and long term the ATL Petersburg will be a more profitable investment.

I know very little about Peter, but could early recognition and respect by a european monarch make him keep the capital at Moscow? Could Petersburg be a project of much smaller scale, basically a modern entrepot and a window to the West, without being a capital? Saving the massive capital and human cost that was the OTL foundation would be beneficial. Naturally, Petersburg can slowly develop in a more natural manner over the coming decades as trade volume increases.

 

[alexmilman]

Better trade arrengement should be pretty easy. A Russian trade city/market town at the mouth of the Neva could be constructed, for example, as long as it is not garrisoned with Russian troops. It could even be fortified by Russia (as Swedish cities with city charter often finances their own fortifications manned by a burgher militia). Sweden has a long tradition of encouraging trade by inviting foreign merchants (Walloon, German and Dutch, mainly) to build cities that was granted city charters. Cities were responsible for their own local laws and law enforcement as well as justice system - ie they had their own "police" (often conscript burghers taking turns patrolling the streets) and court (manned by elected elder burghers) and were free to conduct their business in any language they wanted.

Ingria is the easiest place for this, as it was not part of the Kingdom of Sweden and thus not under the Estates Parliament or Swedish law - the King of Sweden ruled directly by decree there. Estonia and Livonia have their own parliaments, Kexholm lacks access to the sea and Finland is under the Swedish Estates Parliament and Swedish laws. Likewise, it should be possible to grant a similar concession on the south bank of the Düna (I agree with you, this river has so many names!).

In general, the Swedish state was interested in reliable, non-fluctuating sources of real coin. A fixed yearly fee instead of tolls would be completely acceptable. The tolls being forced on someone else - say the Dutch or English purchasers of Russian naval supplies (such as hemp, lumber and tar) and luxuries (such as Chinese goods and furs) would also be a-ok to Karl and other influential Swedes. Having the same amount of money despite wars or bad harvests or other bad times was considered more important than having more money in good times, so fixed money was considered better than fluctuating money, even if fluctuating money meant more money over time.

Other ports are a bit harder, due to the Swedish laws at the time - the lands under the Estates Parliament (ie modern Sweden and Finland plus Viborg) was under the Swedish church law, while it had been liberalised somewhat in the 1600s to allow people of other faiths to practice it (although not publically and certainly not by inviting Swedish protestants to such heretic things) in the cities, non-protestants were not allowed to own property in Sweden and not construct places of worship. I have a hard time seeing Russian merchants accepting this - in general, orthodox people of this era were proud of their religion and actively resisted any attempts at conversion - nearly the whole orthodox populations of Kexholm and Ingria (not that many of them, but still) up and left those territories when Sweden conquered them 1617 rather than face any Swedish attempts at converting them to lutheranism. Some convoluted way around this could of course be found if both sides were willing, such as a merchant company or the Russian state/crown owning the property in name only and orthodoxy was practised in private.

An orhtodox church could be constructed in Ingria, but not in Stockholm.

Since Peter has shown that Russia is becoming both 'western' (ie non-Asiatic and non-Barbaric, mostly by behaving in a honourable way in diplomacy) and is both reliable and honourable in the eyes of Karl, it COULD be possible for Karl to grant Ingria, or at least the relevant parts of it to Peter as a gift from a grateful ally - if Sweden gets a much bigger prize. If Peter helps Karl nail the jelly to the wall (I love this expression, by the way, it describes the situation quite well) in the Commonwealth - with enough nails, it is tedious, but possible and Sweden gains Courland and Danzig out of it (Danzig was a Swedish pipe dream at this point - controlling the tolls on the Vistula would be EXTREMELY profitable, much more so than the tolls on the Neva).

Edit: I should add, any Polish King, Swedish or Russian puppet or not, signing away Danzig would have extreme problems with his legitimacy after that, so it will take a LOT for that to happen. OTL Prussia did not get Danzig until the second Polish partition 1793.

Great info, thank you. So the status of that “Russian zone” is being what? By the standards of time Peter can’t allow himself to be viewed as a Swedish vassal, which is the case with a settlement under the Swedish jurisdiction. How about a swap for the Polish Livonia proposed by @X Oristos ? This way nobody’s royal dignity is diminished and both sides are gaining something valuable to brag about.

Now, you touched a very problematic question to which I was hinting: a realistic scope of the Swedish acquisitions, specifically the Danzig issue. This would be not just an issue on the Polish side but, quite possible a much broader international problem because Britain, the Netherlands, Prussia, Hanseatic cities and Denmark are not interested in a complete Swedish control of the Baltic trade. So we can see a serious naval support that makes siege of the city problematic and a potential Danish-Prussian-Polish military alliance. Prussia has 40,000 (IIRC) strong very well trained army only fraction of which is directly engaged in WoSS (and demonstrated a very good performance) and can be recalled in the case of emergency. Denmark’s army is not, AFAIK, up to the same standard but can’t be just shrugged off either and, taking into an account that Danzig is located between two pieces of Prussia, short of a preliminary conquest of one of these pieces, logistics for the siege does not look good at all. And even if it ends up with a success, there can be a serious international pressure for returning it as a peace condition. Can Sweden ignore it even with the Russian alliance? After all, Russia can’t serve as a main source of coin.

So (and I’m getting somewhat ahead of a planned narrative and probably would have to repeat some of it, sorry), Charles faces a dilemma. He already got (especially if the “swap” happens) pretty much everything he can realistically get from the PLC : Courland and Polish Livonia. Danzig is a greatest prize but the cost of getting it can be extremely high. Will Charles proceed with its conquest no matter what or would he follow the OTL policy of setting his own King of Poland (which has its own problems) and be happy with what he already got ?

 

[alexmilman]

I would argue that the same applies to Polotsk as well.

If it is a swap of territories without fixed payments, or at least an once-a-time payment, in the middle and long term the ATL Petersburg will be a more profitable investment.

Taking into an account a huge amount of silver that Peter eventually paid for the peace (after returning Finland), I’d say that a smaller but considerable one time payment would be quite realistic. A regular payment, would be considered by the Russians as a tribute indicating a subordinate position toward Sweden.

I know very little about Peter, but could early recognition and respect by a european monarch make him keep the capital at Moscow? Could Petersburg be a project of much smaller scale, basically a modern entrepot and a window to the West, without being a capital? Saving the massive capital and human cost that was the OTL foundation would be beneficial. Naturally, Petersburg can slowly develop in a more natural manner over the coming decades as trade volume increases.

St-Petersburg as “just a port” made sense: with possession of Noteburg it provided a convenient trade route with the traditional links to the inland Russia. Without the OTL artificial measures it would not necessarily be able to dwarf Archangelsk and Riga but had a potential to grow into a significant port. As a capital, it had all advantages of a show case (which it became only in the late XVIII) and disadvantages in pretty much all other aspects.

 

[Valena]

St-Petersburg as “just a port” made sense: with possession of Noteburg it provided a convenient trade route with the traditional links to the inland Russia. Without the OTL artificial measures it would not necessarily be able to dwarf Archangelsk and Riga but had a potential to grow into a significant port. As a capital, it had all advantages of a show case (which it became only in the late XVIII) and disadvantages in pretty much all other aspects.

BTW, for "just a port" purpose the OTL Ust-Luga may serve just as good if not better, Luga Bay is 11 meters deep as opposed to 3 meters deep Neva Bay, though Noteburg has SOME infrastructure while the 1557 project would be built in the middle of nowhere. Neva is also better than Luga re. access to Ladoga lake, but navigating the lake was dangerous so a canal would be needed anyways.

 

[von Adler]

Great info, thank you. So the status of that “Russian zone” is being what? By the standards of time Peter can’t allow himself to be viewed as a Swedish vassal, which is the case with a settlement under the Swedish jurisdiction. How about a swap for the Polish Livonia proposed by @X Oristos ? This way nobody’s royal dignity is diminished and both sides are gaining something valuable to brag about.

Now, you touched a very problematic question to which I was hinting: a realistic scope of the Swedish acquisitions, specifically the Danzig issue. This would be not just an issue on the Polish side but, quite possible a much broader international problem because Britain, the Netherlands, Prussia, Hanseatic cities and Denmark are not interested in a complete Swedish control of the Baltic trade. So we can see a serious naval support that makes siege of the city problematic and a potential Danish-Prussian-Polish military alliance. Prussia has 40,000 (IIRC) strong very well trained army only fraction of which is directly engaged in WoSS (and demonstrated a very good performance) and can be recalled in the case of emergency. Denmark’s army is not, AFAIK, up to the same standard but can’t be just shrugged off either and, taking into an account that Danzig is located between two pieces of Prussia, short of a preliminary conquest of one of these pieces, logistics for the siege does not look good at all. And even if it ends up with a success, there can be a serious international pressure for returning it as a peace condition. Can Sweden ignore it even with the Russian alliance? After all, Russia can’t serve as a main source of coin.

So (and I’m getting somewhat ahead of a planned narrative and probably would have to repeat some of it, sorry), Charles faces a dilemma. He already got (especially if the “swap” happens) pretty much everything he can realistically get from the PLC : Courland and Polish Livonia. Danzig is a greatest prize but the cost of getting it can be extremely high. Will Charles proceed with its conquest no matter what or would he follow the OTL policy of setting his own King of Poland (which has its own problems) and be happy with what he already got ?

The "Russian Zone" would be a special case (but not unheard of, many such solutions existed between monarchs and cities in Europe, especially in the patchwork that was the Holy Roman Empire). A group of Russian subjects (merchants) would request from the Swedish King to build a city and be granted a city charter in his territory (just like the Dutch did with Göteborg). With a city charter, those Russian subjects have the right to make their own laws, police and mete justice according to them. They also have the right to take out tolls at the city walls and the right and duty to fortify and defend their city and can conduct their business in any language they want (this is a normal Swedish city charter at the time). Low German or Dutch/Flemish was the language of commerce in Swedish cities at this time. In return the city agrees to pay a yearly charter fee or a percentage of its tolls. Often various monopolies on trade (merging various local trade fairs to the city, delcaring goods can only come by the way of the city etc) is included.

Which such an arrangement, the territory the city sits on would nominally belong to Karl, but the people living in it would be subjects of Peter (and some Swedes too, I am sure). Some kind of arrangement on religion could be made, where children born in the city can choose (ie their parents choose for them) if they want to be lutheran and Swedish subjects or orthodox and Russian subjects and Karl can allow Russian merchants in the city to practice their religion and build churches as long as they not allow any Swedish lutheran subjects to attend their services. The OTL small town of Nyen did have a Russian "suburb" named Vuoronpuol that had a orthodox church dedicated to Spasskij. Of course, that suburb did not have city rights.

The city would be under its own jurisdiction as the right (and duty) to handle its own internal affairs is part of the city charter - so Peter would not be a subject under Karl in any sense of the word.

I agree with you that Danzig in Swedish hands is very far-fetched - that is why I called it a pipe dream (but Sweden would absolutely love if they could get it and get away with it). Karl is smart enough to not go for it - OTL he forced the city to pay tribute and return the value of the Swedish royal treasury the burghers had "loaned" from Karl Knutsson (Bonde) when he fled with the royal treasury from Stockholm to Danzig 1457 (21 200 Prussian marks) in late 1703 but did not attempt to lay siege to it. As you say, Denmark, Brandenburg-Prussia, the Emperor, the Dutch and the English would all be pissed, and even with a Russian alliance Karl would not feel safe enough against such a potential coalition - Karl and other contemporaries would not view the Russians as able to poject power beyond Livonia, Estonia and the eastern parts of Poland-Lithuania. Besides, as I said, any Swedish-forced Polish-Lithuanian monarch would lose most if not all his legitimacy if he signed away Danzig.

The tolls on the Neva provided Sweden with a yearly surplus of about 300-500 000 thalers from around 1690 onwards - Estonia and Livonia also produced surpluses, but nearly all that money was invested back into those provinces in the cost of administration, expanding lutheran education (including translating into and printing bibles and catachesises in Estonian and Latvian), fortification construction (especially Riga and Reval) and the local garrisons.

To be honest, I don't think Polish Livonia and Courland are good enough incentives to trade away the tolls on the Neva for the Swedish state at this time. Especially not if the territories have not been officially ceded yet - then Karl would be trading away something he has for something he does not have.

As for Karl's policy on Poland-Lithuania, part of the reason he was so insistent on enthroning a new King in Poland-Lithuania was to punish the perfidious August, the other part was to establish a Swedo-Polish Alliance. Poland-Lithuania looked to contemporaries like it had bounced back with Jan Sobieski and the intervention at Vienna 1683 and could be a good ally to counter both Russian and Imperial ambition. In your timline, Russia is not a problem, so Karl may not feel the need to have an allied Poland, and might simply go to have August dethroned and say something akin to "Elect whomever you want, just know that if it is August again, I will be back.", take Courland, let Peter have Polish Livonia and other parts he has taken and go home to administer his realm in peace (and rent out the German garrisons to the Dutch or the Emperor) and send Peter some advisors, volunteers and arms as a token gratitude for their alliance as Peter turns south.

But that does not grant Peter Ingria.

 

[alexmilman]

BTW, for "just a port" purpose the OTL Ust-Luga may serve just as good if not better, Luga Bay is 11 meters deep as opposed to 3 meters deep Neva Bay, though Noteburg has SOME infrastructure while the 1557 project would be built in the middle of nowhere. Neva is also better than Luga re. access to Ladoga lake, but navigating the lake was dangerous so a canal would be needed anyways.

Probably quite a few sites had been better, in one aspect or another, than St.Petersburg (which had some major problems including the regular floods) but it had two big advantages which most of the alternative candidates were lacking:

1. It was located on the end of a traditional main trade water route: Novgorod - Volkhov - Ladoga - Neva and the water routes tended to be cheaper and better than what had been passing for the Russian roads.
2. Unlike Narva and Ust-Luga it had a harbor protected by the Kotlyn Island, location at the end of a gulf was making it less exposed to the and the outlying island were adding protection both against storms and naval attacks.

Of course, all considerations regarding canal are true and a bypassing canal had been built during Peter’s life time: this was Munnich’s first major project in Russia.

Probably “just a port” is a somewhat misleading. Of course, it should be meaningful site in the terms of supporting trade and growing potential. And some navy should be eventually built for its protection but not everything at once. 😉

 

[von Adler]

As for some economy on Sweden.

1697 was considered a "normal" year for Sweden. The famine had ended and the troops and ships (6 000 men and 12 ships) rented out to the Dutch had returned and no more income was coming from that. The state had a total income of about 4 800 000 dsm (daler silvermynt) and ran a surplus of some 530 000 dsm. Livonia, Estonia and Ingria provided around 950 000 dsm together, although the Swedish state invested it all back into the region with garrisons, administration and fortification construction.

The Swedish state had a cash reserve of 2 500 000 dsm and Karl XI had a cash reserve only available to him (and of course, after his death, Karl XII) of 2 500 000-6 000 000 dsm.

By 1710, the war had costed about 25 000 000 dsm and the state ran a yearly deficit of 800 000-1 000 000, dsm so despite looting some 10 000 000 dsm total in Poland-Lithuania, Sweden had run out of all reserves and was at least 7 000 000 dsm in debt. But, as you can see, Sweden can afford to be at war for 5 years without devastating its economy too badly, especially if it loots a lot.

A dsm (daler silvermynt) contained 25,5 grams of pure silver if you want to compare it to other currencies.

 

[alexmilman]

The "Russian Zone" would be a special case (but not unheard of, many such solutions existed between monarchs and cities in Europe, especially in the patchwork that was the Holy Roman Empire). A group of Russian subjects (merchants) would request from the Swedish King to build a city and be granted a city charter in his territory (just like the Dutch did with Göteborg). With a city charter, those Russian subjects have the right to make their own laws, police and mete justice according to them. They also have the right to take out tolls at the city walls and the right and duty to fortify and defend their city and can conduct their business in any language they want (this is a normal Swedish city charter at the time). Low German or Dutch/Flemish was the language of commerce in Swedish cities at this time. In return the city agrees to pay a yearly charter fee or a percentage of its tolls. Often various monopolies on trade (merging various local trade fairs to the city, delcaring goods can only come by the way of the city etc) is included.

Well, in OTL Peter annexed the Baltic provinces on the similar conditions regarding the rights of the local nobility and privileges of the cities but we are talking about significant difference: they all became the Russian subjects.

Which such an arrangement, the territory the city sits on would nominally belong to Karl, but the people living in it would be subjects of Peter (and some Swedes too, I am sure). Some kind of arrangement on religion could be made, where children born in the city can choose (ie their parents choose for them) if they want to be lutheran and Swedish subjects or orthodox and Russian subjects and Karl can allow Russian merchants in the city to practice their religion and build churches as long as they not allow any Swedish lutheran subjects to attend their services. The OTL small town of Nyen did have a Russian "suburb" named Vuoronpuol that had a orthodox church dedicated to Spasskij. Of course, that suburb did not have city rights.

The city would be under its own jurisdiction as the right (and duty) to handle its own internal affairs is part of the city charter - so Peter would not be a subject under Karl in any sense of the word.

Of course, I can’t be 100% sure but I have very serious doubts that such a schema would be acceptable to Peter. We are talking Russia of the early XVIII and, AFAIK, the Russian perceptions of that time had been rather straightforward: a territory is either a part of the Tsardom (or a clearly defined vassal state) or it is not. Pretty much the same goes for the Russian merchant class: they are not the German burghers (as much as Peter and his successors tried, they failed) so the city chapters and being Russian subjects while living in Sweden is somewhat overcomplicated for them: they’d simply not go there and Peter (who also has pretty much the same mentality) is not going to force them. If he wants a city, it means that he wants his own city in which he, and not the local people, is going to dictate the rules.

I agree with you that Danzig in Swedish hands is very far-fetched - that is why I called it a pipe dream (but Sweden would absolutely love if they could get it and get away with it). Karl is smart enough to not go for it - OTL he forced the city to pay tribute and return the value of the Swedish royal treasury the burghers had "loaned" from Karl Knutsson (Bonde) when he fled with the royal treasury from Stockholm to Danzig 1457 (21 200 Prussian marks) in late 1703 but did not attempt to lay siege to it. As you say, Denmark, Brandenburg-Prussia, the Emperor, the Dutch and the English would all be pissed, and even with a Russian alliance Karl would not feel safe enough against such a potential coalition - Karl and other contemporaries would not view the Russians as able to poject power beyond Livonia, Estonia and the eastern parts of Poland-Lithuania. Besides, as I said, any Swedish-forced Polish-Lithuanian monarch would lose most if not all his legitimacy if he signed away Danzig.

Yes, we both agree that this is not a realistic goal.

The tolls on the Neva provided Sweden with a yearly surplus of about 300-500 000 thalers from around 1690 onwards

This sounds strange: Neva-based route is meaningful only for the stretch Ladoga Lake - Nien but the Russian trade was going mostly through Narva and Nien became so unimportant that it even ceased to be an administrative center of Ingria (it was moved to Narva). The tolls in 1692 (in Joachimstalers): Riga - 103,327, Revel - 22,851, Narva - 12,490, Nien - 8,066. https://www.gramota.net/articles/issn_1993-5552_2014_8_09.pdf

In the late XVII Riga was giving Sweden approximately 500,000 Joachimstalers of income but this was the biggest port on the Baltic Sea (the whole Latvia was producing 1.4M thalers https://rusojuz.lv/shvedskoe-jarmo/). So getting almost the same amount of money from the river route that was not seriously used looks slightly strange.

Joachimstaler was 28 grams of silver, which explains difference in the numbers, but proportions should be the same and Nien with its trade is quite low on a Swedish totem pole as far as the income is involved. The whole idea of promoting it (and maintaining much lower custom dues than in Riga) was an attempt to create a Swedish alternative to the Russian Archangelsk trade. In OTL Peter eventually was successful with doing this for St-Petersburg but he had been using the tools which Charles simply did not have in his disposal: he artificially cut the trade through Archangelsk, Riga and Revel. The results were bad enough to roll back most of the restrictions but on a domestic side he kept channeling merchandise flow in the needed direction and eventually suceeded. Could not and did not work for the Swedish Nien just because it would not make sense for Peter: by the late 1600s it was receiving just 20-40 ships annually. The main pre-WoSS Baltic trader, the Dutch, amounted to approximately half of them. OTOH, in 1701 Archangelsk was visited by 103 foreign ships, mostly the Dutch.

To be honest, I don't think Polish Livonia and Courland are good enough incentives to trade away the tolls on the Neva for the Swedish state at this time. Especially not if the territories have not been officially ceded yet - then Karl would be trading away something he has for something he does not have.

Of course, the whole swap may happen only as a part of a peace treaty with the PLC but I have very serious doubts that the Duchy of Courland (for security of which the Dynaberg area was important) was producing a smaller revenue than Nien with Noteburg. Look at the palaces the dukes of Courland had been built and compare population of even the Polish Livonia with few hundreds people in Nien + Noteborg. Not sure how much the Swedish crown had been spending on the Baltic provinces but surely these money were not spent on fortifications of Noteborg (an ancient castle with the high walls and no bastions) and Narva (in 1704 it took only 6 days of bombardment to break down bastion “Gloria” and even in 1700 the fortress was obsolete). So these Lutheran churches you mentioned must be quite exoensive. 😉

As for Karl's policy on Poland-Lithuania, part of the reason he was so insistent on enthroning a new King in Poland-Lithuania was to punish the perfidious August, the other part was to establish a Swedo-Polish Alliance. Poland-Lithuania looked to contemporaries like it had bounced back with Jan Sobieski and the intervention at Vienna 1683 and could be a good ally to counter both Russian and Imperial ambition. In your timline, Russia is not a problem, so Karl may not feel the need to have an allied Poland, and might simply go to have August dethroned and say something akin to "Elect whomever you want, just know that if it is August again, I will be back.", take Courland, let Peter have Polish Livonia and other parts he has taken and go home to administer his realm in peace (and rent out the German garrisons to the Dutch or the Emperor) and send Peter some advisors, volunteers and arms as a token gratitude for their alliance as Peter turns south.

The main problem with that schema is that dethroning August was a pretty much meaningless act: we are talking the PLC and the Swedish puppet king, especially one which signs off the considerable territorial losses, is on the throne for only as long as he is backed by the Swedish troops because as soon as they are out, the anti-puppet forces (majority of the Polish nobility) are raising again, August is back (as in OTL) and the whole “jelly to the wall” dance starts again: Charles has to assemble troops, go to the PLC, etc. Leaving the small Swedish garrisons in the PLC is not going to work: they are risking to be massacred. August has at least moral support from Austria and, especially after WoSS is over, of Denmark and Prussia, both of which have their own ideas regarding rearrangement of the Swedish possessions.

Of course, situation becomes different if Russia is getting actively involved. Besides being able to march a considerable regular army across the border without a need to conduct any transfer of the troops by the sea (and potential problems with the weather, Brits, Danes, etc.), there is a big potential of the Cossack card, especially if Russia ends up with most of the Right Bank Ukraine: they may not be too effective against the crown army but they are most definitely very good in looting the estates and killing szlachta, which may give pro-August enthusiasts a serious pause (politics is one thing but destruction of your own estate is a completely different issue). And, besides these two factors, even by Peter’s time the Russian rulers already learned how to deal with szlachta: “a donkey loaded with gold can open any city gates”. In OTL, Sandomierz Confederacy was getting from Peter 200,000 rubles annually and after the GNW the “gold-carrying donkeys” had been regularly finding their way to the Polish magnates. But why would Peter bother to get into the trouble and expenses after he is getting his “piece of flesh” from the PLC? Just out of a pure unselfish brotherly love to Charles? But shouldn’t such a love be mutual? And as far as the “mutual” part is going, there is one more issue to be resolved. In OTL Charles was pretty much free to chose his puppet King, Stanisław Leszczyński, but in this TL policies and inclinations of the puppet are of a certain importance to Russia: what would be his policy toward the Ottomans is a critical question to be answered. If he holds anything but a unequivocally anti-Ottoman position (which does not sit quite well with at least OTL Swedish foreign policy), then good bye the Russian help against pro-August confederation and Charles is completely on his own even if Peter is fully neutral on the issue: there are no formal obligations for him to interfere into the Polish domestic affairs, especially when the king is a potential enemy (and especially if the Russian-Ottoman war is going on).

But that does not grant Peter Ingria.

Surely, it does if Charles is not stupid. See above. 😜

Situation is very similar to one described in the old Soviet joke about bargaining between the regional Party Secretary and the local Orthodox bishop:
“…. If you don’t give me <whatever>, I’ll not send the monks to help collecting a harvest.
If you don’t send the monks, I’ll not let the young pioneers to sing in your church chorus…
If you don’t give the pioneers, I’ll not let the nuns to attend you in a bathhouse…” (after this, the Secretary threatens to revoke the bishop’s Party membership).
You want something, you have to give something in exchange. 😜