No GNW (or “Peter goes South”)

[X Oristos]

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.

I would like to play the devil's advocate in the matter of Danzig. I know you find it likely- with good reason, but hear me out.

My thesis is that the WoSS represents a unique strategic opportunity and the decision-making will be influenced by past experiences and current circumstances.

First of all, the strategic position of Sweden is completely different. An allied Russia means that the Swedes' calculation over the first years of the war will be quite different. It is true, in OTL Karl didn't go for Royal Prussia. However, there was a second front on his back, even after Narva. Under these circumstances, it would have been idiotic overextension to go for Royal Prussia. There is also no need to provide men and supplies in Livonia and Ingria to deal with the Russians. At the same time, these provinces are not ravaged by war and can provide food and taxes.

The ultimate dream of swedish policy was the control of the Sound and with it of all Baltic. They have learned a bitter lesson that the Maritime Powers will never allow such thing to happen. The next best objective is Danzig and controlling the Vistula trade. However, the WoSS will soon start. In the first crucial years, the arch-enemy of the Maritime Powers holds a line from Antwerp to Namur. A dagger held at the throat of both England and the United Provinces. It might be possible that the Maritime Powers despite their preoccupation in Flanders and the Rhine send their fleets if the Swedes try to land on Zealand. However, would they respond with military force over a secondary objective such as Danzig? I sincerely doubt so.

Would the Maritime Powers try to escalate the war and add a Great Power as an enemy? They face the possibility of having their perceived boogeyman controlling Europe from Antwerp to Naples. They will dislike a swedish move on Royal Prussia, but under these circumstances they cannot afford to make an enemy out of Sweden.

The response of the Emperor is of very limited importance. The Emperor has the French at the Rhine, a hostile Bavaria and Rákóczi's Revolt to deal with. Failure in the Germanies or Hungary might mean the loss of his House's position in Europe. At best, the Emperor will send a strong worded letter.

Therefore, for the Swedish policy makers it will seem as a golden opportunity. For all intents and purposes the PLC is neutralized, the Maritime Powers have a Sun King to fry and the Emperor cannot do anything.

But what about after the end of the WoSS ? I think we should make our calculations based on the knowledge they have in 1701. The Swedish policy-makers have spent their entire adulthoods watching half of Europe trying to contain France. And barely succeeding in every war so far. In their minds there are two blocks of power, almost equal that regularly clash. The recent war only stengthens this view. In this geopolitical landscape, where two behemoths crush against each othrr, smaller Powers can keep their gains if they play their cards smartly.

They also knoe enough of the political character of the Dutch Republic. They are merchants and fight to support their commercial interests. If they are presented by a fait accompli - swedish Danzig- will they go to war with Sweden after they dealt with France, just for honor's sake? They are burghers after all, no honorable aristocrats like the Swedes themselves. In any case, dutch ships would still arrive at Danzig and trade will continue to flow- it is the swedish interest after all. They need naval supplies from Sweden and Russia, they need grain from Danzig and Riga and the Swedes would be happy to continue trading. It would be something weird according to 17th century history, if the Dutch would stop acting as Dutch when resented with a fait accompli.

Lastly, Royal Prussia can produce a greater surplus to the swedish budget than Ingria. In OTL, when Frederick annexed it during the 1st Partition of Poland, the province - without Danzig- provided 1,7 million prussian thalers in taxes. At 16,7 g of silver per thaler, that is a lot of silver.

I don't think the Swedes will overly care about polish hostility to be honest. The PLC is facing a new Deluge and without Ukraine it will be perceived as a smaller power. The Polish magnates would still need to export their grain. After some time they would have to accept the new order, as they don't have the institutions of a centralized state to continue a very long war. Especially while having the Russians on their flank and they are open up to Cossack raids. Granted, the Russians won't be perceived as a capable army by the Swedes, but even cannon fodder has its uses.

 

[von Adler]

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.



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.



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



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.






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. 😉



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).




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. 😜

You are right about the tolls on the Neva, it is not that much (it seems I confused the surplus for Estonia, Livonia and Ingria with the Neva tolls), but it experienced a sharp climb in the 1690s as the demand for Russian naval goods increased in England and the Netherlands. The administrative centre moving was most likely because a fire devastated Nyen 1681. By 1697, Nyen saw at least 100 ships per year. There was a general trend where Nyen was starting to replace Reval as the transit place for Russian goods. In 1697 roughly a third of the skippers had orthodox sounding names, which is interpreted as Russian merchants sailing lodyas (lodjor in Swedish), small partially decked two- or three-masted ships that had shallow draft and could be rowed over Ladoga and Neva, through Nyen and to Stockholm, Reval or Lübeck. It seems like overland trade during winter on sleds was carried out between Reval and Nyen at an increasing rate too.

Neva connects the Baltic Sea to Ladoga, and the Volkhov river connects a large part of those days' western Russia with Ladoga. There's also a connection through the Svir river to Onega, so the area that has a water route to the Baltic Sea by the way of Neva is pretty big.

Swedish historians tend to point out that the increased trade along the Neva was one of the reasons for Peter's OTL decision to go to war - with the era's mercantilistic ideas, someone else being able to put tolls on your trade was a direct loss for you.

That about the economy of Ingria.

When it comes to Poland-Lithuania, August was unable (or maybe unwilling) to return before Karl had been defeated at Poltava OTL and only with strong Russian support. If Karl installs Stanislaw (or lets the Poles and Lithuanians choose someone else, there are lots of other candidates) and then washes his hands with Poland-Lithuania, August might not have the strength nor the money to return - it was the combination of a huge Swedish defeat and eradication of the hitherto victorious Swedish army and the shattering of the aura of invincibility that had surrounded Karl together with strong Russian military, diplomatic and economic support that allowed August to return.

After being defeated by Karl (with some token Russian support), I wonder if August will be eager for a rematch, especially if both Karl and Peter are signatories of the peace treaty. He might see it wise to bide his time and try to return later, and rent out his army to the Emperor in the meantime, or go on some other adventure, he was quite fickle after all. I doubt he'll be eager to confront a Swedo-Russian alliance on his own, even if Poland-Lithuania is ripe to be retaken. As you've said earlier, Poland-Lithuania is a mess that does not add much to whomever rules it in this era - and August would be acutely aware of this. One of the reasons he attacked Riga was to regain Livonia for Poland as a royal fief, both to give him a base to work from and prestige to start centralising Poland-Lithuania.

In this scenario, I think a timeline akin to this would be likely.

1701, crossing the Düna.
1702 Battle of Kliszow.
1703 Karl rushes around Poland-Lithuania trying to nail the jelly to the wall. Forcing tribute to lessen the economical load on Sweden wherever he goes. Peter gets the parts he wants in the meantime.
1704 August, without Russian support is running out of money and men and have to give battle and is defeated. Sweden marches into Saxony and forces him to cede territory first and then abdicate from the Polish-Lithuanian throne. Stanislaw (or someone else) is elected King. Swedes and Russians go home.
1705 Karl rents out his German garrisons to the Dutch and uses the revenue to keep a small army in Courland for occupation duties (and keeping an eye on any move August may make), the size of the OTL force that Lewenhaupt brought from Livonia to Lesnaya OTL. Peter gets Swedish volunteers and soldiers of fortune and some grand gift of guns and well-wishes for his campaign against the Ottomans.

Then discussions of trading parts of Ingria for (ex-)Polish Livonia can take place. Considering the tolls are smaller than I initially believed, I am inclined to believe it would be possible, especially as relations would be at their best ever due to Russia stopping to demand Kexholm and Ingria 1681, the alliance being formed 1700 and then switftly honoured and Karl and Peter being victorious good comrades in arms.

 

[von Adler]

I would like to play the devil's advocate in the matter of Danzig. I know you find it likely- with good reason, but hear me out.

My thesis is that the WoSS represents a unique strategic opportunity and the decision-making will be influenced by past experiences and current circumstances.

First of all, the strategic position of Sweden is completely different. An allied Russia means that the Swedes' calculation over the first years of the war will be quite different. It is true, in OTL Karl didn't for Royal Prussia. However, there was a second front on his back, even after Narva. Under these circustamces, it would have been idiotic overextension to go for Royal Prussia. The need to provide men and supplies in Livonia and Ingria to deal with the Russians. At the same time, these provinces are not ravaged of war and can provide food and taxes.

The ultimate dream of swedish policy was the control of the Sound and with it of all Baltic. They have learned a bitter lesson that the Maritime Powers will never allow such thing to happen. The next best objective is Danzig and controlling the Vistula trade. However, the WoSS will soon start. In the first crucial years, the arch-enemy of the Maritime Powers holds a line from Antwerp to Namur. A dagger held at the throat of both England and the United Provinces. It might possible that the Maritime Powers despite their preoccupation in Flanders and the Rhine might send their fleets if the Swedes try to land on Zealand. However, would they respond with military force over a secondary objective such as Danzig? I sincerely doubt so.

Would the Maritime Powers try to escalate the war and add a Great Power as an enemy? They face the possibility of their having their perceived boogeyman controlling Europe from Antwerp to Naples. They will dislike a swedish move on Royal Prussia, but under these circumstances they cannot afford to make an enemy out of Sweden.

The response of the Emperor is of very limited importance. The Emperor has the French at the Rhine, a hostile Bavaria and Rákóczi's Revolt to deal with. Failure in the Germanies or Hungary might mean the loss of his House's position in Europe. At best, the Emperor will send a strong worded letter.

Therefore, for the Swedish policy makers it will seem as a golden opportunity. For all intents and purposes the PLC is neutralized, the Maritime Powers have a Sun King to fry and the Emperor cannot do anything.

But what about after the end of the WoSS ? I think we should make our calculations based on the knowledge they have in 1701. The Swedish policy-makers have spent their entire adulthoods watching half of Europe trying to contain France. And barely succeeding in every war so far. In their minds there are two blocks of power, almost equal that regularly clash between them. The recent war only stengthens this view. In this geopolitical landscape, where two behemoths crush, smaller Powers can keep their gains if the play their cards smartly.

They also enough of the political character of the Dutch Republic. They are merchants and fight to support their commercial interests. If they are presented by a fait accompli - swedish Danzig- will they go to war with Sweden after they dealt with France, just for honor's sake? They are burghers after all, no honorable aristocrats like the Swedes themselves. In any case, dutch ships would still arrive at Danzig and trade will continue to flow- it is the swedish interest after all. They need naval supplies from Sweden and Russia, they need grain from Danzig and Riga and the Swedes would be happy to continue trading. It would be something weird according to 17th century interest, if the Dutch would stop acting as Dutch if they are presented with a fait accompli.

Lastly, Royal Prussia can produce a greater surplus to the swedish budget than Ingria. In OTL, when Frederick annexed it during the 1st Partition of Poland, the province - without Danzig- provided 1,7 million prussian thalers in taxes. At 16,7 g of silver per thaler, that is a lot of silver.

I don't thing the Swedes will overly care about polish hostility to be honest. The PLC is facing a new Deluge and without Ukraine it will perceived as a smaller power. The Polish magnates would still need to export their grain. After some time they would have to accept the new order, as they don't have the institutions of a centralized state to continue a very long war. Especially while having the Russians on their flank and they are open up to Cossack raids. Granted, the Russians won't be perceived as a capable army by the Swedes, but even cannon fodder has its uses.

You play the devil's advocate very well, and everything you say is correct - this time is a unique opportunity to acquire Danzig for Sweden. But one of the problems with your reasoning is that you are a bit blinded by your hindsight, and do not think in the long term.

Karl XI, Piper and Karl XII knew very well that Sweden was surrounded by revanchist and/or land-hungry powers. Hannover-Lübeck wanted Swedish Bremen. Brandenburg-Prussia wanted Swedish Pommerania. Saxony and Poland-Lithuania wanted Livonia back. Denmark wanted Scania back. Russia wanted Ingria and Kexholm back. The Emperor would certainly not mind pushing Sweden out of the Holy Roman Empire and end Sweden's role as a guarantor of the Peace of Westphalia and the integrity of the Empire.

Adding England and the Netherlands to this mix, even if Russia is on Sweden's side would be extremely dangerous. Yes, Russia is a great ally now, but at the time they was regarded as only slightly western, and their ability to project power westwards was severely limited - Russia can't protect Swedish Pommerania, stop the Danes from landing in Scania with Dutch and English support or prevent Hannover from attacking Swedish Bremen.

While Sweden might be able to seize Danzig, what happens in 10 years, when the War of the Spanish Succession is over? What happens next time Denmark wants to go to war with Sweden? They'll find eager supporters in the Dutch and English, and the Emperor may very well give his blessing to Prussia to go for Swedish Pommerania. And so on. Karl XII may have been stubborn, but he was not stupid, and like his father he had an ability to to see what potentially laid in the future and act accordingly.

While we may see that taking Danzig might (might!) be a good idea at this time, I don't think Karl would.

 

[alexmilman]

You are right about the tolls on the Neva, it is not that much (it seems I confused the surplus for Estonia, Livonia and Ingria with the Neva tolls), but it experienced a sharp climb in the 1690s as the demand for Russian naval goods increased in England and the Netherlands. The administrative centre moving was most likely because a fire devastated Nyen 1681. By 1697, Nyen saw at least 100 ships per year. There was a general trend where Nyen was starting to replace Reval as the transit place for Russian goods. In 1697 roughly a third of the skippers had orthodox sounding names, which is interpreted as Russian merchants sailing lodyas (lodjor in Swedish), small partially decked two- or three-masted ships that had shallow draft and could be rowed over Ladoga and Neva, through Nyen and to Stockholm, Reval or Lübeck. It seems like overland trade during winter on sleds was carried out between Reval and Nyen at an increasing rate too.

Neva connects the Baltic Sea to Ladoga, and the Volkhov river connects a large part of those days' western Russia with Ladoga. There's also a connection through the Svir river to Onega, so the area that has a water route to the Baltic Sea by the way of Neva is pretty big.

But the whole schema was meaningful only with the Russian cooperation and if Peter wants to promote Archangelsk, Charles hardly can object. This is not even an openly hostile action: why should he pay the tolls (admittedly, low ones, something like 1%) if he may not pay them at all? Plus, the Dutch loved Archangelsk, had been well-set in it and were reluctant to move (as was the case with St-P).

Swedish historians tend to point out that the increased trade along the Neva was one of the reasons for Peter's OTL decision to go to war - with the era's mercantilistic ideas, someone else being able to put tolls on your trade was a direct loss for you.

That about the economy of Ingria.

When it comes to Poland-Lithuania, August was unable (or maybe unwilling) to return before Karl had been defeated at Poltava OTL and only with strong Russian support. If Karl installs Stanislaw (or lets the Poles and Lithuanians choose someone else, there are lots of other candidates) and then washes his hands with Poland-Lithuania, August might not have the strength nor the money to return - it was the combination of a huge Swedish defeat and eradication of the hitherto victorious Swedish army and the shattering of the aura of invincibility that had surrounded Karl together with strong Russian military, diplomatic and economic support that allowed August to return.

After being defeated by Karl (with some token Russian support), I wonder if August will be eager for a rematch, especially if both Karl and Peter are signatories of the peace treaty. He might see it wise to bide his time and try to return later, and rent out his army to the Emperor in the meantime, or go on some other adventure, he was quite fickle after all. I doubt he'll be eager to confront a Swedo-Russian alliance on his own, even if Poland-Lithuania is ripe to be retaken. As you've said earlier, Poland-Lithuania is a mess that does not add much to whomever rules it in this era - and August would be acutely aware of this. One of the reasons he attacked Riga was to regain Livonia for Poland as a royal fief, both to give him a base to work from and prestige to start centralising Poland-Lithuania.

In this scenario, I think a timeline akin to this would be likely.

1701, crossing the Düna.
1702 Battle of Kliszow.
1703 Karl rushes around Poland-Lithuania trying to nail the jelly to the wall. Forcing tribute to lessen the economical load on Sweden wherever he goes. Peter gets the parts he wants in the meantime.
1704 August, without Russian support is running out of money and men and have to give battle and is defeated. Sweden marches into Saxony and forces him to cede territory first and then abdicate from the Polish-Lithuanian throne. Stanislaw (or someone else) is elected King. Swedes and Russians go home.
1705 Karl rents out his German garrisons to the Dutch and uses the revenue to keep a small army in Courland for occupation duties (and keeping an eye on any move August may make), the size of the OTL force that Lewenhaupt brought from Livonia to Lesnaya OTL. Peter gets Swedish volunteers and soldiers of fortune and some grand gift of guns and well-wishes for his campaign against the Ottomans.

Then discussions of trading parts of Ingria for (ex-)Polish Livonia can take place. Considering the tolls are smaller than I initially believed, I am inclined to believe it would be possible, especially as relations would be at their best ever due to Russia stopping to demand Kexholm and Ingria 1681, the alliance being formed 1700 and then switftly honoured and Karl and Peter being victorious good comrades in arms.

Generally, I agree with most of what you wrote but IMO you are underestimating the “morass” factor. Of course, Charles, with or without Russian help, can defeat the Polish and Saxon armies and eventually can force August to abdicate. But he can’t in the morass forever and for the Poles August (as pretty much any other person on the PLC throne) is mostly a figurehead. The Swedes, by the end of Charles’s little adventure, are not popular in the PLC and his puppet has very little in the terms pf the popular support, especially after he signed up a peace which takes away a considerable piece of the Polish territory (Senate must ratify it but as long as the Swedes and Russians are in, this may be done). The precedent of dethroning a king is being set and as soon as Charles is out, some confederacy/rokosz is declared. What force the puppet can raise against it? Troops of some pro-Swedish magnates and even they are not too reliable: as in OTL the Swedish commander remarked before Battke of Kalisz, “the Poles [applicable to the pro-Swedish faction] had not been keen on fighting Russians or anyone at all during the war”. In this TL they are even less motivated because they are fighting for the king who just humiliated their country. So the morass is being disturbed again with a resulting stench and a need to commit the new resources. Look at the troubles that later in the century the Russians had with Bar confederacy. Austria is not going to interfere directly but it surely can provide a shelter, if needed: dethronement of August is a bad precedent and as an Elector of Saxony he is an ally and, even if he is not directly involved, the uprising is in his support.

To make a long story short, the main difference in our points of views is that you are considered replacement of a king as “mission accomplished” (which probably would be the case in a conventional state) and I think that in this specific case the fun would keep going on for quite a while.

So how about a completely different approach to the problem: Charles is persuaded by his adisors (Piper and whoever else) and Peter that the best punishment for August the Perfidious would be to leave him on the PLC throne and force to sign a humiliating peace. The rest of his reign is going to be quite “interesting” with him being denounced by his Polish subjects, legally confronted in each his action and perhaps facing the numerous confederacies. Part of the peace deal which the Poles are going to like is a ban on presence of the Saxon troops in the PLC. So, “dear cousin August, the crown is yours, enjoy it” (as in the curse “let all your wishes come true”). No need for Russia and Sweden to police the PLC: the Polish nobility will take care of keeping August from doing anything (well, except screwing his female subjects). 😂

 

[Jürgen]

Honestly Charles wins no matter what, either he leave a incompetent king in place or Poland start it own decade long civil war.

There was also another aspect which should be somewhat obvious, the reason Denmark was a threat at all, was because the Danish state was able thanks to its absolutism and lack of internal trade barriers to have a state budget half the size of Swedens. Danzig and Royal Prussia would mean that the Swedes was able to significantly outfund the Danes, which would be obvious to the Danes. This would also give Denmark problems with upkeep a naval force large enough to protect Zealand.

So Denmark have two choice. Either find a sugar daddy with a big navy to protect them, which would obvious need to be England/UK or find new sources of income. Denmark would likely have to do both. The low hanging fruit here would be to increase agricultural output, which Denmark was doing anyway. The higher hanging fruits would be expand their colonial holdings, the easiest way to do that would be to join the Spanish Succession War on the British side and ask for whatever breadcrumbs the British would be willing to throw their way. Of course there‘s also a third way to get money find marriage partners from rich but less prestigious dynasties or even foreign noble houses or bastards with a big dowrit’s.

 

[von Adler]

To make a long story short, the main difference in our points of views is that you are considered replacement of a king as “mission accomplished” (which probably would be the case in a conventional state) and I think that in this specific case the fun would keep going on for quite a while.

The difference here is that OTL Karl wanted Poland-Lithuania as an ally and thus just installing a friendly monarch is not "mission accomplished", just as you say. But with August as the last enemy and Russia as an ally, there is no need create an allied Poland-Lithuania, just a need to remove August as King of it to punish him personally. As soon as the Poles and Lithuanians elect someone else and August has been forced to concede the throne, Karl and Sweden can just wipe their hands with the whole morass and let Poland-Lithuania (continue to) go to shit. As long as August does not return, they'd be fine even if their own candidate is dethroned for someone else. And without Russian support, I don't know if August could (or would want to) return to the morass either.

So how about a completely different approach to the problem: Charles is persuaded by his adisors (Piper and whoever else) and Peter that the best punishment for August the Perfidious would be to leave him on the PLC throne and force to sign a humiliating peace. The rest of his reign is going to be quite “interesting” with him being denounced by his Polish subjects, legally confronted in each his action and perhaps facing the numerous confederacies. Part of the peace deal which the Poles are going to like is a ban on presence of the Saxon troops in the PLC. So, “dear cousin August, the crown is yours, enjoy it” (as in the curse “let all your wishes come true”). No need for Russia and Sweden to police the PLC: the Polish nobility will take care of keeping August from doing anything (well, except screwing his female subjects).

Interesting idea. When I think of it, yeah, that is quite possible. Not that the Polish-Lithuanian nobility were capable of actually keeping the Saxonian army out if August marched it in again, but doing so would be a breach of the peace, and allow Peter and Karl to respond while the Saxonians are still in Poland-Lithuania. Combined with some pretty heavy reparations (and/or holding ports in Royal Prussia, such as Elblag as Sweden did 1629-35 and carry its land rents and tolls in lieu of war reparations) it could be satisfying enough to Karl.

Such a peace could also be acceptable to the Emperor, and he might mediate and be a guarantor of it, as he wants peace and quiet in that part of the Empire and rent armies, not having to check his back for possible Swedish incursions into the Empire, which would further dissuade August from adventurism.

Regardless how you take this story further, I must say I have enjoyed this exchange. I have learned new things, been forced to go back and check my sources, corrected a misconception of mine (on the Neva tolls) and now have a much clearer picture of the Russian, Polish-Lithuanian, Swedish, Saxonian and Imperial position. It has been a good few days.

 

[alexmilman]

You play the devil's advocate very well, and everything you say is correct - this time is a unique opportunity to acquire Danzig for Sweden. But one of the problems with your reasoning is that you are a bit blinded by your hindsight, and do not think in the long term.

Karl XI, Piper and Karl XII knew very well that Sweden was surrounded by revanchist and/or land-hungry powers. Hannover-Lübeck wanted Swedish Bremen. Brandenburg-Prussia wanted Swedish Pommerania. Saxony and Poland-Lithuania wanted Livonia back. Denmark wanted Scania back. Russia wanted Ingria and Kexholm back. The Emperor would certainly not mind pushing Sweden out of the Holy Roman Empire and end Sweden's role as a guarantor of the Peace of Westphalia and the integrity of the Empire.

Adding England and the Netherlands to this mix, even if Russia is on Sweden's side would be extremely dangerous. Yes, Russia is a great ally now, but at the time they was regarded as only slightly western, and their ability to project power westwards was severely limited - Russia can't protect Swedish Pommerania, stop the Danes from landing in Scania with Dutch and English support or prevent Hannover from attacking Swedish Bremen.

While Sweden might be able to seize Danzig,

While in theory any place can be taken, seizing Danzig would be a very serious enterprise with an unclear outcome. First, it can’t be blockaded from the sea because both the maritime powers and Denmark would not let this happening. Even with the ongoing WoSS the Brits and the Dutch (and the Danes, of course) can spare enough ships to prevent such a blockade. On the land the Swedes had to march between Prussia (the Duchy) and Prussian Pomerania all the way from Courland, through Lithuania to Warsaw and then by the Vistula to Danzig. At least 900 miles to get there. And this means to get there with the siege artillery and adequate supply of the munitions.

And below are the fortifications of the city.

what happens in 10 years, when the War of the Spanish Succession is over? What happens next time Denmark wants to go to war with Sweden? They'll find eager supporters in the Dutch and English, and the Emperor may very well give his blessing to Prussia to go for Swedish Pommerania. And so on. Karl XII may have been stubborn, but he was not stupid, and like his father he had an ability to to see what potentially laid in the future and act accordingly.

While we may see that taking Danzig might (might!) be a good idea at this time, I don't think Karl would.

 

[alexmilman]

The difference here is that OTL Karl wanted Poland-Lithuania as an ally and thus just installing a friendly monarch is not "mission accomplished", just as you say. But with August as the last enemy and Russia as an ally, there is no need create an allied Poland-Lithuania, just a need to remove August as King of it to punish him personally. As soon as the Poles and Lithuanians elect someone else and August has been forced to concede the throne, Karl and Sweden can just wipe their hands with the whole morass and let Poland-Lithuania (continue to) go to shit. As long as August does not return, they'd be fine even if their own candidate is dethroned for someone else. And without Russian support, I don't know if August could (or would want to) return to the morass either.



Interesting idea. When I think of it, yeah, that is quite possible. Not that the Polish-Lithuanian nobility were capable of actually keeping the Saxonian army out if August marched it in again, but doing so would be a breach of the peace, and allow Peter and Karl to respond while the Saxonians are still in Poland-Lithuania. Combined with some pretty heavy reparations (and/or holding ports in Royal Prussia, such as Elblag as Sweden did 1629-35 and carry its land rents and tolls in lieu of war reparations) it could be satisfying enough to Karl.

Such a peace could also be acceptable to the Emperor, and he might mediate and be a guarantor of it, as he wants peace and quiet in that part of the Empire and rent armies, not having to check his back for possible Swedish incursions into the Empire, which would further dissuade August from adventurism.

Regardless how you take this story further, I must say I have enjoyed this exchange. I have learned new things, been forced to go back and check my sources, corrected a misconception of mine (on the Neva tolls) and now have a much clearer picture of the Russian, Polish-Lithuanian, Swedish, Saxonian and Imperial position. It has been a good few days.

We are not done, yet. I’m not going to declare “you ain’t see nothing, yet” but with the framework which is being shaping up by the ongoing discussion things start look much more interesting than I anticipating initially. Probably, I’ll to slow down a little bit to attend to the domestic issues (including coming birthday) but promise to keep thing at a descent speed.

Really enjoying interactions with all of you.

 

[von Adler]

Damn it, but I am sorry, I was just reading through "Stad och stat. Nyen, migrationen och borgarna under 1600-talets andra hälft" ("City and state, Nyen, the migration and the burghers during the 1600-hundreds second half"), by Finnish author Kepsu, who claims that by the start of the Great Northern War, the tolls from Nyen made up between 20 and 50% of the income from the Baltic provinces (Ingria, Estonia and Livonia).

I checked his source, Die Staatlichen Zölle - Portorium und Lizent - in den Städten den schwedischen Ostseeprovinzen by Enn Küng, and I don't think it supports Kepsu's conclusion - most of the money goes over Narva rather than Nyen.

Narva grows from 9 529 Reichsthaler in 1695 to 41 372 in 1699. So the combined income from Ingria is about 20% of the Baltic Provinces - but most of it is by Narva, not by Nyen. So I supose a deal where Peter gets Nyen, but not Narva would be very palatable to the Swedes.

 

[alexmilman]

Damn it, but I am sorry, I was just reading through "Stad och stat. Nyen, migrationen och borgarna under 1600-talets andra hälft" ("City and state, Nyen, the migration and the burghers during the 1600-hundreds second half"), by Finnish author Kepsu, who claims that by the start of the Great Northern War, the tolls from Nyen made up between 20 and 50% of the income from the Baltic provinces (Ingria, Estonia and Livonia).

I checked his source, Die Staatlichen Zölle - Portorium und Lizent - in den Städten den schwedischen Ostseeprovinzen by Enn Küng, and I don't think it supports Kepsu's conclusion - most of the money goes over Narva rather than Nyen.

Narva grows from 9 529 Reichsthaler in 1695 to 41 372 in 1699. So the combined income from Ingria is about 20% of the Baltic Provinces - but most of it is by Narva, not by Nyen. So I supose a deal where Peter gets Nyen, but not Narva would be very palatable to the Swedes.

It seems that the numbers do differ from author to author, sometimes depending upon the modern considerations but it looks like we came to the consensus that comparing to Riga and even Narva, Nyen was a relatively small potato and Charles potentially could swap them for the Polish Livonia + one time cash grant + the services rendered and expected.

In this TL (and IMO in OTL as well) Nyen should better than Narva suit Peter’s limited goals: the place is suitable for expanding the existing settlement into a reasonably big port conveniently connected to the Russian internal markets (the waterways remained the preferred communications well after Peter’s death). It also close enough to both Finland and Estonia to provide a good market for their agricultural products (the sides can agree upon free trade for the local products). It also is easily defensible from the sea (Danes, Brits, Dutch are not necessary always friendly).


OTOH, the site has obvious problems which make it hard to develop it into something comparable to Riga without very big investments of both labor force and money. The regular floods, low salt level of the Gulf of Finland (which makes maintenance of a large fleet out of it rather expensive) and a need to build a canal bypassing the Ladoga Lake known of its storms.

 

[von Adler]

I wonder about the long-term consequences if this alliance lasts - if Alexei is taken out like OTL (which might or might not happen with no Great Northern War), Anna Petrovna might marry Karl Fredrik as OTL, and their son will be the grandson of Peter and grand nephew of Karl. The Royal Houses might acually become closely related. And if Karl decides to not marry and adopt Karl Fredrik as heir you might even have a situation where he and Anna need to have two sons - one to inherit Sweden and one to inherit Russia!

However, in this scenario, Peter may be more careful dealing with Alexei, and he is not killed, and the Russian succession is stable.

If the Swedo-Russian alliance continues - and I don't see why not, for Sweden it will be the only grand power friend and with resolved border issues, there's really no reason to ditch that, and Russia will not be bringing Sweden into wars she does not want to fight like France did - Russia has a western friend and through that access to the mercenary market of Germany without going though Poland or having to deal with the Emperor, a friend for any issues in Poland-Lithuania and someone with a fleet strong enough to protect Russian trade, at least in the eastern and northern Baltic Sea against the Dutch, British and Danes should any of them turn unfriendly.

I am getting way ahead of myself here, but a Russo-Swedish alliance might be a fearsome bloc in the War of Austrian Succession, especially if Sweden is still a grand power and has not been consumed by the OTL corruption of the liberty era.

 

[McAuslan_in_the_Rough]

However, in this scenario, Peter may be more careful dealing with Alexei, and he is not killed, and the Russian succession is stable.

There is also the question of Peter's second marriage, unless his somewhat more stable personality means that Eudoxia stays out of the monastery. Either way, since there is no war with Sweden, Marta Skowrońska probably lives out her life in Marienburg.

 

[alexmilman]

11. Everybody is having fun

A little bit of a background:

While all these things had been happening and even few years prior to them staring happening the Lithuanian nobility was having their own civil war. On one side there were the Republicans and on another …., I’m sure that you guessed correctly, Sapieha family - the magnates who had been controlling both Lithuanian military force (Jan Kazimierz Sapieha was Lithuanian Great Hetman)

and Treasury (another Sapeha was a Treasurer). The republicans were not as much for pro-something as they were against Sapehas having too much power. The fighting started after the death of Jan Sobiesky and happily continued into the reign of August. Formally, the republicans were pro-August while the Sapehas not too much so but also recognized August who tried to stop an ongoing war by a royal universal and, of course, got the opposite results. In 1698 August reached an agreement with the republicans led by Grzegorz Antoni Ogiński (and others).

By this agreement size of the Lithuanian army (one which Sapeha controlled ) was cut in half (which, of course was ignored by Sapeha) and the fighting kept going on. Everything was nice and peachy until 1700 when August got to war with Sweden. From this point things started getting complicated because August needed Hetman Sapeha to raise as many troops as he can to fight against the Swedes [1]. So August gave him such a permission without bothering to get permission from the Sejm [2]. The Republicans, understandably, protested [3] and had been pissed even more when August started placing the Saxon troops on the winter quarters in Lithuania. A pospolite ruszenie of the Lithuanian nobility was declared by the leaders of the Republicans. They claimed they were doing it in accordance with the King's universal, which ordered the nobility to prepare the country's defence against Swedish invasion. August II maneuvered in between the two sides, because he needed Sapieha's support, but still wanted to keep the power of Sapieha's in check. Moreover, the king illegally maintained the Saxon Army in Lithuania, pretending to do it for the protection of the nobles, while actually assembling his forces for the campaign of Livonia, as the Little Northern War had already started in 1700. August II asked the Polish and Lithuanian senators to declare war on Sweden. The Polish refused, but Sapieha agreed, even if he protested against the stationing of the Saxon army. So, Sapieha was forced to recruit an army, and lead it. He also appealed to the Republicans, inviting them to contribute but the Field Hetman of Lithuania Michał Serwacy Wiśniowiecki, instead of defending his country from the Swedes, attacked Sapieha at the Battle of Valkininkai [4]. Confederates declared that Sapeha is deprived of Hetman position, his estates had been looted, he was forced to flee to Warsaw. Augustus II appointed a commission to investigate the quarrel and, now with Sapieha's consent, stationed the Saxon army in Lithuania [5]. But Sapeha still did not like August.

Back to Charles:

While entertainments available in Courland during the winter (mostly throwing snowballs) had been exhausted, Charles decided that he is supporting Sapeha. He started with sending two small detachments against Oginski who activated his partisan war. Charles decided that the time came for his personal interference. He loaded 400 of his Guards on the sledges and disappeared in a general direction of Samogitia. He was absent for the whole December and only close to the New Year reappeared happy as a clam because his little adventure proved to be quite satisfactory. At some point Oginski managed to launch a sudden attack on a village in which Charles and his detachment had been sleeping and put it on fire. This was a real fun because the Swedes (Charles including) had to run out of the houses in underwear, repel the attack, put down the fire and go back to sleep. The next time Charles almost caught Oginski but he managed to escape.

August, when his attempts to get Sejm’s support for his war with Sweden failed, decided to try diplomacy and proceeded in his usual way. At that time Maria Aurora, countess von Königsmark [6], former August’s mistress, now a secular abbess of Quedlinburg [7], and as such a princess if the Empire,

and mother of August’s bastard son, Hermann Moritz von Sachsen (who was at that tine much younger than on his portrait below),

was going to Courland to meet with count Piper on the matter of a family business (most of “who was who” in Sweden was her relative). So August asked her to met Charles and used her well-known charms (to which many could attest) to convince Charles to make a peace. The fact that she was twice older than Charles did not look as a big deal. When she arrived to the royal headquarters Piper met her with all respect due to her official status and she was quite busy being entertained by her relatives (Wrangels, Levenhaups, etc.) but Charles refused to met her. Finally, she almost caught him when he was enjoying a horse ride but on her sight, Charles turned his horse and galloped away giving Aurora a reason to claim that she is the only person from who Charles ever fled.

The next August’s messenger was arrested at put in prison in Riga at the pretext that his papers were not in order. Charles had enough: if August wants to see him so much, he will have a chance. Charles ordered Swedish army to start march on Warsaw.

Well before this happened Peter got information which forced him to rethink some of his earlier actions… [8]

_________
[1] This was PLC. so Sapeha still remained the top military authority in Lithuania.Augustus II appointed a commission to investigate the quarrel and, now with Sapieha's consent, stationed the Saxon army in Lithuania
[2] To make situation clear, we are talking about 3,660 soldiers, a rather pathetic number.
[3] Who cares about Sweden when there are the Sapehas to fight.
[4] Which clearly indicates that Wisniowiecki was a true Lithuanian patriot with all priorities properly set. As for the battle, Sapeha had higher quality troops and even 8 artillery pieces but the opponents had numeric advantage of at least 4:1 and when the things started getting sour, all leaders of the Sapeha’s army fled from the field, except for Sapeha’s son who was taken prisoner and the next day was killed together with all other prisoners.
[5] Probably formally he was still the Great Hetman.
[6] Lady “pleasant in all aspects”, to put it politely.
[7] My first reaction that this establishment actually was some kind of a bordello for the German aristocrats proved to be wrong: this was a highly prestigious religious institution. Well, this makes her position as an abbess even more piquant. 🥵
[8] Remember the officers he sent to Charles? And Sheremetev as well? The ATL Peter has a habit of thinking and acting upon the results….

 

[alexmilman]

I wonder about the long-term consequences if this alliance lasts - if Alexei is taken out like OTL (which might or might not happen with no Great Northern War),

Without Russian conquest of Livonia Martha Skavronskaya is just a washerwoman. There is no plot against Alexey.

Anna Petrovna might marry Karl Fredrik as OTL, and their son will be the grandson of Peter and grand nephew of Karl.

No Martha/Catherine - no Anna Petrovna.

The Royal Houses might acually become closely related. And if Karl decides to not marry and adopt Karl Fredrik as heir you might even have a situation where he and Anna need to have two sons - one to inherit Sweden and one to inherit Russia!

Ulrika Eleonora is just 2 years older than Alexey so the main problem may be religion: both sides had been rather stubborn on that issue but the arrangements could be made for her remaining a Lutheran while the children will be Orthodox.

However, in this scenario, Peter may be more careful dealing with Alexei, and he is not killed, and the Russian succession is stable.

As I said, the whole thing looks as a big setup possible only in a very specific set of the circumstances which are absent there.

If the Swedo-Russian alliance continues - and I don't see why not, for Sweden it will be the only grand power friend and with resolved border issues, there's really no reason to ditch that, and Russia will not be bringing Sweden into wars she does not want to fight like France did - Russia has a western friend and through that access to the mercenary market of Germany without going though Poland or having to deal with the Emperor, a friend for any issues in Poland-Lithuania and someone with a fleet strong enough to protect Russian trade, at least in the eastern and northern Baltic Sea against the Dutch, British and Danes should any of them turn unfriendly.

In OTL Amsterdam was a point through which many mercenaries had been recruited and then shipped to Russia. Thanks to the beautiful Dutch system of a state organization, the government in Hague could declare embargoes and pretty much everything else that it wanted and the merchants of Amsterdam could do pretty much whatever they wanted completely ignoring blabbing coming from Hague. Amsterdam was a najor Russian trade partner that kept supplying weapons, strategic materials and mercenaries through the GNW in the open defiance of the government.

As for the fleet (your are forcing me to go ahead of the schedule 😉), of course, Russia could not maintain a strong Baltic fleet out of a single port, especially with its focus being on the South and, to a certain degree, on the North, but it can maintain a reasonably-sized squadron which, together with the Swedish navy, guarantees at least parity and probably superiority to the Danish fleet. Well, to be honest, I have some additional plans for this squadron but they are outside Baltic Sea.

I am getting way ahead of myself here, but a Russo-Swedish alliance might be a fearsome bloc in the War of Austrian Succession, especially if Sweden is still a grand power and has not been consumed by the OTL corruption of the liberty era.

But would they really care for this specific war? If both Swedish and Russian territorial interests are secure, then why go to the expensive adventure on somebody else’s behalf? The only reason that I can come with off the top of my head is not to allow excessive raise of Prussia because it potentially puts Swedish German possessions in danger. But if alliance holds and both partners are strong, stepping upon their toes is a much greater risk than anybody in Europe can afford. And, by sticking together, they are holding a near monopoly upon many strategic materials, which makes Britain’s position weaker than in OTL where it could play them against each other. Getting even more ahead, if Sweden and Denmark are managing to resolve their issues to a mutual satisfaction, then the block of three Baltic powers becomes a very serious European factor.

 

[Jürgen]

[7] My first reaction that this establishment actually was some kind of a bordello for the German aristocrats proved to be wrong: this was a highly prestigious religious institution. Well, this makes her position as an abbess even more piquant. 🥵

Don’t think about it as a religious institution, but as a minor territorial state with a elective prince or in this case princess, who just happen to also have a religious title. These elected princes usual came from the class of imperial knights[1] (territorial nobles who was answering directly to emperor instead of answering to the territorial princes), but sometimes and some ecclesial states elected secondary members of princely lines instead. These ecclesial rulers didn’t usual practice celibacy but they rarely married (never in case of the Catholics and rarely in case of the Protestants), but their children joined the burgher class instead of the nobility, even if they were from princely family. Of course there’s exceptions to this like the Bishopric of Lübeck, which was a heritable bishopric ruled by a sideline of the Gottorps (who would later becomes kings of Sweden and dukes/grand dukes of Oldenburg). The book “Social History of Germany 1648-1914” is a pretty good source for this complexity.

[1] the Germans tended to use the term “Ritter” (rider/knight) for non-royal nobility, they usual had titles of counts or baron, but to make it even more complex some princely families also used the title count, which we see in the pre-ducal County of Oldenburg.

 

[Merrick]

While all these things had been happening and even few years prior to them staring happening the Lithuanian nobility was having their own civil war.

... and so the Lithuanians were once again plunged info conflict with their eternal foes, the Lithuanians ...
Seriously, has any polity in history been quite as dysfunctional as 18th-century Poland-Lithuania? A normal country would merely have had a big civil war and then either centralised or fragmented in the aftermath, but the PLC seems capable of keeping the chaos going for decades without anything workable emerging. True, Augustus is 100% the wrong monarch for the situation, but still...

If I was in Augustus's place, I'd be seriously tempted just to send Charles and/or Peter a letter saying "Congratulations, they're your problem now" and hie myself and my army back to Dresden.

Back to Charles:

While entertainments available in Courland during the winter (mostly throwing snowballs) had been exhausted, Charles decided that he is supporting Sapeha. He started with sending two small detachments against Oginski who activated his partisan war. Charles decided that the time came for his personal interference. He loaded 400 of his Guards on the sledges and disappeared in a general direction of Samogitia. He was absent for the whole December and only close to the New Year reappeared happy as a clam because his little adventure proved to be quite satisfactory. At some point Oginski managed to launch a sudden attack on a village in which Charles and his detachment had been sleeping and put it on fire. This was a real fun because the Swedes (Charles including) had to run out of the houses in underwear, repel the attack, put down the fire and go back to sleep. The next time Charles almost caught Oginski but he managed to escape.

Sledges, snowballs, playing guerilla leader, being pursued by a famous beauty - Peter must be sorry he missed the fun! I get the impression that if Charles and Peter ever met in person, and if both of them could somehow avoid throwing a tantrum in the first 15 minutes, they could easily emerge as best buds.

So have both Charles and Peter been tempted into pushing further into the military void (and political morass) that is the PLC, or does Peter have something more devious in mind?

 

[alexmilman]

... and so the Lithuanians were once again plunged info conflict with their eternal foes, the Lithuanians ...
Seriously, has any polity in history been quite as dysfunctional as 18th-century Poland-Lithuania?

Perhaps HRE prior to the 30YW when it could be considered as some kind of a single entity? Well, not not sure even about that after liberum veto had been introduced in the PLC and, anyway, at least the rulers of the HRE entities had formal rights to some degree of a sovereignty while “the 200,000 kings” of the PLC were simply doing whatever they wanted.

A normal country would merely have had a big civil war and then either centralised or fragmented in the aftermath, but the PLC seems capable of keeping the chaos going for decades without anything workable emerging. True, Augustus is 100% the wrong monarch for the situation, but still...

IMO, pretty much any monarch would be “wrong” for the PLC unless he has an overwhelming power of his own and not shy of using it: this may (optimistically) unify his subjects …. against him (as happened in the XIX in Congress Poland). 😢

Of course, a wiser person than August could simply sit quiet watching as his subjects are fighting each other (don’t forget the Cossack war on the South) and doing nothing except chasing his female subjects, if course. Probably would end up as “August the Wise”. 😂

If I was in Augustus's place, I'd be seriously tempted just to send Charles and/or Peter a letter saying "Congratulations, they're your problem now" and hie myself and my army back to Dresden.

Well, we (me and @von Adler ) are seemingly agreed on the opposite plan: after getting whatever they want, Charles and Peter are sending him a letter saying “now they are your problem, again”. 😂 As was formulated by Kalman Miksat, “only a bad ruler takes away something that he does not need” and in this TL both Peter and Charles are slightly better rulers then in reality.

Sledges, snowballs, playing guerilla leader, being pursued by a famous beauty - Peter must be sorry he missed the fun!

At least real Peter preferred entertainment on a greater scale, often involving some physical damage to the butts of his jokes but probably these two can exchange the ideas.

I get the impression that if Charles and Peter ever met in person, and if both of them could somehow avoid throwing a tantrum in the first 15 minutes, they could easily emerge as best buds.

Getting a little bit ahead of myself (don’t complain when this would be repeated later 😉) I have a picture of their “perfect meeting”. Charles in his trademark blue and yellow uniform, botforts, and without a wig and Peter in his modest green and red army uniform (no gold braid), botforts and without a wig (or a very small one, hard to tell looking at his portraits). Two “man of the men”, two true soldiers. Both with the rough manners and not excessively sophisticated sense of a humor so the first sentence after the mandatory greetings (nothing like Versallies-style exquisite bows, just shaking hands or embrace) is going to be along the lines “we did pluck few feathers out of the tail of that peacock August, didn’t we?”. Both share a good laugh and perhaps even slap each other on a back. Both, being good showmen, are having on a background a retinue of the much better dressed top ranking military and civilian officials. A mandatory banquet reflects their mutual preference to the plain food (so there would be no disparaging remarks on that subject like Marlborough made in his report) and perhaps Peter is wise enough to cut the usual drinking to few toasts to the mutual health (each accompanied by the artillery salute). Yes, they’ll go together just fine.

So have both Charles and Peter been tempted into pushing further into the military void (and political morass) that is the PLC, or does Peter have something more devious in mind?

To quote from the “Spaceballs”: “This will be revealed to you in a due time” 😜😜😜😜🤗

 

[von Adler]

Getting a little bit ahead of myself (don’t complain when this would be repeated later 😉) I have a picture of their “perfect meeting”. Charles in his trademark blue and yellow uniform, botforts, and without a wig and Peter in his modest green and red army uniform (no gold braid), botforts and without a wig (or a very small one, hard to tell looking at his portraits). Two “man of the men”, two true soldiers. Both with the rough manners and not excessively sophisticated sense of a humor so the first sentence after the mandatory greetings (nothing like Versallies-style exquisite bows, just shaking hands or embrace) is going to be along the lines “we did pluck few feathers out of the tail of that peacock August, didn’t we?”. Both share a good laugh and perhaps even slap each other on a back. Both, being good showmen, are having on a background a retinue of the much better dressed top ranking military and civilian officials. A mandatory banquet reflects their mutual preference to the plain food (so there would be no disparaging remarks on that subject like Marlborough made in his report) and perhaps Peter is wise enough to cut the usual drinking to few toasts to the mutual health (each accompanied by the artillery salute). Yes, they’ll go together just fine.

Speaking of food, the Swedish royal court was pretty good at maintaining a festive spirit, even in the field. This is the menu that was served the royal table on the 2nd of January 1702:

For dinner and supper the royal table was served a total of 14 dishes. Sauerkraut, beef, beer brisket, veal, sheep and pig roast, 4 turkeys, 2 hares and 2 hens, also apple cake and almond milk. At dinner there were also 6 smaller dishes - ham, pig's head, smoked Braunschweig saucage, Dutch herring and cheese, Riga flatfish, olives and caprice. The day's consumption of spririts, wine and beer was made up of - for the King and the immediate court - 5,22 litres of Rhenian wine, 86,46 litres of French wine, 2,62 litres of Bleckert (light red wine, perhaps rosé), 5,22 litres of sweet wine, 7,53 litres of brandy, 36,68 litres of strong beer (about 4-5% like our modern beer) and 377,28 litres of beer (weak, about 1-2,5%).

 

[Jürgen]

Perhaps HRE prior to the 30YW when it could be considered as some kind of a single entity? Well, not not sure even about that after liberum veto had been introduced in the PLC and, anyway, at least the rulers of the HRE entities had formal rights to some degree of a sovereignty while “the 200,000 kings” of the PLC were simply doing whatever they wanted.

In the HRE even after 1648, non-territorial nobility (knights answering directly to a prince instead of to the emperor) could complain over the action of their princes to the Diet in Regensburg and limit their actions. The emperor could also protect domains from each other, as we see in Denmark being kept from annexing Hamburg and Sweden from annexing the City of Bremen. So all in all the HRE was to the very end more unified and functioning than the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The only reason we see the PLC as a state and not so for the late HRE was because of the inability of the Polish nobility to establish alternative state-like structure; fundamental PLC was a libertarian utopia/dystopia.

 

[Hastings]

The Holy Roman Empire gets a lot more flack than it deserves. With a little better luck, it could have turned into a very powerful confederation. It was far more functional than Poland-Lithuania. Real control could be highly variable and there were often internal conflicts, but being Holy Roman Emperor brought real power and was why the Habsburgs were were able to compete against France. Even as late as the War of the Spanish Succession, about half the forces the Habsburgs fielded were from the various German states (despite a leading German kingdom, Bavaria, fighting on the French side). Habsburg forces peaked at 340,000 in 1710, not all that much smaller than the forces of the Sun King. War of Austrian Succession was when it was clear that Habsburg control over the HRE was disintegrating, three of the major German kingdoms went to war against Habsburgs, and even though they technically 'won' other than losing Silesia, were never able to rely on the HRE for manpower to the same extent again.