On the Western Fjords and under the Midnight Sun: A Norway TL

The Danish noble titles are largely derived from German titles, with the clear exception of Jarl. Jarl was used as a general title for just about any major leader. It would be the import of Greve, Baron and Hertug which really filled out the ranks. Huskarl and Thane (though the later is more Anglo oriented to my knowledge) both refer to parts of a retinue rather than an actual noble rank. They are professions rather than ranks. Hope it helps. This is really interesting and I look forward to seeing what happens next. What effect has the lack of Wendish Crusades had on Germany?
Ah, so Greve is a German title equivalent to a Count or Earl. When I just put in greve I got nothing. Hertug is duke? Huskarl and thegn are indeed more bodyguard, although at least in England and Scotland thegn it also came to refer to an actual class of nobles. Not so sure about Scandinavia, although I will give a hint as to my current thoughts in that Alva's sister, Margaret, is currently married to King David I of Scotland's eldest son. David utilized Thane as a type of noble. Although I am also imagining them more as professionals than inherited nobility. Still got a bit rattling around in my head.

The eastern expansion of Germany really kick-started in the second half of the 12th century, so not as much clear issues quite yet. However Albert the Bear's lands received a greater concentration of the early settlers, meaning OTL Margrave of Brandenburg is far more developed here. That's partly what allowed Albert to push into what OTL is southern Mecklenburg, and Wolgast is experiencing strong growth as a German port on the Baltic (not sure whether it will eventually be renamed ITTL). While a bigger butterfly will occur in the future, it also has several other causes than just the Danish preemption of the Wendish Crusade.

Otherwise an area I didn't really expand on in the chapter that probably is important is Henry the Lion and Adolf II's attack on Denmark in 1147 for the Duchy of Holstein. This really was an invasion. While Albert was persuaded not to help Bjorn and King Conrad officially didn't support Henry's act, many Germans did. Bjorn's successful defense was arguably the highlight of his military career, and he even occupied Holstein to enforce his de facto control of it. Bjorn however never invaded Saxony as he didn't desire to produce a threat that might give Henry more German support, and so Conrad made a peace. If Bjorn had lost, there's a good chance Denmark would have lost the Duchy of Holstein with Wagria with it. Bjorn already had a pretty good military history. The only pitched battle he ever lost was outside Roskilde while he was a teenager, and he never failed in a larger campaign. Its just that as he engaged in the typical style of war of the period where the focus was on taking of forts, his campaigns aren't exactly something I can talk about without going into great detail. Already Bjorn will be remembered as something of more successful military leader of all the Kings of Denmark ITTL, and if he was instead a military commander to a more ambitious king he very likely would have been a famous military commander throughout Europe.
 
I've been playing too much skyrim. All I know is Thane, Jarl, Oberjarl (from brotherband chronicles and the Ranger's Apprentice), and High king (of Skyrim).

And the last two are pretty fictional.
 
I've been playing too much skyrim. All I know is Thane, Jarl, Oberjarl (from brotherband chronicles and the Ranger's Apprentice), and High king (of Skyrim).

And the last two are pretty fictional.
I've always liked the sound of Oberjarl, but it is indeed a fictional term. Or at least, to the best of my knowledge. High-King does seem to have existed though. The obvious is Ireland, although I'm pretty sure Harald Fairhair divided Norway so each of his sons could be a king with one serving as High-King of Overking.

While I'm glad people have pitched in, I'll reiterate this original question since its the one I really want a few opinions on.
4) Finally, this is the important one, well...I don't want to spoil anything, but my original plan was for TTL's Napoleon to appear in four or five chapters. As expected for a Norway TL, he's Norwegian. Like from the beginning, he was part of my TL. However being forced to do all the details, I suddenly a bit more hesitant. Now Norway's power would peak during his life for at least...four hundred years, and there'd be something of a backlash at some point. Still it's one thing for a series of skilled or opportunistic rulers engaging in skilled state-building, but having such a singular figure just overturn the board is suddenly feeling a bit cheap now that I've put in so much time to this.

Now obviously some such figures exist. People like Genghis Khan and the Mongol Empire, the rise of the Arabs, and obviously Napoleon. If they didn't actually exist, some of their gains in mere decades would be considered ASB. In regards to AH TL's though, what do you all think of Charlemagne or Napoleon-esque figures? How many battles can be won before its ASB? Is a wank based around a single person worse than a longer wank of a country over centuries?

I just want to know since if I need to alter my outline, I'd rather do it now.
 
I think a Norwegian Napoleon wouldn't be too bad, but I think it might benefit if you show the instability after this person's death.

Though a Norwegian Joan of Arc might be better, as such a proficient commander will severly piss off the nobility and be a constant threat to the monarch and their power. As long as you show the realistic consequences of such a powerful battlefield commander and if their skill is so evident show that some people respond knowing they are weaker and trying to do non-battlefield methods of removing them.

So yeah, it's fine to have such a figure. But they all faced opposition, and if they are so skilled people will take notice and form "anti-Norwegian-Napoleon" coalitions to either contain or destroy the Norwegian kingdom.

Suffice to say, it'll depend on how you do it. I'd advise setting aside sufficient time for it to ensure that it seems natural and explain this person's origins and how they come to overcome things time and time again.
 
I think a Norwegian Napoleon wouldn't be too bad, but I think it might benefit if you show the instability after this person's death.

Though a Norwegian Joan of Arc might be better, as such a proficient commander will severly piss off the nobility and be a constant threat to the monarch and their power. As long as you show the realistic consequences of such a powerful battlefield commander and if their skill is so evident show that some people respond knowing they are weaker and trying to do non-battlefield methods of removing them.

So yeah, it's fine to have such a figure. But they all faced opposition, and if they are so skilled people will take notice and form "anti-Norwegian-Napoleon" coalitions to either contain or destroy the Norwegian kingdom.

Suffice to say, it'll depend on how you do it. I'd advise setting aside sufficient time for it to ensure that it seems natural and explain this person's origins and how they come to overcome things time and time again.
You raise a few points I have already considered. It would certainly be getting a lot of time and attention. I was planning to add actually POD's during this time.

If you're willing I could PM you some details to bounce a bit more of the specifics off of as a sounding board. Napoleon-esque figure is rather broad after all.
 
Just found this tl, and its anot nice early Christmas gift. I normally skip European centric tls but a good scandinavian one is rare. Following.

One comment on the last update, one place you were talking about the relationship between Normandy and Denmark, did you mean to say Norway?

And about placenames. Other geographical indicators you can use are -strand (beach) -vold (field) or -os (riverdelta/mouth) as in Nidaros, which lies at the os of the Nidelva-river.
 
You raise a few points I have already considered. It would certainly be getting a lot of time and attention. I was planning to add actually POD's during this time.

If you're willing I could PM you some details to bounce a bit more of the specifics off of as a sounding board. Napoleon-esque figure is rather broad after all.

I'm hardly the best arbiter, but PMing me the small details might help you gather your own thoughts better when writing them down and figuring out how to phrase it aswell as my feedback.

So if you want to, PM away :) .
 
Thanks. I unfortunately focus on European-centric TL's, if only because my knowledge of history in other continents is woefully inadequate to really keep up in such a timeline. A failing on my part. Asian history is intimidating to delve into.

Appreciate the correction, and the placenames. I'll try to remember and use them.
 
Keep in mind that as much as Napoleon managed to do, he still suffered serious defeats. Also, he managed to seize power in a populous nation on the leading edge of technology during a fierce bout of patriotic fervor. He had a lot of willing, eager and well-equipped men to throw at problems. Also, while the difference in infrastructure is nowhere near as massive from age of sail to modern age, it was still a lot easier to raise and maintain a large world-shaping army in the 1800ds than the 1100ds.

Alexander achieved greatness earlier, but he built a lot of his success on his father's work. Philip of Macedonia had taken a minor 'almost barbarian' kingdom on the periphery of Hellenic culture, seized the tech advantage and subjugated or co-opted most of the Greek city states. Before he died, he pointed them at their mutual enemy in Persia. I have not looked at the figures, but I am betting that Greece was at that point one of the most densely populated parts of the world, at least east of Indus. They had gotten rather good at fighting one another over the centuries and could once united field large numbers of what in any other land at the time would have been heavily armoured elites.

In contrast, in this timeline, Norway has holdings by the White Sea as well as in Ireland, both of which have native populations with a different culture and mindset, both of which require long and at this time dangerous boat trips to send troops to. If there's one thing that's unrealistic in this timeline, it is the constant naval campaigns that never end catastrophically when someone who is not expendable goes down with his ship due to poor weather, a mistake in navigation, an unseen reef or suchlike.

I am not saying that a 'Norse Napoleon' is impossible, but to achieve the results comparable to the 'great men of history', one needs not only a great leader and commander, but also the right starting point. Given how much he managed to expand Norway, Magnus already managed to make himself a 'great warrior king', if not one quite as great as Alexander. He expanded the realm to the point that his daughter and granddaughter need a lot of work just to make sure it does not fall to pieces.
 
You've illustrated a lot of what I'm trying to keep in mind. Actually writing a TL you hope is semi-realistic requires some revision to what one naturally comes up with when first imagining a TL for one country. One reason I haven't updated in a while is I'm trying to really consider possible POD's and the consequences from my original plan, alongside the next chapter sort of jumping around since I'm trying to tell the reigns of two separate queens over a roughly 20-30 year period. Right now I've got four different outlines, each based on a different POD point. Although I think I've decided to stick with the guy's existence, disqualifying the first outline which involved me eliminating him entirely with an early POD (at least as a general).

The real problem is one the most central aspects of his life is meant to be a conflict with the Roman Catholic Church, particularly a pissing match with Pope Innocent III. You could say it is one of the most central series of events I have planned in this TL. Changing too much of that conflict sort of invalidates everything I had planned afterwards.

As for your other points. Maybe Napoleon wasn't the perfect comparison. He's just sort of the go-to in regards to military geniuses, at least for much of the western world. I'm drawing some inspiration from Napoleon, but there are a lot of noticeable differences between the two. In both ideology and military achievements.

I admit I tend to skim over naval matters. I'm just not as familiar with it. Especially this early where we have so little detailed records of Ireland's naval capabilities or of specific people, and all I got for the Norwegians was an estimated 60 ships for the baronial and royal force with 100 from the leidang. I also can't exactly have an unfortunate accident happen to many noticeable people as there simply aren't many, at least in English sources. I instead tried to show several setbacks of other causes. Just a review. King Magnus had four major expeditions to Ireland over a period of almost 30 years, with much of Norway's available military power behind him. He successfully took Dublin, Fingal, Leinster, Wexford, and Waterford. Not an insignificant amount, roughly a third of Ireland, but it is almost exactly what the Normans took within several years of their invasion. And that invasion was primarily by several Marcher Lords, not by England as a whole. They had native allies, but so did Magnus. Norway's efforts were thus quite inefficient in comparison. There were numerous accidents, tactical and organizational failures, etc. While I didn't get into the real specifics, especially in regards to the naval matters of Norway invading Ireland, there will have been many. We just aren't at the point where I'm really devoting time to the minutiae. In the future there will be POV's where such things will be more noted.

Thanks for the thoughts. They really help in my current rethinking and revising phase. I'll try to give a bit more details, especially in naval matters, rather than a more general 'they were however forced to retreat after suffering a number of setbacks.'
 
Top