I think a stronger Scandinavian state has to figure out how the hell it manages to juggle the divergent interests of three separate kingdoms before it can seriously take hold of significant pieces of North Germany.
Plausibility Check: Surviving Kalmar Union
- Thread starter MarshalBraginsky
- Start date
I think a stronger Scandinavian state has to figure out how the hell it manages to juggle the divergent interests of three separate kingdoms before it can seriously take hold of significant pieces of North Germany.
The Scandinavian Union would still have the Sound toll which is a huge source of income...
And think of all the resources Denmark and Sweden used to fight wars between them self, that can be used for other projects...
And i would say that Copenhagen is pretty much the ideal place to have the capital, but that might just be me because i am a Dane
And think of all the resources Denmark and Sweden used to fight wars between them self, that can be used for other projects...
And i would say that Copenhagen is pretty much the ideal place to have the capital, but that might just be me because i am a Dane
MarshalBraginsky
Banned
Wouldn't Oslo be a more, suited capital of the Kalmar Union? On the other hand, if there is a way for England to be severely weakened long enough for the Kalmar Union to survive, then it could have a greater chance of starting colonial expeditions.
Norway is by far the smallest in the scandinavian threesome, and have allways been ... most of the wars in scandinavia have been between Denmark and Sweden for superiority in the region
there is 2 things that have to be handled to create a lastin Kalmar union IMO
1. an argeed way to handle the conflicting interests in northern HRE (warring / Trading, an option could be warring to capture enough to have a safe base to trade from)
2. Dissatisfaction from the Swedish Nobles who feel negected by centralization in Denmark
As for the second, i believe the best way would be either decentralized rule from a couple of different places (doubt that'd float) or creating a more neutral centralization point, somewhere in Halland might be one since thats much closer to Sweden, yet still within the Danish realm with access to Kattegat ... Halmstad, the nominal capital of the province, was through the time of the OTL Kalmar union the 'neutral' gathering point between the different countries' nobles to appoint kings (all the Scandinavian crowns was de jure elective, de facto inherited) and the like would be a logical point.
there is 2 things that have to be handled to create a lastin Kalmar union IMO
1. an argeed way to handle the conflicting interests in northern HRE (warring / Trading, an option could be warring to capture enough to have a safe base to trade from)
2. Dissatisfaction from the Swedish Nobles who feel negected by centralization in Denmark
As for the second, i believe the best way would be either decentralized rule from a couple of different places (doubt that'd float) or creating a more neutral centralization point, somewhere in Halland might be one since thats much closer to Sweden, yet still within the Danish realm with access to Kattegat ... Halmstad, the nominal capital of the province, was through the time of the OTL Kalmar union the 'neutral' gathering point between the different countries' nobles to appoint kings (all the Scandinavian crowns was de jure elective, de facto inherited) and the like would be a logical point.
Which would be an excellent reason for putting the capital there. It makes it clear that neither sweden nor denmark are the top dogs.
MarshalBraginsky
Banned
Hence my suggestion at having Oslo the capital of the Kalmar Union, though Narvik or some other Norweigan port could be suited as an alternate capital. On the other hand, are there any other nations that could join the Kalmar Union or is it restricted to just the Nordics? Estonia should have joined.
Since the Kalmar Union is the result of "the three Scandinavian kingdoms all happening to have the closest heir by blood be the same person", nothing technically stops it from including other polities - but that would require them to well, qualify.
MarshalBraginsky
Banned
Estonia being the unlikely candidate to join, and even Latvia is disqualified. I can think of a Kalmar conquest of Prussia as a plausibility, though I don't know which sides the Prussians should choose: to be stuck with the Poles, to look towards the HRE or to hook up with the Nordics.
The problem with Oslo and Narvik is that they're small, poor, and far away from the European centers of power. A capital near OTL Gothenburg or somewhere in Scania is probably best for a compromise.
EDIT: And given how Sweden OTL managed to conquer the Baltics, I imagine that a united Scandinavia should be able to do the same.
MarshalBraginsky
Banned
Though only Estonia and Livonia would end up as part of the Kalmar Union. Lithuania would take a hard bargain on the Nordics' part.
Estonia and most of the eastern baltics was at the time of Kalmar union, parts of the Teutonic Order's Lands (Denmark sold them off in 1346) ... allthough you could certainly (depending on the POD) argue that Kalmar union would be interested in buying off the lands again when they started declining in 1410
Actually ... looking at the map i'd suggest Kungsbacka as the Capital ... 20km (and present day suburb) south of Gothenburg, but in Danish Halland ... was built early in the period (of Kalmar, earliest mention of the city i can find is 1366) as a trading post / Merchant city between Denmark and Sweden ... easily defendable harbour by having it tucked into a small 10km fjord with a small peninsula to the west of it (and scattered islands within it), which could be easily fortified for defensive messures, while the westernmost coastline towards Kattegat is dotted by skerries, reefs and areas with shallow water, where ships could easily run aground
Actually ... looking at the map i'd suggest Kungsbacka as the Capital ... 20km (and present day suburb) south of Gothenburg, but in Danish Halland ... was built early in the period (of Kalmar, earliest mention of the city i can find is 1366) as a trading post / Merchant city between Denmark and Sweden ... easily defendable harbour by having it tucked into a small 10km fjord with a small peninsula to the west of it (and scattered islands within it), which could be easily fortified for defensive messures, while the westernmost coastline towards Kattegat is dotted by skerries, reefs and areas with shallow water, where ships could easily run aground
Last edited:
MarshalBraginsky
Banned
Would the Kalmar Union be interested in turning the Baltc Sea into their own lake though?
If they were convinced that it would be a good way to stop discontent swedish nobles from plotting for revolts (one way or another) i could see them doing it ... that and given the fact that the danish king had 3 crowns, he might see intelligence in moving the center of the country closer to the center (doing the time of danish scandia, Copenhagen was fairly middleish)
The problems are the different interests of the three kingdoms. Take foreign policy. Norway is west oriented, the concern is to protect her Atlantic possessions. Denmark's main interest is to expand in North Germany, while Sweden's interest is to protect the eastern border, and possibly expand in that direction.
MarshalBraginsky
Banned
There should be some compromise on what could the Kalmar Union do. If the Kalmar Union does fail as in OTL, which Scandinavian country could become a lot stronger? Denmark or Sweden?
A surviving Kalmar union is more than possible, though not always likely. I think that it would need a Danish or Swedish king who is willing to focus his reign solely on integrating whechever of the two he isn't from. Norway is almost a nonfactor, and would thus be easily controled by whichever of Denmark or Sweden is stronger, but you would need serious effort by one or two strong rulers for whichever state the ruler does not hail from to accept him.
As for long term prospects, beating Britan one to one in anything is unlikely, but the Kalmar union could be a useful ally to France or Spain when they come a knokin' at England's door, and may even be able to land a successful invasion given how they are on the opposite side of England compared to England's traditional enemies. United Scandinavia could also benefit tremendously as a British ally, supplying naval supplies in exchange for the right to colonize certain territories, and perhaps threatening to withhold those naval supplies to extort more money during war times. The only big problem is Germany, but with a different reformation, a butterflied Prussia, or any number of other things Germany could become friendly or neutral towards the union, so Germany is a danger, but not an inevitable death sentence.
As for long term prospects, beating Britan one to one in anything is unlikely, but the Kalmar union could be a useful ally to France or Spain when they come a knokin' at England's door, and may even be able to land a successful invasion given how they are on the opposite side of England compared to England's traditional enemies. United Scandinavia could also benefit tremendously as a British ally, supplying naval supplies in exchange for the right to colonize certain territories, and perhaps threatening to withhold those naval supplies to extort more money during war times. The only big problem is Germany, but with a different reformation, a butterflied Prussia, or any number of other things Germany could become friendly or neutral towards the union, so Germany is a danger, but not an inevitable death sentence.