Sweden joins to Crimean war

67th Tigers

Banned
First, Sweden actually has to do something, a formal declaration of war backed by no concrete military action isn't going to earn much.


67th Tigers, just what would Denmark be getting out of all this? Risking much of her military and fleet to strengthen Sweden doesn't strike me as being of use to Copenhagen.


There's also the long term as this pretty much ensures that the Russians will rearm as rapidly and massively as possible, just as the French or British would if they suddenly had an enemy border in artillery range of their capital city's outskirts, not to mention making future relations between the Anglo-French and the Russians much more problematical.

They gained security for Schleswig-Holstein. They were to extract a British alliance guaranteeing it again the German Federation (or that was their intent). It was also about being on the "winning side"; Austria had delivered an ultimatum, Spain had come over to the British, and by winter 1855-6 the whole of Europe was lining up to kick the Russians.

As Lambert (The Crimean War: British Grand Strategy against Russia 1853-6) points out in his discussion of the Baltic plans for 1856, Sweden always intended to declare, but were holding out for a little while to get a better deal, but held out so long the war ended and they got nothing.

The entire British policy for the post-war settlement was to make Russia too vulnerable to contemplate another adventure; by insisting on the disarmament of Forts etc. the British were guaranteeing their ability to strike cheaply at Russia. A force within striking range of the capital would affect this even better (Neilsen, lecture to Joint Command and Staff College, 2007).
 
Given actual events I seriously doubt the British would honor a permanent commitment to offend Prussia, Austria and the smaller German states for a modest Danish contingent, especially since legally Denmark wasn't in the right in terms of the right of succession.

Not to mention that Austria was also to be an ally and no doubt a much more formidable one than Denmark.


Except the British also want to avoid unnecessary wars and a threat to St Petersburg guarantees a massive Russian effort at armament, naval expansion and fortification while also seriously complicating the inevitable day when the British need Russian good will on something.
 
How do you believe a stronger Sweden would effect the great war? or do you believe in the next one hundred years Russia will reclaim Finland, the land of the Fins?
 
Well I would assume that if Sweden had taken Finland it would have seen itself as superior to Russia. And I don't even care, I just want Germany to win for once.

Why do you assume that after any POD things are still the same as in our timeline? Perhaps Russia is no longer Sweden's only ally, ever think of that? This is the Alternate History Forum.
A German victory in WWI is one of the most used PODs in alternate history. There are plenty of timelines published and on this forum that involve it.

How do you believe a stronger Sweden would effect the great war? or do you believe in the next one hundred years Russia will reclaim Finland, the land of the Fins?
If Sweden took Finland in the Crimean War, I doubt there would be a Great War, or at least, as we know it. A Russia that was humiliated that much would probably be more aggressive in the later 19th century and early 1900s as it tries to regain its standing on the world stage.
 
What do you think would have been the overall result of Crimean war if Sweden would have participated.
If Sweden got Finland, Russia would likely have gotten it back 20 years latter especially after the fall of Napoleon III and the establishment of the French Republic which reversed French hostility towards the Russians. Bismarck of Germany also supported Russia.

The whole Crimean War was a pointless war that did not solve anything in the long run. On the side that opposed Russia, the war was to prevent Russian interference in the Ottoman Empire. However, 20 years later, assured of French and German neutrality after the Franco-Prussian War, Russia began interfering massively in the Ottoman Empire. The other allies of the Crimean War fumed and did nothing to stop Russian interests in the Crimean. So the war proved useless to them. Therefore, if Sweden got Finland, a vengeful Russia would likely have attacked Sweden and gotten back Finland at that point.

You would have to butterfly away the Franco-Prussian War, which reversed French hostility to Russia, for Sweden to be able to hold onto Finland and for the Crimean War to have any lasting benefit for the side that opposed Russia. Finding a way to have Germany oppose Russia at that time would also be necessary.
 
If Sweden got Finland, Russia would likely have gotten it back 20 years latter especially after the fall of Napoleon III and the establishment of the French Republic which reversed French hostility towards the Russians. Bismarck of Germany also supported Russia.

The whole Crimean War was a pointless war that did not solve anything in the long run. On the side that opposed Russia, the war was to prevent Russian interference in the Ottoman Empire. However, 20 years later, assured of French and German neutrality after the Franco-Prussian War, Russia began interfering massively in the Ottoman Empire. The other allies of the Crimean War fumed and did nothing to stop Russian interests in the Crimean. So the war proved useless to them. Therefore, if Sweden got Finland, a vengeful Russia would likely have attacked Sweden and gotten back Finland at that point.

You would have to butterfly away the Franco-Prussian War, which reversed French hostility to Russia, for Sweden to be able to hold onto Finland and for the Crimean War to have any lasting benefit for the side that opposed Russia. Finding a way to have Germany oppose Russia at that time would also be necessary.
IOW, Retain The Concert of Europe ...

Unfortunately, Central Europe's Burgeoning Industrialization Plus The Nascent Nationalism of The Period, Will Inevitably Lead to The Doom of ANY Such Endeavor ...

All it would Take is One Country Attempting to Rearm itself, *Cough* Unified-Germany *Cough*, to Destroy The Whole Mess; Just Like in OTL!
 
They gained security for Schleswig-Holstein. They were to extract a British alliance guaranteeing it again the German Federation (or that was their intent). It was also about being on the "winning side"; Austria had delivered an ultimatum, Spain had come over to the British, and by winter 1855-6 the whole of Europe was lining up to kick the Russians.

You really don't read other peoples posts!

Where did you conjure up this nonsense?
Denmark managed to secure Russian backing for staying neutral and allowing the Allied fleet access to the Baltic.
It had no intention whatsoever in joining in the war - it had the unresolved issue of succession to which the Tsar was party and it surely did what it could to play down any German mobilization due to the war.

Denmark would like to be on the British side but not at the cost of the Tsar's support in the succession question as that would surely endanger the security of the Kingdom - southern border.

Denmark would gain security by staying neutral as the Tsar was party to solve the succession crisis.
During the 1848-50 war the Tsar had been an ally of Denmark telling the Prussians to get out of the Kingdom which had led Denmark to the faulty impression of "We beat the Germans!" which sane politicians knew not to be the truth!

Yes Denmark would like an alliance with Britain but that hadn't been in the cards since the Great Northern War!
So it chose second best which was the Russian alliance that eventually as already mentioned made it possible to even take the policy of Britain friendly neutrality during the Crimean War!

And yes the King of Denmark as Duke of Holstein did mobilize the Confederation Contingent but only as a defensive force - not to be used against Russia if it at (any cost) could be avoided!

But interpreting these moves as a prelude to joining up against Russia would be faulty.
 
Sweden was uncertain that it could fight close to Russia's heartland alone and held out for a general grand alliance - we wanted Austria and Prussia in, and make sure that a European Grand Alliance took Russia apart. In such a scenario, I can see a renewed Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (with only Congress Poland, as Austria and Prussia would keep their parts) with a Habsburg King and a Baltic Kingdom under a Hohenzollern - and Finland along the 1939 border to Sweden. The Ottomans would probably regain quite a bit of land lost in earlier wars too.
 
The whole Crimean War was a pointless war that did not solve anything in the long run. On the side that opposed Russia, the war was to prevent Russian interference in the Ottoman Empire. However, 20 years later, assured of French and German neutrality after the Franco-Prussian War, Russia began interfering massively in the Ottoman Empire. The other allies of the Crimean War fumed and did nothing to stop Russian interests in the Crimean. So the war proved useless to them. Therefore, if Sweden got Finland, a vengeful Russia would likely have attacked Sweden and gotten back Finland at that point.

It did prevent Russian expansion against the Ottomans at a critical time and gave the latter a generation to institute some pretty major reforms, without which the empire might very well have fallen victim to the Russians, in a bigger way than happened in OTL.
 
How would our army go about defeating the russians. Our rifles were worse than those used when we lost the war in 1808
 
How would our army go about defeating the russians. Our rifles were worse than those used when we lost the war in 1808

Hope that most of the Russian army is engaging the Brits and French elsewhere or buy better weapons.

(The Brits and French might sell at bargain rates)
 
I came across this thread very late last night whilst unable to sleep.

What size of an army did Sweden have in the 1850's and how might a Baltic Campaign against Russia have unfolded?
 

67th Tigers

Banned
I came across this thread very late last night whilst unable to sleep.

What size of an army did Sweden have in the 1850's and how might a Baltic Campaign against Russia have unfolded?

The Swedish army on mobilisation consisted of 140,000 men and 150 field guns:

Volunteers: 3 infantry regiments (2 Bns ea), 2 cavalry regiments and the bulk of the artillery totalling ca. 7,700 men and 136 field guns

Provincials: 20 Infantry Regiments and 5 separate infantry battalions and 6 cavalry regiments totalling 33,000 men

Reservists: ca. 95,000 men

Gotland "Militia": 7,900 men and 16 field guns

The reservists can't serve beyond the frontiers of Sweden.

The Norwegians add:

Regulars: 5 infantry brigades (12,000 men), 3 chasseur regiments (3,000 men) and 1,300 gunners

Militia: about 9,000 men

The regulars were very well equipped, light infantry carrying a breechloader, the rest a tige rifle. The artillery equipment was quite good as well.
 
Top