Swedish Finland and Danish Norway

[Deleted member 109224]

Didn't Russia promote Finnish Nationalism in the mid-19th Century? If Sweden retains Finland, I imagine it'd be lessened - there'd be more focus on cultural/linguistic autonomy and respect than outright political independence.

Sweden would have a lot more timber and metal in its domain. There'd probably a bit more development in Finland here too.

 

[Jürgen]

Another important aspect is what would happen to Swedish Pomerania?

It was around 4000 square kilometer (small compared to the rest of Sweden, but the agricultural land is significant better) and had 125 .000 people when Sweden traded it away for Norway.

 

[DrakonFin]

Unlikely, the situation in Finland is unique, at most I could see Swedes in Finland being forced to learn Finnish, but I couldn't see it happen in Sweden proper.

I agree in part, I don't believe Finnish would in any case become a compulsory subject for all citizens west of the Gulf of Bothnia, even if it would by sometime in the 20th century become compulsory in much, if not all, of Eastern Sweden.

But then I think that TTL's Sweden might by 2000 have, say, have an expectation that everyone who works for the state bureaucracy, etc, in Eastern Sweden is at some level proficient in Finnish as well as in Swedish, to safeguard the language rights of Finnish speakers. In Finland IOTL, to work in government jobs a Finnish speaker must qualify for what we call "bureaucrat Swedish" (and the same vice versa for Swedish speakers), and here we might see the Swedish state expecting its university graduates to learn some level of Finnish, too, even in Western Sweden, if they ever want to apply to a job in the state bureaucracy in provinces that have significant, traditional Finnish majorities or minorities. Here we have to consider the possibility that some provinces of Western Sweden, too, have Finnish speaking minorities of, say, 5-15% by 2000 or so (and individual towns and municipalities even bigger ones), due to internal migration, and such requirements could logically apply in these provinces, too.

 

[Jürgen]

So let’s us talk about population, both Denmark-Norway and Sweden with Finland will have a bigger population than the sum of the parts. While Oslo and Helsinki could’ve will be smaller (through not necessary by much) Copenhagen and Stockholm will be bigger. In general I raise the population of a capital in a small country in Europe by around 1 milion per 5 million inhabitants. That would create a Copenhagen and Stockholm metropole with 3 million inhabitants. But Copenhagen is a a major transport hub, so I give that a million people more (which is why Stockholm and Copenhagen have roughly the same population in OTL even through Denmark only have half the population of Sweden)

Next we look elsewhere Turku replace Helsingki as the administrative center and biggest city of Finland, I would give Turku roughly a 0,5 million inhabitants without suburbs. While Helsinki I would give 200-300.000 people placing it third behind Tampere. I also think Vaasa will be more important as a gateway to Greater Ostrobothnia. All in all I would give Finland the same population as in OTL.

Swedish Pomerania will likely be more densely populated without communist rule, it will be a important vacation spot and together with Scania the breadbasket of Sweden. I would say it have around 0,5 million inhabitants.

Oslo is more complex, while it lose the status as Norwegian capital, it will on the other hand see significant industrial growth with Danish investments (in OTL Sweden didn’t invest in Norway, because the investment was better used in similar industry at home, but Denmark doesn’t have alternative mines), I think Oslo will be less densely populated, but the Oslo Fjord will have a bigger population spread out over several coastal industry cities, think a mini Ruhr district. I think around 2 million people.

Beside that Altona will be the major city of the Duchies with around, Flensburg will likely rival Aarhus and Kiel in size, of course Esbjerg will likely not be there, but because of the need of a port in the region, Ribe will likely be bigger (I think around 50.000 people) and have a industrial port around where is Esbjerg today. Schleswig (town) will likely also be bigger at around the same size as Ribe thanks to the continue importance as a transport hub without the connection to Denmark being cut.

Sweden:
Sweden proper 11,5 million people
Finland 5 million people (20-40% Swedish speakers, very rough estimate)
Swedish Pomerania 0,5 million people

Denmark:
Denmark proper 8 million people
Norway proper 6 million (90% Danish speakers)
Schleswig-Holstein (including South Jutland) 4 million people (25% Danish speakers)
Island 300.000
Faroese 50.000
Greenland 50.000

Other colonies not included.

So Sweden have 17 million inhabitants.
Denmark-Norway 18, 5 millions inhabitants.

This place them at around the same size as Netherlands, Yugoslavia or Romania in population size. In the colonial era Denmark-Norway will likely be more important thanks to Denmark being a more active colonial power, when the post-colonial era hit Sweden will grow in importance thanks to its massive industrial potential, until the oil prices rises again and the a North Sea oil raise Denmark-Norway to the premier power of Scandinavia again.

Cultural Sweden will likely to be pretty similar to OTL, the Finns will pretty much just grow into Swedes speaking Finnish.

Danish(-Norwegian) culture will keep its mercantile focus, but will likely be less agrarian. Political it will have stronger socialist and conservative parties and weaker liberal ones. Cultural the conservative will likely be more religious conservative and in general I expect a greater religious conservatism, I also think that as result we will see a more German conservatism, with strong and real Christian unions competing with socialist ones. Denmark-Norway will likely also stay a rather militaristic culture. It’s not impossible we would risk seeing political party having militias. I think civil wars will be avoided as I still expect a culture of pragmatism and compromises.

Political I expect Jutland, Funen and the duchies as liberal stronghold with Altona, Kiel, Flensburg, Aarhus, Aalborg and Odense being socialist strongholds. Zealand will be dominated by Copenhagen where the Socialist hold strong but with the Conservative as a competitor. In Norway the Socialist run the Oslo Fjord while in the rest of Norway they compete with the Conservatives with the Socialist just being slightly stronger.

 

[Arkenfolm]

If Finland is part of Sweden, there will be more Finnish speakers in Sweden, since areas like the Tornio Valley won't be cut off from the rest of Finland as well as immigration. There will still be plenty of assimilation however, and the local dialect Meänkieli will decline much faster than OTL in favour of Standard Finnish and Standard Swedish.

 

[Lord High Executioner]

Didn't Russia promote Finnish Nationalism in the mid-19th Century?

I don't know how it's described in Finland, but in my Swedish history school book, the development of
Finnish Nationalism in the 19th century was summed up with what I think is an actual quote from
someone:
"We cannot be Swedes. We do not want to be Russians. Let's be Finns."
But that might be the Swedish-speakers' position, and one would suspect that they might be less Finnish Nationalist
if still in Sweden.

 

[Lalli]

I don't know how it's described in Finland, but in my Swedish history school book, the development of
Finnish Nationalism in the 19th century was summed up with what I think is an actual quote from
someone:
"We cannot be Swedes. We do not want to be Russians. Let's be Finns."
But that might be the Swedish-speakers' position, and one would suspect that they might be less Finnish Nationalist
if still in Sweden.

Russians indeed promoted Finnish nationalism (speciality cultural one) to minimise Swedish influence. Probably Finnish would get official recognition much later than in OTL possibility not before 1900 like in OTL.

 

[Jürgen]

So let's talk about potential colonies.

For Sweden I will be short, I don't think owning Finland really change anything from OTL in terms of colonies.

For Denmark-Norway, we will likely see them keeping their colonies.
Danish India will likely stay much the same, the mainland will likely be given to India after indepedence, while the Nicobars could stay permanent on Danish hands.
Danish West Indies would not be expanded either, but they would likely stay Danish too,
The Danish Gold Coast on the other hand will likely expand east, so it includes both eastern Ghana and Togo, beside that it will expand inland and likely incliude the Volta River watershed (northern Ghana and Burkina Faso). In many ways I expect the this to be the crown of the Danish colonial empire (unless Denmark get something else)

Other colonial areas under Denmark, your people's guesses is as good as mine. It will likely be either low value areas, or areas of too big strategic importance to give to a another major power, so Denmark get it as a compromise.

 

[JohnBull]

So let's talk about potential colonies.

For Sweden I will be short, I don't think owning Finland really change anything from OTL in terms of colonies.

For Denmark-Norway, we will likely see them keeping their colonies.
Danish India will likely stay much the same, the mainland will likely be given to India after indepedence, while the Nicobars could stay permanent on Danish hands.
Danish West Indies would not be expanded either, but they would likely stay Danish too,
The Danish Gold Coast on the other hand will likely expand east, so it includes both eastern Ghana and Togo, beside that it will expand inland and likely incliude the Volta River watershed (northern Ghana and Burkina Faso). In many ways I expect the this to be the crown of the Danish colonial empire (unless Denmark get something else)

Other colonial areas under Denmark, your people's guesses is as good as mine. It will likely be either low value areas, or areas of too big strategic importance to give to a another major power, so Denmark get it as a compromise.

Could Danish and Swedish carve concessions in Tiajin? What about Sweden keeping St. Barths and taking part on Scramble for Africa?

 

[Jürgen]

Could Danish and Swedish carve concessions in Tiajin? What about Sweden keeping St. Barths and taking part on Scramble for Africa?

The point about Sweden with Finland is that it's not bigger than OTL Sweden-Norway, but more important the geopolitical situation for Sweden is precisely the same as in OTL. Sweden is going to keep low profile to avoid conflict with Russia.

Denmark-Norway could carve concessions in Tiajin, but I think it's unlikely, Denmark is far more likely to offer the Qing assistance. Denmark have far more to win by being seen as a potential partner even by a weakened China than by being the least of the powers carving China up.

Fundamental Denmark and Sweden roles will be different.

Sweden will be the neutral power, keeping its head down and staying above the petty bickering. While Denmark-Norway will be everyone's friend, trying to push compromises, keep the staus quo, while oppotunistic taking the pierces of meat being thrown to it.

 

[Kungsholmen]

I think Jürgen is wrong on a few things. I don't agree with him saying that Swedens role will be fundamentally the same. The attitude of neutrality did not appear out of thin air, it came from the trauma of loosing half the country. Swedish politicians will act differently without this trauma both domestically and and internationally. I would not put it past this version of Sweden to (arrogantly) get involved in the crimean war (Sweden itself would probably play a minor role. mostly acting like a springboard from which Britain and France could threaten St. Petersburg). Maybe Sweden would get a few, small useless parts of Karelia after the war.

I also think he overestimates the population of Denmark-Norway but thats a minor thing.

Denmark-Norway had been surpassed by Sweden since arguably the 1500s and without question by the 1600s and I don't see any reason why it would change suddenly.

On a different note, I think Sweden and Denmark are actually equally likely to be get colonies in Africa. Sweden was actually in the real world involved in the Belgian Congo (Swedish soldiers helped in the brutal murder of millions in exchange for trading rights or something. You can find ears from Congolese victims in Swedish museums basements, they were sent back to make sure the soldiers did not waste bullets). I think it is quite likely that a larger, more chauvinistic and more militaristic Sweden would be involved in the horrific colonisation in Africa. Swedens role would not be large of course.

 

[JD180]

To the original question - I‘ll shamelessly plug a thread I posted (Oldenburg Sweden) which details how, even with a Russian victory in the napoleonic wars, Sweden retains Finland. Regarding Denmark keeping Norway, that’s much, much easier - just have the Danes switch sides at an earlier point

 

[Lord High Executioner]

On a different note, I think Sweden and Denmark are actually equally likely to be get colonies in Africa. Sweden was actually in the real world involved in the Belgian Congo (Swedish soldiers helped in the brutal murder of millions in exchange for trading rights or something.

I was under the impression that it was officers and an example of the sort of exchange student system that seems to
have existed at the time, with officers being sent/taking time off to serve with bigger & better or more active armies.
The term mercenaries is frequently used in regards to the non-Belgian white officers of the Force Publique, so I doubt
they were sent of with more official support and thought than "So, you want to take off time to go serve in a foreign army
to get some actual combat/commanding experience? OK."
Swedes do tend to appear in unexpected places like the Persian Gendarmerie and the Shanghai Municipal Police
(although the latter may have been a single locally picked up volunteer, I don't recall the numbers and don't know
the backstory).

I'm also ot convinced that Sweden would be very likely to get any colonies of our own in Africa. We were still a pretty poor country OTL
(consider the emigration numbers and their reasons, none of which seens likely to be changed) and keeping Finland seems unlikely to,
for example, butterfly the Swedish famine of 1867-69 and the Finnish one of 1866-68.

The question of "fundamentally the same" or not, probably depends on how Finland was kept.
In Karelian's scenario (post #19) of re-affirmed neutrality it seems not unlikely.
If we somehow fight off the Russians to keep Finland, not so much

 

[Hvalrossen]

Norway and Denmark is a relative stable union and it’s more stable than the Swedish-Norwegian Union. In a Danish-Norwegian Union Denmark would invest in Norway, as Norway was better geared toward industrialization with their access to raw materials and hydropower. At the same time Denmark would serve as a bread basket for the Norwegian industrial areas (likely mostly the Oslo Fjord region). This would also the center of the Danish realms Kattegat, which would also serve to keep eastern Holstein more focused toward Denmark than Hamburg, making a Holsteinian revolt less likely. Denmark would also be a small but active colonial power, which would likely join in carving Africa up.

Perhaps the Oslo region with recieve immigrants from Denmark? Thus further increasing the 'cultural union' that existed (and exists) between Norway and Denmark.