Treaty of Kiel deemed null-and-void?

Hey Guys,

In 1814 the Treaty of Kiel led to the transferral of Swedish Pomerania to Denmark, and Norway to Sweden. Pomerania was then transferred to Prussia the next year in the Congress of Vienna.

But Norway declared independence after the Treaty was signed, and thus Sweden had to invade it for the Norwegian government to yield to King Charles XIII.

Due to this could the Treaty of Kiel be deemed to be invalid? I'm unsure as to how these kind of treaties worked but to me it seems as if Denmark didn't help keep up their side of the bargain.

If the treaty could be said to be invalid then what would happen and what would the results be in a revised Treaty?
 
Probably nothing of important happens. Sweden is a mid-major partner in the victorious coalition, and they are going to be granted some spoils of war, especially to compensate for the loss of finland. Sweden will occupy norway, with the tacit backing of the coalition (and british or prussian support if they require it, perhaps). Unless Denmark incites norway to rebel, this is the end of it. If the danes do that... depends on the context, but at the very least it gets hauled back into line, with Prussia and Sweden gaining from this (Pomerania back to Sweden, or to Prussia?)
 
Probably nothing of important happens. Sweden is a mid-major partner in the victorious coalition, and they are going to be granted some spoils of war, especially to compensate for the loss of finland. Sweden will occupy norway, with the tacit backing of the coalition (and british or prussian support if they require it, perhaps). Unless Denmark incites norway to rebel, this is the end of it. If the danes do that... depends on the context, but at the very least it gets hauled back into line, with Prussia and Sweden gaining from this (Pomerania back to Sweden, or to Prussia?)

Denmark wouldn't incite Norway to rebel - they did it on their own in relation to the Treaty of Kiel.
Denmark didn't have the resources to support the Norwegian struggle; the country was bankrupt, the Army worn down and the Navy in British ports!
Part of the Army was away in France on occupational duty; a fine hostage in the event of the Danes being unruly.

Should they choose to do so anyway the Prussians would probably keep both Swedish Pomern and Lauenburg and perhaps get Holstein even if this might be strechting it - but a bonus to the Kingdom of Denmark in the long run.
Other parts of the Duchies could go into the deal as Britain OTL got Heligoland from Schleswig!
 

Susano

Banned
Since the contract powers had no actual responsibility ove rwhat happened inside Norway itself, of course not. What the treaty gave Sweden (or, the Swedish King, rather - theres a difference) was a right/claim/entitlement to Norway. And then he had to go and enforce it himself. That had nothing to do with the treaty, such claims have always to be enforced by oneself.
 
I agree with Susano. The Swedish king was allowed to take Norway, if he is so weak that he cannot go and conquer it then it is his problem. If some kind of 'revolutionary' republic emerges in Norway though, Im sure the Powers will have something to say about it.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
I agree with Susano. The Swedish king was allowed to take Norway, if he is so weak that he cannot go and conquer it then it is his problem. If some kind of 'revolutionary' republic emerges in Norway though, Im sure the Powers will have something to say about it.

They won't, what the Norvegian did was making a liberal* constitution for a constitutionel monarchy, the Danish crown prince was elected King, so if Sweden fail to beat down the Norvegian rebellion, we will see the Danish crown prince as Norvegian King, and the powers of Europe will just accept it (except Sweden of course).

*with a few illiberal paragraph, like forbidding Jews in Norway.
 
Top