Viking Scandanavia-Baltic

Could the Pagan Baltic states and the Vikings form a common state.

They could. Remember, the Vikings did have a bit of a foothold in the general area for a while and the Balts weren't exactly totally powerless. Perhaps it'd start out as a coalition and then go from there.
 
They could. Remember, the Vikings did have a bit of a foothold in the general area for a while and the Balts weren't exactly totally powerless. Perhaps it'd start out as a coalition and then go from there.

A coalition against whom though? More successful Mongol invasions?
 
Could the Pagan Baltic states and the Vikings form a common state.

Well considering the many wars and feuds between the various Nordic (Viking) states and minor Kings, eventhough they are so cultural alike; it would be even more difficult to unite with the Baltic states whose culture is much more different.

Should it have a opportunity, you should have a united Denmark-Norway-Sweden, much earlier than the Kalmar union, and this union should then conquer the Baltic states, and colonize these. The focus of the new union should then be East in stead of West (UK, France etc.) as IOTL.

But as history have shown, keeping such a union would be extremely difficult.
 
Well considering the many wars and feuds between the various Nordic (Viking) states and minor Kings, eventhough they are so cultural alike; it would be even more difficult to unite with the Baltic states whose culture is much more different.

Should it have a opportunity, you should have a united Denmark-Norway-Sweden, much earlier than the Kalmar union, and this union should then conquer the Baltic states, and colonize these. The focus of the new union should then be East in stead of West (UK, France etc.) as IOTL.

But as history have shown, keeping such a union would be extremely difficult.
What little I have personally read on the subject agrees with this above view. The amalgamization of the area around Stockholm was very bloody and full of losers enslavement, with their own people.

AFAIK only far distant shores or lands, like Kievian Rus or Sicily (Norman) did they try hard and mostly succeed to mend fences. And with Sicily, the Vespers were ultimately hacked by the locals in numerous incidents. This showed they never really got to the heart of the country, though a long run with some remnants passing on by till the 1700's in a 600 year run I recall. Kiev elements were apparently so small that in three generations not much was left of the Viking presence, but technically lasted longer.

A guess would be a greater possibility of an escaped refugee minor king in the said amalgamization landing on Baltic shores, given a small fief due to previous marriage of a closer relative (to seal some Amber trade business), doing well, defeats the onslaught in what is present day Sweden, and take it from there.
 
Well perhaps a militarily more powerfull alliance could better withstand Christian pressure to convert....but I do off course see crusades looming...

The Vikings did not convert to Christianity under coercion or pressure. No Christian armies invaded Denmark, Norway, or Sweden. Their kings converted because of the benefits derived from being part of the greater Christian European state system and cultural inheritance. That still remains even if there is some overking over all Scandinavia and the Baltic.

Crusading as an ideology developed in response to the disruption of safe pilgrimage to Jerusalem and requests from the Byzantines for help after their defeat at the Battle of Manzikert. After several centuries of development, it eventually started to be used elsewhere than the Holy Land in the 1200s. None of this is in place at the time a pagan Norse superstate could emerge.

The big problem for such a state forming is that you essentially have westward looking Vikings in Denmark and Norwar, and eastward looking Vikings in Sweden. You would first need some sort of internal Norse war where one chieftain forces everyone to obey him.

That might last a generation or two until it falls apart. The Norse simply do not have the cultural ability to form strong STATES as opposed to personal loyalty ties to a warrior chief who can provide his companions with plunder. They certainly do not have the ability to centrally control such a large area.

A Norse chieftain hoping to entrench such power has only one place to look if he wants to know how to develop strong state institutions - and that is Christian Europe. So he's going to convert to Christianity so that Bishops will come who are literate and know Roman law so that can begin the process of state formation.
 
Its easier for an urban or semi-urban society to form the necessary clerical or bureaucratic practices to achieve a higher form of statehood beyond that of a tribal-based society. True, the activities of the Vikings would lead to the rise of new cities and trading centres from Ireland to Kiev, but that was probably too little too late.

The Scandinavians had a rich cultural heritage, but due to their limited demographics and geographically disparate locations, they could not develop the sort of urban society that had already existed in western and southern Europe soon enough for them to counteract the Christianization of their culture. Some of the more powerful and ambitious Norse kings would accept the services of the bureaucratically experienced Christian priests and monks, along with their ties to the greater monarchies of Europe, as they were useful for helping to develop a military coalition of clans and Jarldoms into more formidable state-level societies.

As much as I like the Polytheistic Norse, I think one would have to make changes within early Germanic culture before some new cultural ideology, created within the context of Pagan Norse society, could even begin to counteract the encroaching influence of Christianity.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
I disagree that the Pagan Scandinavians couldn't form strong states, Denmark was a military threat in almost half of Charlemagne reign, and even after Denmark was weaken by civil war, we see examples how Horik I become so pissed at the Franks that he burn down Hamburg, and the Franks more or less is forced to apoligise. The only reason no other Scandinavian states was similar threats was thanks to lower population. But there was no doubt that even the pre-Christian Norse could created strong states. The Balts was somewhat different, thanks to a low population and lack of a clear nobility.

The weaknesses of Norse state was that they was isolated from each other, Denmark lay in the south, the most centralised state and with control over Bohuslen and the Oslo area in the early 9th century. But the other population centre the Norwegian west coast and the Stockholm area took as long time to travel to as England. So what we need is a heavier populated Götaland so that we can create a strong South Scandinavian state, which can force it will on the other states.
 
One might argue that the Kievan Rus were a powerful state even before their Christianization, and that their change in religion had probably more to do with dynamics within the ruling dynasty than any perceived cultural shift.
 
The Vikings did not convert to Christianity under coercion or pressure. No Christian armies invaded Denmark, Norway, or Sweden. Their kings converted because of the benefits derived from being part of the greater Christian European state system and cultural inheritance. That still remains even if there is some overking over all Scandinavia and the Baltic.
Crusading as an ideology developed in response to the disruption of safe pilgrimage to Jerusalem and requests from the Byzantines for help after their defeat at the Battle of Manzikert. After several centuries of development, it eventually started to be used elsewhere than the Holy Land in the 1200s. None of this is in place at the time a pagan Norse superstate could emerge.

You are right that no coercion took place IOTL. But if the point of view ITTL is that the vikings remain pagans, then a religious conflict would eventually emerge. As IOTL this occured in Northern Europe in the 12th and 13th (Among others by the Danish King). If a united pagan northern kingdom exists during this time, they would become targets of Catholic crusades.

As I have stated elsewhere the main challenge is ofcourse to stay united until then.
 
Top