I don't know if anyone has done this already, but WI, during the commotion between the Russian Revolution and the Russian Civil War, when Finland becomes independent, it remains as a grand duchy?
Wha? Finnland never was traditionally a Kingdom. It was a Grand Duchy under Swedish rule as well.
Pretty tough one, IMHO. The title of "the Grand Duke of Finland" was not, during the autonomy, an independent position as such. In effect it was just another title for the Tsar, kind of a different legal persona for him because his rights were (in theory) different as the ruler of Finland than as the ruler of Russia.
Susano said:Wha? Finnland never was traditionally a Kingdom. It was a Grand Duchy under Swedish rule as well.
How different?
I know that, Susano.We're talking about the Russian period, though.
I wa stalking to DrakonFin.
Sorry.
Oh, and DrakonFin: why rejoin Finland with Sweden? (besides all the historical bits)
Oh, that. Just one way of keeping the title of Grand Duke in existence post-1917. It guess rejoining with Sweden would not be very plausible in the twentieth century anymore. The Finnish peasant-soldiers were already used to stage enough Swedish imperial adventures before 1809, thank you very much...
OK, I see. So you only see a reunion with Sweden as the option for this?
I guess one could try to change the Russian rule in Finland in a way that the office of Grand Duke was detached from Tsardom early on.
In that case Finland could have a true, resident Grand Duke (maybe a younger Romanov) in Helsinki. Give a well-liked and adored Duke or two, and maybe by the time independence becomes an option, the constitutional situation will be interpreted in a way that a foreign prince will be elected into that position rather than to become a King.
But even then, people could be critical towards the perceived subservient rank of the Finnish leader to the Kings in the other Nordic countries and make him King, if only to save face.![]()
Yeah. An early 20th century Finland was too nationalistic and anti-swedish for rejoining be plausible.Oh, that. Just one way of keeping the title of Grand Duke in existence post-1917. It guess rejoining with Sweden would not be very plausible in the twentieth century anymore.
Well how else you think Sweden could have ever become a Great Power otherwise?The Finnish peasant-soldiers were already used to stage enough Swedish imperial adventures before 1809, thank you very much...
By having German Kings, how else?Well how else you think Sweden could have ever become a Great Power otherwise?![]()
I guess one could try to change the Russian rule in Finland in a way that the office of Grand Duke was detached from Tsardom early on.
In that case Finland could have a true, resident Grand Duke (maybe a younger Romanov) in Helsinki. Give a well-liked and adored Duke or two, and maybe by the time independence becomes an option, the constitutional situation will be interpreted in a way that a foreign prince will be elected into that position rather than to become a King.
But even then, people could be critical towards the perceived subservient rank of the Finnish leader to the Kings in the other Nordic countries and make him King, if only to save face.![]()
Yeah. An early 20th century Finland was too nationalistic and anti-swedish for rejoining be plausible.
Though I suppose that some huge crisis might change the situation. After all, it actually did change during the WW2 in OTL.
Finland would benefit from better legal system (laws in OTL are copied and translated from Sweden, but Finnish judges are more corrupted) and better health care...
I know there has been a tendency (in the past anyway) watch how new legislation works in Sweden and then make similar laws for Finland but I thin it often was bit more complex process than just copying and translating.
Also, do you have sources about Finnish judges being more corrupted?