A Stroke Separated the Swedish and Schleswig Successions?

[Wendell]

After the 1809 revolution in Sweden, the new king was childless and an adoptive heir was sought. The consensus candidate, Charles August of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg_Augustenburg, ultimately died of a stroke when he fell from his horse. After this, Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, one of the more capable and independent of Napoleon's marshals was offered the throne and his descendants reign in Sweden to this day. My questions are thus, what happens to Bernadotte, who played an important role in Napoleon's ultimate downfall historically, and what happens to Sweden, given that the initial choice for prince regent given that his nephew (and potential successor in Sweden) Christian August II, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Augustenburg was a contender for the Danish crown as well as the legal heir at one point to the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

@BlueFlowwer @Atterdag @Jürgen @Milites

 

[Atterdag]

Charles August's alt-history potential has always intrigued me, I'm actually a bit surprised that he isn't used more often. I think this stems from a few places, Bernadotte was such a curve ball in otl regarding Sweden and the Napoleonic wars that it becomes difficult to predict what would've happened without him. August also has both short- and long-term possibilities, but I think it can be difficult to gauge how these would affect eachother. Also I think he has kind of a reputation of being sort of a loser, especially compared to Charles XIV, and this may turn people off of using him.

I did start a thread a while ago about Bernadotte not becoming King of Sweden and it’s effect on the Napoleonic war and the Russian campaign specifically. There wasn’t that much discussion, but there was a good case made that it wouldn’t drastically change Russia’s situation. Ultimately if Sweden sided with France in the invasion, it would likely be ruinous for the already weakened country and it may end up under Russian occupation in one way or the other.

But it’s not at all certain that Charles August would take Sweden in that direction, sure there was a large portion of Swedish leadership who were in favor of an attempted reconquest of Finland, but certainly not all, and even some of the hawks realized that even if war was desirable it wasn't feasible at the time. My personal belief is that Charles August entertained the hawks while he still wasn't secure in his position, but that he didn't intend to make good on their hopes. In short I don't think Sweden under Charles August joins France in a war against Russia.

But it does raise a lot of questions about what direction he would take Sweden, he was in favor of Scandinavian unity - initially he supported Frederick VI's candidacy to the Swedish throne, but once that clearly wasn't on the table he also seems to have had ambitions for taking Norway from Denmark. However, Frederick VI planned to start negotiations for Charles August to be engaged to his daughter Caroline shortly before his death, which might not mean war with Denmark after all.

Disregardning how the Napoleonic wars end for Sweden and Denmark-Norway, Denmark and Sweden likely become much closer dynastically since the Augustenburgs are likely to inherit in Denmark sooner or later, especially since the reason for the enemity between them and the main Oldenburg line is gone with Charles August still alive. If the stars align just right then pan-scandinavian sentiment may coincide with a personal union between Denmark(-Norway) and Sweden(-Norway).

EDIT: Another short-term consequence of Charles August dying is of course Axel von Fersen not being lynched, strengthening the Gustavians, again I'm unsure how much this would affect, Fersens time as a prime political mover was behind him anyway, but Charles August could align himself with them to strengthen his personal rule. I don't see Gustav Gustavsson being adopted as an heir as a possibility, but it's not impossible that he could be rehabilitated in some way down the line.

 

[Jürgen]

Charles August's alt-history potential has always intrigued me, I'm actually a bit surprised that he isn't used more often. I think this stems from a few places, Bernadotte was such a curve ball in otl regarding Sweden and the Napoleonic wars that it becomes difficult to predict what would've happened without him. August also has both short- and long-term possibilities, but I think it can be difficult to gauge how these would affect eachother. Also I think he has kind of a reputation of being sort of a loser, especially compared to Charles XIV, and this may turn people off of using him.

I did start a thread a while ago about Bernadotte not becoming King of Sweden and it’s effect on the Napoleonic war and the Russian campaign specifically. There wasn’t that much discussion, but there was a good case made that it wouldn’t drastically change Russia’s situation. Ultimately if Sweden sided with France in the invasion, it would likely be ruinous for the already weakened country and it may end up under Russian occupation in one way or the other.

But it’s not at all certain that Charles August would take Sweden in that direction, sure there was a large portion of Swedish leadership who were in favor of an attempted reconquest of Finland, but certainly not all, and even some of the hawks realized that even if war was desirable it wasn't feasible at the time. My personal belief is that Charles August entertained the hawks while he still wasn't secure in his position, but that he didn't intend to make good on their hopes. In short I don't think Sweden under Charles August joins France in a war against Russia.

But it does raise a lot of questions about what direction he would take Sweden, he was in favor of Scandinavian unity - initially he supported Frederick VI's candidacy to the Swedish throne, but once that clearly wasn't on the table he also seems to have had ambitions for taking Norway from Denmark. However, Frederick VI planned to start negotiations for Charles August to be engaged to his daughter Caroline shortly before his death, which might not mean war with Denmark after all.

Disregardning how the Napoleonic wars end for Sweden and Denmark-Norway, Denmark and Sweden likely become much closer dynastically since the Augustenburgs are likely to inherit in Denmark sooner or later, especially since the reason for the enemity between them and the main Oldenburg line is gone with Charles August still alive. If the stars align just right then pan-scandinavian sentiment may coincide with a personal union between Denmark(-Norway) and Sweden(-Norway).

EDIT: Another short-term consequence of Charles August dying is of course Axel von Fersen not being lynched, strengthening the Gustavians, again I'm unsure how much this would affect, Fersens time as a prime political mover was behind him anyway, but Charles August could align himself with them to strengthen his personal rule. I don't see Gustav Gustavsson being adopted as an heir as a possibility, but it's not impossible that he could be rehabilitated in some way down the line.

Pretty interesting perspective.

It do raise the question what would have happened if Russia had occupied Sweden?

 

[Wendell]

Disregardning how the Napoleonic wars end for Sweden and Denmark-Norway, Denmark and Sweden likely become much closer dynastically since the Augustenburgs are likely to inherit in Denmark sooner or later, especially since the reason for the enemity between them and the main Oldenburg line is gone with Charles August still alive. If the stars align just right then pan-scandinavian sentiment may coincide with a personal union between Denmark(-Norway) and Sweden(-Norway).

EDIT: Another short-term consequence of Charles August dying is of course Axel von Fersen not being lynched, strengthening the Gustavians, again I'm unsure how much this would affect, Fersens time as a prime political mover was behind him anyway, but Charles August could align himself with them to strengthen his personal rule. I don't see Gustav Gustavsson being adopted as an heir as a possibility, but it's not impossible that he could be rehabilitated in some way down the line.

Would there not be a war over Danish succession or succession in the Duchies in this timeline?

 

[Atterdag]

It do raise the question what would have happened if Russia had occupied Sweden?

I’m not sure. There had been partition plans drawn up with Denmark during the Finnish war, which would’ve assigned Sweden south of Motala to Denmark and north of it to Russia, but if Denmark is still in the pro-Napoleon camp then that’s of course of the table. Maybe Denmark switches allegiance for the war of the 6th coalition like many German states did.

I don’t think an outright annexation of Sweden is very likely, given that Russia was fine with an unusually hands-off Finnish buffer state it’d be weird if they then wanted to fully integrate and administer Sweden. The prospect of it would however be a useful tool in itself, Gothenburg in Russian hands is a terrifying prospect for Britain, but it’s not like they can do all that much about it - they’re not gonna launch operation unthinkable in 1815. Russia might be able to offer Britain a choice between them having access to the North Sea or the Mediterranean, and Britain would likely prefer the latter.

A personal union with Sweden could also be a possibility, reviving the old Holstein party and such, it requires some rewriting of Swedish constitutional law though - regarding religion in particular. Strategically speaking this isn’t very different from outright annexation. An alternative could be installing a puppet ruler and turn Sweden into a Russian vassal state, maybe under another member of the Russian imperial family, or they could even bring back Gustaf Gustafsson as Gustaf V. It may seem weird given his father’s relationship with Russia, but that may pan out in Russia’s favor. Gustaf wouldn’t trust the men who deposed his father, and they in turn would fear retribution from him, which could drive them both into the russian fold.

The long term consequences are of course much harder to speculate on, Sweden may develop in a similar way that Finland did otl, or the TL may have changed so much that it’s all up in the air. Sweden and Finland could become sort of the Lithuania and Belarus of the Nordics when it comes to questions of identity.

 

[Atterdag]

Would there not be a war over Danish succession or succession in the Duchies in this timeline?

Depends on the exact circumstances. Whether or not Charles August marries Caroline of Denmark and if he has children with her would be an important factor, as would the fate Norway be, I.e whether the Danish composite monarchy is left intact by the end of the war or not.

 

[Jürgen]

I’m not sure. There had been partition plans drawn up with Denmark during the Finnish war, which would’ve assigned Sweden south of Motala to Denmark and north of it to Russia, but if Denmark is still in the pro-Napoleon camp then that’s of course of the table. Maybe Denmark switches allegiance for the war of the 6th coalition like many German states did.

I may misremember, but the reason why Denmark didn’t change side was because they would have to give Norway up. Here they would not, so there’s no reason to stay on Napoleon’s side.

A Molata border would be interesting, of course you could also simply see Denmark regain it eastern provinces minus Gotland but plus Gothenburg, cutting the Russians off from Kattegat, thereby keeping the British happy.

Of course a Molata border, which I expect would also include the old lost Norwegian territory would be pretty interesting how it would affect Nordic culture.

 

[Atterdag]

Of course a Molata border, which I expect would also include the old lost Norwegian territory would be pretty interesting how it would affect Nordic culture.

Unsure of Jämtland would be included but Bohuslän for sure, though I’m not sure if either would be re-integrated to Norway, I’m leaning towards no, same with the Scanian lands. The Danes could certainly play up the whole “King of the Goths” and try to foster a separate identity from Swedish in their new territory. It could maybe work, as it would seperate them from the shameful collapse that Sweden suffered in the last century.

As for the Russian part, I don’t know if it would still be called Sweden or changed to something more generic a la the Vistula land down the line. There would probably be some migration of Russians to mining towns in the north and some to Stockholm, but I doubt it’d be more extensive than what Finland experienced in otl. Gotland would be Russia’s natural outwards post in the Baltic and Visby or a new city could grow a lot as a naval base. Eventually the island could become majority Russian, given that its population is so small,

 

[Jürgen]

Unsure of Jämtland would be included but Bohuslän for sure, though I’m not sure if either would be re-integrated to Norway, I’m leaning towards no, same with the Scanian lands. The Danes could certainly play up the whole “King of the Goths” and try to foster a separate identity from Swedish in their new territory. It could maybe work, as it would seperate them from the shameful collapse that Sweden suffered in the last century.

I think the Skånelandene would be reintegrated into Denmark and Bohuslän into Norway, it simply make more administrative sense and if the Goths keep standard Swedish as Church language [1], it make sense to disconnect the Danish and Norwegian speaking areas from the Geatish speaking areas. I expect Götaland to have it own stadholder instead of being administrated from Denmark. It would be pretty interesting to see how Götaland would develop under Danish rule. Denmark did not really have area like it, Danish and Norwegian landscapes have always been dominated by coastlines. I could easily see Götaland end up like Norway under Swedish rule; a neglected red haired stepchild. On the other hand the region have some agricultural potential and Denmark was ahead of Sweden in active develop agriculture and while Denmark-Norway had the vast forest of Norway, these was dominated by conifers, Gøtaland may be distinct and important enough that its interests are not ignored.

Of course that also raise the question; what will happen to Svealand under Russian rule.

[1] Danes would likely lean to remove it, but honestly it may be seen as needlessly antagonistic toward the Goths. Of course this written standard will likely adopt Danish ø/æ and slowly become more Geatish with a lot of Danish loanwords.

 

[Jürgen]

As for the Russian part, I don’t know if it would still be called Sweden or changed to something more generic a la the Vistula land down the line. There would probably be some migration of Russians to mining towns in the north and some to Stockholm, but I doubt it’d be more extensive than what Finland experienced in otl. Gotland would be Russia’s natural outwards post in the Baltic and Visby or a new city could grow a lot as a naval base. Eventually the island could become majority Russian, given that its population is so small,

I suspect that Finland would see see Swedish settlement in the northern part, as for Gotland I don’t think it’s a good base for the navy. If Russia place it navy at Visby, the navy will lack land defense, the British or Germans can blockade the island and land marines and simply conquer the navy. I think the navy stays in St. Petersburg. But even if it’s placed there it should be said that the modern population of the island is unnatural low and this is caused for economic reasons making a lot of young people move away, a naval base would make more young people stay.

 

[30PrincesAndAKing]

Would there not be a war over Danish succession or succession in the Duchies in this timeline?

In terms of succession, it's hard to say. By 1810 Frederick VI has given up on having more children with his wife besides his two daughters, so his male line is certain to go extinct. Less certain is the state of Prins Christian Frederik and his brother Prins Ferdinand.

By 1810, the future Frederick VII has already been born to Christian Frederik, and anyone with an eye to the succession will see that he will almost certainly become King of Denmark. But Frederick VII is assumed to have some defect making it impossible to have children, so his line will probably become extinct as well. But Christian Frederik may well have more children; in 1810 he'd gotten a divorce from Frederick (VII)'s mother and was free to marry again, and was young enough to still have children.

OTL, he remarried Charles August's niece Caroline Amalie in 1815, which seems to have been a desired match in all circles (Frederick VI mainly wanted it to tie his family to Christian Frederik's). They didn't end up having children, but, if the marriage doesn't go through for whatever reason (perhaps because Caroline Amalie is desired as a Swedish proxy if Charles August has no daughters?) then Christian Frederik might remarry to someone else and have children with them.

Moreover, if Charles August marries Frederick VI's daughter Caroline, then Caroline cannot marry Christian Frederik's brother Ferdinand, leaving Ferdinand free to possibly marry someone else and potentially have children (he had an illegitimate daughter so he was at least capable of fathering children). Basically, if Christian Frederik and/or Ferdinand are allowed to marry differently, then either of their male lines surviving would be enough to prevent a Schleswig-Holstein question from brewing in the foreseeable future.

 

[Wendell]

I want to thank everyone so far for engaging constructively in this thread thus far. It's going in interesting directions.

Unsure of Jämtland would be included but Bohuslän for sure, though I’m not sure if either would be re-integrated to Norway, I’m leaning towards no, same with the Scanian lands. The Danes could certainly play up the whole “King of the Goths” and try to foster a separate identity from Swedish in their new territory. It could maybe work, as it would seperate them from the shameful collapse that Sweden suffered in the last century.

As for the Russian part, I don’t know if it would still be called Sweden or changed to something more generic a la the Vistula land down the line. There would probably be some migration of Russians to mining towns in the north and some to Stockholm, but I doubt it’d be more extensive than what Finland experienced in otl. Gotland would be Russia’s natural outwards post in the Baltic and Visby or a new city could grow a lot as a naval base. Eventually the island could become majority Russian, given that its population is so small,

Bothnia, perhaps?

In terms of succession, it's hard to say. By 1810 Frederick VI has given up on having more children with his wife besides his two daughters, so his male line is certain to go extinct. Less certain is the state of Prins Christian Frederik and his brother Prins Ferdinand.

By 1810, the future Frederick VII has already been born to Christian Frederik, and anyone with an eye to the succession will see that he will almost certainly become King of Denmark. But Frederick VII is assumed to have some defect making it impossible to have children, so his line will probably become extinct as well. But Christian Frederik may well have more children; in 1810 he'd gotten a divorce from Frederick (VII)'s mother and was free to marry again, and was young enough to still have children.

OTL, he remarried Charles August's niece Caroline Amalie in 1815, which seems to have been a desired match in all circles (Frederick VI mainly wanted it to tie his family to Christian Frederik's). They didn't end up having children, but, if the marriage doesn't go through for whatever reason (perhaps because Caroline Amalie is desired as a Swedish proxy if Charles August has no daughters?) then Christian Frederik might remarry to someone else and have children with them.

Moreover, if Charles August marries Frederick VI's daughter Caroline, then Caroline cannot marry Christian Frederik's brother Ferdinand, leaving Ferdinand free to possibly marry someone else and potentially have children (he had an illegitimate daughter so he was at least capable of fathering children). Basically, if Christian Frederik and/or Ferdinand are allowed to marry differently, then either of their male lines surviving would be enough to prevent a Schleswig-Holstein question from brewing in the foreseeable future.

Would this then prevent a Danish succession question as well?

 

[30PrincesAndAKing]

Would this then prevent a Danish succession question as well?

Yes, since although Denmark allowed female inheritance in-theory, the succession was formally limited to the male heirs of Frederick III; only after the total extinction of these would a female heir be considered. Succession law in the duchies wasn't nearly so formalized, but Christian VIII wasn't necessarily wrong when he postulated that they were similar to Denmark's. The duchies were limited to the male heirs of Christian I, but female line succession had previously been tacitly allowed (Christian I had inherited the duchies through the female line despite the existence of heirs male).

So long as the (legal) male line of Frederick III doesn't die out, there is no divergence in the succession law between Denmark and the duchies.

 

[Wendell]

I'm wondering now what, if anything, this means for France. Does the Malet coup plot instead become the Bernadotte coup plot, for example?

Yes, since although Denmark allowed female inheritance in-theory, the succession was formally limited to the male heirs of Frederick III; only after the total extinction of these would a female heir be considered. Succession law in the duchies wasn't nearly so formalized, but Christian VIII wasn't necessarily wrong when he postulated that they were similar to Denmark's. The duchies were limited to the male heirs of Christian I, but female line succession had previously been tacitly allowed (Christian I had inherited the duchies through the female line despite the existence of heirs male).

So long as the (legal) male line of Frederick III doesn't die out, there is no divergence in the succession law between Denmark and the duchies.

But the marriages could still go as per OTL despite the change in circumstances?

 

[Jürgen]

Would this then prevent a Danish succession question as well?

A important factor is that separatism in the duchies arose indirectly as result of the loss of Norway and the economic crisis which followed that. Eastern Holstein was historically the economic center of the duchies thanks to their rich soil and easy connection to Denmark-Norway and the Baltic. With the loss of Norway the economic center shifted to southern Holstein thank to the growing industry in the region, which focused on Germany and the North Sea. If Norway stayed in the union, eastern Holstein would stay more important and Denmark would avoid the economic trouble of the 1820ties. The result would be the unionists would stay more important in Holstein.

Without any 1st Schleswig War, it’s more likely that Holstein and Copenhagen would find a better compromise candidate, also the Augustenburgs wouldn’t be traitors, so they would be viable candidates and their pan-German sympathies would also be more minor problem, if union identity was stronger than Danish nationalism.

 

[Wendell]

A important factor is that separatism in the duchies arose indirectly as result of the loss of Norway and the economic crisis which followed that. Eastern Holstein was historically the economic center of the duchies thanks to their rich soil and easy connection to Denmark-Norway and the Baltic. With the loss of Norway the economic center shifted to southern Holstein thank to the growing industry in the region, which focused on Germany and the North Sea. If Norway stayed in the union, eastern Holstein would stay more important and Denmark would avoid the economic trouble of the 1820ties. The result would be the unionists would stay more important in Holstein.

Without any 1st Schleswig War, it’s more likely that Holstein and Copenhagen would find a better compromise candidate, also the Augustenburgs wouldn’t be traitors, so they would be viable candidates and their pan-German sympathies would also be more minor problem, if union identity was stronger than Danish nationalism.

Are we right to assume that this POD prevents the personal union between Sweden and Norway?

 

[Jürgen]

Are we right to assume that this POD prevents the personal union between Sweden and Norway?

Likely, but I’m not entire sure. It was a long term plan of Sweden to get Norway and there were also some support in Eastern Norway for a union with Sweden, Charles August was also popular in these areas, but on the other hand Charles August is someone the Frederik trusted and seemed to have been pretty loyal, his childlessness also raise the question about him selected one one of his royal cousins as heir.

 

[30PrincesAndAKing]

But the marriages could still go as per OTL despite the change in circumstances?

Yes, it's possible both marriages happen like OTL, but I wouldn't say either is especially likely. Caroline's marriage in particular is nearly 30 years out from the POD.

Bear in mind that the marriages of Christian Frederik and Ferdinand served dual purposes for Frederick VI, one political and one dynastic. Without sons, Frederick VI knew Christian Frederik would be his inevitable successor. Yet Frederick VI hated the children of his uncle Arveprins Frederik, and, furthermore, believed (perhaps with good reason) neither Christian Frederik nor his siblings were even his uncle's biological children. Needless to say Frederick VI found the idea of being succeeded by them abhorrent.

Christian Frederik's marriage to Caroline Amalie came after Christian Frederik's failed bid to bring Norway back into the fold, and it served to rehabilitate him in the eyes of the family, while also reintroducing Frederick VI's blood to that branch (Caroline Amalie was the daughter of Frederick VI's (half) sister). Caroline's marriage to Ferdinand was, conversely, a complete last resort after every other marriage option for her fell through--and also to cover up the embarrassing situation of her younger sister having been married the year prior (incidentally, to the future Frederick VII). All three marriages would have ensured Frederick VI's blood remained on the throne if any of them had produced children (none did).

But tying up dynastic loose ends caused by infidelity were not the only reasons for the marriage(s); if Christian Frederik hadn't failed in Norway (or hadn't needed to go to Norway in the first place), or if an actually useful marriage could be arranged for Caroline at an earlier date, I doubt either match would have taken place, especially Caroline's.

 

[Wendell]

How important was Sweden to the OTL Sixth Coalition and how essential was Bernadotte to Sweden's contribution to the same?