Kalmar Union

[colonelkadaffy]

I was just wondering if anyone knew if the kalmar union (Which existed as a almagamtion of denmark, sweden and norway) would exist at the start of the game.

I can't rember it being in the old EU2 at the start (mind you I can't check my computer with it on being broken.)

Be intresting to make it into a world superpower with a bit of ahistorical playing. Of course it would be nessiary to have to break up with events and to have to strugle against that.

 

[saskganesh]

it was represented in EU2 by having Norway and Sweden as vassals of Denmark.

yes it will be in the game at 1453. I don't know how they will represent it.

 

[colonelkadaffy]

it was represented in EU2 by having Norway and Sweden as vassals of Denmark.

yes it will be in the game at 1453. I don't know how they will represent it.

Well did that really do it justice, it was far more of a single nation state (hell it broke apart due to a full scale civil war) than a union of independant states. I'll take a look through the screen shots and see if they give anything away.

 

[colonelkadaffy]

Apprenlty not

thats a bit of a shame, the kalmar union was for all intensive purposes a nation the same way england wales and scotland were in 1701.

 

[unmerged(62543)]

Apparently not.



thats a bit of a shame, the kalmar union was for all intensive purposes a nation the same way england wales and scotland were in 1701.

Not necs! Read the following:

The Kalmar Union (Danish/Norwegian/Swedish: Kalmarunionen) was a series of personal unions (1397–1521) that united the three kingdoms of Denmark, Norway and Sweden under a single monarch.[1] The countries had given up their sovereignty, but not their independence, and diverging interests (especially Swedish dissatisfaction over the Danish and Holsteinish dominance) gave rise to a conflict that would hamper it from the 1430s until its final dissolution in 1523. (Wikipedia)

You will see the Kalmar Union was not a unified realm, like the United Kingdom. In 1701 England, Scotland and Wales (if you really want to count Wales) weren't independant of one another anymore. They still existed as countries but all had one king and one government.

 

[unmerged(37697)]

You will see the Kalmar Union was not a unified realm, like the United Kingdom. In 1701 England, Scotland and Wales (if you really want to count Wales) weren't independant of one another anymore. They still existed as countries but all had one king and one government.

Don't, because Wales was annexed hundreds of years before then.

 

[unmerged(62543)]

Don't, because Wales was annexed hundreds of years before then.

I know. That's why I put that little disclaimer in - a lot of people seem to count Wales as a official part of the United Kingdom whereas it's not.

 

[kleomenes]

Yes, Wales is not officially part of the United Kingdom (Hence the absence of any welsh symbolism from the Union Jack).
It's too bad the Kalmar Union isn't in, I really would have liked to see them represented in EUIII.

 

[colonelkadaffy]

Not necs! Read the following:

The Kalmar Union (Danish/Norwegian/Swedish: Kalmarunionen) was a series of personal unions (1397–1521) that united the three kingdoms of Denmark, Norway and Sweden under a single monarch.[1] The countries had given up their sovereignty, but not their independence, and diverging interests (especially Swedish dissatisfaction over the Danish and Holsteinish dominance) gave rise to a conflict that would hamper it from the 1430s until its final dissolution in 1523. (Wikipedia)

You will see the Kalmar Union was not a unified realm, like the United Kingdom. In 1701 England, Scotland and Wales (if you really want to count Wales) weren't independant of one another anymore. They still existed as countries but all had one king and one government.

Well after the act of union, 'britian' as a nation came proparlly into being (allthough it had existed de facto for a hundred years or so before that) which had a unified foriegn policy and a single army. Like the Kalmar union. Having individual states each with their own A.I isunt quite the same.

 

[unmerged(59737)]

It'll probably be represented as a personal union which will always ( ) fall apart via event.

 

[unmerged(11600)]

It'll probably be represented as a personal union which will always ( ) fall apart via event.

As an Irish state will be my first game of EU3, I'll have to rely on a KalmAAR Union to see how to avoid it falling apart. I'm as certain as I can be that it will start the game as three countries in a Personal Union.

-Pat

 

[saskganesh]

It's too bad the Kalmar Union isn't in, I really would have liked to see them represented in EUIII.

it is in, its just not represented as a "unitary state"

 

[unmerged(10915)]

At its time of existence, there was no such thing as a "nation state". Such symbolism is taken entirely out of context.
The Union was personal, more about dynastic ties and family politics, than some kind of nationalistic creation.

Simply put, it was more medieval than modern.

 

[Zuckergußgebäck]

I think that it is best represented as it is now - most of the nobles in Sweden paid little or no attention to what the king in Copenhagen wanted. And if they did, it was only because they had something to gain by it.

I wouldn´t mind having a KLM tag, though.

 

[Van der Gent]

Mm... KALMAR-unionen, sounds good ey.

It will be in, and I'll break it as sweden.

 

[Lasse Nielsen]

I think that it is best represented as it is now - most of the nobles in Sweden paid little or no attention to what the king in Copenhagen wanted. And if they did, it was only because they had something to gain by it.

I wouldn´t mind having a KLM tag, though.

Actually it was some of the most powerfull nobles that originally backed the union - and it was a contributing factor to the "bloodbath" at stockholm (rivaling nobles). and to some degree it was the smaller nobles that was against the union.

I think it is right to portray the union as independent stats that share the same roayl house. the contries had their own national cousels to advise the monarch (though the danish and norwegian was unified). the only monarch to really control the nations as one was Magrethe 1. in the name of her son Oluf/Olaf and later her adopted son Erik. After Erik was deposed, the unionking (Christopher of Bavaria) had to agree to the independence of the seperate kingdoms.

There has been a debate for over a hundred years about two documents that state the nature of the union. 1)the union letter. 2)the coronation letter. the first says it should be a loose union and the latter that the union king has a lot of centralized power. the first letter looks like it is just a draft (written on paper, has been editet, and is not fully signed or with the right amount of sigil). the second is on parchment (shepskin i belive) fully signed and the right amount of sigil.
The latest reaserch suggests that the coronation letter was origianlly the lawfull basis for the union (but was never really confirmed in the different counsels, as it should have been as stated in the document). used by the screwd diplomat Queen Margrethe 1. the Union letter, it is belived, was later used by the nobles (in all three contries, not just sweden) to reign in the more agressive and conflict seeking King Erik.

 

[Zuckergußgebäck]

Actually it was some of the most powerfull nobles that originally backed the union - and it was a contributing factor to the "bloodbath" at stockholm (rivaling nobles). and to some degree it was the smaller nobles that was against the union.

While they may have backed the union, it didn´t mean that they paid any attention to the king in Copenhagen.

 

[Johan]

I was just wondering if anyone knew if the kalmar union (Which existed as a almagamtion of denmark, sweden and norway) would exist at the start of the game.

In may 1453????

No, EU3 is a historical game with historically accurate setups.

 

[Arilou]

In may 1453????

But will the situation with a Personal Union between Denmark and Half of Norwya and Sweden and the other half of norway be represented?

 

[unmerged(10915)]

But will the situation with a Personal Union between Denmark and Half of Norwya and Sweden and the other half of norway be represented?

In 1453, the Union was out. It would be temporarily be revivified later, but in 1453 Karl Knutsson Bonde was running around with his head full of power and ambitiousness.