Russian Claims on Sweden

[peo]

Just noticed a thing when i was looking at some family trees over the Swedish royal family.
The russian czars should have had a claim on the Swedish throne after 1739.

Karl XII sister married the duke of Holstein Gottorp they then got a son Karl-Fredrik which married Peter the Greats doughter.
He had a better claim to the Swedish throne than Adolf-Fredrik of Lübeck which as far as i can see had no relation to the Swedish royal house.

I wonder why Russia didn't try to take advantage of the turmoil following Karl XII death or following Fredrik of Hessens death and put themselves on the throne of the now extremly week Sweden?
Especcialy since they clearly had better claims to the throne than Adolf-Fredrik.

 

[unmerged(5730)]

Wasn't it so that it actually was the Russians that put Adolf Fredrik on the throne, as he was a relative to the Ruling house of Russia and Katarina the Great? There was two main candidates I believe, Adolf Fredrik and some Danish noble if I remeber right. And it was on the will of the Russians that it was included in a peace treaty that Adolf Fredrik would be the Prince of Heritance in Sweden.

So I believe that that was the reason for the poor interest from the Czars to put themselves on the Swedish throne.

 

[peo]

Acctually Adolf-Fredrik was a danish nobleman.
Or related to them at least.
But it is still rather stupid of the czars imo to not have put themselves on the throne of Sweden.

 

[unmerged(234)]

Originally posted by peo
Acctually Adolf-Fredrik was a danish nobleman.
Or related to them at least.
But it is still rather stupid of the czars imo to not have put themselves on the throne of Sweden.

Well, he couldn't. Not without renouncing the Russian throne.
Since only a confessing Lutheran was allowed as king of Sweden and only a confessing Russian-Orthodox as Tsar of Russia.

I thought Adolf Fredrik, lantgraf of Hessen and king of Sweden, was german.

 

[peo]

Originally posted by Janbalk
Well, he couldn't. Not without renouncing the Russian throne.
Since only a confessing Lutheran was allowed as king of Sweden and only a confessing Russian-Orthodox as Tsar of Russia.

I thought Adolf Fredrik, lantgraf of Hessen and king of Sweden, was german.

He could probably been able to get around that little obstacle

 

[unmerged(234)]

Originally posted by peo
He could probably been able to get around that little obstacle

Yes, but would likely have had to involved force (or at least a big danger of rebellion in Sweden), so he obviously thought it was not worth the hasle.

 

[peo]

Originally posted by Janbalk
Yes, but would likely have had to involved force (or at least a big danger of rebellion in Sweden), so he obviously thought it was not worth the hasle.

Probably
But it is still intresting that the russian Czars had a better claim on the throne than the Swedish king had.
In effect that would mean that the decendands of the Czars that is living today should be considered nobility in Sweden and have a claim on the throne...

 

[saskganesh]

Originally posted by peo
Probably
But it is still intresting that the russian Czars had a better claim on the throne than the Swedish king had.
In effect that would mean that the decendands of the Czars that is living today should be considered nobility in Sweden and have a claim on the throne...

whats the word for " jacobite" in swedish?

 

[Arilou]

Originally posted by saskganesh
whats the word for " jacobite" in swedish?

Jabokit.

Adolf-Fredrik was the Empress Elisabeth's nephew, Peter (who would become Czar later on) was actually raised to be swedish king, but he was more or less kidnapped by the russians.

(good thing, that, Peter III was more or less insane) Peter never liked orthodoxy though, and remained a lutheran at heart (one of the reasons his wife could overthrow him so easily)

 

[Vandelay]

The English especially with their Baltic trade would have opposed a personal union between Russia and Sweden as would probably the other great powers France, Austria, Prussia.

Remember that the English sided with Sweden at the end of the Great Nordic War.

Probably not worth the hassle for the Russian.

Cheers,
Vandelay

 

[peo]

Originally posted by Vandelay
The English especially with their Baltic trade would have opposed a personal union between Russia and Sweden as would probably the other great powers France, Austria, Prussia.

Remember that the English sided with Sweden at the end of the Great Nordic War.

Probably not worth the hassle for the Russian.

Cheers,
Vandelay

Sided... pfff
Didn't see any English soldiers here.
Only thing they did was to say please don't close the straights again.
About the same thing they did in 1809.

 

[Ape]

Originally posted by Vandelay
The English especially with their Baltic trade would have opposed a personal union between Russia and Sweden as would probably the other great powers France, Austria, Prussia.

Remember that the English sided with Sweden at the end of the Great Nordic War.

Probably not worth the hassle for the Russian.

Cheers,
Vandelay

Now Im bewildered. You must mean at the beginning, when England as a guaranteening power for the the soveriegnity of Holstein sent a fleet to the straits under the command of Admiral George Rooke?

At the end of the conflict England sided with Denmark, Russia, Prussia, Saxony and all the rest. King George I was also Count or Margrave or whatever of Hannover, and he wanted Bremen added to Hannover, so he joined the fray like a vulture

 

[Vandelay]

I didn´t mention any soldiers, peo...

The English fleet and the Swedish fleet cruised the Baltic jointly during 1720. The English fleet was commanded by Admiral Norris.

I heve no doubt this influenced the peace negotiations. Remember that Russia held all of Finland at the end of the war and was systematically ravaging the Swedish coast. Sweden could have lost Finland in 1721 rather than 1809...

Russia and Denmark was in much better shape to continue the war than Sweden and yet didn´t.

My guess is that this was partially influenced by the great powers´ wish for "balance" in the Baltic - as the leading maritime nation England was at the forefront, Bremen was "payment" for their Navy.

Adolf Fredrik was elected king with support from the Russians and in opposition to the Danes - this support included Russian "protective" troops in e.g Norrtälje, Nyköping and Norrköping. The Russians evacuated, again, Finland after the 1741-42 war and finally in 1744 Sweden proper. I don´t think they did this out of the goodness of their hearts, but rather that they got what they wanted.

Sweden was, from 1721, gradually slipping into the Russian sphere of influence a process that wasn´t really stopped until Gustavus III although it was resisted diplomatically with the Swedish royal marriages with Prussia and Denmark.

Cheers,
Vandelay

 

[unmerged(5730)]

Originally posted by Vandelay
Adolf Fredrik was elected king with support from the Russians and in opposition to the Danes - this support included Russian "protective" troops in e.g Norrtälje, Nyköping and Norrköping. The Russians evacuated, again, Finland after the 1741-42 war and finally in 1744 Sweden proper. I don´t think they did this out of the goodness of their hearts, but rather that they got what they wanted.

Exactly, the Russians wanted Adolf Fredrik.

Originally posted by Janbalk
I thought Adolf Fredrik, lantgraf of Hessen and king of Sweden, was german.

Just a point, Adolf Fredrik wasn't Lantgraf of Hessen, Fredrik I of Sweden was.

The title Aldof Fredrik had before he bacame King of Sweden was Duke of Holstein-Gottorp, but as he entered the Swedish throne, the Swedish Riksdag took that title away from him, with made Adolf Fredrik a bit upset

 

[unmerged(234)]

Originally posted by Kent I Wallmi
Just a point, Adolf Fredrik wasn't Lantgraf of Hessen, Fredrik I of Sweden was.

Ok, I always had difficullties keeping those two apart

 

[peo]

Originally posted by Vandelay
I didn´t mention any soldiers, peo...

The English fleet and the Swedish fleet cruised the Baltic jointly during 1720. The English fleet was commanded by Admiral Norris.

I heve no doubt this influenced the peace negotiations. Remember that Russia held all of Finland at the end of the war and was systematically ravaging the Swedish coast. Sweden could have lost Finland in 1721 rather than 1809...

Russia and Denmark was in much better shape to continue the war than Sweden and yet didn´t.

My guess is that this was partially influenced by the great powers´ wish for "balance" in the Baltic - as the leading maritime nation England was at the forefront, Bremen was "payment" for their Navy.

Adolf Fredrik was elected king with support from the Russians and in opposition to the Danes - this support included Russian "protective" troops in e.g Norrtälje, Nyköping and Norrköping. The Russians evacuated, again, Finland after the 1741-42 war and finally in 1744 Sweden proper. I don´t think they did this out of the goodness of their hearts, but rather that they got what they wanted.

Sweden was, from 1721, gradually slipping into the Russian sphere of influence a process that wasn´t really stopped until Gustavus III although it was resisted diplomatically with the Swedish royal marriages with Prussia and Denmark.

Cheers,
Vandelay

Well...
How if the royal navy was in the baltic the Russians could ravage the easter seaboard.
Either the royal navy was crap or they didn't care.

Sweden was "allied" to England when we lost Finland to.
They helped as much then.
During the Crimean war they managed to convince us to open a nothern front on the russians but when we agreed and started the front they said that they weren't going to help.
So the english-swedish alliances that has been hasn't been to the benefit of Sweden.

 

[Vandelay]

So the english-swedish alliances that has been hasn't been to the benefit of Sweden.

Without them Sweden would probably have lost all holdings in Northern Germany in 1721 and quite possibly Finland and Bohuslän as well.

The English had no interest in a Swedish dominated Baltic, but did have an interest in Baltic strategic balance.

After 1721 Sweden was no longer a great power - ultimately Swedish independence rested on the currents of European great power politics - England, France, Russia and Austria.

These tendencies were to be seen already in 1676 when Louis XIV made peace above the head of Karl XI.

Cheers,
Vandelay

 

[peo]

Originally posted by Vandelay
Without them Sweden would probably have lost all holdings in Northern Germany in 1721 and quite possibly Finland and Bohuslän as well.

The English had no interest in a Swedish dominated Baltic, but did have an interest in Baltic strategic balance.

After 1721 Sweden was no longer a great power - ultimately Swedish independence rested on the currents of European great power politics - England, France, Russia and Austria.

These tendencies were to be seen already in 1676 when Louis XIV made peace above the head of Karl XI.

Cheers,
Vandelay

Maybe.
Sweden shouldn't have accepted the negotiated peace when Karl X conquered denmark, we should have annexed it and got rid of it in the first place.

 

[unmerged(234)]

Originally posted by peo
Maybe.
Sweden shouldn't have accepted the negotiated peace when Karl X conquered denmark, we should have annexed it and got rid of it in the first place.

Easier said that done. Very hard to take Copenhagen when pretty near evrybodywas helping the danes keep the sealines to it open

 

[peo]

Originally posted by Janbalk
Easier said that done. Very hard to take Copenhagen when pretty near evrybodywas helping the danes keep the sealines to it open

Not that difficult.
Öresund is easily closed by shore based guns even back then.
Considering that he went back later to finish the job but managed to get himself sick or wounded in the process i think it would have been better to finish it earlier and once and for all.
Broken Denmarks back so to speak.

But anyway that wasn't why i opened the thread. So lets leave it