Help support TMP

"If Sweden had allied herself with Napoleon during " Topic

9 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Napoleonic Discussion Message Board

Areas of Interest


730 hits since 9 Feb 2018
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP09 Feb 2018 11:50 a.m. PST

….the Napoleonic Wars, would Finland exist today?

See here


RudyNelson09 Feb 2018 5:24 p.m. PST

Russia would have dominated Sweden. Bed move to allied with France.

Edwulf Inactive Member09 Feb 2018 7:15 p.m. PST

Then she would have been on the losing side. Denmark maybe push into the allied camp. So Demarik gains something, Bernadotte deposed as a failure.

Jcfrog Supporting Member of TMP10 Feb 2018 1:50 a.m. PST

Not so sure. Definite full no entry of Uk ships in Baltics.
Much more trouble and less troops for Russia on northern pincer in 1812.
Possible axis / resupply from sea on North axis towards SPB.
Interesting what if, after all they had a wars with Russia very recently.

alan L10 Feb 2018 3:37 a.m. PST

Would probably have lost a lot more men!

Lonkka1Actual10 Feb 2018 4:06 a.m. PST

Some thoughts from a Finn.

King of Sweden, Gustav IV Adolf, was kinda bonkers and thought that napoleon was the Anti-Christ and saw himself as the Anointed of the God who was going to rid the world of this monster. So I don't see it very possible that he'd ally himself with The Beast of the Apocalypse.

Losing Finland in 1809 (due to the war of 1808) was a catastrophe for Sweden, but stroke of luck for Finland. For hundreds of years Finland had been a shunned backwater for Sweden, but since the Russians needed to appease the just conquered Finns so they gave the country a lot of autonomy and Finland was an autonomous grand duchy in Russia. Although this autonomy was later on attacked it was still better than with the Swedes.

a hundred years later Finns got independence which I fail to see happening with the Swedes.

If Finland would've stayed with Sweden, in 1939 Soviet Union would've still demanded areas for the safety of Leningrad and if Swedes had agreed I think the whole country would've been annexed the way Baltic countries were and if Winter War had broken out, the miracle of the Winter War defense would've never happened (even if with Sweden Finns would've had more resources) as it was a very much a national thing and under Swedes there wouldn't have been as unified a people as with independent Finland. So whatever happened in Winter War Finland would've ended under Soviet yoke in 1939-1940.

As Hitler apparently got the idea of attacking Soviet Union from the abysmally poor performance of Red Army during the Winter War (or at least that showed him that the Soviets were in dire straits) Barbarossa might've never happened, had Soviets wrestled Finland from Swedes.

If it had it is rather probable that Germans would've invaded also through Finland, which would've let the country in much worse condition than it now was after Continuation War ended in 1944.

Perhaps Finland would've finally gotten the independence in early 90's along with the Baltic countries when Soviet Union crumbled. There would be plenty of tension in the borders today and Finland most likely would've joined NATO along with the Baltic states which would also increase tensions.

Mike the Analyst10 Feb 2018 5:15 a.m. PST

I understood that the Royal Navy used Swedish trees for masts due to length and strength so other alternative and perhaps lower quality tree trunks would have been sourced.

Bill N16 Feb 2018 3:41 p.m. PST

Sweden could have gotten out of the Napoleonic wars without losing Finland. Unless Napoleon had struck some secret deal with Alexander at Tilsit I don't know about I see no reason why Sweden could not have signed peace with Napoleon in 1807. If they had done so I see no reason why Napoleon would have green lighted the subsequent attack on Sweden-Finland by the Danes and Russians. Sweden could then have played the same game in the rest of the Napoleonic wars that they did in the OTL and come out of the war with their Finnish possessions.

Given Gustav IV's temperament it is unlikely that WOULD have happened. However in What If land you can disregard that.

Having gotten through the Napoleonic Wars with their Finish territory intact, could Sweden have kept it? Finland could still be used by another power to cut Russian access to the Baltic and to launch an attack on St. Petersburg. This would give Russia an excuse to meddle in Sweden's domestic affairs or to try and capture Finland later. Also what about Norway?

Daniel S17 Feb 2018 7:45 a.m. PST

Russia had already taken significant parts of Finland by 1807 (significant in population and strategic importance) While the loss of territory in 1743 had been the result of a disastrous Swedish attempt to retake the land lost in 1721 I doubt that Russian hunger for more of Finland had been so sated by 1807 that they would not have gone to war with Sweden for it even with Sweden at peace with France. After all Napoleon had not reason to aid the Swedes in a Russo-Swedish war as Russia getting Finland did not impact the balance of power in central Europe. Indeed one could argue that a Russo-Swedish war would have been the perfect thing for Napoleon as it would have tied up the Russians for even longer in Finland if the the Swedish part of the army had not been distracted by the threat of a Franco-Danish invasion.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.