Talk:Kalmar Union
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Concerning the contention that there supposedly is a flag of the Kalmar Union, please refer to the discussion at Flags of the World. -- Mic 23:33, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Graphic of the royal lineages
I added a graphic of the royal lineages in Scandinavia around 1400. The graphic could use a translation from Danish to English but most people should be able to make sense of it. Anyone should feel free to make an english version.--Heelgrasper 03:48, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] The Sture party and Vasa's rise to power
I think a page is needed (or perhaps on this page) for a more cohesive description of the events leading up to Sweden leaving the Kalmar Union and afterwards. Right now, this content is spread out over the pages for Christian II of Denmark, the Stockholm Bloodbath, Christina Gyllenstierna and Gustav I of Sweden. There is a bit of redundancy between these pages, yet other parts of the story are missing. (I personally wrote up the Battle of Bogesund.) So I'd like to add some more info on this, but I'm not sure what to call it? There doesn't quite seem to be an accepted term for it. I've seen "Sten Sture den yngres krig mot Danmark" (Sten Sture the Younger's war on Denmark), which is what I used. Maybe it should be put under a "Sture party" (Sturepartiet) page. Comments? --BluePlatypus 22:28, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Delisted
I have to delist this from a GA, there are no references, that's not right! Homestarmy 16:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Denmark "allied with" or "at war" with Holstein
In the introduction Sweden is described as unhappy with the Danish and Holsteinish influence implying that these two were allied, yet later in the article Denmark makes war on Holstein (among others). I've read about this period but not enough to resolve this seeming contradiction.
- reply: Since 1460, Holstein was a principality whose ruler was Denmark's king, too. Not actually an alliance, but a personal union. Danish kings tended to draw cadres of officials from Holstein, to serve in various other places. However, in 1530s or so, a portion of Holstein was given to a younger son of the Danish king. And future kings would have wars against that guy's descendants, who were, for shorthand, called Dukes of Holstein, though they did not possess the whole Holstein.
- Moreover, sometime in 1470s or so, Danish king, the new ruler of H., launched conquest to subjugate some small border districts in or near Holstein, such as Ditmarschen. some could call that also a Holstein war. Suedois 17:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Subject for possible inclusion
o There was considerable political conflicts about the charters in which the Union was settled that are not included at the moment.
o I'm also missing that the important struggle between the Danes and the Hansa was over Danish aspirations to tax trade through the Sound. As a result of fighting the question was raised about compensation for losses due to Danish piracy.
o Of some importance for the formation of the Union was the fact that the Swedish and Danish nobility owned land on both sides of the borders so they had a common interest with the Union. As the conflicts grew between the countries the nobility were forced by the kings to take sides losing the cross-border property. This also influenced increased polarization as time passed.
o Aftermath: several wars were fought between Sweden and Denmark were the latters kings wanted to restore their kingdom.
[edit] Dissolved 1523 or 1536?
According to the article the Union was still existing formally until 1536, yet the opening paragraph claims it was dissolved in 1523, which is really when Sweden seceded.
- The union was never actually formally dissolved! (Just like the Korean war is still ongoing - formally:-). It was de facto dissolved when Gustav Vasa seized power - or - when Christian III declared in his accession charter that Norway should remain "a province of Denmark eternally" (Ledemodt af Danmarks Rige) I.e the new royal union succeeded the old Kalmar one. Depending on how you interpret the history H@r@ld 09:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Norway (with Iceland and Greenland)?
Is there any reason why the Faroes, Orkney and Shetland isn't included here? -- Nidator T / C 13:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Capital= Copenhagen?
Copenhagen was not the capital of the Kalmar Union. Infact, there was no official capital but the city you shuld count as a capital was kalmar. Cause that was were the King and Queen lived. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.119.21.34 (talk) 23:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)