Scottish-Norwegian Union

[Ricardolindo]

As a spin-off from my British Norway thread, what if Margaret of Scotland, wife of Eric II of Norway, had lived and had a son? He would have eventually inherited both Scotland and Norway. Could an union between Scotland and Norway have lasted?

 

[Stikfigur]

Was Norway/Scotland in any way strategically beneficial to each other where they can prevent a neighboring country from rollling over them?

 

[Ricardolindo]

Was Norway/Scotland in any way strategically beneficial to each other where they can prevent a neighboring country from rollling over them?

Norway has always been oriented towards the Atlantic and is fairly isolated from Sweden by the mountains. A Scottish-Norwegian union would be very powerful navally.

 

[Stikfigur]

Norway has always been oriented towards the Atlantic and is fairly isolated from Sweden by the mountains. A Scottish-Norwegian union would be very powerful navally.

So they can have some level of control over the North Sea, which can be advantageous against incursions by England and Denmark and such right?

 

[Ricardolindo]

So they can have some level of control over the North Sea, which can be advantageous against incursions by England and Denmark and such right?

Yes, I think so.

 

[Torten]

Biggest issue over the longer term, is that if the monarch remains in Norway, the Scottish nobility might turn against him over time and install a suitable claimant. My very limited understanding of medival Scotland is that royal authority was low, so it wouldn't take much for the magnates to decide that they don't want a foreign, and possibly unpopular king.

Or Edward I, or his descendents stir up the magnates and invade/liberate Scotland.

I can't see it lasting for more than two or three generations.

 

[Ricardolindo]

Biggest issue over the longer term, is that if the monarch remains in Norway, the Scottish nobility might turn against him over time and install a suitable claimant. My very limited understanding of medival Scotland is that royal authority was low, so it wouldn't take much for the magnates to decide that they don't want a foreign, and possibly unpopular king.

Or Edward I, or his descendents stir up the magnates and invade/liberate Scotland.

I can't see it lasting for more than two or three generations.

Scotland was slightly richer than Norway. Thus, I think the royal family is likely to move to Scotland.

 

[OwenM]

Scotland was slightly richer than Norway. Thus, I think the royal family is likely to move to Scotland.

How is Norway likely to take that?

 

[Ricardolindo]

How is Norway likely to take that?

They didn't mind Danish domination. There wasn't much of a Norwegian nobility.

 

[Geordie]

Was it that they didn't mind, or were the Danes too powerful to oppose?

 

[Ricardolindo]

Does anyone have any more thoughts on this?

 

[Geordie]

So they can have some level of control over the North Sea, which can be advantageous against incursions by England and Denmark and such right?

Must admit, if I was a Danish king, it even a more powerful magnate, I'd be waiting for this Caledonian-Norwegian realm to become distracted by a) English incursions; b) Scottish rebellion; c) something in Ireland. Perfect time to meddle. Not necessarily an invasion or takeover, but there's definitely an opportunity to cause problems and weaken this realm.

I suppose that he English King (or an ambitious Percy) is doing the same in reverse. Or a Scot who feels that maybe he should be king for reasons.

I can't help thinking that the divided focus, distance and meddlesome neighbours bring more problems than the combined strength of the realms bring solutions.