Kingdom of Norway (1814-1905) - Background - Consequences of The Napoleonic Wars

Consequences of The Napoleonic Wars

Both Sweden and Denmark-Norway tried to remain neutral during the Napoleonic wars, and succeeded for a long time, in spite of many invitations to join the belligerent alliances. Both countries joined Russia and Prussia in a League of Armed Neutrality in 1800. Denmark-Norway was forced to withdraw from the League after the British raid on the navy during the first Battle of Copenhagen in April 1801, but still stuck to a policy of neutrality. The League collapsed anyway after the assassination of tsar Paul I of Russia in 1801.

Denmark-Norway was finally compelled into an alliance with France after the British preemptive second attack on the Danish navy, the Battle of Copenhagen (1807). The defenseless capital had to surrender the navy after heavy bombardment, because the army was at the southern border to defend it against a possible French attack. As Sweden in the meantime had sided with the British, Denmark-Norway was forced by Napoleon to declare war on Sweden on 29 February 1808.

Because the British naval blockade severed communications between Denmark and Norway, a provisional Norwegian government was set up in Christiania, led by army general, prince Christian August of Augustenborg. This first national government after several centuries of Danish rule demonstrated that home rule was possible in Norway, and was later seen as a test of the viability of independence. His greatest challenge was to secure the food supply during the blockade. When Sweden invaded Norway in the spring of 1808, Christian August successfully commanded the army of Southern Norway and compelled the numerically superior Swedish forces to withdraw behind the border after the battles of Toverud and Prestebakke. His success both as a military commander and as leader of the provisional government made him very popular in Norway. Moreover, his Swedish adversaries noticed his merits and his popularity, and in 1809 chose him as successor to the Swedish throne after the overthrow of the king Gustav IV Adolf.

One contributory factor behind the poor performance of the Swedish invasion force in Norway was that Russia at the same time invaded Finland on 21 February 1808. The two-front war proved disastrous for Sweden, and all of Finland was ceded to Russia at the Peace of Fredrikshamn on 17 September 1809. In the meantime, discontent with the conduct of the war led to the deposition of king Gustav IV on 13 May 1809. Prince Christian August, the enemy commander who had been promoted to viceroy of Norway in 1809, was chosen because the Swedish insurgents saw that his great popularity among the Norwegians might open the way for a union with Norway, to compensate for the loss of Finland. He was also held in high esteem because he had refrained from pursuing the retreating army of Sweden while that country was hard pressed by Russia in the Finnish War. Christian August was elected Crown Prince of Sweden on 29 December 1809 and left Norway on 7 January 1810. After his sudden death in May 1810, Sweden chose as his successor another enemy general, the French marshal Jean Baptiste Bernadotte, who was also seen as a gallant adversary and had proved his ability as an army commander.

Read more about this topic:  Kingdom Of Norway (1814-1905), Background

Famous quotes containing the words consequences of, consequences and/or wars:

    Every expansion of government in business means that government in order to protect itself from the political consequences of its errors and wrongs is driven irresistibly without peace to greater and greater control of the nation’s press and platform. Free speech does not live many hours after free industry and free commerce die.
    Herbert Hoover (1874–1964)

    The middle years are ones in which children increasingly face conflicts on their own,... One of the truths to be faced by parents during this period is that they cannot do the work of living and relating for their children. They can be sounding boards and they can probe with the children the consequences of alternative actions.
    Dorothy H. Cohen (20th century)

    The bases for historical knowledge are not empirical facts but written texts, even if these texts masquerade in the guise of wars or revolutions.
    Paul Deman (1919–1983)