tokle wrote:You don't seem to be making any sense. You're saying that they were not candidates in the elections that i talk about, and in the next sentence you say they were elected in the precise same elections that I'm talking about.
Nope.. you misunderstand me. They were elected in Sweden and for
Sweden/Finland only by the swedish Riksråd while
independent. Those were not union elections but
for Sweden only. Very different from those elections you talk of. I guess I explained it poorly, sorry - I am not a teacher just an overaged student.
There were no union kings when Sweden was being ruled independently. Sweden was a part of the union.
There certainly were "union" kings while Sweden/Finland was independent. In 1434 the swedish riksråd sent official letters to the German order, The Hanseatic league and the Norwegian riksråd explaining that Erik no longer was king
over Sweden. It would take some years before the norwegians and danes also got rid of him. I bet he didn´t change his title just because he lost Sweden.. Then the swedes again
by themselves elected Karl/Charles. This had nothing to do with any union elections as they had won the war against Eriks forces and was independent.
I think you have misunderstood the meaning of the word "election" in this case. There were not several candidates for the norwegians (although not sure there, maybe the danes in control had a norwegian election?) and swedes/finns to choose from. I get the impression that Germans and Danes usually decided the only candidate. Please point me to a book if you know of some "alternative history" where there was an actual choice between candidates. The only exception I know of was for the norwegians when they chose Karl Knutsson Bonde, but that was a short-lived rebellion against the Danes - not some election backed by a union constitution.
Sweden/Finland accepted union kings for something like 20 years out of the remaining 90 years:
Kristoffer of Bavaria was accepted by Sweden for more than half of his reign (7 years).
Kristian of Oldenburg was accepted by Sweden for less than half of his reign (also 7 years).
John/Hans was accepted by Sweden for roughly ten percent (1/10) of his reign (3-4 years -the swedes even held the queen hostage).
Kristian II lost a couple of wars trying to take Sweden during his first 7-8 years but finally succeeded. He became king of Sweden in november 1520 by conquest - not election. Gustav Vasa started the freedom war only three months later..
If you say that none of those were union kings then there never was one at all.. I believe I´ve mentioned all of them?
Sorry if this sounds arrogant but I suggest you read a little more about what happened outside of Norway if you have an interest.. Can you recommend a book in bokmål about the norwegian union history?
My family tree pretty much starts with a guy called Guttorm in Norway during the early union. I am actually genuinely interested. There is less about Norway than Denmark or Finland in swedish history books on the Kalmar union, but as I understand it they weren´t always completely controlled by the danes and there were at least a few uprisings?
Denmark and Norway made "treaties" while the eastern part of the union was independent. This might be one source of your confusion. I am sorry if what I say still makes no sense to you.
Read it again or read more books. I´m out. (..but I will check back for a recommendation on a norwegian history book)
) This will make several things more feasible: it will allow us to be a bit more creative with the territory connections, thus ensuring that starting positions won't be too "close" to each other. 
Estonia was lost, but Scandinavian influence was strong...
