ENIn this article I have focused on the issue of how early modern Sweden and Poland-Lithuania as composite states managed their lands in the coastal areas of the Finnish Gulf, namely in Finland and Estonia/Livonia. Traditionally, Sweden and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth have been considered as very different from each other. The concept of the composite state, however, enables a historian to compare the states in a new way and also to focus on their potential similarities. Here I have focused especially on the Swedish and Polish-Lithuanian attempts to unify their territories, and the challenges they faced. During the crisis of the 1590s, which concluded in King Sigismund’s dethronement in Sweden and Sweden’s attack on Poland-Lithuania in Livonia, Finland became a key area of the conflict internally. In the relations of Poland-Lithuania and Sweden, however, Estonia always received more attention than Finland, as the Polish-Lithuanian estates repeatedly made their claim to incorporate the whole of Estonia into the Commonwealth. Only in nuntius Malaspina’s mind could both Estonia and Finland have been secured by the Catholics and Poland-Lithuania. In 1600, Sigismund finally agreed to the incorporation of Estonia, but only after it was clear that he had lost his power in Sweden, and his uncle Duke Charles continued the war in Livonia. By comparison, any plan for detachment of Finland from Sweden at this point was unrealistic. Finland was not a disputed area, the estates in Finland did not seek to leave Sweden, and the Polish-Lithuanian nobility never made such claims. Even though (parts of) Finland were occasionally called and administered as a duchy, Finland was never an autonomous part of the Swedish realm. The royal title of grand duke of Finland, introduced by John Vasa and followed by his son Sigismund, was mainly intended to impress foreign audiences.It was devised to emphasize the grandeur of the monarch himself, but it did not reflect the actual administrative system of Finland. In this article I have suggested that John Vasa was most likely inspired by the eastern concept of a grand duke, and that he introduced the title to make his realm appear comparable to Poland-Lithuania and the Russian lands. It is not an easy subject to tackle the early modern history and political conditions in areas and communities that were not yet modern nations during the time under scrutiny. One should avoid fitting modern nations into the early modern settings. Thus, my aim has not been to rewrite the histories of Finland and Estonia to emphasize their autonomous position. Representing different cases and conditions, however, both early modern Finland and Estonia provide interesting perspectives on early modern composite states in the Baltic. The acquisition of Estonia turned early modern Sweden into a composite state. Finland, on the other hand, was often seen by earlier historians as a separate part of the realm, thus implying (erroneously) that Sweden was a composite/conglomerate state even before 1561, even if the historians in question did not yet use or know this concept. As their mutual conflict intensified, both Sweden and Poland-Lithuania aimed at securing their border areas tightly to the motherland. In case of Finland, closer integration to the government in Stockholm was successful and replaced the previous “elusive” state system, though this took place after a violent battle for power between Duke Charles and Sigismund’s supporters. In Estonia and Livonia, Poland-Lithuania aimed at close integration of these territories by introducing the Commonwealth’s administration and religious system, but soon lost these lands to its opponent, Sweden.Finally, Swedish rule in the Baltic provinces had to be agreed and compromised with the local elite, who did not oppose the Swedish kingdom, but wanted to stay conveniently apart from its core. Although distant from the capitals of Stockholm and Warsaw, both Finland and Estonia were important pieces of the greater puzzle comprised of the different composite states in the Baltic.