Prussia annexes Danish West India in 1864
- Thread starter Byzantion
- Start date
Which they did not have in 1864.
Bismarck was unintestered in colonies. Prussia had no navy to speak of, not even a coastline outside the Baltic (whose entrance is held by... Denmark).
Also, the uses of the Danish West Indies to any power at that point in time are far from clear, and I don't think that they were particularly profitable.
Perhaps, the Danes might threaten Prussia to cede them the place to get some other concession.
Anaxagoras
Banned
The United States would not be pleased, as this would violate the Monroe Doctrine. Bismarck was one of the best operators in the business and knew that the goodwill of the United States, for economic reasons if nothing else, was worth far more than anything that would ever be gotten out of the Danish West Indies. He wouldn't bite on this deal any more than he would on a rotten apple.
EDIT: On second thought, I am trying to recall if the opposition to a transfer of one Western Hemisphere territory from one European power to another was originally embraced within the Monroe Doctrine or was implied by a later administration. Does anyone know? Either way, though, the USA is not going to like this and Bismarck knows that.
EDIT: On second thought, I am trying to recall if the opposition to a transfer of one Western Hemisphere territory from one European power to another was originally embraced within the Monroe Doctrine or was implied by a later administration. Does anyone know? Either way, though, the USA is not going to like this and Bismarck knows that.
Agree with the first part .The Danish west indies by the nineteenth century had little to no value whatsoever .The only reason US bought them was I think that they wanted them to claim that they had an empire .
And as for the second part the US had no problem with one colonial power buying or exchanging territory so long as they did not try to take any more territory from an independent nation .
Well, IIRC the Americans didn't complain at all when St. Barts was transferred from Sweden to France in 1878... Granted that was after a plebiscite of the island population but still a transfer of a colony from a minor power to a great power, just like it would've been the case with Denmark and Prussia (even if Prussia isn't established as a colonial power, which might be a disadvantage).
So yeah, I don't see why the Monroe Doctrine would be that big of a hurdle for this. Bismarck's lack of interest is much more obstructive to the idea.
The widespread introduction of sugar beet in Europe during the Napoleonic Wars coupled with the end of slavery had made the West Indies, particularly the smallest islands in the eyes of many to be worthless. To top it off, in 1867 the islands were ravaged by a hurricane.
In 1864, the U.S. was still mired in a civil war and as Prussia was not a major naval power, the issue would have been largely ignored. It may have been useful as a coaling station later on, but that's about it.
In 1864, the U.S. was still mired in a civil war and as Prussia was not a major naval power, the issue would have been largely ignored. It may have been useful as a coaling station later on, but that's about it.
Interesting, although maybe "vital" is excessive if referred to the British Empire as a whole (why didn't Britain offer to buy the Islands herself when opportunity presented, by the way? Real question, I'm curious).
But there's at least a Great Power with an important local interest. It makes the whole thing even more remote, unless the value of the islands to Bismarck somehow becomes precisely that he can antagonize Britain with them. It's hard to see why.
(The US would do exactly nothing, this is during the Civil War).
By the time the Danes were willing to sell, the British were busy with the First World War, and short on cash.
Fair enough, but what rationale made the Danes so unwilling to accept an offer earlier, if the place was almost entirely valueless to them and useful to Britain? I think I am missing something.
Prussian West Indies have two (already stated) problems: In 1864 Prussia didn’t want a far of colony if it could get even an inch more of Schleswig. And later on Britain and the US wouldn’t allow over a German colony in that area.
So I can think of two possible (though not very likely) ways of achieving Prussian/German West Indies.
It stopped being a RMSPC coaling station in 1870 if I remember correctly afterwards the Hamburg-Amerika Line was stationed there.
So I can think of two possible (though not very likely) ways of achieving Prussian/German West Indies.
- Austria takes them in 1864.
In the same year Austria shipped Maximilian to Mexico, so let's say they don't send ships to the north sea and instead send them with Maximilian (SMS Aurora, Kaiser, Schwarzenberg and Radetzky). This flotilla then occupies part of the Danish West Indies. (Disclaimer: I am a hardly knowledgeable about Naval Warfare or the amount of Danish troops on the West Indies so I don't know if this is even plausible). Austria then demands them in the peace treaty [maybe for a smaller share of land in Europe (meaning Denmark loses less)] and in 1866 loses them to Prussia or decides to sell them to Germany later on.
- Prussia return a share of North Schleswig to Denmark and receives the West Indies as compensation.
The peace treaty of 1866 included an article that promised a referendum, on rejoining Denmark, in the northern districts of Schleswig. Prussia/Germany never held that referendum and in 1878 Austria even agreed to rescind the article. So you need someone to push Germany or its Emperor to hold that referendum. No one could realisticly force Germany to give up territory without a war, but a possible arrangement to save face could be that Germany holds a referendum in the Haderslev district (maybe more) and receives the West Indies as compensation. The difficulty here (besides the problem of forcing Germany to hold such a referendum) is timing. It needs to happen before Britain fears Germany more than Russia and the US is strong enough to block such a deal, but only after Germany becomes interested in colonies.
It stopped being a RMSPC coaling station in 1870 if I remember correctly afterwards the Hamburg-Amerika Line was stationed there.
You should all remember that the combined might of the Prussian navy consisted of two coastal steam gunboats in 1864, both of which were left behind during the Battle of Helgoland as they were unable to keep up with the Austrian steam frigates (you know your navy is shit when you have to ask the Austrians for help). The Danish navy had no problems blockading the Prussians in during the war, and they won the Battle of Helgoland quite well, setting the Austrian flagship on fire and forcing the Austro-Prussian force to seek refuge in neutral waters.
Prussia has no way to capture the Danish Virgin Islands and no way to keep them if they get them in a peace. Both Austria (1866) and especially France (1870-71) can take it from them at any time.
Prussia has no way to capture the Danish Virgin Islands and no way to keep them if they get them in a peace. Both Austria (1866) and especially France (1870-71) can take it from them at any time.
Unless they offer it to Britain (who already owns the other half of the Virgin Is) in exchange for Heligoland.
Talk about a lopsided naval confrontation
.Of course it did not matter in the actual war.
But still, this clearly means that Prussia has no ability to even ask for a colony in 1864, unless the purpose is purely political and the intention is to sell the place afterwards ASAP. Which is convoluted even by Bismarck's standards (particularly since the only apparent conceivable purpose would be to piss off Britain at a time where Britain was already somwhat pissed off about the way Prussia acted regarding both Denmark and Hanover) and generally a remarkable display of idiocy.
Oh, OK. The other conceivable purpose is to purposefully look stupid in order to lure Napoleon III into some sort of trap (sorta what Bismarck actually did with the whole Spanish crown thing, except that was actually apparently sensible) but again, this seems extremely and needlessly convoluted.
However, again, what value had the islands, generally and in particular to Denmark*? Where they a money sink, as I suspect, or there was some rationale in keeping them? I see that they obviously were appealing to the US in principle, and to Britain for other reasons. Who else might be conceivably interested in the place? Spain perhaps (as they hold Puerto Rico and about that time there was potential for retaking the Dominican Republic)? France (for the sake of coloring another corner of the map with their colour, I would guess)? Both look quite remote.
* I don't think that "Denmark stronk! Denmark can into colonial empire!" is enough of an explanation, although I admit that it suffices to explain Belgian Congo.
Basically all of the West Indies had long since ceased to be the sort of profit center they had been earlier on by the 1860's. The reason the USA was interested in buying the Danish Islands in 1917 was for protection of the sea approaches to the Panama Canal (opened in 1914) and to make sure that nobody else got them as a potentially hostile base. The transfer of St Barts was acceptable as France already had West Indies possessions. The USA would not be happy to see an new European power expand in to the Western Hemisphere, although in 1864 the USA is rather preoccupied.
It was not part of the Monroedoctrine, actualy it was excluded from the Monroe doctrine, but according to wikipedia it was added in 1870.
Last edited:
I know that an English-speaking forum will - willingly or not - have a clear American bias, but, well, Monroe Doctrine was not a real thing until the 1880's with the occupation of Panama and Cuba. Before that, the US could hardly have an active foreign policy even towards its immediate neighbors (i.e. "French" Mexico, Spanish Cuba, British Canada). During the 19th century we have countless European interventions (e.g. French intervention in Mexico, Spanish in Dominican Republic, British in Honduras, Essequibo conflict, Guano War, French Canal of Panama, etc.).
The US would not do a thing if Prussia gets the Virgin Islands. 19th century American foreign policy equals 'William Walker-ish' filibustering, please stop being so biased.
The US would not do a thing if Prussia gets the Virgin Islands. 19th century American foreign policy equals 'William Walker-ish' filibustering, please stop being so biased.
Last edited: