Prussia recieves Orkney and Sheltand off Denmark in 1863

What if the Orkney and Sheltand Islands had been kept as Scandinavian possessions and been Danish and never ceded to any British Nation. Danish stays the offical language but Norn is spoken as the majority first language. This situation persists until 1863 when after the war between Denmark and Prussia, Denmark is forced to cede them to the victor of that conflict.

How would the islands fare under Bismark and later, Kaiser Willhelm?
How would this effect British Politics from 1863-1914?
Would Germany trash Britain during the First World War?
Assuming that Germany still gets beaten, would the islands finally be British?
What would British Rule be like?

Wouldn't a POD centuries before the Bismark era butterfly all those questions?

EDIT: Wait, Orkney and Shetland became Scottish in the 15th century. That really kills your Bismark questions and the like.

The Faeroes, however, make for an interesting question

Abdominalz said:

What if the Orkney and Sheltand Islands had been kept as Scandinavian possessions and been Danish and never ceded to any British Nation. Danish stays the offical language but Norn is spoken as the majority first language. This situation persists until 1863 when after the war between Denmark and Prussia, Denmark is forced to cede them to the victor of that conflict.

How would the islands fare under Bismark and later, Kaiser Willhelm?
How would this effect British Politics from 1863-1914?
Would Germany trash Britain during the First World War?
Assuming that Germany still gets beaten, would the islands finally be British?
What would British Rule be like?

Click to expand...

Orkneys and Shetlands are, as has been said, too far back, but the fates of the Faeroes, Iceland, Greenland, and the Danish Virgin Islands in the event of the absorption of Denmark into what becomes Germany at some point in the 1860s or later in the Nineteenth Century is an interesting one.

Best,

A map of the Northern Atlantic:

One of Bismarck'S talents was taking as much as he would get away with without a general congress of the European powers being convened to discuss and decide the question.
Taking Holstein and even all of chleswig? The question was muddled enough to make that possible. But any of the far North Sea islands, even those who *did* belong to Demark in 1864? The UK would claim a right to discuss the topic.

Undoubtedly ... Be an interesting question.

What right to the British have to tell a unifying continental power what to do with (presumably) some small colonies that formerly belonged to one of the unifying power's member states?

This is the same Britain, of course, that chose not to intervene in the Danish war because even Palmerston was forced to admit the British Army was no match for the Prussians and Austrians...

Now, they could have contested any annexation by naval strength, but given the whole Vicky and Fritz thing, probably not the best of moves with the Prussians...

Like I said, some interesting questions.

Best,

TFSmith121 said:

What right to the British have to tell a unifying continental power what to do with (presumably) some small colonies that formerly belonged to one of the unifying power's member states?

This is the same Britain, of course, that chose not to intervene in the Danish war because even Palmerston was forced to admit the British Army was no match for the Prussians and Austrians...

Now, they could have contested any annexation by naval strength, but given the whole Vicky and Fritz thing, probably not the best of moves with the Prussians...

Like I said, some interesting questions.

Best,

Click to expand...

While absorbing Denmark into Imperial Germany is an interesting discussion in its own right, isn't the OP talking about an alternate (2nd) Schleswig War? Thus it isn't beyond the bounds of the UK to get involved where North Sea territories get discussed since they'll likely have been covered under a similar London Protocol earlier.

Well, you've butterflied my existence. That's about the time that my ancestors upped sticks from Shetlands and Orkney. The first generation largely married other Highland migrants in NZ too, which won't happen either.

The OP should be tried at The Hague for willful and malicious attempt to genocide butterflies

As for a Denmark being included in a German Confederation (which may or may not develop into a German empire), there was the proposal of Christian IX to enter the German Confederation in exchange for being allowed to keep Schleswig-Holstein under the crown of Denmark. The proposal was not sanctioned by (and possibly not even known to) the Danish government, but Bismarck never did consider it (very reasonably IMHO).

Leaving aside the "minor" matter of the approval of the Danish government, the inclusion of Denmark into the German Confederation would need the approval of the German Confederation members (first among them Austria) and would not have been given a warm reception by German nationalists.
Besides this "minor" point, the inclusion of Denmark in the GC would have resulted in a significant change of the status quo regarding the navigation in the Baltic and as such the other Powers would have certainly requested that it be discussed in an ad hoc Conference (same as it happened for Belgium and would happen a few years later). The fate of Iceland etc. was frankly quite immaterial (or at least would not be by far the major issue on the table).

LordKalvan said:

The OP should be tried at The Hague for willful and malicious attempt to genocide butterflies

As for a Denmark being included in a German Confederation (which may or may not develop into a German empire), there was the proposal of Christian IX to enter the German Confederation in exchange for being allowed to keep Schleswig-Holstein under the crown of Denmark. The proposal was not sanctioned by (and possibly not even known to) the Danish government, but Bismarck never did consider it (very reasonably IMHO).

Leaving aside the "minor" matter of the approval of the Danish government, the inclusion of Denmark into the German Confederation would need the approval of the German Confederation members (first among them Austria) and would not have been given a warm reception by German nationalists.
Besides this "minor" point, the inclusion of Denmark in the GC would have resulted in a significant change of the status quo regarding the navigation in the Baltic and as such the other Powers would have certainly requested that it be discussed in an ad hoc Conference (same as it happened for Belgium and would happen a few years later). The fate of Iceland etc. was frankly quite immaterial (or at least would not be by far the major issue on the table).

Click to expand...

Danish membership in the German confederation likely wouldn't be seen as critical. After all, Denmark was more or less a member anyway due to Holstein and Schleswig. Even if Denmark became a full member, that doesn't mean that Faroer, Iceland or Greenland must be part of the German confederation - even large parts of Prussia weren't.

The critical thing here is that Prussia in some war in the late 19th century gains strategically important islands in the Northern Atlantic. It doesn't really atter whether this is Shetland, Faroer or Iceland IMHO. Britain would definitely object. And since no country could compete with Britain in naval terms at the time, Britains objections would probably be considered.

If you really want a Prussia that has these islands, I'd use an earlier POD leading to a personal union between Denmark and Prussia.

Sure; it is an interesting question how all of the above

LordKalvan said:

The OP should be tried at The Hague for willful and malicious attempt to genocide butterflies

As for a Denmark being included in a German Confederation (which may or may not develop into a German empire), there was the proposal of Christian IX to enter the German Confederation in exchange for being allowed to keep Schleswig-Holstein under the crown of Denmark. The proposal was not sanctioned by (and possibly not even known to) the Danish government, but Bismarck never did consider it (very reasonably IMHO).

Leaving aside the "minor" matter of the approval of the Danish government, the inclusion of Denmark into the German Confederation would need the approval of the German Confederation members (first among them Austria) and would not have been given a warm reception by German nationalists.
Besides this "minor" point, the inclusion of Denmark in the GC would have resulted in a significant change of the status quo regarding the navigation in the Baltic and as such the other Powers would have certainly requested that it be discussed in an ad hoc Conference (same as it happened for Belgium and would happen a few years later). The fate of Iceland etc. was frankly quite immaterial (or at least would not be by far the major issue on the table).

Click to expand...

Sure; it is an interesting question. Given a point of departure where Prussia ends up controlling Jutland as well as the duchies (as just one possible example), my guess is the British would want the Faeroes, Iceland, etc to be protectorates... presumably, given the general level of concern demonstrated by the Prussians and British in this period for their perceived strategic needs, the concerns of the Danes would not seen as a hurdle, as witness the fates of Hanover and (say) Heligoland and Cyprus.

Best,

What might the trade-offs be in the falling dominos of the German Confederation acquiring all or most of Denmark and it's possessions?

As you folks have noted above, IF the Germans acquire improved access to the North Sea - and especially beyond - that would likely get the British directly involved. If the British demand the Faroes and/or Iceland/Greenland be denied to the Germans, what could have been the "sweetener" in the deal for the Germans? The Quid Pro Quo....

At this point in time, the British & Prussians/Germans weren't the mortal enemies of the 20th century, so I assume that some horse-trading would be possible.

Also, from a 19th Century Naval point-of-view; how valuable would the Faroes have been as a defensible set of harbors? Looking at a topographical map, the islands look quite rugged, with numerous channels/fjords. Could they be made to work on the order of Scapa Flow, for instance?

Driftless said:

What might the trade-offs be in the falling dominos of the German Confederation acquiring all or most of Denmark and it's possessions?

As you folks have noted above, IF the Germans acquire improved access to the North Sea - and especially beyond - that would likely get the British directly involved. If the British demand the Faroes and/or Iceland/Greenland be denied to the Germans, what could have been the "sweetener" in the deal for the Germans? The Quid Pro Quo....

At this point in time, the British & Prussians/Germans weren't the mortal enemies of the 20th century, so I assume that some horse-trading would be possible.

Click to expand...

Since I suggested the British would ask to be involved: I did not want to imply that they would necessarily and completely be against the acquisition of these islands by Prussia. But great powers had their spheres of interest beyond their own direct possessions, and the North Atlantic was certainly of interest for the British. So Prussia would be expected to trade in something. Not territory, necessarily. But diplomatic support somewhere else. Maybe in a British dispute with Russia. I don't know the exact details, because this whole idea is so unusual.

But the whole thing with this kind of European congresses is that sweeping successes and crushing defeats on the battlefield can be reversed by diplomacy at a congress. See Vienna, Talleyrand.
So once the UK has claimed involvement because of the islands, Russia has claimed involvment because of the Copenhagen straits, FRance has claimed involvement because it is ruled by Napoleon III, their diplomats will gather and talk the whole thing through, slowly.

The Faeroers and Iceland and all of Greenland do not have as much value for Prussia as getting the whole war with Denmark closed without foreign diplomatic involvement has.

It's hard to imagine Britain allowing a congress power control of strategic islands in the north sea at this time, particularly when Britain was so dominant navally it's hard to imagine anyone doing anything to be seen to challenge the RN.

Ultimately I can't see it making a difference if it happened and Germany controlled them in WW1. Either they base the HSF in Germany as OTL, and so Britain easily invades and occupies, or else they try and defend them, either with a token force that Britain easily defeats, or else with a large land force escorted by all of the HSF, which inevitably clashes with the Grand Fleet. A clash the British would win.

If anything it'd help Britain.

A big IF... Denmark were subsumed in some fashion by the German Confederation, and for all practical purpose, ceased to exist; would the British have an interest in Greenland? More as an extension of Canada, rather than any direct percieved resource value. At several points it's closer to Canada than Iceland

Driftless said:

What might the trade-offs be in the falling dominos of the German Confederation acquiring all or most of Denmark and it's possessions?

As you folks have noted above, IF the Germans acquire improved access to the North Sea - and especially beyond - that would likely get the British directly involved. If the British demand the Faroes and/or Iceland/Greenland be denied to the Germans, what could have been the "sweetener" in the deal for the Germans? The Quid Pro Quo....

At this point in time, the British & Prussians/Germans weren't the mortal enemies of the 20th century, so I assume that some horse-trading would be possible.

Click to expand...

You miss the key point: with the single exception of Christian IX, no one wanted this deal. Not Prussia, since it would have meant leaving ethnic Germans within the Danish nation, not Austria (same as above plus increasing the number of Lutherans in the GC), not the pan-Germanists who did not want a people speaking a different language in the confederation.
The British were not interested in either the Far-Oer or Iceland (much less the frozen waste of Greenland), and as far as the Baltic was concerned their only interest was free navigation in the straits: the status-quo was good for them. If Denmark was going to loose its southern duchies, it was not skin of their nose (or wallet). Same thing for the Russians. Napoleon III would have been happy to make a deal, but who was going to pay the price (at least a chunk of Rhineland if not that and Luxembourg, with the great result of pulling in a bunch of Danes and expelling from the GC a good number of Germans).

Well sticking with the idea that Germany might attempt to annex Denmark and the Faroe Islands in a victorious S-H War you have to try and run around a few questions:

1) Would Bismarck want to run the risk of getting the powers of Europe (UK, Austria, France, Sweden and Russia) involved in deciding on how to divvy up newly conquered territory?

2) Do the Danes want to be apart of any German Confederation?

3) Even if all of the above goes right for Germany and it annexes Denmark is it really in Germany's best interests to stick its neck out over a number of ice covered islands in the North Atlantic?

To each of these questions I would argue that no is the answer. Bismarck didn't want all of Denmark (and neither did anyone else in Germany apparently, too many Danes to deal with) and I'd say he's canny enough to realize a general 'Conference' has the very real ability to go against him if he tried to, or at least that the Austrians would turn on him.

The other part is that it's very unlikely the Danes would even want to be apart of a 'German' nation, they didn't exactly respect the Germans within their own borders to a great extent, the idea of playing fifth string in the German Empire would probably not sit well with them. The German nationalists are probably going to be less than thrilled by the idea of absorbing non-Germans, I mean they had such a big bruhaha about absorbing Austria for that very same reason. And a sudden new powerhouse on the Baltic probably wouldn't sit well with Russia or Sweden.

Finally why would Bismarck, if he for some reason went to all the effort to engineer this, feel the need to press the issue of a few ice covered islands? Prussia doesn't have a navy worth a damn, and if he can use the islands as collateral to buy off a power like Sweden or the UK why wouldn't he? It would make zero sense for him to try and hang on to these islands rather than use them as bargaining chips in negotiations.

sendô said:

It's hard to imagine Britain allowing a congress power control of strategic islands in the north sea at this time, particularly when Britain was so dominant navally it's hard to imagine anyone doing anything to be seen to challenge the RN.

Ultimately I can't see it making a difference if it happened and Germany controlled them in WW1. Either they base the HSF in Germany as OTL, and so Britain easily invades and occupies, or else they try and defend them, either with a token force that Britain easily defeats, or else with a large land force escorted by all of the HSF, which inevitably clashes with the Grand Fleet. A clash the British would win.

If anything it'd help Britain.

Click to expand...

The POD here is the 1860's, but if the Faroes were held in WW1 by someone other than the neutral Danes, how useful would they have been as a German Uboat base, or conversely, a British ASW base?

Driftless said:

The POD here is the 1860's, but if the Faroes were held in WW1 by someone other than the neutral Danes, how useful would they have been as a German Uboat base, or conversely, a British ASW base?

Click to expand...

Quite a lot for the few weeks it would take for the British to gather an invasion force and take them.