German Amerika

Realistically a large German presence in North America is pretty ASB, smaller or some islands in the Caribbean doable. However MORE German influence in North America, even with the USA the same size is possible. There was a legitimate push to make German the language of the USA, there were a lot of German speakers in the "USA" at the time of the American Revolution and some feeling to make it the official language to further "separate" from England. If the USA was German speaking rather English speaking you'd expect more German immigration, perhaps less from the UK and closer ties with "Germany" than OTL. This would NOT make the USA "Nazi" in WWII, though it might make US loans and neutrality in WWI more neutral/even handed, and possibly prevent US entry on the Entente side.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
In 1842 the Pacific Squadron commander Commodore Thomas ap Catesby Jones received false information that war had begun between the United States and Mexico and that the British ship HMS Dublin was cruising off California to take control of the Mexican state. In response Commodore Jones in his frigate USS United States and with the sloops USS Dale and USS Cyane sailed for California's capital, Monterey. They arrived on 19 October 1842 and took control of the city without bloodshed before returning it to the Mexicans on 21 October when Jones discovered that war had not actually been declared.

I'll be honest, I'm not sure why this completely stupid mistake proves that Prussia couldn't buy California. Did Jones call Bagsy?
 
There was a legitimate push to make German the language of the USA, there were a lot of German speakers in the "USA" at the time of the American Revolution and some feeling to make it the official language to further "separate" from England.

This is an urban legend.

What was once proposed was to offer German translations of U.S. laws (which of course were written in English). This never actually came to a vote and in any case, the proposal was never intended to replace English as the language of government.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Except that Mexico was willing to fight to preserve itself

You Answer your own Question, they wanted prussia money and military resources, thus California in an 'neutral' hands and resources to fight all rebellions and that both London and Washington were in the bargain table show that wa serious for a while.

Except that Mexico was willing to fight to preserve itself against all comers.

Basically, you are suggesting that the Mexican leadership (in 1843, it's switching from Bravo to Santa Anna to Canalizo, and Santa Anna appointed both Bravo and Canalizo) is willing to do something they historically did not do in this era, and at a time when Santa Anna is essentially the power in the nation, and - by the way - is based on an offer brought forward by a European emigrant to Mexico with little to no influence in Mexico City, in what is only going to remind everyone in Mexico of the Moses Austin debacle, and on the behalf of a power with essentially no abilitiy to project power to California - and at a time when, oddly enough, the Californios are actually doing reasonably well economically because of the hide and tallow trade by sea with the US.

Other than that, it's a great plan.

Best,
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Because in reality

I don't actually think they would - for several reasons.

One of them is that the Monroe Doctrine was barely enforcable - certainly I wouldn't want to be the American commander attempting to invade Hochkalifornien, given that at this point the Prussians have just adopted the needle-gun which gives them much higher ROF compared to American troops. (Though if the British object that's another thing.)

Another is that Bismarck was at this time an officer in the Landwehr.

And a third is that the Americans haven't got a great deal of power projection west of the Rockies at this time -they have no Pacific coast at all - and their army is below 5,500 strong in peacetime.

I suppose the point I'm making is that the Monroe Doctrine is actually more of a diplomatic thing than a military one. If the Prussians honestly decided to hold California - and I can see them getting serious about it if they discover the gold - then it's not as simple as the US just deciding "nope, Manifest Destiny".

It's either functionally a seaborne invasion at a range of thousands of sea miles, or a land invasion over the Rockies... in both cases against an army with substantially better weapons. This is a major commitment for the US.
More to the point, there's the question of attitude - "California" now is a part of the US and in fact one of the principal parts of the US, but Hochkalifornien would be Prussian and a long way off. There wouldn't be a significant impetus to take it... until gold was discovered, of course. At that point it becomes significantly more important, but allow me to doubt that William Walker and 48 men would be able to take it - it would have to be an actual declaration of war and hence a full-on invasion.

Ironically, this might actually give Mexico some warning of the standard US attitude to neighbouring powers (i.e. "disregard locals, acquire land") and hence selling half of California might be the best thing that ever happened to Mexico!

I'll be honest, I'm not sure why this completely stupid mistake proves that Prussia couldn't buy California. Did Jones call Bagsy?

Because in reality, unlike the suggestion above the US could not project military power to the Pacific, it undoubtedly could, as proven in 1843 and 1846 (and, for that matter, in 1812-15 and even 1803).

One other point: "no Pacific coast at all"? May want to check on the 1818 Treaty. See:

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1830-1860/oregon-territory

And of course, the minor reality that Prussia's capability to project power to the Pacific in 1843 was, to be charitable, rather limited. May want to take a look at what Prince Adalbert and then-Cdr. Brommy were up to in the 1840s. The results of the battle of Heligoland in 1849 are probably worth considering, as well.

Best,
 
Last edited:

Tyr Anazasi

Banned
If Prussia bought Oberkalifornien in 1842 they would not have done so if they had to fear an immediate invasion by powers interested in. However, if they bought, they would have invested into a much stronger navy way sooner.

Anyway, I doubt the USA would invade them as up to 1863 they had no military capable beating the Prussian army or elements of it in Oberkalifornien. Later they had but would soon lose if they sent the army home in 1865.

Up then we have too great butterflies.

Another possible colony would have been Klein Venedig, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klein-Venedig
 
I don't think it's really possible OTL.

Outside of Germany buying/winning European Colonies in a war, of course.

For a heavy presence, you'd probably need a much earlier POD and possibly a much stronger German nation that can project.

So you're looking at...what, a POD around the early 1500s? Maybe older?
 
Basically impossible without a POD before the Late Middle Ages. However, if a powerful German state can get the North Sea coastline to itself, you could see a German power getting involved. I wonder how far they might get, since you could throw in elements like the Reformation or an alt-Thirty Years War into German colonies in the New World.

If a clever prince/king gets the idea to encourage settlement there and manages to get other German states onboard with this idea, then the German communities in Eastern Europe will be much smaller (and others like the Volga Germans simply won't exist), since the New World will be a population outlet for the Germans. South America is probably the best place for a German state to grab, since it's got mineral wealth and agricultural potential for sugar, etc. that's immediately attractive as well as has generally good land. The downside is Spain and Portugal being closer and thus more capable of exerting control over it, but an early enough POD could weaken Iberian presence.

North America is also interesting for obvious reasons, since it's best suited for a settler colony rather than exploiting Indian/imported African labour. Germans replacing the British is pretty doable, since British presence is by no means guaranteed (less so than Iberian presence in *Latin America).
 

TFSmith121

Banned
You do realize the Prussians were defeated in 1848-50

If Prussia bought Oberkalifornien in 1842 they would not have done so if they had to fear an immediate invasion by powers interested in. However, if they bought, they would have invested into a much stronger navy way sooner.

Anyway, I doubt the USA would invade them as up to 1863 they had no military capable beating the Prussian army or elements of it in Oberkalifornien. Later they had but would soon lose if they sent the army home in 1865.

Up then we have too great butterflies.

Another possible colony would have been Klein Venedig, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klein-Venedig

You do realize the Prussians were defeated by Denmark in the First Schleswig War in 1848-50, right?

And you're suggesting Prussia could project power into the Pacific coast of North America and prevail six years earlier, right?

And that Mexico didn't sell any land in this period, and basically fought tooth and nail to hang onto what they had, right?

Best,
 

Tyr Anazasi

Banned
The Prussians were in 1848/49 only retreated from the war because other countries were meddling within. De facto the war was a draw with the status quo ante bellum reestablished. A greater Prussian fleet might have done better.
 

trajen777

Banned
It actually existed if you consider the Swedish empire control of parts of Northern Germany -- have them transfer to Prussia -- or have the Swedish / Germany empire somehow

New Sweden (Swedish: Nya Sverige, Finnish: Uusi Ruotsi, Latin: Nova Svecia) was a Swedish colony along the lower reaches of the Delaware River in North America from 1638 to 1655[1] in the present-day American Mid-Atlantic states of Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Fort Christina, now in Wilmington, Delaware, was the first settlement. Along with Swedes and Finns, a number of the settlers were Dutch. New Sweden was conquered by the Dutch in 1655, during the Second Northern War, and incorporated into New Netherland.


The relative locations of New Netherland (magenta) and New Sweden (blue) in eastern North America
By the middle of the 17th century, the Realm of Sweden had reached its greatest territorial extent and was one of the great powers of Europe. Sweden then included Finland and Estonia, along with parts of modern Russia, Poland, Germany, and Latvia, under King Gustavus Adolphus and later Christina, Queen of Sweden. The Swedes sought to expand their influence by creating an agricultural (tobacco) and fur-trading colony to circumvent French and English merchants.
The Swedish West India Company was founded with a mandate to establish colonies between Florida and Newfoundland for the purposes of trade, particularly along the Delaware River. Its charter included Swedish, Dutch, and German stockholders led by directors of the New Sweden Company, including Samuel Blommaert.[2] The company sponsored 11 expeditions in 14 separate voyages (two did not survive) to Delaware between 1638 and 1655.
The first Swedish expedition to North America sailed from the port of Gothenburg in late 1637. It was organized and overseen by Clas Fleming, a Swedish Admiral from Finland. A Dutchman, Samuel Blommaert, assisted the fitting-out and appointed Peter Minuit (the former Governor of New Amsterdam) to lead the expedition. The members of the expedition, aboard the ships Fogel Grip and Kalmar Nyckel, sailed into Delaware Bay, which lay within the territory claimed by the Dutch, passing Cape May and Cape Henlopen in late March 1638,[3] and anchored at a rocky point on the Minquas Kill that is known today as Swedes' Landing on March 29, 1638. They built a fort on the present site of Wilmington, which they named Fort Christina, after Queen Christina of Sweden.[4]
In the following years, 600 Swedes and Finns, the latter group mainly Forest Finns from central Sweden, and also a number of Dutchmen and Germans in Swedish service, settled in the area. Peter Minuit was to become the first governor of the newly established colony of New Sweden. Having been the Director of the Dutch West India Company, and the predecessor of then-Director William Kieft, Minuit knew the status of the lands on either side of the Delaware River at that time. He knew that the Dutch had established deeds for the lands east of the river (New Jersey), but not for the lands to the west (Maryland, Delaware, and Pennsylvania).[citation needed]
Minuit made good on his appointment by landing on the west bank of the river and gathered the sachems of the local Delaware tribe. Sachems of the Susquehannocks were also present. They held a conclave in his cabin on the Kalmar Nyckel, and he persuaded the sachems to sign deeds he had prepared for the purpose to solve any issue with the Dutch. The Swedes claimed the section of land purchased included the land on the west side of the South River from just below the Schuylkill, in other words, today's Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, southeastern Pennsylvania, Delaware, and coastal Maryland. The Delaware sachem Mattahoon, who was one of the participants, later stated that only as much land as was contained within an area marked by "six trees" was purchased and that the rest of the land occupied by the Swedes was stolen.[5]
 
It actually existed if you consider the Swedish empire control of parts of Northern Germany -- have them transfer to Prussia -- or have the Swedish / Germany empire somehow

New Sweden (Swedish: Nya Sverige, Finnish: Uusi Ruotsi, Latin: Nova Svecia) was a Swedish colony along the lower reaches of the Delaware River in North America from 1638 to 1655[1] in the present-day American Mid-Atlantic states of Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Fort Christina, now in Wilmington, Delaware, was the first settlement. Along with Swedes and Finns, a number of the settlers were Dutch. New Sweden was conquered by the Dutch in 1655, during the Second Northern War, and incorporated into New Netherland.


The relative locations of New Netherland (magenta) and New Sweden (blue) in eastern North America
By the middle of the 17th century, the Realm of Sweden had reached its greatest territorial extent and was one of the great powers of Europe. Sweden then included Finland and Estonia, along with parts of modern Russia, Poland, Germany, and Latvia, under King Gustavus Adolphus and later Christina, Queen of Sweden. The Swedes sought to expand their influence by creating an agricultural (tobacco) and fur-trading colony to circumvent French and English merchants.
The Swedish West India Company was founded with a mandate to establish colonies between Florida and Newfoundland for the purposes of trade, particularly along the Delaware River. Its charter included Swedish, Dutch, and German stockholders led by directors of the New Sweden Company, including Samuel Blommaert.[2] The company sponsored 11 expeditions in 14 separate voyages (two did not survive) to Delaware between 1638 and 1655.
The first Swedish expedition to North America sailed from the port of Gothenburg in late 1637. It was organized and overseen by Clas Fleming, a Swedish Admiral from Finland. A Dutchman, Samuel Blommaert, assisted the fitting-out and appointed Peter Minuit (the former Governor of New Amsterdam) to lead the expedition. The members of the expedition, aboard the ships Fogel Grip and Kalmar Nyckel, sailed into Delaware Bay, which lay within the territory claimed by the Dutch, passing Cape May and Cape Henlopen in late March 1638,[3] and anchored at a rocky point on the Minquas Kill that is known today as Swedes' Landing on March 29, 1638. They built a fort on the present site of Wilmington, which they named Fort Christina, after Queen Christina of Sweden.[4]
In the following years, 600 Swedes and Finns, the latter group mainly Forest Finns from central Sweden, and also a number of Dutchmen and Germans in Swedish service, settled in the area. Peter Minuit was to become the first governor of the newly established colony of New Sweden. Having been the Director of the Dutch West India Company, and the predecessor of then-Director William Kieft, Minuit knew the status of the lands on either side of the Delaware River at that time. He knew that the Dutch had established deeds for the lands east of the river (New Jersey), but not for the lands to the west (Maryland, Delaware, and Pennsylvania).[citation needed]
Minuit made good on his appointment by landing on the west bank of the river and gathered the sachems of the local Delaware tribe. Sachems of the Susquehannocks were also present. They held a conclave in his cabin on the Kalmar Nyckel, and he persuaded the sachems to sign deeds he had prepared for the purpose to solve any issue with the Dutch. The Swedes claimed the section of land purchased included the land on the west side of the South River from just below the Schuylkill, in other words, today's Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, southeastern Pennsylvania, Delaware, and coastal Maryland. The Delaware sachem Mattahoon, who was one of the participants, later stated that only as much land as was contained within an area marked by "six trees" was purchased and that the rest of the land occupied by the Swedes was stolen.[5]

Considering they were basically defeated by the Dutch (who held a very tenuous position as it was), I don't think New Sweden is exactly the way for a non-English Germanic North America (although as a Finnish-American, the Finnish links to New Sweden amuse me greatly).
 
Probably the latest POD for a german-dominated America would be the 30 years' war. Maybe sweden wins the thirty years war and establishes some sort of swedish-dominated German confederation in place of the HRE. As part of this sweden gers direct control of bremen (a newly secularization archbishopric), and sells the rights to settle new sweden to a group of merchants from bremen. These bremen merchants then recruit German settlers, and new sweden becomes german-dominated and eventually (add handwoven here) defeats both the Netherlands and the English colonies (as sweden is THE superpower in this scenario, it's not as implausible as it would be OTL).

Thoughts?
 
The British invited the king of Hanover to become the British monarch as well. Suppose that instead of becoming a proposed prison colony for debtors and others sentenced to colonial servitude, Georgia had been designated as a colony for Hanoverians as part of the quid pro quo for George I to come over, or to please George II? I'd think that the British Parliament would insist that it be governed in harmony with the government of the British colonies, but could technically be Hanoverian. This might come in especially handy since Georgia abutted directly on Spanish territory, so perhaps it would be a useful diplomatic buffer to claim Georgia is under a different realm than the properly British colonies.

Maryland of course was set up to be a refuge for British Catholics, but was soon dominated by Congregationalists from the New England colonies; it would be easy and probable to assume that Georgia too would be swamped by English-speaking British colonists and thus German in name only. This would also happen if the landed colonial positions were reserved for German purchasers but they employed lots of English-speaking indentured servants such as the convicts who were to be sent over OTL; eventually the servile/penal class would become free and overwhelm the German domination, all the more so due to the language divide. But suppose instead that the penal colony scheme goes by the board and Hanover supplements settlement with immigrants from elsewhere in Germany so that a solidly German-speaking majority forms. Surely many of these Germans will learn a lot of English to transact business with their neighbor colonies to the north, but it might remain a second language to them. I suppose it is inevitable that Georgia will become a colony heavily dependent on slave labor, but the slaves will learn a dialect of German, not English. George the Third was the first Hanoverian monarch who was born in Britain and considered England his true home; it could be that if we assume the Revolutionary crisis brews up much as OTL, that Georgia might have a special grievance impelling her to join the cause, being relatively spurned in George III's policies versus the more doting attention his predecessors may have given the place. So right away with the Declaration and the Articles of Confederation there might be one state that does not speak English! (They'd participate in the Continental Congresses in English of course, but insist that all relevant Federal laws, including the Constitution, be translated into German for their domestic convenience, and there would be no question of "English-only" in the USA. Perhaps if this is known to be the case early on, the American ventures into Canada might go better, winning over Quebec--if one non-English language, why not two?

Or go another way--colonial Georgia does not join with the English-speaking colonies in rebellion, or a segment of its people do but do not prevail. I believe OTL Georgia was in fact largely under British control during the war. At the peace settlement, it is agreed that Georgia shall not be included in the United States, and shall remain a colony, but also (analogous to the British relinquishing control of Florida in the aftermath of the Revolution and the Treaty of Paris) that it shall not be British (or Hanoverian) and instead will be sold to another German power. That power cannot be Roman Catholic since Hanover is Protestant and all the other Germans brought over would probably also be Protestant. So Austria would be out, but perhaps another power--Prussia say--would have been allied with France during the Revolutionary War and could be rewarded. (France can't take the colony for the same reason the USA can't; the parties to the treaty are looking for a weak power to occupy a buffer between the USA and British holdings--the British would hold Florida in this scenario). So now we might have a German speaking colony ruled by a German European patron power.

I wrote something speculative about how long it might last, but it wasn't very rigorous. Realistically I suppose it is only a matter of time before either Britain or the USA swallow it up.
 
This is an urban legend.

What was once proposed was to offer German translations of U.S. laws (which of course were written in English). This never actually came to a vote and in any case, the proposal was never intended to replace English as the language of government.

Although there were indeed many German speakers in the US in the 1790s, overall approximately 90% of the population spoke English as their first language, making this myth completely implausible in addition to not being true.
 
Let me throw in the idea that the area that became Pennsylvania in OTL is granted to Prince Rupert of the Rhine instead, as proprietary colony (and part of the British colonial possessions).
Rupert declares it as to New World refuge for the people of the Rhineland impoverished and dispossessed by the French davastations during the War of Devolution on further wars.
Mainly Rhenish settlers come to the colony, where English is the official language of administration, but German is much more prevalent in daily life.
 
Top