If the UK had gone to Denmarks aid in 1864?

But how was that balance threatened by Denmark losing a strip of cow pasture at the foot of the Jutland Peninsula?

After all, GB was content to remain neutral in the Franco Prussian War, when far more was at stake. So was Russia. So why would they move in 1864?

There is no reason for it. Only a narrow, ridiculous hindsight from today.

The whole thing leaves out the German reaction to the possiblity of a British response.

Bismarck played chess with the whole Continent, but somehow in this scenario he does not, right.

Really realistic. *sarcasm off*
 
Would the infusion of Swedish resources and troops possibly tip the overall result in favor of the Danes?
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

No!

It would not. Sweden is a small power fighting against an alliance of medium to great powers! There was no hope for Denmark. Denmark were full of fucking idiots as the top to ever think they would be able to pull it off.
 
If you want the UK to make Denmark not lose S-H: Have the British envoy tell the government of Christian XI that signing the November Constitution would be a bad move.

Generally, the best solution for Denmark would probably have been:
+ giving up Holstein and the bluish part of South Schleswig (with the namesake city) as an autonomous region and member of the GC to Duke Friedrich of the S-H-Augustenburg branch,
+ integrating the reddish and yellow parts of Slesvig into Denmark proper
+ having a plebescite in the greenish parts
+ bribing Prussia with the Duchy of Lauenburg for supporting that idea

Languages Schleswig 1838.png
 

Dorozhand

Banned
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

No!

It would not. Sweden is a small power fighting against an alliance of medium to great powers! There was no hope for Denmark. Denmark were full of fucking idiots as the top to ever think they would be able to pull it off.

Hold on there, the Danes actually made a pretty decent account of themselves given their outnumbered state on land, and managed very much to hold their own at sea. I could totally see a Swedish Army turning the Battle of Dybbøl for example, and the Swedish fleet helping to inflict a decisive defeat at sea.
 
Hold on there, the Danes actually made a pretty decent account of themselves given their outnumbered state on land, and managed very much to hold their own at sea. I could totally see a Swedish Army turning the Battle of Dybbøl for example, and the Swedish fleet helping to inflict a decisive defeat at sea.

I imagine the battle will be decided on land though. How is the Danish navy (with or without hypothetical Swedish support) going to stop the Austro-Prussian armies from marching north?
 
Hold on there, the Danes actually made a pretty decent account of themselves given their outnumbered state on land, and managed very much to hold their own at sea. I could totally see a Swedish Army turning the Battle of Dybbøl for example, and the Swedish fleet helping to inflict a decisive defeat at sea.

They fight on a lost post. They can win battles but not the war against Prussia, Austria and the German Confederation.
 

Dorozhand

Banned
They fight on a lost post. They can win battles but not the war against Prussia, Austria and the German Confederation.

Not so. If they can drag the affair on long enough, they could bring those who don't want the Germans to win out of the woodwork, and the problems inherent in the Prussian state and Army could begin to unravel.
 
Not so. If they can drag the affair on long enough, they could bring those who don't want the Germans to win out of the woodwork, and the problems inherent in the Prussian state and Army could begin to unravel.

Doubtful, since the German states can drown Danemark in soldiers.

It has no allies, because most states saw it as the aggressor.

They are no nations who dont want the "Germans" to win the war, because this is a minor war. Two big powers against a local one. Why even bother with this?

And Prussia has Bismarck at its helm, everything the Danes can came up with, he can do better.

And which problems do you mean? The Prussian army later defeated France & Austria and was regarded as the best in the world.
 
This is completely unreasonable.

The Danish military actually had a sound strategy: They wanted to use their naval supremacy to shuffle troops between fortified coastal places in northern, central and southern Jutland. The German arnies would have had to march uselessly form south to the north and back again (and again) without ever fighting a decisive battle.

But the politicians decided that this would be dishonorable and decided to meet the Germans at the hiostorically important, but inciomplete Dannevirke fortification near the city of Schleswig.

The crux is this: If you give 1863 Denmark politicians less romantic and more acquainted with reality, you have also politicians that will not let it come to a shooting war in the first place.
 

Dorozhand

Banned
This is completely unreasonable.

The Danish military actually had a sound strategy: They wanted to use their naval supremacy to shuffle troops between fortified coastal places in northern, central and southern Jutland. The German arnies would have had to march uselessly form south to the north and back again (and again) without ever fighting a decisive battle.

But the politicians decided that this would be dishonorable and decided to meet the Germans at the hiostorically important, but inciomplete Dannevirke fortification near the city of Schleswig.

The crux is this: If you give 1863 Denmark politicians less romantic and more acquainted with reality, you have also politicians that will not let it come to a shooting war in the first place.

That's interesting. Probably the best plan that could have been done and a good use of Denmark's one advantage, its not insubstantial navy. Could it theoretically have worked if it were actually implemented? Not to mention with Swedish assistance?

Perhaps you could have politicians who are nationalistic, but are willing to use whatever means are necessary to win.
 
This is completely unreasonable.

The Danish military actually had a sound strategy: They wanted to use their naval supremacy to shuffle troops between fortified coastal places in northern, central and southern Jutland. The German arnies would have had to march uselessly form south to the north and back again (and again) without ever fighting a decisive battle.

But the politicians decided that this would be dishonorable and decided to meet the Germans at the hiostorically important, but inciomplete Dannevirke fortification near the city of Schleswig.

The crux is this: If you give 1863 Denmark politicians less romantic and more acquainted with reality, you have also politicians that will not let it come to a shooting war in the first place.
The thing is, if the danish politicians were reasonable they would had realized this was an terrible idea in the first place. There was no way this would end well for Denmark. They were facing an alliance of medium to great powers whist being an small power. This could never had ended well.
 
Denmark's main problem, it seems to me, is numbers. Without assistance from a more powerful nation (as we are discussing here), even assuming the Danish Army is man-for-man as good as the Austrian & Prussian troops being sent against them, it's not a man-for-man contest. It's a man-versus-many contest, each Dane being stacked against numerous Austrians and Prussians.
 
It isn't likely the British would offer military assistance - I think the most likely thing they would have done is broker a negotiated agreement with the warring factions, Denmark giving up Schleswig-Holstein while preserving Northern Schleswig from the Germans.

Perhaps if the Germans/Austrians rejected such an offer you'd see some 'justified' intervention by Britain and very possibly Italy as well (since the latter would be a pretty willing ally in most wars against Austria). But to be honest, I don't see the Germans rejecting such a demand.
 
Remember also that Queen Victoria 's daughter was married to the heir to the Prussian throne and that son is married into the danish royal Family.
 
Plus, both the Austrians and Prussions/North Germans have potential friends elsewhere in Europe that presumably would not be unhappy to discomfit the British.

Best,

THis! and more.

In a ontinental war the brits simply don't have the manpower to put pressure on two of the most important powers in Europe. In wars against European powers the Brits always had strong allies or were able to strike at their enemies colonies - nothing is true here. Even if tehy manage to bring the French in (interesting possibility) all they would do is starting a longer war and be defeated in the end.

If we assume France stays peaceful and gets concessions from "Germany" (say Luxembourg goes to France ;))

Major difference - Russia, Prussia and Austria grow closer (Britain is the common enemy for the next decades/France sits on the fence)

minor things (OTLs dars might be sped up/delayed here)

Mexican intervention butterflied away - or goes in the French way as Britain likel is NOT backing out because they want France to be an ally)
1866 war - Austria and Prussia are forced to work together
1867 - Maximilan NOT killed - was the more intelligent Habsburg and might be a good "face" of the Empire.
1870/71 - never mind
1878 - Russia (and the German states) carve up much more of the OE
1880+ scramble for Africa might see some different outcomes. (France might not back down at Fashoda (like incident) as it can rely on "Germanic" support).

All considered Britain can't win in the intervention.
 
If you want the UK to make Denmark not lose S-H: Have the British envoy tell the government of Christian XI that signing the November Constitution would be a bad move.

Generally, the best solution for Denmark would probably have been:
+ giving up Holstein and the bluish part of South Schleswig (with the namesake city) as an autonomous region and member of the GC to Duke Friedrich of the S-H-Augustenburg branch,
+ integrating the reddish and yellow parts of Slesvig into Denmark proper
+ having a plebescite in the greenish parts
+ bribing Prussia with the Duchy of Lauenburg for supporting that idea


The Prussians (and Austrians) wouldn't need bribing. During the war (iirc it was at the time of the first armistice) they offered the Danes a division of Schleswig more or less along the linguistic divide.

The Danes refused. Instead they insisted on a border at the River Schlei, which would have given them around three-fourths of Schleswig, including quite a bit of its German population; this despite of the fact that all of SH, and most of Jutland to boot, was already in Austro-Prussian hands.

Michael Embree Bismarck's First War has a good account of it all.

It's easy to feel sorry for the Danes when they were so heavily outnumbered, but it's like feeling sorry for the Confederates in 1861-5. They really were their own worst enemies.
 
while it might linguisticly seem logical to give Prussia the southern most parts of Schleswig, it wouldn't make historical sense, since Schleswig had never been part of HRE, and it was only due to military disputes between Denmark and Sweden in the late middle ages that devestated the region enough to make room for german speaking peasents from Holstein to move in.

more reasonable danish polititians would probably consider making an argeement with GC that Holstein and Laurenborg was allowed to join GC (still with lip service to the Danish king as their duke), while Schleswig was reincorperated into Denmark. (as it were before it was parceled out in 1115 to the nephew of the then king) with population exchanges abound
 
while it might linguisticly seem logical to give Prussia the southern most parts of Schleswig, it wouldn't make historical sense, since Schleswig had never been part of HRE, and it was only due to military disputes between Denmark and Sweden in the late middle ages that devestated the region enough to make room for german speaking peasents from Holstein to move in.

more reasonable danish polititians would probably consider making an argeement with GC that Holstein and Laurenborg was allowed to join GC (still with lip service to the Danish king as their duke), while Schleswig was reincorperated into Denmark. (as it were before it was parceled out in 1115 to the nephew of the then king) with population exchanges abound


What do you mean by "population exchanges"?

If you mean ethnic cleansing, no one in 1864 was considering anything so demented.

All the Danes had to do was leave things exactly as they were and had been for centuries, ie Schleswig, Holstein and Lauenburg in personal union with Denmark but not incorporated into it. They tried to make unilateral changes (in defiance of an international treaty iirc) and got a well-deserved kicking as a result. Very sad but they did it to themselves.
 
What do you mean by "population exchanges"?

If you mean ethnic cleansing, no one in 1864 was considering anything so demented.

All the Danes had to do was leave things exactly as they were and had been for centuries, ie Schleswig, Holstein and Lauenburg in personal union with Denmark but not incorporated into it. They tried to make unilateral changes (in defiance of an international treaty iirc) and got a well-deserved kicking as a result. Very sad but they did it to themselves.

THIS and if that doesn't work, play Austria and Prussia off each other and cede Holstein to Augustenburg.
 
Top