PC: Danish Colonialism, Post Great Northern War

Well, does Denmark have any chance of being a colonial power after the 1720's? Can it even think of expanding beyond Dannesmarksnagore or Oddeway Torre, or even grab some land in the Pacific/Australia?
 
How long could they support a pacific empire?

would the US, Japan, Britain, or Russia have any problems knocking the Danes out of the Pacific during their Imperialism period?
 
Um, they have colonies

They have 2 concessions in India, they have sovereignty over the Nicobar Islands, and they have forts (later plantations) around Accra in the Gold Coast

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Um, they have colonies

They have 2 concessions in India, they have sovereignty over the Nicobar Islands, and they have forts (later plantations) around Accra in the Gold Coast

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
They had colonies, past tense. They also held some Caribbean Islands.
 
They had colonies, past tense. They also held some Caribbean Islands.

The OP said after the 1720s. The Indian concessions were given up in c1840, and the African ones were sold to Britain in 1850, after a last failed attempt to make them viable by extending into the hinterland with plantations

The trick really is to make the colonies viable, the West African ones especially suffering after the ending of the slave trade

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Well the Caribbean colonies were Denmark's most viable colonies. That's why I think a couple of more Caribbean Islands would be the best possible solution for a larger Danish Empire.
 
Could go real bad..

It would probably be a risky business even if they managed to grab a colony somewhere.

Historically most of the fighting in around the baltic where backed by other nations, wanting to keep the struggle for the baltic trade going. Nations who were, for the most part colonizing nations.

If Denmark manages to upset someone it could mean support for Swedish revanchism during the 18th century.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
It would probably be a risky business even if they managed to grab a colony somewhere.

Historically most of the fighting in around the baltic where backed by other nations, wanting to keep the struggle for the baltic trade going. Nations who were, for the most part colonizing nations.

If Denmark manages to upset someone it could mean support for Swedish revanchism during the 18th century.
Well, Denmark WAS a colonizing nation OTL.
 
It would probably be a risky business even if they managed to grab a colony somewhere.

Historically most of the fighting in around the baltic where backed by other nations, wanting to keep the struggle for the baltic trade going. Nations who were, for the most part colonizing nations.

If Denmark manages to upset someone it could mean support for Swedish revanchism during the 18th century.

Actually Denmark had its colonies seized by Britain a couple of times even during the Napoleonic wars but got them back following termination of hostilities!
That wasn't the issue.

As already said getting the hinterland of Danish Gold Coast turned into a thriving agricultural area could have changed the perception of colony in Danish ruling circles and made for further investments. Problem was that the slave traders were still powerful when this was attempted and allegedly killed off the first prospector effectively killing off the colony.

The West Indies was a back yard with planters trying to rip off a profit caring zilch of Denmark - most was non-Danes. Only late in the history did government take a real interest there but then it was too late.
Making it viable would need a very early change in who's setting up plantations or a plan when the slaves are emancipated as to whats up now!
One positive was that Charlotte Amalie was actually the second city of the Kingdom and a major trade hub in the Caribbean!

The Indian colonies were merely trading stations - factories or forts - too scattered and too small to make a difference. Their raison being of course to trade the valuable spices etc. from India but also secure the route to the real bonanza market - China!!!

At all times the resources allocated were too few to matter being the energies of individuals intereste in making a profit and the state not really being interested in settling the areas but reaping a profit too!
No wonder as the King wanted to live in splendour and needed to finance his wars with mostly Sweden so income was needed; not costly overseas establishments.

What would be needed was more government/state/King interest in long term development of colonies beyond mere profit reaping; a surplus of manpower to populated said areas and not spending limited resources on immensely costly wars.
 
If Denmark was to somehow end up on the side of the British during the Napoleonic Wars, could it be that it would be rewarded with a couple of French or Dutch holdings in the Caribbean? Possibly St. Barthélemy, St. Martin, or even Guadeloupe and Martinique(though they might be a bit big).
Siding with the British could also mean that the Danish fleet would be somewhat intact, rather than completely taken away as in OTL. A large fleet would be paramount to maintaining some islands in the West Indies.
 
If Denmark was to somehow end up on the side of the British during the Napoleonic Wars, could it be that it would be rewarded with a couple of French or Dutch holdings in the Caribbean? Possibly St. Barthélemy, St. Martin, or even Guadeloupe and Martinique(though they might be a bit big).
Siding with the British could also mean that the Danish fleet would be somewhat intact, rather than completely taken away as in OTL. A large fleet would be paramount to maintaining some islands in the West Indies.

I don't think the first would be impossible but wouldn't change the end result much; still an island full of planters with no interest in Danish Empire!

Keeping the navy would be an essential for keeping a colonial empire; but Denmark did maintain communications across the Atlantic and along the Gold Coast with the available means.
But being allied to the British would most likely imply Sweden not getting Norway as well as avoid starvation in Norway during the 1807-14 period. That would make for a totally different history in Scandinavia post 1815 as Sweden would still like a replacement for Finland, Norway would demand independence or at least autonomy.
Northern Germany may see some change with Prussia having an eye on Swedish Pommern but the exchange with Hanover may go different; Lauenburg was used in the exchange of Sweden getting Norway, Denmark getting Swedish Pommern in exchange which was given to Prussia that had exchanged some bishoprics and Lauenburg with Hanover with the latter going to Denmark! (are you confused??? :D )
 

archaeogeek

Banned
If Denmark was to somehow end up on the side of the British during the Napoleonic Wars, could it be that it would be rewarded with a couple of French or Dutch holdings in the Caribbean? Possibly St. Barthélemy, St. Martin, or even Guadeloupe and Martinique(though they might be a bit big).
Siding with the British could also mean that the Danish fleet would be somewhat intact, rather than completely taken away as in OTL. A large fleet would be paramount to maintaining some islands in the West Indies.

Sweden got them IOTL and ended up having to hand them back, besides the fact that it would require a different king and heir to the throne - both enlightenment monarchs, which made post Napoleon Denmark a bit of a pariah. I don't see cash-strapped Denmark doing much better.
 
Last edited:
Well, does Denmark have any chance of being a colonial power after the 1720's? Can it even think of expanding beyond Dannesmarksnagore or Oddeway Torre, or even grab some land in the Pacific/Australia?


Maybe a Chinese concession around the time of the Boxer rebellion. The attitude of the other colonial powers was the more the merrier.

Denmark was on the losing side in the Napoleonic Wars; if Napoleon had won decisively instead, there would have been colonies all over the place that he could have handed out to his allies.
 
Top