Where would be the best place for a german state to set up a colony in the new world?

So let’s say we can get get a german State with enough power that it can stake a claim to become a colonial power in the new world

The question I’m asking you here is not how or why a german state would colonize the new world but where and how successfully a colony in that area would turn out
 

Kaze

Banned
Would this work:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanna

or King Charles the Fifth (Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain) decides to place some of his German subjects into the New World - how best to get rid of some noise-some protestants instead of burning them at the stake? Exile them!
 
Would this work:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanna

or King Charles the Fifth (Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain) decides to place some of his German subjects into the New World - how best to get rid of some noise-some protestants instead of burning them at the stake? Exile them!

I mean I wasn’t asking about what state could gain such power and the like but where would the best place for a colony from a German state could be but sure!
 
King Charles the Fifth (Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain) decides to place some of his German subjects into the New World.

IOTL He did briefly give part of Venezuela to the Welsers, a German banking family, but that didn't really go anywhere.
 
Either hijack the Dutch/Danish settlements on the Hudson river & the modern DelMarVa shore, or perhaps this German state includes the Dutch & the Hudson River region is the entry point to the German colony? The climate & distance lend to that location.

I am wondering at this point if a large seafaring German state means less success for England?
 
East Coast of North America or the La Plata region/southern Brazil (maybe as far north as Paraná State). The East Coast is less contested by European powers, while the La Plata region has a fantastic port with ample opportunities for growth, easy river transit, and also a climate which enables all sorts of agriculture while not being too harsh for Europeans. You just need to defend it from the bandeirantes in Portuguese Brazil and any possible Spanish attacks.

Although any POD which has the potential for German colonisation would make how, when, and who is colonising the Americas totally different.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
@metalinvader665 nailed what the "best" colony would be.

But to go for what the "easiest" colony an OTL German state could possibly occupy and hold in the long-run, possibly Hudson's Bay, because other Europeans are far less likely to fight for it if its the Brandenburgers who get there first.
 
You need a pretty good POD for German colonies in the Americas. With a 16th century POD there are basicly two problems. First of all the emperor was a Habsburg, just like the rulers of Spain (and for quite a while the same person, Charles V) and Spain basicly claimed all of the Americas (besides Portuguese brasil) for itself. A treaty made by the pope. Sure the English, Dutch and French simply ignored it, but I doubt the Habsburgs would themselves would. Secondly, there basicly was no Germany. The Holy Roman Empire was divided into several more or less sovereign entities and they would not care about some colonistation dreamed up by the Emperor (or whoever).

So you need a relatively early POD in the 14th or even 13th century, before the discovery of the Americas by Columbus. And in that case it doesn't matter. All of America would be a good place for a German colony.

Or you need a later POD, for example a different 30 year war with a better conclusion for the Emperor leading to a more unified Germany (or even a divided HRE, with a significant part independent of the HRE, but the rest closer to it than OTL). In that case you are almost too late for German colonisation (especialy considering that afterwards Germany needs to rebuild before they can start colonising), since Spain, England, Portugal and France already have significant claims and presence in the Americas. It ould be hard for Germany to join them on an equal level. Sure they might get some islands or small parts of the mainland (like Denmark, or Sweden or even the Netherlands had OTL), but the prime territory is lost to them.

Maybe, and this is a big maybe, they could start colonising the western coast of North America, but I think that would only be possible in the late 18th century and Germany would need some kind of presense in Eastern Asia to do that.
 
The Hanseatic League, early in the reign of Charles V. The League consisted of free cities who were traders and it had a fleet of its own. It's easy to imagine Charles V owing them a favor (especially before the Reformation) and giving their colony his protection. The colony could be on the mainland or a Caribbean island so long as it had a good port. A second colony logically could be established in Newfoundland, pre-empting the English settlement , because Lubeck had fishing fleet.
 

Skallagrim

Banned
Now I'm imagining a more successful Hanseatic League siding with Charles V (and the Catholic cause) against (among others) the Dutch, who could after all be dangerous rivals (and in OTL did ultimately play a role in outcompeting the already much-weakened League). Charles V rewards the League with certain grants, which includes the right to set up colonies in North America. As Charles V divides his empire, the grants remain relevant, and Hanseatic colonies in North America remain an option. With the English reformation and all, I don't see the Spanish being very keen on claiming that the (Catholic-in-this-scenario) Hanseatic League is somehow barred from actually establishing those colonies. On the contrary: this would be a direct rival to British colonies and French colonies in the same are. Spain can but approve of that.

Thus, with any luck, we end up with Hanseatic New York (Neu Lübeck?) or something like that. Which would be in an excellent location.
 
Now I'm imagining a more successful Hanseatic League siding with Charles V (and the Catholic cause) against (among others) the Dutch, who could after all be dangerous rivals (and in OTL did ultimately play a role in outcompeting the already much-weakened League). Charles V rewards the League with certain grants, which includes the right to set up colonies in North America. As Charles V divides his empire, the grants remain relevant, and Hanseatic colonies in North America remain an option. With the English reformation and all, I don't see the Spanish being very keen on claiming that the (Catholic-in-this-scenario) Hanseatic League is somehow barred from actually establishing those colonies. On the contrary: this would be a direct rival to British colonies and French colonies in the same are. Spain can but approve of that.

Thus, with any luck, we end up with Hanseatic New York (Neu Lübeck?) or something like that. Which would be in an excellent location.

I can't see the Hanseatic league being particularly successful at establishing settler colonies. Trade posts, for sure, that was their specialty. Plantation colonies in the Caribbean could probably also be run successfully under Hanseatic protection (i.e. individual merchants would set up individual plantation settlements, and the league would simply be responsible for defense and for organizing convoys from the Caribbean to Europe), but settler colonies require a population to use as settlers. The Hanseatic League, as a league of free cities, didn't really have surplus population.
 
Couldn't they take surplus population from neighboring German principalities (e.g. the OTL Pennsylvania Dutch's ancestors) though? AIUI they were on good terms politically with the Hansa, and using other countries' settlers for your own colony seems easier when they speak the same language as you.
 
Couldn't they take surplus population from neighboring German principalities (e.g. the OTL Pennsylvania Dutch's ancestors) though? AIUI they were on good terms politically with the Hansa, and using other countries' settlers for your own colony seems easier when they speak the same language as you.

Landlords don't tend to take kindly to their peasants packing up and moving to greener pastures. Although, if it wasn't the general population that was leaving but only dissidents, then it would probably be less of a problem. If the Hanseatic League was Catholic in this scenario, a lot of their neighbours are Protestant and probably have a number of Catholics they'd like to be rid of....
 

Skallagrim

Banned
I can't see the Hanseatic league being particularly successful at establishing settler colonies. Trade posts, for sure, that was their specialty. Plantation colonies in the Caribbean could probably also be run successfully under Hanseatic protection (i.e. individual merchants would set up individual plantation settlements, and the league would simply be responsible for defense and for organizing convoys from the Caribbean to Europe), but settler colonies require a population to use as settlers. The Hanseatic League, as a league of free cities, didn't really have surplus population.

They can probably get settlers from a lot of places outside the League, as @FleetMac suggested. But more importantly: would they need to create settler colonies? Their main goal would be to corner the North American fur market. They don't need settler colonies. They'll be doing what the HBC did in OTL, basically. Setting up factories (or, you know, kontors), launching their own trade-and-hunting missions inland and/or buying furs off the Native Americans and various freelance trappers of European stock. Even without settler colonialism, the eventual growth of business interest and of the sheer number of people involved will lead to some sizable settlements. (Which is why a Hanseatic NYC would be both possible and really, really cool.)
 
Landlords don't tend to take kindly to their peasants packing up and moving to greener pastures. Although, if it wasn't the general population that was leaving but only dissidents, then it would probably be less of a problem. If the Hanseatic League was Catholic in this scenario, a lot of their neighbours are Protestant and probably have a number of Catholics they'd like to be rid of....

I see your point, although I imagine the Hansa's take would be "not my f**king problem" WRT said landlords' concerns, compared to a boosted workforce in their abroad colonies.

And maybe it's other, non-Lutheran Protestants that end up taking the big boat ride if Catholics aren't allowed over (not sure if such groups existed in any numbers in "Germany" back in the day). Although given a strictly financial outlook, I wonder about the odds of Lubeck not giving a fig about Catholic colonists or not.

EDIT: Skalla-ninja'd. I wouldn't rule out Hanseatic kontors in America essentially becoming mini city states; settler colonies or not, their populations could grow to become such de facto.
 
Top