WI: Iceland abandoned

[rcduggan]

What if the 1783 Laki volcano eruption had had a lot worse effect on Iceland? It killed 50% of the livestock on the island, which led to a famine in which 25% of the population died.

Let's increase that somewhat. Say the eruption kills 90% of the livestock in Iceland. The famine is much worse, and between fifty and seventy percent of the population die. Also, after the eruption there was a semi-poisonous cloud over Iceland (and other parts of the world) for a while.

So would the remaining population of Iceland, less than half of that of the 1770s, remain on Iceland? There is next to no livestock, the land is devastated, and many parts are still uninhabitable. Might they flee the island, back to Denmark, to Iceland, or to the Americas? What do you think would happen in this scenario?

 

[boredatwork]

Back to Denmark probably, or possibly they'll end up in the Faeroes. Wait, did Denmark already have the virgin islands at this point? If so, there's a... different possibility.

They've just lost everything, and will probably be lucky to make it out with the clothes on their backs and one or two treasured heirlooms (sic?). Not the best circumstance to go to some foreign colony in the middle of unrest - so if they do go to NA, you can probably count out the 'American' colonies.

They might end up in Labrador or Newfoundland, but still think they'ld be more likely to opt for Denmark or Norway - family and cultural ties are something folks rely on in times of crisis.

Still, with a bit more tweaking, you could get a new iceland somewhere on or close to the St Lawrence.

 

[rcduggan]

Back to Denmark probably, or possibly they'll end up in the Faeroes. Wait, did Denmark already have the virgin islands at this point? If so, there's a... different possibility.

They've just lost everything, and will probably be lucky to make it out with the clothes on their backs and one or two treasured heirlooms (sic?). Not the best circumstance to go to some foreign colony in the middle of unrest - so if they do go to NA, you can probably count out the 'American' colonies.

They might end up in Labrador or Newfoundland, but still think they'ld be more likely to opt for Denmark or Norway - family and cultural ties are something folks rely on in times of crisis.

Still, with a bit more tweaking, you could get a new iceland somewhere on or close to the St Lawrence.

Yep, the Danish had them at this point, for a few decades at least. It would be a bit of a climate shift for the immigrants.
I was thinking back to Denmark too. Canada would be interesting, I wonder what effect they would have. Thanks for your input.

 

[HueyLong]

I think its a little more interesting to imagine what would happen to the island itself.... would it be resettled, and if so, when and by who?

 

[Valdemar II]

I think its a little more interesting to imagine what would happen to the island itself.... would it be resettled, and if so, when and by who?

By Danish fishermens most likely, it's still Danish territorium

 

[Valdemar II]

Yep, the Danish had them at this point, for a few decades at least. It would be a bit of a climate shift for the immigrants.
I was thinking back to Denmark too. Canada would be interesting, I wonder what effect they would have. Thanks for your input.

There was around 40000 Icelanders at the time if they are settled in Canada, they're going to end up a large part of population. The interesting thing could be if they could be settled on the American west coast in the Oregon territorium, which would mean that they would stay a majority forever.

 

[arctic warrior]

About a fifth of the population died along with some 60 % of the livestock.
It was actually considered to move the rest of the population to Denmark but the thought were abandoned.
Moving 40000 peoples those days would have proven some task.

But if the population were moved out some presence would have been maintained to sustain the island as part of the Kingdom of Denmark and the route to the Greenland colony.

Another factor was the whaling subsidised by the Danish government in the North Atlantic. Even if the farmers of Iceland were to be moved the fishermen would most probably have been encouraged to stay on to provide securing of Danish territory as well as ports and support for whalers.

If all of the island was evacuated you would most probably see foreign whalers make bases on it be it Dutch, Hamburg, British or US or some other with a state probably Britain claiming the Island soon after.

 

[Joseph Solis in Australia]

I think if Iceland had been abandoned, British would colonize Iceland by late 16th century and I would assume for ATL that British stock would predominate in Iceland in ATL instead of Scandinavian stock in OTL.

 

[arctic warrior]

I think if Iceland had been abandoned, British would colonize Iceland by late 16th century and I would assume for ATL that British stock would predominate in Iceland in ATL instead of Scandinavian stock in OTL.

Don't disagree with you but the eruption was in the late 18th century! (1783-4)

 

[Tyr]

Even if it was abandoned by its population (I doubt they'd all go, some would stay. There's always some. And a lot of people lived off the sea afterall) it would remain Danish.
The European powers wouldn't have any interest it it to begin with and should one try anything they would support Denmark- Britain is in the best position to go for it but I'd think they're also among the most likely to support Denmark's rights there.


(I just thank god that this forum has evolved to such a stage that no one has yet mentioned 'perhaps the US could claim it!' then perhaps 'it can be a place to settle Irish escaping the British yoke' )

 

[boredatwork]

(I just thank god that this forum has evolved to such a stage that no one has yet mentioned 'perhaps the US could claim it!' then perhaps 'it can be a place to settle Irish escaping the British yoke' )

Damnit I knew I forgot something!

 

[Dave Howery]

(I just thank god that this forum has evolved to such a stage that no one has yet mentioned 'perhaps the US could claim it!'

in 1783? We were just barely getting started on working our way across the continent... no time for misadventures way over there...

 

[Joseph Solis in Australia]

Don't disagree with you but the eruption was in the late 18th century! (1783-4)

Correction for my typing, If the volcano had erupted in late 18th century, the more the British would colonize Iceland and by 21st century Iceland would resemble to United Kingdom.

 

[arctic warrior]

Correction for my typing, If the volcano had erupted in late 18th century, the more the British would colonize Iceland and by 21st century Iceland would resemble to United Kingdom.

Well, no - Denmark would have maintained sovereignty over Iceland. It was still important to the Kingdom at the time for reasons outlined.

 

[Joseph Solis in Australia]

Well, no - Denmark would have maintained sovereignty over Iceland. It was still important to the Kingdom at the time for reasons outlined.

What if Denmark would not reclaim Iceland after the eruption. The another colonial power will claim Iceland is British.

 

[arctic warrior]

Britain was still at war with the Netherlands so the other most likely candidates for occupying Iceland were occupied! That way Britain would probably support the Danish-Norwegian (must do this right) claim to Iceland even if the eruption was so violent as to make any life on the island impossible.

Denmark-Norway would have claimed sovereignty at least by putting a frigate or two on station possibly establishing a port on one of the islands to sustain the whaling expeditions.

During the 1778-83 war Denmark-Norway had sent Ships-of-the-Line and frigates on convoy duty as far away as the Cape Gode Hope.
The ability and will to project power to protect Danish-Norwegian interests were present.

 

[rcduggan]

Britain was still at war with the Netherlands so the other most likely candidates for occupying Iceland were occupied!

They still could have claimed it, it's not like 100% of the war effort of both of those countries were occupied in a war. All it would take is a small detachment to land on Iceland... how much of a navy did Denmark have at that point?

 

[Cromm Crúaich]

If the island is almost completely depopulated, and Denmark suffered an unrelated financial disaster, would they have considered selling it to Britain?
Or was it considered an integral part of the realm?

 

[Tyr]

Why on Earth would Britain want it?
This would piss off Denmark-Norway (sorry) for no gain.
Sure D-N wasn't a major world power and Britain could do without its trade but it would still hurt a bit.
Also- British trade from Sweden was very important. Having a potentially hostile D-N in the way of this could be dangerous.

 

[Major Major]

What, you mean the Icelanders wouldn't want to go to South Africa and do their part in building a dominion of sterling serpentine where only the strong survive?