Help support TMP


"Why didn’t Napoleon invade the Channel Islands?" Topic


7 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Age of Sail Message Board

Back to the Napoleonic Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

Renaissance
18th Century
Napoleonic
19th Century

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Showcase Article

Fighting 15's Teutonic Order Command 1410

Command figures for the 1410 Teutonics.


Featured Profile Article


1,247 hits since 5 Mar 2018
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tango0105 Mar 2018 9:49 p.m. PST

"Given that Britain and France were at war almost permanently between 1792 and 1814, it does seem strange that Napoleon Bonaparte made no effort to occupy what were almost exclusively French-speaking islands just a few miles off the French coast. The harsh truth is that it was never really worth his time to make the effort.

The islands had long had a strategic importance in naval warfare that far exceeded the intrinsic worth of the farming produce of the islands. Earlier in the 18th century, Britain had fortified most of the harbours with gun batteries, garrisoned the islands with infantry, and naval ships were frequently on hand. Moreover, the local militia was well-drilled and could put over 3,000 men into the field at 24 hours' notice…."
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Personal logo Virtualscratchbuilder Supporting Member of TMP Fezian06 Mar 2018 5:53 a.m. PST

My guess would be that since the French fleet could not leave port on a whim due to the blockade and frequently contrary winds, steadily resupplying the islands would have been problematic. The problems (and results) of trying to invade the islands would probably not be any different from the problems encountered when the French attempted to send a military force to Ireland.

mwindsorfw06 Mar 2018 8:09 a.m. PST

Why bother? Do the Channel Islands really get you much of an advantage?

Bob the Temple Builder06 Mar 2018 10:30 a.m. PST

Mwindsorfw,

The Channel Islands were a potential base/safe refuge for British blockaders. That said, British attempts to build an anchorage during the mid nineteenth century were abandoned because of the tides.

From an invaders point if view, the tides, rocky coast, and cliffs made a landing difficult. The only successful landing was made possible by an renegade Jerseyman who navigated the French attackers through the narrow channel at La Rocque at the southern end of Grouville Bay.

gunnerphil07 Mar 2018 6:15 a.m. PST

Perhaps he needed an off shore tax haven. One way round French tax people

Garde de Paris07 Mar 2018 11:32 a.m. PST

Napoleon was in so many ways a wise man. He realized these islands would simply be starved into submission, and he'd lose his troops, if he ever captured them

When Leclerc and his troops were killed off by Yellow Fever in the West Indies, Napoleon decided to sell the Louisiana Purchase to the US. He expected the British Navy to take it from him anyway.

The truly bizarre and amazing part of this sale is that the US went to British bankers to finance the purchase!

GdeP

Tango0107 Mar 2018 12:48 p.m. PST

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.