# In what year did the "sun set" on various European empires? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 25, 2012, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089 "2012-05-25T18:28:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/21 "2012-05-26T12:53:22Z")
BTW, suppose we insisted on INHABITED regions for “empire”. Not only should the empire claim land which is sunlit at any given time, but there must be a subject of the empire residing there to see it, and catch rays if they like. Makes us consider France more carefully, since their possessions in the Indian Ocean are uninhabited except for military personnel, scientific researchers, etc. But the combination of French Polynesia, and Saint Pierre and Miquelon probably gives it to them, and they also have islands in the Lesser Antilles and Wallis and Futuna to consider. ---
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/22 "2012-05-26T13:16:41Z")
> [@robardin](#): > > But just having Macau doesn’t mean the sun “didn’t set” on Portugal, as they’re only 7 hours apart (Macau being UTC/GMT +8, Lisbon being +1). About half an hour ago, it was 10:00pm in Lisbon and 5:00am in Macau. I would imagine the sun was down for both locations. Really you need an American possession somewhere to do the “sun never sets” thing, which for Portugal meant Brazil, which broke off in the early 19th Century. > > The Dutch still have the Antilles so that means the independence of either Suriname or Indonesia marks the end of that claim for the Netherlands. What about countries that claim Antarctic territories? I believe several countries claim wedges of territory in Antarctica that go all the way to the South Pole. At the South Pole, the sun is up from southern vernal (northern autumnal) equinox to southern autumnal (northern vernal) equinox. Thus, you would then only need to deal with the northern hemisphere months from the vernal to the autumnal equinox, when days are longer, so you might be able to get by with a distance gap that provides illumination to two areas in summertime simultaneously for at least a few moments (thus “bridging the gap”) but are too far apart to receive illumination at the same time during the winter months, which would be ok anyway because the sun would be shining on at least part of the Antarctic territory. Do Antarctic territories not count because countries like the US refuse to recognize them? Also, several countries, including the US, Canada, Norway, Russia, and Denmark/Greenland (are they independent or not now?) receive midnight sun during at least parts of the northern hemisphere summer, so that might figure into a calculation for part of the year. ---
**Author:** ![supery00n](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5f9b8f/32.png) [@supery00n](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/supery00n)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/23 "2012-05-26T13:39:15Z")
> [@MikeS](#): > > [Inspired by this recent thread about the British Empire:](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=652990) It was often said that the “sun never set on the British Empire.” In the literal sense, this was because it spanned the globe, so the sun was always up in a British possession somewhere in the world. Apparently the quote was originally about the Spanish Empire, which was pretty globe-spanning too. A couple of years back we did a thread on [whether this was literally true](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=586445), and the consensus seemed to be that the sun has not yet set on the British Empire. > > My question: many European powers had empires back in the day. Which of them were large enough, at any point in history, that the “sun never set” on them in this sense? Do any of them (other than the UK) still have enough flyspeck possessions scattered about the globe that the “sun never sets” on them? And for those countries that once had large enough empires but don’t any more: when, exactly, did the “sun set” on them? > > I suspect that the Sun has not yet set on the French empire, given its possessions in the South Pacific and the Caribbean. When did the sun set on the Spanish Empire? The Portuguese? The Dutch? The Danish? (OK, the Danes may never have been constantly illuminated.) I would say that the Spanish Empire declined tremendously in the early 19th century, when it lost all of its colonies in the mainland of the Americas in the aftermath of Napoleon’s invasion in 1807. The Spanish Empire was definitively eliminated in 1898 as a consequence of its defeat by the United States; Spain ceded Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Guam to the United States. The sun sat on the Portuguese Empire when Brazil gained independence between 1821-1823, also as a consequence of the Napoleonic Wars; one could think of Brazil as the “crown jewel” of the Portuguese Empire, much as India was to the British Empire. I would say that the Dutch lost their empire when Indonesia (Dutch East Indies) was invaded by the Japanese Empire shortly after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Japan pretty much conquered the entire Indonesian archipelago in a couple of months. The Danish still have Greenland, and the sun never sets on Greenland during the summer months, so maybe that still counts. =) I’d say the French colonial empire was left on its last leg due to its defeat in 1940 in the Battle of France, and even though it regained control of its African and Southeast Asian possessions due to the Allied victory in the Second World War, France was a second-rate power by then. I always wonder why the British were able to bounce back after their crushing defeat in the American War of Independence to become the great power that they became throughout the 19th century. I think it was to a large degree a result of Britain’s excellence in diplomacy and foreign relations, and that this was fundamentally a result of Britain’s failed policy and ensuing war with America. I also believe that Britain’s war effort and policy in the Peninsular War would have failed to achieve its objectives if Napoleon hadn’t chosen to invade Russia in 1812. I have always thought that when America signed the Treaty of Ghent that ended the War of 1812, the war had reached an inflection point where if fought out to the end, would result in the attainment of America’s original war goals, namely that of the conquest of Canada. The victory in the Battle of New Orleans was won over veterans of the Peninsular War, some of the best troops in the world at that time, and although it was a defensive victory, it was one that would have eliminated the national disunity that plagued the war effort, especially in New England. As the Civil War showed, the North can fight just as well if not better than the South man for man, and the naval victories won were truly impressive, and could be built upon. I think James Madison and the U.S. government signed the Treaty of Ghent in late 1814 because of Napoleon’s defeat in that year after his failed invasion of Russia. If Napoleon concentrated all of this forces in the Peninsula, he would have, at the bare minimum, not have been defeated by 1814. In the meantime, Britain would not even be able to send a large body of veteran troops from that campaign; even these soldiers were defeated at New Orleans. If Britain had been placed in that situation, the outcome of the War of 1812 would have been a situation similar to that of Mexico after the Mexican-American War. I believe Britain would have lost either a huge swath of its possessions in North America, or even all of them. There are some other points in time where I think Britain was on the brink of a devastating defeat. The first would was in the Oregon Territory dispute of 1846. I don’t know how many of you will agree with me, but I firmly believe that an Anglo-American alliance during what was the Mexican War would be insufficient to prevent America from being victorious against an alliance of both nations. There was something in the air in America at that time, and her confidence in the destiny of her nation was a confidence that came from a fair self-assessment and self-knowledge. Although this is not explicitly stated, I believe that the **reason why Britain did not intervene in the American Civil War was because of the outcome of the Mexican-American War.** I think Britain knew that a war would America would, in the worst-case scenario, have an outcome quite similar to the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, in which the vanquished becomes a second-rate power. Another example would be during the Franco-Prussian War. If Britain had intervened in the Franco-Prussian War, its armies would have almost certainly have been defeated _ **to the same degree as was the French Army; the reason being that the French Army was freely admitted to be by the British themselves of being the equal if not the superior of the British Army** _. And finally, and perhaps most significantly, a war with America in 1895-1896 over Venezuela would have led to a situation very similar to that of the Spanish American War just a few years later, save for the fact that Britain had _ **so much** _ more to lose than Spain at that time. Spain only ceded a small amount of territory to America in 1898, but that was only because it had so little in its possession. Theodore Roosevelt knew what he was talking about when he said that in an Anglo-American war, Britain would be defeated if not destroyed, and would lose Canada. Furthermore, if America had not intervened in the First World War, Germany would have pulled through and achieved victory in the Western Front. I believe that American intervention the Allied Powers. Finally, if Germany had not invaded Russian in 1941, and instead concentrated all of its forces in the Middle East, first capturing the Suez Canal, and then planting the Swastika along the banks of the Nile River, and making the Mediterranean and Red Seas Axis controlled lakes, and _ **not declaring war on America after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor** _, Germany would be able to control all of the resources in the Middle East, Western Europe, and North Africa; and whoever controls the center controls the board. Britain’s colonies would fall piecemeal to the Axis forces, and the crushing French defeat of 1940 on her home ground would be repeated, while not in the British isles itself, in Britain’s overseas colonies, by at latest 1942. Churchill was a great leader, but he was fighting a lost cause. Mussolini spoke prophetic words when he said that Britain’s empire was doomed to perish. Hitler’s true destiny was to be the man who conquered the British Empire; this seemingly Herculean Labor was within his means. But destiny crossed paths with Stalin and the Soviet Union, that one world power that he did not know had become steeled with the fires of revolution that had made it a force not even a man of destiny could overcome. Hitler’s number one mistake and strategic error was to believe, somewhat understandably, that the British Empire was the greater power than the Soviet Union. This estimate wasn’t even close; in fact, a war with Britain alone was a war Hitler couldn’t lose. But a war with the USSR alone was a war Hitler couldn’t win; only in hindsight do we see this, yet it is the truth. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/24 "2012-05-26T14:31:20Z")
> [@yabob](#): > > Makes us consider France more carefully, since their possessions in the Indian Ocean are uninhabited except for military personnel, scientific researchers, etc. Er, _les citoyens_ of the _départements de la [Réunion](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9union) et à [Mayotte](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayotte)_ will be surprised to hear that, man. Like I said, between Réunion and New Caledonia it’s close enough for simultaneous sunshine at some point year-round. By that standard it’s the _ **Brits** _ who turn out the lights, with Diego García having no local “townie” population. ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/25 "2012-05-26T15:21:35Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > By that standard it’s the _ **Brits** _ who turn out the lights, with Diego García having no local “townie” population. Yeah, and that’s a particularly shameful episode: The [Chaggosians](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagossians). There’s not even the excuse it was centuries ago - it was in my lifetime. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/26 "2012-05-26T15:28:34Z")
Tuvalu is an independant realm of her Majesty that still uses her Majesty by way of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as its final court of appeal, thus bridging the gap between the overseas territories of Pitcairn and Chagos in terms of reach of empire. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/27 "2012-05-26T15:31:33Z")
> [@Tom\_Tildrum](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > The United States is pretty wide-spread, we’ve got territories in the Pacific and Carribean, but we’re missing a critical stretch in the Indian Ocean. Fails. > > The US has troops on Diego Garcia, I think. Does it count if we’ve got an aircraft carrier in the Indian Ocean? “BEHOLD THE FLOATING CITY!” ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/28 "2012-05-26T19:13:25Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > Tuvalu is an independant realm of her Majesty that still uses her Majesty by way of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as its final court of appeal, thus bridging the gap between the overseas territories of Pitcairn and Chagos in terms of reach of empire. Sorry, but ISTM from the general thrust of the thread that independent entities in some form of faint association such as the Commonwealth Realms would not really count. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/29 "2012-05-26T19:32:19Z")
Then ignore the commonwealth realm aspect, and simply look at the highest court of appeal aspect. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2012, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/30 "2012-05-27T01:07:34Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > Then ignore the commonwealth realm aspect, and simply look at the highest court of appeal aspect. Tuvulu is an odd case but I don’t think you can consider them part of Britain in any way, they’re an independent country whose legal system lets you appeal to the British Privy Council. But yes Antarctic territories should count, and Norways Queen Maud land northern and southern border and not defined but all the other Antarctic claims do go all the way to the south pole. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2012, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/31 "2012-05-27T11:30:04Z")
> [@yabob](#): > > For Spain, they probably lost the status following the Spanish American War, which lost them Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Philippines and some other Pacific islands. I imagine that possessions in the Carribean, Spain Itself and the Spanish East Indies were enough to confer “Sun never sets”. Most of the colonies had been lost before, during the Napoleonic Wars; most of the Wars of Independence started against the French but ended producing independence from Spain (Spain herself calls our chunk of the Napoleonic Wars “the War of Independence”). While the Philippines and Cuba meant that strictly speaking the Sun wasn’t setting on the Empire, they were strategically-placed rags; nobody would have applied the sentence any more after losing most of the Americas, unless perhaps under the influence of heavy doses of opioids. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2012, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/32 "2012-05-27T19:35:33Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > Most of the colonies had been lost before, during the Napoleonic Wars; most of the Wars of Independence started against the French but ended producing independence from Spain (Spain herself calls our chunk of the Napoleonic Wars “the War of Independence”). While the Philippines and Cuba meant that strictly speaking the Sun wasn’t setting on the Empire, they were strategically-placed rags; nobody would have applied the sentence any more after losing most of the Americas, unless perhaps under the influence of heavy doses of opioids. Agreed, but for this thread, we seem to be participating in a game based on literal interpretation, rather than exploring metaphorical intent. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2012, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089/33 "2012-05-27T19:42:31Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > Er, _les citoyens_ of the _départements de la [Réunion](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9union) et à [Mayotte](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayotte)_ will be surprised to hear that, man. Like I said, between Réunion and New Caledonia it’s close enough for simultaneous sunshine at some point year-round. > > By that standard it’s the _ **Brits** _ who turn out the lights, with Diego García having no local “townie” population. Well, oops. I did look up France’s possessions. For some reason, I thought Mayotte was somewhere else on the Globe. Saint Pierre and Miquelon and holdings in the Lesser Antilles really nail it anyway, as I noted. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-what-year-did-the-sun-set-on-various-european-empires/623089.md?page=1)