What if: George Washington Had Never Been Born?

Possibly, very charismatic showed great strategic sense in capturing the old Northwest Territory. Doubt we would have got it otherwise

  Doug

  Did he actually capture much of the region or simply raid through it against minimal defence?  It took several later attacks by American forces, including a failed attempt by Clark himself before the area of the current Ohio state was conquered and many Indians held out in areas to the west until their crushing in the 1812 conflict. 

  I suspect its more than Britain, facing opposition from France, Spain and the Netherlands as well as the rebels was willing to offer a generous peace to end the conflict and resume trade with the former colonies.  Possibly also after initial resistance many of the Indians in the region seems not to have opposed Clark's attacks, at least going by en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Rogers_Clark#Revolutionary_War.  Hence it might have been that the British didn't think it would be practical to defend the region against future attacks.

  Ironically I've been thinking of a short TL with a POD in 1781 that results in a crushing naval victory in Cheasapeake Bay, no French-rebel victory at Yorktown as a result and a significantly different peace settlement.  The US still takes most of the colonies but Britain doesn't give southern Canada to the US and also keep lands in the south - S Carolina, Georgia and lands to the west.

  Steve

  My scenario is not that they lose it but that they don't win it.  However the French suffer a heavy loss at sea and hence Cornwallis's army survives.  [May give more details tomorrow but late here now].  British naval superiority in the American and Carribean waters after such a long and expensive war may make the French willing to come to terms.  Even without this supplies of weapons and gold from France will be reduced at least for a while.  However Britain is also strained by the war and by some internal support for the rebels, misguided as it was.  Hence you could see a compromise peace which sees more land for loyalists, including as I said southern Canada, between the Ohio and Great Lakes, staying in British hands rather than being formally transferred to the new US.  There are possibly other changes such as the two southern colonies staying in Loyalist hands along with OTL Maine in the north, which had become a refuge for loyalists fleeing persecution in the New England colonies.

  Well Maine is south of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia so it would become probably another member of the Maritime provinces.  With more tension with the US over disputed borders and possibly being also to complete with the larger inland states you might see those provinces along with Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland could end up merging into a single province.  Although Newfoundland OTL was independent of Canada until 1949 and had a brief spell as an independent dominion so it may stay outside Canada for quite a while OTL.

  I think its very likely at some point.  Presuming Britain has something like OTLs Seven Years War victories the immediate French threat will considerably recede.  Also if something like Pontaic's uprising occurs Britain is likely to seek to reassure the Indians against being forceably expelled from their lands.  As such there will be tension with settlers who want to take all Indian lands.  Also given the costs of the wars in N America its likely that Britain will seek some contribution to the defence costs of the colonies.  Plus if you still get a young and eager George III your likely to have a period of turmoil, presuming he still goes for the fashion of enlightened despotism.

  Probably not yet with a lack of victory rather than a clear defeat in terms of loss of territory.  However it won't have done the reputation of the current establishment, let along the OTL fiscal stress on the country.  Unless it prompts serious fiscal reform in France rather than the patching and continued over-spend that resulted OTL.

Gates was a disaster. Arnold won Saratoga