|
|
Post by diamondstorm on Feb 1, 2023 3:44:55 GMT
In our timeline, the Continental Army under George Washington was able to escape from Brooklyn Heights in late August 1776 thanks in part to the weather and in part due to British General William Howe rejecting the requests of his advisors to attack the American forces trapped at Brooklyn Heights. What if Howe ended up listening to them and attack the Continental Army, likely knocking them out of the war? How would peace talks proceed (would the Staten Island Peace Conference still happen, for instance)? How would America transform through the late 18th and 19th centuries under British rule due to losing at Brooklyn Heights?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832 
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Feb 1, 2023 16:25:09 GMT
In our timeline, the Continental Army under George Washington was able to escape from Brooklyn Heights in late August 1776 thanks in part to the weather and in part due to British General William Howe rejecting the requests of his advisors to attack the American forces trapped at Brooklyn Heights. What if Howe ended up listening to them and attack the Continental Army, likely knocking them out of the war? How would peace talks proceed (would the Staten Island Peace Conference still happen, for instance)? How would America transform through the late 18th and 19th centuries under British rule due to losing at Brooklyn Heights?
A lot would depend on the exact circumstances. Assuming no other significant groups seek to continue armed conflict its likely there would be some conference and some concessions on both sides. This may not be the case as areas such as New England might seek to continue the rebellion. However such a victory might persuade the French not to fund the revolution, which would greatly weaken it.
Similarly in turn what happens in later years. Without the rebel victory you might not see the same reaction against pressure for reform in the UK itself. Also without the vast amounts spent on the war by the French is the revolution there averted or delayed say? Which would have huge butterflies. Its likely that a system as corrupt and malfunctioning as the ancient regime in France is going to fall at some time, especially since there could be another dynastic war in Europe and around the world at a somewhat later stage. However even a delay of a few years could change a lot in terms of events that follow on and whether the revolution is successful or suppressed.
If the resultant treaty does have some agreement where the colonies are committed to making a fiscal funding to their own defence needs then that could well have knock on impacts on other settler colonies.
Also if the N American colonies are still open for sending convicts to them - which may not be the case - that would mean less interest in settling Australia which might end up in other hands or possibly shared between two or more powers.
|
|
|
|
Post by diamondstorm on Feb 1, 2023 17:51:45 GMT
In our timeline, the Continental Army under George Washington was able to escape from Brooklyn Heights in late August 1776 thanks in part to the weather and in part due to British General William Howe rejecting the requests of his advisors to attack the American forces trapped at Brooklyn Heights. What if Howe ended up listening to them and attack the Continental Army, likely knocking them out of the war? How would peace talks proceed (would the Staten Island Peace Conference still happen, for instance)? How would America transform through the late 18th and 19th centuries under British rule due to losing at Brooklyn Heights?
If the Continental Army is captured, I don't really see how the war could continue unless the rebellion transforms into a series of guerilla wars. I mostly ask about the peace conference as the one in Staten Island took place IOTL roughly two weeks after the Battle of Long Island and wonder how that would change since John Adams attended IOTL on behalf of New England. And the peace terms I've seen swing both ways - from leniency and everyone being pardoned to all the leaders being executed and all the Thirteen colonies being oppressed in a similar way Ireland was IOTL - so I'm not fully sure there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Feb 2, 2023 1:41:31 GMT
GURPS Alternate Earths II suggested that they'd stay a British colony, held down with the help of more and more sepoys. Settlers west of the Appalachians are driven out by the natives, with the approval of Britain. And yes, no French Revolution.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Feb 2, 2023 16:42:37 GMT
GURPS Alternate Earths II suggested that they'd stay a British colony, held down with the help of more and more sepoys. Settlers west of the Appalachians are driven out by the natives, with the approval of Britain. And yes, no French Revolution.
That would be an idiotic scenario. Both in terms of the task of holding such a large and distant population by force, which would have been against Britain's interests as well and many of its leaders knew that and in the idea of using sepoy's for such a task. It was only ~ 1840/50 that Indian forces started being deployed outside India and that's unlikely to change, especially since its only really ~1800-10 that Britain emerged as the dominant power in India.
Illegal settlement west of the Appalachians are likely to be very few in the short term as such could only really exist with the consent of the local Indian tribes but its likely with the greater political power of the settlers in the colonies compared to the locals that this would change in a generation or two at most. Hopefully London could supply some constraint over the resulting expansion which might mean significantly more of the Indian populations survive compared to OTL.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,966
Likes: 49,370
|
Post by lordroel on Feb 2, 2023 16:45:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by diamondstorm on Feb 2, 2023 17:54:14 GMT
lordroel For Want of a Nail is a good story but Saratoga is one of the more common scenarios I've seen depicting an American loss in the Revolution, or at least much more common than at Long Island (the scenario I'm trying to look at) which took place a year before Saratoga.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Feb 2, 2023 20:35:08 GMT
Its an interesting PoD but much of the story after that is rather unbelievable. Both in terms of things like a militaristic Germany still arising and then ending up conquering most of Eurasia while the British colonies in N America have no interest in the world around them. Also the odd and unbelievable success of the slavocracy that I think was it Andrew Jackson and his successors manage to establish and then expand to the conquering of all western N America and much of Latin America as well. [Could be remembering some details wrong as so long since I read the book].
|
|
|
|
Post by diamondstorm on Feb 2, 2023 21:01:09 GMT
Its an interesting PoD but much of the story after that is rather unbelievable. Both in terms of things like a militaristic Germany still arising and then ending up conquering most of Eurasia while the British colonies in N America have no interest in the world around them. Also the odd and unbelievable success of the slavocracy that I think was it Andrew Jackson and his successors manage to establish and then expand to the conquering of all western N America and much of Latin America as well. [Could be remembering some details wrong as so long since I read the book].
I agree it's a good POD but not the one I'm looking for, over a year late in fact. I don't think Saratoga would happen with the scenario I'm looking at. |
|
miletus12
Squadron vice admiral
To get yourself lost, just follow the signs.
Posts: 7,470 
Likes: 4,295
|
Post by miletus12 on Feb 3, 2023 9:34:52 GMT
The American revolution would peter out for a bit, but then it would flare up again, this time with more of a violent and radical fervor. Depending on how things go with FRANCE come their revolution, I doubt the British survive AR 2.0 due to the social revolutions going on in Europe. There are not enough idiot "Loyalists" in North America to stop a genuine people's war once the incompetents in London mismanage the "peaxce conference" the rebellion transforms into a series of guerilla wars. I mostly ask about the peace conference as the one in Staten Island took place IOTL roughly two weeks after the Battle of Long Island and wonder how that would change since John Adams attended IOTL on behalf of New England. You mean "Fight to the death, John Adams?" Are you KIDDING? |
|
|
|
Post by diamondstorm on Feb 3, 2023 16:03:18 GMT
The American revolution would peter out for a bit, but then it would flare up again, this time with more of a violent and radical fervor. Depending on how things go with FRANCE come their revolution, I doubt the British survive AR 2.0 due to the social revolutions going on in Europe. There are not enough idiot "Loyalists" in North America to stop a genuine people's war once the incompetents in London mismanage the "peaxce conference" the rebellion transforms into a series of guerilla wars. I mostly ask about the peace conference as the one in Staten Island took place IOTL roughly two weeks after the Battle of Long Island and wonder how that would change since John Adams attended IOTL on behalf of New England. You mean "Fight to the death, John Adams?" Are you KIDDING? I mean to be fair, John Adams was part of OTL's Staten Island Peace Conference delegation alongside Benjamin Franklin and Edward Rutledge. Also, without French entry into the American Revolution, I would imagine that their own Revolution is delayed perhaps by a generation or so. |
|
miletus12
Squadron vice admiral
To get yourself lost, just follow the signs.
Posts: 7,470
Likes: 4,295
|
Post by miletus12 on Feb 3, 2023 16:36:12 GMT
The American revolution would peter out for a bit, but then it would flare up again, this time with more of a violent and radical fervor. Depending on how things go with FRANCE come their revolution, I doubt the British survive AR 2.0 due to the social revolutions going on in Europe. There are not enough idiot "Loyalists" in North America to stop a genuine people's war once the incompetents in London mismanage the "peaxce conference" You mean "Fight to the death, John Adams?" Are you KIDDING? I mean to be fair, John Adams was part of OTL's Staten Island Peace Conference delegation alongside Benjamin Franklin and Edward Rutledge. Also, without French entry into the American Revolution, I would imagine that their own Revolution is delayed perhaps by a generation or so. This assumes eonomics and social pressures do not reach criticality until 1840=> 1850? Not as far as I can tell. Remember what was causing the American Revolution was British government interference and taxation of the the previously laIssez faire triangle trade. Add to that the Royalist French government seeking any opportunity for revenge after the Seven Years War. In effect, you postulate to give American slavocrats, and New England smugglers and the FRENCH 20 more years to get annoyed with the mostly static British along with ongoing American and FRENCH industrialization, internal birthrates, and vastly improved French and American technology. Kick everything off around 1800 when the Americans are the 3rd and the French are the 2nd more industrialized nations in existence, with combined populations of 6 and 18 million respectively against 8 million Britons. A Royalist France will not have Austria Hungary, Russia, and Sweden and Prussia against her in coalition after coalition after coalition, not with a Bourbon trying to pull the British down. Remember the actual coalition that actually made the American Revolution possible? We do not even need Napoleon to make it all work. |
|
|
|
Post by diamondstorm on Feb 3, 2023 22:17:47 GMT
I mean to be fair, John Adams was part of OTL's Staten Island Peace Conference delegation alongside Benjamin Franklin and Edward Rutledge. Also, without French entry into the American Revolution, I would imagine that their own Revolution is delayed perhaps by a generation or so. Not as far as I can tell. Remember what was causing the American Revolution was British government interference and taxation of the the previously laIssez faire triangle trade. Add to that the Royalist French government seeking any opportunity for revenge after the Seven Years War. In effect, youy postulate to give American slavocrats, and New England smugglers and the FRENCH 20 more years to get annoyed with the mostly static British along with ongoing American and FRENCH industrialization, internal birthrates, and vastly improved French and American technology. Kick everything off around 1800 when the Americans are the 3rd and the French are the 2nd more industrialized nations in existence, with combined populations of 6 and 18 million respectively against 8 million Britons. A Royalist France will not have Austria Hungary, Russia, and Sweden and Prussia against her in coalition after coalition after coalition, not with a Bourbon trying to pull the British down. Remember the actual coalition that actually made the American Revolution possible? We do not even need Napoleon to make it all work. I was thinking somewhere in the 1800-1815 range ie when Napoleon ruled France IOTL. The Seven Years War is what sent the Ancien Regime into deep debt but French entry into the American Revolution is what determined that the fall of the Ancien Regime would be sooner than later. If the French never enter on the American side then it would probably be in the first two decades of the 19th century - potentially during another Franco-British war - that the debt builds up to the point where the monarchy goes into crisis mode. |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Feb 4, 2023 0:47:59 GMT
GURPS Alternate Earths II suggested that they'd stay a British colony, held down with the help of more and more sepoys. Settlers west of the Appalachians are driven out by the natives, with the approval of Britain. And yes, no French Revolution.
That would be an idiotic scenario. Both in terms of the task of holding such a large and distant population by force, which would have been against Britain's interests as well and many of its leaders knew that and in the idea of using sepoy's for such a task. It was only ~ 1840/50 that Indian forces started being deployed outside India and that's unlikely to change, especially since its only really ~1800-10 that Britain emerged as the dominant power in India. Well, the TL goes until the 1980s, so the sepoys aren't deployed immediately.
Don't know about you, but I liked the GURPS AE scenarios. Much more than those from Infinite Worlds. I like long scenarios with many original ideas. Sure, they don't care much about the butterfly effect, but then again, few people do.
|
|
raunchel
Commander
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 1,182
|
Post by raunchel on Feb 4, 2023 9:13:08 GMT
In the end, that was just an army and new ones can be raised as happened historically all the time. Of course, it makes for a nice story that everything was balanced on the edge of a knife but a small army being destroyed doesn't change the fact on the ground that there was a large population there that was willing to take up arms because of their opposition to the current arrangement. It also doesn't do anything about any guerilla movement and the like. So, I personally think that peace talks would still fail and there would be ongoing fighting. At some point, a new army will be raised as well, so all this just delays things by a few years.
|
|
