Spanish Alternatives in the American War of Independence:

Spanish Alternatives in the American War of Independence: Jan 25, 2024 0:51:45 GMT stevep, American hist, and 1 more like this

Quote

Post by raharris1973 on Jan 25, 2024 0:51:45 GMT

Consider, if you wish, some alternatives courses of action, or outcomes of their actions, in the American War of Independence:

1) No Bernardo Galvez as Governor of Luisiana, Commandante del Lame-O instead: What if instead of the talented Sr. Galvez as Governor of Luisiana and commander of Spanish forces in North America from 1777-1783, there is a crappy, administratively and militarily less competent appointee?

As a result, the Crown and Ministry policy of first allowing arms-smuggling to the Americans occurs via Spanish New Orleans, but the Spanish campaign based out of Luisiana to reclaim Florida, which succeeded in taking Pensacola and West Florida, and securing Spain's claim to recover all Florida, completely fails, as does Spanish campaigning in the Bahamas.

What are the consequences? A continued British Florida? Of what size and extent? Or Britain conceding Florida to the young USA early? With what historical effect?

2) Super-Bernardo: Galvez has even more foresight and ambition as the war approaches, and support from the New Spain Viceroyalty and Spain, which broadens the scope of his offensive from Luisiana into West Florida into Pensacola. A parallel. northern prong positions a smaller, but meaningful, mixed Spanish, local Francophone and native force under Spanish command around St. Louis to cross the Mississippi, which, operating well before Yankee George Rogers Clark, defeats pro-British native tribes, British detachments, and forts, secures garrisons around the base of the Great Lakes, Chicago and Detroit areas, and secures the Kentucky/Tennessee settlements.

Thus, the most forward of Spanish claims to the Trans-Appalachian/Allegheny West made at OTL's Paris negotiation, is actually backed by de facto occupation, troop sweeps, deals with natives, from the current western border of Georgia up through the middle of Ohio to Lake Erie, placing Spain, the owner of the real Toledo, as the probable owner of the land that became in OTL, Toledo, Ohio.

3) Spain can't be bothered: What if Spain, despite all its butt-hurt feeling against Britain, and pining for lost Florida, Gibraltar, and Menorca, and its family alliance with France, just feels like it's bad precedent, bad karma, bad juju, and bad vibes to be supporting independence rebels of another colonial power. It's just too risky, win or lose, expensive, win or lose, and prone to fail anyway. So Spain doesn't help the American rebels, even though the French go all in, first with covert aid, then with recognition, alliance, and war with Britain.

How does an American revolutionary war/war of independence, with the American Patriots, and the French, going all in, but the Spanish staying all out, go differently from OTL, if at all? In terms of final outcomes on the map, perhaps not much different, except for near-certainly, no transfer of Florida from Britain to Spain [so what there, Florida stays British? Ceded to America? Ceded to France of all strange things?] Or maybe quite different - Maybe the Americans lose? Maybe the French do not get Tobago or Senegal?

But certainly some campaigns would be different. No focus on a siege of Gibraltar. A pretty good chance of no massed Bourbon Armada of 1779, because Spain was pushing more for that type of decisive massed assault at the heart of British power - France on its own may be more satisfied with an expeditionary naval duel focused on the North American and Caribbean theaters.

4) Spain is a scaredy gato and stays out of open war: Spain is cool with covert aid to the Americans, but eschews the risk, and the propaganda contradiction of open warfare with the British and relations with the Americans. So they pass material aid to the US and France under the table, but do not engage in combat or warfighting alliances. How does this change the war? It must change the campaigns the way I describe, but the resource picture is not as reduced for the Franco-American coalition as much as in scenario #3 I imagine. Difficult to see Britain getting any improved strategic result out of this except the possibility of keeping Florida.

Spanish Alternatives in the American War of Independence: Jan 25, 2024 19:53:03 GMT

Quote

Post by stevep on Jan 25, 2024 19:53:03 GMT

Jan 25, 2024 0:51:45 GMT raharris1973 said:

1) Your likely to see Britain retain control of Florida, in its larger form of the period and possibly even some of the Indian lands to the north. I recently saw a PSB programme on the plight of the Loyalists and a lot started settling in W Florida after the finalizing of terms with the US only to have to abandon it when it was returned to Spain. If this doesn't happen then Britain is likely to retain it as it provides a homeland for the loyalists and also some buffer to the valuable British Caribbean against future US attacks.

There might be other butterflies as the failure of those Spanish operations as compared to OTL but I suspect they wouldn't be significant.

2) That would seriously impact relations between Spain and the US. The latter has lost most of the prospects for western expansion unless its willing to risk war with Spain - which until ~1789 assuming no other butterflies probably also means war with France. [Not sure what Britain's position would be in such a conflict. The other option is that the US seeks to expand north with a probably earlier 1812 type conflict but that's less prosperous for the US and also could well see war with a Britain not tied down by war on the continent.

As such I would expect the former option is more likely. I would expect war at some time with eventually - if it takes a generation or two - for the US to win at least eastern Louisiana to the Mississippi. Because they have a larger population in the region and also its a relatively minor location for the Spanish while a French collapse into revolution - which I would see as pretty likely to occur in some form would remove the powerful ally for a Spain that is already in deep decline. Especially since the success of the American revolution and probably then a French one Spain could see unrest in its own territories. However it could delay America's expansion across the continent and have lasting effects on developments in N America. Plus in such a conflict, or at least the early stages your likely to see a fair number of attacks on the American east coast and a blockade, doubly so if French helps its ally. This could do a lot of material damage to the Us and possibly also cause some division between those in the west looking for expansion and the east who wonder whether this is worth all the damage and disruption. Although possibly attacks as destructive as this might in turn prompt British intervention for fear that the US is in danger of becoming a Bourbon satellite.

3) I would think this unlikely as France is Spain's primary ally and the two Bourbon powers were both bitter at the defeats they had suffered in the 7YW. However if it did occur then there are a hell of a lot of butterflies. Spain added a considerable amount of resources to the conflict OTL so without them - which could well be resented in Paris - Britain's position would be significantly stronger. As well as no siege of Gibraltar you could also see no attack on Minorca, or such an attack fails which would give Britain a base markedly closer to the French Med fleet base at Toulon.

All in all a lot of British resources are freed up for the war with the primary enemies, i,e. France and the American rebels. Britain would still have to take precautions against Spain joining the conflict at a later stage. However it could greatly change the balance of power in the war. By this time - i.e. Spain deciding not to join the anti-British coalition in 1779 its probably unlikely that Britain can inflict heavy enough damage on the French for them to withdraw and then to conquer the entire rebel controlled regions is practical, at least unless the rebels cause so many problems for the ordinary population that they become too unpopular.

However its likely that a lot of areas would stay under British control, especially in the west and south. Furthermore if its a war that ends in mutual exhaustion, or Britain getting the upper hand over France and prompting their withdrawal then Britain is less likely to be motivated to seek to appease and win over the new nation. As such Britain is likely to seek to maintain control of lands that it actually holds when peace is concluded. Given that Britain was strong in the south and here the defeat at Yorktown might not occur your could see at least Georgia as well as Florida and points west to the Spanish Louisiana ending up in British hands. Similarly in the north the lands west of the proclamation line and probably a good chunk of Maine which was in British hands along with possibly other territories.

Having such territory in fairly easy reach and probably with tensions between the two nations a lot cooler you could see a lot more loyalists deciding to move to secure their future rather than risk staying in lands controlled by the revolutionaries. Coupled with Indian allies and black slaves released from rebel owners along with more migration from Britain going this way plus the backing of the British state this could see the near west that is in British hands being a tough target for the US. Your likely to see conflict between the two, especially when Britain is distracted by war in Europe. [This might actually prompt the US to seek allies in Europe, which in the short term would almost certainly be France, whether royalist or probably later republican.]

4) This is a smaller version of 3) above and a lot would depend on what degree of impact on the war. Britain is almost certain to retain Florida here but how much more would depend on the circumstances.