WI: George Washington joins the Royal Navy

IchBinDieKaiser

IchBinDieKaiser

I heard a story that George Washington almost joined the navy in his early teens. He was supposed to receive a formal education in England like his older brother but his father died and he couldn't afford to go. A family connection with an officer in the royal navy got the young Washington the opportunity to join. He was going to join but his mother talked him out of it because she thought he would probably die in the RN.

So my question is what if Washington did join the Royal Navy? Do you think he would have done well? If so how far would he get? How might this effect his attitude toward the mother country and the colonies? If the revolution still comes at around the same time as OTL what side would he choose? How would this choice affect the war?
 

jamsodonnell

IchBinDieKaiser said:
I heard a story that George Washington almost joined the navy in his early teens. He was supposed to receive a formal education in England like his older brother but his father died and he couldn't afford to go. A family connection with an officer in the royal navy got the young Washington the opportunity to join. He was going to join but his mother talked him out of it because she thought he would probably die in the RN.

So my question is what if Washington did join the Royal Navy? Do you think he would have done well? If so how far would he get? How might this effect his attitude toward the mother country and the colonies? If the revolution still comes at around the same time as OTL what side would he choose? How would this choice affect the war?
Click to expand...

If he joined the RN and remained a loyalist then the sky's the limit so long as he was capable and had decent connections.

Perhaps his career would have mirrored Jahleel Brenton sr who was of a similar age to Washington. He served with distinction and reached the rank of rear admiral. His son Jahleel jr reached vice admiral rank and was given a baronetcy (a hereditary knighthood)
 

Georgie Porgie

I would agree, the RN unlike the Army was far more likely to promote based on merit rather than connections. Washington would have done well.

Exploring this more I have always felt there was no natural replacement for Washington as leader of the Republican army. I don't normally like to say that some one is irriplaceable by history - but Wahington (as a figure head) may well have been the one person who could do the job and have the support of everyone.
 

Dathi THorfinnsson

Mount Vernon was built (or at least named) by his older brother Lawrence who did serve in the RN, and is named after Edward "Old Grog" Vernon, under whom he served.

So there's a definite connexion, and I imagine George joining the navy is entirely possible.

It does raise interesting questions.

I agree that the effect on the ARW is huge if GW isn't available to general. While he wasn't necessarily as good a general as US history makes him out to be, he was better than most of the other available choices, and politically reliable.

What would have happened if Lee or Arnold or Gates, for instance had been the guy that won US independence, I don't want to think.

For that matter, would independence have been won? Because of Washington's reputation, he was actually nominated by a New Englander, thus making him acceptable to both south and north. Otherwise, you might have had (even nastier) political infighting in the Continental Congress over military affairs (which were bad enough, iOTL), and possibly the war would have been lost.
 

jkarr

Gannt the chartist said:
I think you mean won Darthi
Click to expand...

think he meant as otl...where the war was won and the united states remained united....there was a lot of infighting betweent he various states delegates afer the war and if someone like washington hadnt being around to be picked both all sides, the untied states easily couldve broken up even after the war...making them "lose" in a sense, and possibly letting great britian regobble some, if not all, at a later point
 

Shogun

The Royal Navy? I hadn't heard that one before. I was aware that he tried to get a commission as an officer in the British Army during the French and Indian War, though.
 

KnightofTempest

A word about Benedict Arnold. . .

Arnold was actually a pretty competent officer, of course the problem is that he's hot headed, which makes him do some pretty stupid things sometimes. In fact his response to being passed over for promotion in favor of people like gates? Well instead of writing Washington about it(who iirc was a friend of his) he decided that the ultimate method of revenge was to turn traitor. Of course that's what history remembers him for these days, not for his actions at say, Brandywine where he prevented a rout at the cost of a musket ball to the leg.
 

Dathi THorfinnsson

KnightofTempest said:
Arnold was actually a pretty competent officer, of course the problem is that he's hot headed, which makes him do some pretty stupid things sometimes. In fact his response to being passed over for promotion in favor of people like gates? Well instead of writing Washington about it(who iirc was a friend of his) he decided that the ultimate method of revenge was to turn traitor. Of course that's what history remembers him for these days, not for his actions at say, Brandywine where he prevented a rout at the cost of a musket ball to the leg.
Click to expand...

Thats part of my point.

Gw was a competent general, as was arnold for instance, but unlike a couple of others.

No. The point is gw was 1) a decent general, 2) a great leader of men, 3) could handle the continental congress well enough to get occasional supplies, which was tough, 4) was trusted and respected by both south and north, and 5) could be trusted not to lead a coup afterwards.

The us got lucky, really lucky to have him.

You can find people in the arw that beat gw in most, maybe all, of the categories i listed. But no one else comes close in ALL, and thats what the nascent us NEEDED.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top