Concequences of a failed American Revolution???

I'm working on a timeline where the American Revolution is lost, prior to the French involvement. I'm having trouble deciding how this impacted French Revolution/Napoleonic Wars, since in OTL their involvement in the Americas bankrupted the nation; but I'm fairly sure something would have happened since France's finances were already in bad shape. I'm also wondering how to reflect the changes in Britain's imperial expansions, since American independence refocused the UK's efforts in colonizing Asia, Africa, and Australia. (I plan on taking the timeline up to the modern day).
 
A lot depends on the Surrender terms.
A harsh represion leads to the hanged Founding Fathers looked on as Martyrs.
To lienient and you leave the American Elite in position to try again.
[Anyone ever try a Second ARW Time Line]

no french Revolution = different Spain = 1803 Revoution in Mexico = 1812 ARW taking it's insperation from the MRW of 1803.
 
no french Revolution = different Spain = 1803 Revoution in Mexico = 1812 ARW taking it's insperation from the MRW of 1803.

Why do so many people in the USA think that have the AR have failed, then there would be an earlier and more successful Mexican war of independence?

Just look at OTL: Mexico remained loyal more time than most Spanish colonies and only proclaimed independence because of a French-inspired coup in Spain. In fact, it could be said that Mexico remained more loyal to "Spain" (that is, Enlightened Despotic Spain) than Spain itself, and that the old system of government of New Spain only really disappeared with the Mexican Revolution of 1910...
 
When will it be lost, because the longer the war goes on for the longer the discontent. For instance , I think if the British win the Battle of Bunker Hill with minimal human cost, then thats really the last chance. Lord North was conciliatory, but the Americans might not be. If you plan a war won in the time of Cornwallis' campaigns in the south, then you have a sort of Ireland situation for the next seventy, eighty years- the 13 original colonies are constantly rebellious and pushing the envelope all the time. After that such discontent might be diluted by new immigrants arriving from Europe (again, no reason to believe why this should be really different; I asked Niall Ferguson in an e-mail on this (surprising, non?) and he agreed).

With regards to France. Before, France was doing well in getting rid of the Seven Years War debt, and I believe without the ARW France might survive in its current, absolutist state. Of course, Louis is a bit of an Anglophobe since France lost sooo much in the Seven Years War- he could provoke war later on with the UK anyway (in my TL he does). He could also expand on France's navy (something with he loved), or look upon his country and reform. I have a rough idea of Louis (depends on his personality really, but there is wiggle room) looking upon a reformed British America (in the collaborative TL in working on) and decides to reform the legal system. Louis is thus seen as the guarantor of French liberty against the perfidious nobles, and guarantor of law and order. Some of the discontent of the French lower classes and bourgeoisie could filter away- until 1791 Louis was generally popular as a person, unlike his ministers and his wife. Helpful?:eek:

You also seem to have worries on the British colonial expansion. The antipodes could definetely look different- Australia and New Zealand could have gone French very easily (a French warship was spotted scouting off Botany Bay once). India would probably still be British, given the real French presence was shrunk in the Seven Years War. Africa is hard- it all depends on what the butterflies are....


Thanks for the suggestions and the info:). I was originally thinking, Washington was shot by Patrick Ferguson after Brandywine, but I was thinking this might be a bit cliche. My other thought, was Howe aggressively pursued Washington after the battle of White Plains and crushed the continental army (Washington dying in battle). After this defeat, the British spent the next few years mopping up the rest of the rebels, and reestablishing control over the colonies. I was thinking of an ongoing insurgency and other pushing by the conquered colonists continueing for years; Upper Canada could have served as a place of exile for rebels instead of a new home for loyalists.

As for France, I figured Louie would eventually end up in some war with the UK again. I was thinking, unburdened by the dept of the ARW, that France would have interviened in the Patriot vs. Orangist in the Netherlands, sparking off another continetal war; far more draining to France then the ARW, and the French Revolution breaking out in midst of an ongoing war. However I do like the monarchy sticking around a while longer, and maybe sparking off a war for another expansion into India or trying purchase the Louisiana Territory back from Spain (which seems possiable since France's finacial woes prior to the ARW were better then I thought). A French Australia does sound intersting as well.
 
Consider the idea that America would be a much smaller place. British authoritieis wanted American colonization to stop around the Northwest Territories, near the Ohio Valley. France would have never relinquished the Louisiana territory to the British colonies it is certainly likely that the French would clash along the banks of the Mississippi River. Consider the history of Sub-Saharan Africa as a model for the region in the affairs of Native Americans.

A second attempt at American Revolution in the nineteenth century would most likely be seen in the context of Simon Bolivar of Latin America and/or the model of Napoleon Bonaparte. Another thing to consider is that longer that the Revolution is delayed, the more likely it is to have its ideals based on the works of Karl Marx and/or Friedrich Engels.
 
Why do so many people in the USA think that have the AR have failed, then there would be an earlier and more successful Mexican war of independence?
I was being sarcastic over the idea [US History Books view] that all the Spainish American Revolts were inspired by the US one.
I know that the Mexican revolution didn't start till till 1810 with Father Hidalgo's Grito de Delores.
And was on the cusp of Defeat when General Agustín Iturbide, switched sides and lead the Rebels to victory, in 1819.

A second attempt at American Revolution in the nineteenth century would most likely be seen in the context of Simon Bolivar of Latin America and/or the model of Napoleon Bonaparte. Another thing to consider is that longer that the Revolution is delayed, the more likely it is to have its ideals based on the works of Karl Marx and/or Friedrich Engels.

I doubt if the second attemp at self control would wait that long.
The oldest colonies were alredy 7 generations old, and while Georgia was only 2 generations [offically] large numbers of Settlers in Georgia had come from 4~5 generation Carolinias.
With the americans losing the Tories staying put, no migration to Canada.
and It was the Loyalists and there sons and grandsons that keep canadain independence out of the picture till the 1870's.
[?How many of todays desendents still know about the loyalist initials they are allowed to use?]
I see many of the Crown loyalists, post 1776 sons and grandsons favoring the Americans.

By 1810 Whe are at 9 Generations, even the Hessians et al, have grown Grandkids.

I see an American Rebellion coming out of Problems over New Orleans, and the Mississipi.
 
I've got my doubts that there would be a second revolution. The British more than likely would enact many reforms to address the problems in the colonies. There may be a serious second attempt at something like the Albany Plan. With a degree of self-governance I would guess that the American colonies would develop fairly similar to the other British dominions in the late 19th century in that they didn't usually pay their fair share for defense.

Some sort of settlement of the Ohio River Valley will have to be reached that did not marginalize the native indians. Expansion westward isn't going to be too much of a problem, there will never be enough Frenchmen (let alone Spaniards) to keep British settlers out. The conquest and settlement of the transmississippian Midwest and Central Plains may prove to be similar to Boer's Great Trek. Louisiana may be seized by the British to prevent a French takeover. One could see the Mormons serving as a more docile version of the Boers come to think of it.
 
Early on, the ARW could have been lost by the rebels, and a satisfactory agreement made.... later on, the rebels got more and more taken with the idea of complete independence, and it gets harder.

To address colonial concerns, the home government would have to:

let the American colonies slide on most of the taxes applied elsewhere in the empire. The colonists had gotten used to paying very little; their chances of accepting a lot of 'new' taxes were pretty slim.

let the colonies trade as they please. Again, they had been doing just that for a long time. Britain tried to interfere with this by requiring that all goods to and from the colonies be shipped in British hulls. This was widely ignored, and where it wasn't, the colonists proved to be great smugglers.

let wholesale immigration into the colonies. This was pretty much going on already, and any attempts to limit non-British colonists would be resented. Hand in hand with this would be the need to open up the west for settlement. Attempts to restrict this were one of the issues of the ARW.

Meet these demands, and you could have a content American colony under the British crown...
 
Here's a start...

October 28th, 1776, the Continental Army under George Washington met the British force of William Howe in the land surrounding White Plains, New York. The British and their Hessians mercenaries drove the rebellious colonials from the field after several charges. Howe chased after the Americans, at a Hessian commander, Johan Rall’s, urging. The Americans were completely routed and General Washington’s body uncovered beneath his dead horse; brought down by several musket shots. With his death, much of the organized resistance to the United Kingdom’s rule over the 13 colonies, was broken like the patriots who bled their last at White Plains. The Continental Congress would flee Philadelphia, some to seek sanctuary in the wilderness or on foreign soil, while others surrendered themselves or tried to hide in the chaos of the failure of the “American Rebellion”.

Over the next three years, much of the rebellion’s leadership was captured or dead. The most outspoken and influential ringleaders were charged with treason,and hanged. The rest were made to swear an allegiance to their rightful monarch, and exiled with other patriots to Canada. Some continued to struggle, striking from the wilds, or with knives in the shadows. The most infamous, and when no Crown officials were about, and revered of the diehards, was Benedict Arnold; he would plague the authorities for years to come.

Fresh Royal Governors were sent from Britain; to rule over new administrative divisions. It was an effort to completely sweep away the past of failed policies, practices, and most importantly, loyalties. The colonies were reorganized into three new entities: New England became Williamsland (after William Howe), the middle colonies were renamed Richardia (after Richard Howe), and the southern colonies came under Henria (after Henry Clinton). Despite a stern hand over the Americans, reforms were made. Taxes were reduced, and expansion was opened up (particularly into the lands of Native tribes that fought for the Americans); but compensation was paid to the loyalists.
 
Top