Earliest Possible "American Revolution"?

[Superman]

In OTL, the American Revolution mostly lasted from 1775-1783. It was fought for various reasons, and resulted in the United States of America becoming independent from the Kingdom of Great Britain.

However, would it be possible for the English/British colonies in North America to rebel earlier than they did IOTL? And if so, how early? Could English North America have had a revolution as a North American theater of the English Civil War? Or maybe the unpopular formation of Dominion of New England, coupled with the Glorious Revolution in England, could have led to a "United States" 100 years earlier?

 

[Emperor Norton I]

There is Bacon's Rebellion (which was also genocidal towards Indians, so keep that in mind).

And there was that time that time traveling Welsh Indian got Roanoke to secede and start America. Or was that just a comic book?

 

[Superman]

There is Bacon's Rebellion (which was also genocidal towards Indians, so keep that in mind).

And there was that time that time traveling Welsh Indian got Roanoke to secede and start America. Or was that just a comic book?

I think that answers your question.

But seriously, did the rebellion have any chance of succeeding at all? And if it did, would tthey eventually stop killing, or would they continue being genocidal until they got to the Pacific?

 

[packmanwiscy]

Or maybe the unpopular formation of Dominion of New England, coupled with the Glorious Revolution in England, could have led to a "United States" 100 years earlier?

If the colonists didn't wage constant wars with the French (which were more of British allied Native Americans v. French allied Native Americans) perhaps they could be more willing to join them in a Revolution during this time. I think the Glorious Revolution could cause a revolution, but if the colonists won I don't think they would last long as an independent country.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

I think that answers your question.

But seriously, did the rebellion have any chance of succeeding at all? And if it did, would tthey eventually stop killing, or would they continue being genocidal until they got to the Pacific?

I'd imagine it depends on the Crown's ability or desire to fight it, and how swiftly and successfully the rebellion could move. OTL, they did send troops over and they put it down. In terms of Empire as geographic territory, that makes sense. In terms of mercantile trade, as the British would learn later it did not matter if you owned the territory so long as you had ample trade because it was really all the same; it's just you did not have to worry about upkeep.

In short, really no clue and I'm bloviating.

On a side note, I did use a similar POD for a nations game once (only to later be decimated and occupied by a Fenpire). The problem with early secession I learned from that was, realistically, population is going to be small, if the motherland is not sending in people it will have to grow naturally from that and whoever may come of their own desire, towns are going to be small, colonization of the shore in the Virginia/Carolina region was hindered because it was really swampy and rife for disease and it took decades for people to actually not die and for population growth, etc. The biggest issue is when you successfully rebel, you are going out on your own. If you haven't become independent enough and don't have enough infrastructure, population, etc, you are going to have issues because what you have is going to be what you have to work with. America in 1776 was an entity unto itself that could stand on its own.

 

[Tripwire]

It's entirely probable that the war could break out in 1764ish if the Stamp Act is not repealed, if further acts are passed to try and force the colonists to pay it, etc, that leads to escalation.

Before that I think it's unlikely the colonies had the population to stand on their own.