No Battle of New Orleans 1815

Most likely it would be because news of the Treaty had spread faster.

American nationalism would still go through a growth phase, though it would be more focused from New England events (Fort McKinley) and not in the South so much (New Orleans). This might have the longer term effect of emboldening the North states relative to the South, which could mean that the South won't be able to dominate US politics as much. (The North could argue that it was a Southern War fought by the North.)

Biggest potential butterfly would be the effect on Andrew Jackson. Jackson is still a war hero from other theatres and battles, but if for some reason he is passed over for president the butterflies are numerous. Jacksonian democracy, which introduced universal white male suffrage, could be delayed. Jackson's limitations and emboldening of executive powers would be different. States Rights could either be nipped in the bud by a more forceful executive, or grow further with a more passive one.

Of course, if Jackson is still elected (and there's good reason for him to be; war hero, "Favorite Son" of a region, etc.), none of the above matters.
 

67th Tigers

Banned
Keane's Brigade (left wing)
Rennie's Battalion of Converged Light Coys (Light Coys of 1/7th, 1/93rd and a Coy of the 1/43rd)
1st Bn, 93rd Highlanders (from garrison duty in South Africa)
1st West Indies (from WI)
wing of the 3rd Bn, 95th Rifles

Gibbs' Brigade (right wing)
Jones' Battalion of Converged Light Coys (in the Swamp) (Light Coys of 1/4th, 1/44th, 2/21st and 5th WI)
1/4th King's Own (from Peninsula)
1/21st Royal Scots Fusiliers (from Army of Italy)
1/44th (from garrison duty in Spain)
wing of 3/95th Rifles

Lambert's Brigade (reserve)

14th Light Dragoons
1st Bn, 7th Royal Fusiliers (from Peninsula)
1st Bn, 43rd Light Infantry (from Peninsula)
5th West Indies (from West Indies)

Thorton's Column
85th (from Peninsula)
 
Most likely it would be because news of the Treaty had spread faster.

American nationalism would still go through a growth phase, though it would be more focused from New England events (Fort McKinley) and not in the South so much (New Orleans). This might have the longer term effect of emboldening the North states relative to the South, which could mean that the South won't be able to dominate US politics as much. (The North could argue that it was a Southern War fought by the North.)
Not so sure of much of this. The war was seen primarily as that of a Northern war, or more correctly that of the Northwest.

And thats Fort McHenry.
 
Most likely it would be because news of the Treaty had spread faster.

American nationalism would still go through a growth phase, though it would be more focused from New England events (Fort McKinley)...
As another poster has mentioned, it's Fort McHenry. This was located outside Baltimore, Maryland...which at that time was (and still is, to a certain extent) considered a Southern State. It certainly was NOT in New England.

New England didn't make much contribution to the American war effort during the War of 1812. They pretty much sat out the war, sold supplies to the British, and plotted secession. :eek:
 
Whe would not have the Campaign song [[In 1814 ,Whe took a Little Trip}} Very non P.C.--Jimmy Horton cleaned it up for his 1950's version.
No Lafiatee Pardon, He would have remained a minor Pirate.

If he didn't become president due to this-[iffy] Then no Trails of Tears. Indian Removal.
 
Andrew Jackson's career just took a big hit, with imponderable effects.

Britain presses for stronger terms, I suspect. There was still scope for negotiation after the signing of the treaty, but it wasn't worth taking up again. At the very least, if there's no Battle of New Orleans I'd expect for Britain to push for the return of it to Spain. Which would probably last all of twenty minutes after Spain got it, but hey...
 
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding was that The Battle Of New Orleans was in a sense unnecessary. My understanding was that the treaty ending The War Of 1812 had already been signed before The Battle Of New Orleans, but neither The Americans or The Brittish at New Orleans knew that because communications back then was so slow that word of the treaty had not reached them yet.

If that is true then The Battle Of New Orleans was actually fought after the war was officially over and the treaty ending it had been signed.
 
Jared said what I was going to add better. The war was over, but if the British own you bet your ass terms would have changed.
 
Last edited:
If that is true then The Battle Of New Orleans was actually fought after the war was officially over and the treaty ending it had been signed.
Nope. The Treaty of Ghent stated that the war wouldn't be over until an exchange of ratifications had taken place. This happened on 16 February 1815 - over a month after the Battle of New Orleans.

The odds are quite high that even if the British troops at New Orleans had known about the signing of the treaty, they would have gone ahead anyway. There's a reason they were sent to New Orleans even though peace negotiations were well underway. Some historians (e.g. Robert Remini and J. Leitch Wright, Jr.) have argued that Britain continued to treat New Orleans as a separate case from the Treaty of Ghent, since the whole Louisiana Purchase was viewed as illegal and the Gulf Coast as belonging to Spain.
 
Top