Tacky's War Succeeds - Successful Slave Uprising in Jamaica

Any ideas on what would happen if Tacky's War succeeded and, at least temporarily, slaves took control of Jamaica in 1760? I assume the UK would attempt to take back the island, but it was pretty busy fighting the 7YW at the time. The topography of Jamaica would make it very hard to quell (and the actual revolt was put down with the help of maroon communities that had already negotiated deals with the Brits/plantation owners, in exchange for returning future runaways), and I assume diseases would cause a lot of UK sailor/marine casualties. So I can see this this working over the long term, but I'd like to know if I'm off base.

And would it inspire more uprisings around the Caribbean? Maybe accelerate things in Saint-Domingue?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacky's_War
 
To put it mildly, this is incredibly scary to everyone in the Caribbean and North American, or at least those that own slaves. For the long-term success of Tacky's War, and a slave-run Jamaica, they'll need foreign aid. France may or may not be in a position to help, but honestly, they're asking for their own slave rebellion in Saint-Domingue if they intervene and post-rebellion Jamaica succeeds. On the other hand, the British have the manpower and the will to crush the rebellion. Sure the Jamaican slaves could have an independent Jamaica, but it won't take long for the British to decide on smashing them flat.
 
To put it mildly, this is incredibly scary to everyone in the Caribbean and North American, or at least those that own slaves. For the long-term success of Tacky's War, and a slave-run Jamaica, they'll need foreign aid. France may or may not be in a position to help, but honestly, they're asking for their own slave rebellion in Saint-Domingue if they intervene and post-rebellion Jamaica succeeds. On the other hand, the British have the manpower and the will to crush the rebellion. Sure the Jamaican slaves could have an independent Jamaica, but it won't take long for the British to decide on smashing them flat.

You know, this makes me thing what made Haiti succeed IOTL. I mean, of course France couldn't really oppose the Haitian Revolution due to the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (even then there were some attempts...), but after the 1820s, didn't the restored Bourbon monarchy or the Orleanist one tried to restore the colonial dominion in St. Domingue? If I recall correctly there was even a time in which France came to own the whole island of Hispaniola.

Whatever were the causes of the French... disinterest that allowed for an independent Haiti, perhaps they can be replicated regarding Jamaica?
 
Jamaica is much smaller than Haiti - certainly a lot less places for Jamaican maroons to hide and ambush any British troops determined to reconquer the island. There are the same factors that the French had in Haiti: tropical disease, an unfamiliarity with the terrain (compared to the enemy), and a small white population that will likely be exterminated and unable to assist the troops. The British don't have to worry about revolution but they're in the middle of the Seven Year's War: the French and Spanish would probably do everything possible to prevent British reconquest while planning their own takeovers of the island - much like Britain attempted in Haiti. The best case scenario is that you have an independent Maroon state that is isolated from the rest of the world AND/or reconquered at some point.
 
You know, this makes me thing what made Haiti succeed IOTL. I mean, of course France couldn't really oppose the Haitian Revolution due to the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (even then there were some attempts...), but after the 1820s, didn't the restored Bourbon monarchy or the Orleanist one tried to restore the colonial dominion in St. Domingue? If I recall correctly there was even a time in which France came to own the whole island of Hispaniola.

Whatever were the causes of the French... disinterest that allowed for an independent Haiti, perhaps they can be replicated regarding Jamaica?

After the failed attempt to retake Haiti in 1802-1803, the French were never able to successfully reclaim the island, although the restored French monarchy continued to claim the island, and made attempts to take the island without resorting to force. Haiti remained in diplomatic limbo and de facto isolation following the rebellion, basically due to the actions of their leadership following the ousting of the French. This gave France a golden opportunity, as they were able to blackmail the Haitians, exchanging a hefty sum of cash in exchange for diplomatic recognition and acceptance of the de facto independence of Haiti. Haiti was unable to pay off the French, requiring loans from foreign banks, which essentially extorted the Haitian government with interest rates.

As for your second point, there wasn't a "disinterest" in reconquering St. Domingue. Quite the opposite, as revolutionary France and Napoleonic France both attempted to control the colony. The reasoning is quite simple: Sugar. This one cash crop accounted for the majority of the agricultural production on the island and it served as the primary source of income for the island, which meant that the French government was making quite a killing through their possession of the island.

Jamaica is in a similar position regarding its role within the British Empire: It's a small island colony that produces a cash crop that earns a decent amount of revenue for the government, which means that the government would be willing to put quite a lot of time and resources into retaking the island from the rebelling slaves. Now, if the American Revolution were to happen a few years earlier, at a time when the British are attempting to retake Jamaica, that could serve as the means to distract the British government from retaking the island from the slaves.
 
After the failed attempt to retake Haiti in 1802-1803, the French were never able to successfully reclaim the island, although the restored French monarchy continued to claim the island, and made attempts to take the island without resorting to force. Haiti remained in diplomatic limbo and de facto isolation following the rebellion, basically due to the actions of their leadership following the ousting of the French. This gave France a golden opportunity, as they were able to blackmail the Haitians, exchanging a hefty sum of cash in exchange for diplomatic recognition and acceptance of the de facto independence of Haiti. Haiti was unable to pay off the French, requiring loans from foreign banks, which essentially extorted the Haitian government with interest rates.(...)

Jamaica is in a similar position regarding its role within the British Empire: It's a small island colony that produces a cash crop that earns a decent amount of revenue for the government, which means that the government would be willing to put quite a lot of time and resources into retaking the island from the rebelling slaves. Now, if the American Revolution were to happen a few years earlier, at a time when the British are attempting to retake Jamaica, that could serve as the means to distract the British government from retaking the island from the slaves.

That was my question, actually. Why exactly France opter for a "peaceful" (i.e. blackmailing) approach instead of sending another expedition of French soldiers to wrestle back the island? I realize they were exhausted by the Napoleonic Wars, but by the 1840s, for example, they could very well have done it. If I recall correctly, the Haitian government was even divided at the time, it might facilitate a reconquest.

I agree completely with you: if Jamaica succeeds in a revolt, it would be a matter of time before the British came back to reconquer the island. With some luck, perhaps the Jamaicans get a more "friendly" arrangement with the British Crown: instead of a complete recolonization with a white-minority upperclass, Britain gets satisfied with a protectorate, some military and naval facilities, allowing some measure of self-government for the Jamaicans (which I highly doubt, considering that 19th Century Britain showed little sensibility towards its Irish and South African subjects...).
 
Top