The British fail at Seringapatnam, 1799. Effects on British India?

Mysore under the Haidar Ali dynasty (1761-1799) was one of British India's most implacable foes in the 18th century, fighting the East India Company to a stalemate as late as the 1780s through its innovative technological and administrative reforms (the Mysorean rockets, for instance, or its degree of centralization nearly unprecedented in India). But in the end, the kingdom paid for its resistance. Partially dismembered following the Third Anglo-Mysore War in 1792, it came to a short but bloody end in 1799, when its capital Seringapatnam was captured and sacked and its ruler, Tipu Sultan, killed. The story inspired quite a few Orientalist painters, such as Henry Singleton's ""The Last Effort and Fall of Tippoo Sultaun":
299px-Tipu_death.jpg


However, Seringapatnam's fall in 1799 was just as much luck as skill. The British had been attacking for more than three weeks, and when the city fell the besiegers had only three days' worth of supplies remaining. If Tipu Sultan had held out for just three more days, the British would have been forced to retreat. To be sure, by May 1799 the Mysorean army had been broken. But on the other hand, the Madras Presidency and many EIC directors thought of this Mysore war as a waste of money and resources - so it is not inconceivable that the British would not have allowed Tipu Sultan to survive in a larger rump Mysore than IOTL (compare Mysore in 1784 with Mysore in 1860), albeit with reduced power and as a subjugated monarch.

But the bigger ripple effect is on the Anglo-Maratha Wars. The easiness of Tipu Sultan's defeat convinced the British to take a more hard-line stance against the Marathas, directly contributing to the Second Anglo-Maratha War which conclusively ensured British hegemony across the Indian subcontinent. With a less conclusive and more drawn-out Fourth Anglo-Mysore War, Maratha power might well survive for longer. And that, of course, has its effects on the emerging Sikh kingdom, or on any confrontation between the English and the Burmese.
 
I, of course, come from a very Euro-centric point of view, but could they have lasted longer if Napoleon had managed to send them more supplies?

From what I remember, a big problem with Mysore is that they were allied to the French, or at least trying to and represented a big danger to the BEIC. Maybe Napoleon can send some troups from Egypt or la Réunion? Could that help?

The divergence would be very interesting as India would now have two European powers meddling in it (Portuguese don't count by this time) and it would be a major foothold for the French to come back there.
 
Maybe Napoleon can send some troups from Egypt or la Réunion?

In 1798 Tipu sent envoys to Mauritius. Although Malartic, the Governor of La Reunion, did not have men to spare at the time, he did send a letter to the sultan saying:
I am persuaded that they [the government in Paris] will send you as speedily possible the succors of men which you demand, and which you may require for the purpose of attacking your enemies, who are also the enemies of the French Republic.​
Up to his final defeat, Tipu was secretly carrying on correspondence with the French Republic generally with the idea that the French would somehow send forces to Porto Novo, who would cooperate with Tipu to conquer southeastern India. The British thought at the time that this was at least somewhat plausible and was a major reason they invaded Mysore. But on the other hand, I doubt French involvement could really save Mysore. Mysore had a numerical disadvantage by 1799, and I doubt Napoleon can send enough men to change this with British power in the Indian Ocean. And Indian warfare was just as technologically advanced as European war, so the French would have no new technology to teach the Indians either.
 
If you're willing to do an earlier PoD, make Louis XVI fully support Pigneau de Béhaine's expedition in Vietnam in 1789 rather than leaving the very final say to an Irish officer in Pondichéry.

With that, you'd get a much bigger force in the region and a stronger network of alliances. Ten years later, you'd get a) closer ports with Poulo Condor being French, b) veteran troups and boats around, c) possibility for Vietnamese troups coming to give a hand?

It would also mean that, with Poulo Condor, the French would be able to really put pressure on East Indies British networks, especially the road to China
 
Top