Washington dies in 1755

i was sitting in History class yesterday and my prof was talking about how George Washington almost died three times in the French and Indian War. i was wondering, if he did die how would things have played out. the revalution isn't my strongest area of history.

Just some food for thought
 
Well when does he die?

If it's at Jumonville Glen, it might avert the colonial war that eventually turned into a world war.

If it's on the banks of the Monongahela, Braddock's army might be annihilated.

What was the third time?
 
OH, it says 1755, so -- the Monongahela?

I suspect the Seven Years War plays out largely the same. I'm not sure if Washington had any major role in the rest of the colonial morass.
 
i was sitting in History class yesterday and my prof was talking about how George Washington almost died three times in the French and Indian War. i was wondering, if he did die how would things have played out. the revalution isn't my strongest area of history.

Just some food for thought


Washingtons death may not have caused any major changes in the Seven Years War (French and Indian War). But it would have a devestating effect in the American Revolutionary War.
 
Washington's absence alone from the War of Independence/Revolutionary War would most likely have made little difference to the outcome. Of course, afterward there would have been a different first President - probably one more amiable, intelligent and diplomatically aware.
 
I suspect another person would have stepped into the shoes Washington wore as leader of the continental army during the American revolution. I dont know if that person would have done better or worse. Remember that war was really a long drawn out affair that the American forces won by merely tiring the British out and winning one big battle, Yorktown, by a fluke really.
 
I suspect another person would have stepped into the shoes Washington wore as leader of the continental army during the American revolution. I dont know if that person would have done better or worse. Remember that war was really a long drawn out affair that the American forces won by merely tiring the British out and winning one big battle, Yorktown, by a fluke really.
To some extent.

However, Washington, while not a genius military leader was competent as a general, was competent politically, was trusted, and was trustworthy. It is really not obvious WHO would fill his shoes, unless the butterflies throw someone different than OTL.

The very way his nomination as CinC happened - a southerner proposed by a northerner, gave his leadership a good start with support from a much broader base in the colonies than if New Englanders had pushed for a New England leader, similarly with NY, PA, VA and the south.

IIRC, the other 'obvious' candidate was Gates, who would have been a disaster.

Or you could have ended up with someone like Benedict Arnold, a decent enough general, but not someone you want to hand that much power to.


I suspect the ARW would have gone very differently, and much worse for the US, without George. There might not be a US (but multiple independent states).


Of course, with a PoD that early, it might be possible to butterfly the ARW into something that doesn't resemble OTL at all. Make it not happen or not a war or ...
 
Top