WI: Lord Dunmore's slave rebellion extends in 1775

Early in the American Revolutionary War, Virginia Royal Governor Lord Dunmore encouraged all slaves to rebel against any seditious masters, promising freedom in exhange.

He received an enthousiastic response but lacked resources to arm them. Virginia's colonial forces ejected the collection of Redcoats, Loyalists and freedmen without overly much of a problem in 1775.

Though tens of thousands of slaves used the Revolution as an opportunity to escape, many serving the British in some capacity, the services of the black population was never fully tapped for fear of alienating the Loyalist white population.

What if the Virginia insurgancy continued with a low level guerilla war that lasted the entirity of the Revolution?

Even with an American victory, how would this affect the development of the new nation and the racial relations?
 
If it's possible potentially a worse slavery, and race relations in general. You no longer have people as only considered objects, but a potential fifth column if it's either an American victory or defeat.

A big question is what happens to the freed slaves, are they given land and freedom or do they get shafted?
 
If it's possible potentially a worse slavery, and race relations in general. You no longer have people as only considered objects, but a potential fifth column if it's either an American victory or defeat.

OTOH, maybe Laurens and Hamilton are able to get the United States to arm freed slaves as well. Let us set a country free!
 
War ends in 76 or 77 when the rather loyalist South turns fully against the British.

I'm not sure how much even losing the south would affect the war. They didn't give overly much in the way of troops or money.

Then Governor Thomas Jefferson was more concerned with slave revolts than sending men and material north.

I'm thinking the colonists still kick out the British from the south in 1775 but the slaves are armed and proceed to carry out a low level constant insuragency.

Would this make their position better or worse in the long run?

Only a small percentage of the south owned slaves. If the common folk are faced with this rebellion without any benefit to themselves would they turn against the aristocratic class and support manumission?

WOuld slavery continue but the nation outlaw the slave trade?

Would slavery become even more opporessive, akin to San Dominigue?
 
War ends in 76 or 77 when the rather loyalist South turns fully against the British.

The South wasn't really that loyalist; Virginia was a center of the Revolution, and even when the Southern colonies were invaded, the British never found loyalists outnumbering the patriots. It says a lot that the British couldn't guarantee the safety of loyalists in the south even with troops in the ground.
 

takerma

Banned
If insurgency is at all successful it will be put down in rivers of blood. If it is really successful then perhaps slaves would be viewed as a dangerous 5th column that new republic can not afford? Genocide and ban on importing new slaves? If you want to make it really dark.
 
If insurgency is at all successful it will be put down in rivers of blood. If it is really successful then perhaps slaves would be viewed as a dangerous 5th column that new republic can not afford? Genocide and ban on importing new slaves? If you want to make it really dark.

A ban on importing slaves was done OTL...

What people are ignoring in this thread is that the British used thousands of slaves in OTL, but this didn't lead to the rivers of blood people are describing.
 

takerma

Banned
A ban on importing slaves was done OTL...

What people are ignoring in this thread is that the British used thousands of slaves in OTL, but this didn't lead to the rivers of blood people are describing.

Didnt ban go into effect in beginning of 19th century? Insurgency has to be really successful and long lasting to get there. Tens of thousands of whites killed, whole regions depopulated. But I don't think you can create insurgency that is this successful.
 
Didnt ban go into effect in beginning of 19th century? Insurgency has to be really successful and long lasting to get there. Tens of thousands of whites killed, whole regions depopulated. But I don't think you can create insurgency that is this successful.

Why would it be an insurgency. It's a British army consisting of light infantry, with a core of Redcoats.
 
Top