WI: Pickering cuts off the British Retreat

Redhand

Banned
At a crucial juncture in the Battle of Lexington and Concord, a substantial Massachusetts Militia force from Salem and Marblehead under Colonel Timothy Pickering arrived in the vicinity and had an opportunity to block Lord Percy's route into Charlestown and safety by seizing the road over the neck of the peninsula. He was later accused of not doing so due to his own opinions about a peaceful resolution of the conflict. What if he had moved with more pace and cut off the retreat? Would the expedition be annihilated? Would this allow for a storming of Boston?
 

TFSmith121

Banned
It is a good what if;

At a crucial juncture in the Battle of Lexington and Concord, a substantial Massachusetts Militia force from Salem and Marblehead under Colonel Timothy Pickering arrived in the vicinity and had an opportunity to block Lord Percy's route into Charlestown and safety by seizing the road over the neck of the peninsula. He was later accused of not doing so due to his own opinions about a peaceful resolution of the conflict. What if he had moved with more pace and cut off the retreat? Would the expedition be annihilated? Would this allow for a storming of Boston?

From what I've read, there was certainly a possibility to cause a lot more casualties to the British column on the retreat than even what occurred historically; given the fatigue factor and ammunition, it's probably an even bet as to whether the British would be able to crash through a blocking force, disperse, surrender, or all of the above.

I don't know how much of a garrison the British had left in Boston, and how much naval support they had; likewise, given the general ad hoc nature of the American force, hard to see who would have had the authority to order an immediate assault. Presumably Warren, but I'd expect he'd need at least some of the artillery from Ticonderoga.

If the initial battle/campaign of the conflict turns into an outright British defeat - as opposed to a withdrawal - then one can only think there might be even less willingness by St. Germain or whoever to mobilize and start sending expeditionary forces 3,000 miles across the Atlantic.

Possible ripples could run from a negotiated settlement in 1775 to a rougher war for the British if they prolong the conflict to less of a sense of shared nationhood among the Americans and balkanization to an absolute collapse of British control over all the thirteen colonies, plus the Canadas and maritimes as an incipient confederacy, with what all the above means to the future of North America; push it far enough, and there's the question of Ireland and Scotland, which if it leads to independence, has all sorts of ripples in Europe...

It is certainly an interesting potential point of departure...

Best,
 
Last edited:

Redhand

Banned
@TFSmith121
The garrison of Boston wasn't big at this point; reinforcements were later sent to beef it up but it wasnt more than a few thousand men, maybe around 4,000 at the time of the battle. If the expedition is wiped out, that means all of their elite grenadier and light infantry companies are gone, which really hampers the British ability to fight open battles while severely outnumbered, which they would be as 15,000 New Englanders were in the area in just a few days.

As far as commanders go, Warren would help with oranization and be the inspiration for the army as he commanded a lot of political respect, but likely Artemas Ward who assumed command OTL or even more likely Israel Putnam who was an experienced soldier and somewhat of a Davy Crockett figure would take control if the town was to be assaulted, provided colonial loyalties don't fracture the entire army. Nathanael Greene was unfortunately irrelevant at this point in time.

Boston Neck couldn't be assaulted head on as it was heavily fortified and Charlestown was untenable with artillery in the city, but with such a disparity in numbers, an amphibious assault that cuts off the neck like what Washington invisioned OTL could be doable as the navy would have trouble interfering. This however would take a lot of command and control that the Colonial army lacked at this point in time.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
@TFSmith121
The garrison of Boston wasn't big at this point; reinforcements were later sent to beef it up but it wasnt more than a few thousand men, maybe around 4,000 at the time of the battle. If the expedition is wiped out, that means all of their elite grenadier and light infantry companies are gone, which really hampers the British ability to fight open battles while severely outnumbered, which they would be as 15,000 New Englanders were in the area in just a few days.

As far as commanders go, Warren would help with oranization and be the inspiration for the army as he commanded a lot of political respect, but likely Artemas Ward who assumed command OTL or even more likely Israel Putnam who was an experienced soldier and somewhat of a Davy Crockett figure would take control if the town was to be assaulted, provided colonial loyalties don't fracture the entire army. Nathanael Greene was unfortunately irrelevant at this point in time.

Boston Neck couldn't be assaulted head on as it was heavily fortified and Charlestown was untenable with artillery in the city, but with such a disparity in numbers, an amphibious assault that cuts off the neck like what Washington invisioned OTL could be doable as the navy would have trouble interfering. This however would take a lot of command and control that the Colonial army lacked at this point in time.


Interesting points; this simplest takeway is you have an intriguing point of departure, and it is early enough you could take it dozen different ways, if you wish...

Best,
 
It wouldn't change anything at all politically at that point in the conflict; the British would be even more eager to get reinforcements across, but a victory like that as the very first battle could really kick-start the revolution and perhaps throw it into even higher gear. I'm not really seeing it as the most fruitful of PODs, though, I think it would create an immediate result much like OTL, only more so.
 

Redhand

Banned
It wouldn't change anything at all politically at that point in the conflict; the British would be even more eager to get reinforcements across, but a victory like that as the very first battle could really kick-start the revolution and perhaps throw it into even higher gear. I'm not really seeing it as the most fruitful of PODs, though, I think it would create an immediate result much like OTL, only more so.

I think reinforcements were already on their way as Gage asked for 20,000 men (which was ridiculous as there were only 12,000 in Britain at the time).

You're probably right that the political fallout wouldn't really be different; although if there might not be that many British reports to contradict the colonial account of atrocities inflicted on civilians on the retreat as the entire force would be captured or killed.

The military situation is where I see room for significant changes to OTL as the British force in Boston would be in some danger without their flank companies and a substantial amount of their force.
 
At a crucial juncture in the Battle of Lexington and Concord, a substantial Massachusetts Militia force from Salem and Marblehead under Colonel Timothy Pickering arrived in the vicinity and had an opportunity to block Lord Percy's route into Charlestown and safety by seizing the road over the neck of the peninsula. He was later accused of not doing so due to his own opinions about a peaceful resolution of the conflict. What if he had moved with more pace and cut off the retreat? Would the expedition be annihilated? Would this allow for a storming of Boston?

British? I didn't think things were referred to as British until 1801?
 
Top