WI: Successful 1778 Canadian Invasion

TinyTartar

Banned
In OTL, we are aware that there were plans after the Battle of Saratoga to follow up with another invasion of Canada. Logistically speaking, this was not possible until spring/summer of the next year because of the needs of the Southern Army and reform of the quartermasters department. There were plans for Washington to send the Marquis de Lafayette to Albany to take command of the Northern Department and proceed up Lake Champlain to make a go at Montreal.

This invasion never got off the ground, however, as miscommunication in levying militia again as well as logistical failures and a lack of will by the state of New York to support the army now that it was not under existential threat anymore from the North made it so Lafayette returned to the Hudson Highlands in frustration, and the Northern Army was instead spit up, with some troops sent south to Washington's army on the Hudson while the rest of the regulars were commanded by Sullivan and campaigned against the Iroquois for the next year and drove them from New York.

But what if the invasion actually got off of its feet? Do you think it would have more success than the last one? Would Lafayette's French origin make any difference with getting the native population to support the Americans a bit more?
 
If american invasion under Lafayette there is, I wonder why France couldn't just take its colony back, while giving anything south of the great lake to there new allies.
 
Logistically, this was flatly impossible in 1778 without major butterflies.

The British had 10,000 soldiers in Canada and the land defended itself. Most of the French inhabitants by this time had rejected the American colonies and would not have assisted in any way.

There is no way that sufficient quantities of soldiers, resources, supplies or money, even with French assitance, could have been available for an American invasion of Quebec via upstate New York unless there were MAJOR changes to history. Washington was struggling to keep enough soldiers around to keep Clinton off the New York/New Jersey mainland (the Philadelphia Campaign did not go well, you recall. Imagine Washington with 10,000 fewer soldiers).

The best shot would be early French and/or Spanish involvement that bleeds British resources away so they have fewer soldiers on the mainland. Even then, France would be far more likely to conquer Quebec than America.

It is difficult to control the region without control of the seas. France could do that on occasion. They would also command more support from the Canadiens.

Maybe if the "Great reinforcement" of 1776 that arrived with 25,000 men were to be wiped out by a hurricane a al the "Divine Wind" of Kama Kazi, their might be a chance the US may try something. Even then, Nova Scotia might be a more practical early target.
 
Logistically, this was flatly impossible in 1778 without major butterflies.

The British had 10,000 soldiers in Canada and the land defended itself. Most of the French inhabitants by this time had rejected the American colonies and would not have assisted in any way.

Where's the 10,000 number from? We had a thread the other day where someone argued that Canada was basically undefended.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Where's the 10,000 number from? We had a thread the other day where someone argued that Canada was basically undefended.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Canada_(1775)#Reinforcements_arrive_at_Quebec_City



Of the 50,000 troops that Britain raised in 1776, nearly one third came from a handful of these principalities; the number of troops from Hesse-Cassel and Hesse-Hanau caused them to be widely referred to as Hessians.[74] Of these 50,000, about 11,000 were destined for service in Quebec.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Canada_(1775)#Reinforcements_arrive_at_Quebec_City



Of the 50,000 troops that Britain raised in 1776, nearly one third came from a handful of these principalities; the number of troops from Hesse-Cassel and Hesse-Hanau caused them to be widely referred to as Hessians.[74] Of these 50,000, about 11,000 were destined for service in Quebec.

I don't see how that number indicates 10,000 British troops in Canada. If there truly were 10,000 British troops in Canada, they would have made another attempt at invading Upstate New York and seizing Albany.

Remember, Burgoyne lost almost 8500 men in the Saratoga campaign, his entire command aside from a few companies of men left at Ticonderoga who scampered back north after Burgoyne's surrender. St. Leger lost almost half of his force due to desertion.

The British did not have all that much left in Canada aside from the Provincial Canadian units who did not go south with Burgoyne, as well as the garrisons of Quebec and Montreal. The army sent in 1776 was the only reinforcements Canada received until 1781, and Burgoyne's army was promptly destroyed when it marched south. While the British had a substantial force at Halifax, almost 3500 men, who probably could have been brought over to Quebec, the truth of the matter is that the only British efforts post-Saratoga were Loyalist and Indian raids on the frontier that accomplished little besides wiping out groups of civilians and taking Sullivan away from the main army for a few months. There is no way that they would have had 10,000 men in Canada. They didn't even devote 10,000 men to the Southern Campaign.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
I don't see how that number indicates 10,000 British troops in Canada. If there truly were 10,000 British troops in Canada, they would have made another attempt at invading Upstate New York and seizing Albany.

Remember, Burgoyne lost almost 8500 men in the Saratoga campaign, his entire command aside from a few companies of men left at Ticonderoga who scampered back north after Burgoyne's surrender. St. Leger lost almost half of his force due to desertion.

The British did not have all that much left in Canada aside from the Provincial Canadian units who did not go south with Burgoyne, as well as the garrisons of Quebec and Montreal. The army sent in 1776 was the only reinforcements Canada received until 1781, and Burgoyne's army was promptly destroyed when it marched south. While the British had a substantial force at Halifax, almost 3500 men, who probably could have been brought over to Quebec, the truth of the matter is that the only British efforts post-Saratoga were Loyalist and Indian raids on the frontier that accomplished little besides wiping out groups of civilians and taking Sullivan away from the main army for a few months. There is no way that they would have had 10,000 men in Canada. They didn't even devote 10,000 men to the Southern Campaign.
I assume it's where the number came from, anyway.


I know the Great Reinforcement was 50,000 men - do we know where they all ended up by 1778? If not even 10,000 of them were in the South, and about 10,000 went to Quebec, that leaves 30,000...
 
I assume it's where the number came from, anyway.


I know the Great Reinforcement was 50,000 men - do we know where they all ended up by 1778? If not even 10,000 of them were in the South, and about 10,000 went to Quebec, that leaves 30,000...

All over the world, by this time France had declared war and Spain was brink of declaring war, Britain had to reinforce itself across the world. Historians weren't kidding when they say that France and Spain tied down lots of British troops.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
I assume it's where the number came from, anyway.


I know the Great Reinforcement was 50,000 men - do we know where they all ended up by 1778? If not even 10,000 of them were in the South, and about 10,000 went to Quebec, that leaves 30,000...

Clinton's army in New York was a pretty sizeable force, ranging from 15,000 to 20,000 men at any one point after Philadelphia was evacuated.

Quite a few thousand British troops were in Florida, Louisiana, and most importantly, the Caribbean, because of the French entry into the war. Gibraltar was also a big manpower suck.

But the great reinforcement was only 50,000 men on paper, and it was scattered around the empire as well to free up more British troops to go into America. Too many Hessians would complicate political objectives, as their use was highly unpopular, even with staunch Tories. The Hessian units also suffered from massive desertion problems. Keep in mind that many of them came from a harsh semi-feudal existence in Germany and knew of little other than cruelty due to recruitment methods of the time, as the rank and file were not much more than war serfs. The culture shock did not go well at all.

The Canadian command was for almost the entire war, neglected and forgotten. Burgoyne's effort was really the only exception. Guy Carleton was in command most of the time, and was sort of a cautious and poor general only kept around for his popularity among the civilian population of Canada. The actual war effort was led post Saratoga by the Loyalist Walter Butler, and he did little except raid every now and then, as it was all his manpower allowed him to do.


Gates thought an invasion of Canada was possible right after Saratoga, and he may have been right given how demoralized the British were in the entire theatre, but Washington needed men outside Philadelphia and it did not come to fruition, as well as the prospects of a Canadian winter.

I am of the opinion that if the Americans could get all the way up to Quebec in 1775 with a small, poorly armed and trained militia force, they could do that and much more in 1778 with a well led and well trained force of regulars that should be at least 10000 men strong if the governments of New England's states allow Lafayette what he wanted, which was for the Eastern Department to send most of its force to Albany to join him and the Northern Department, as well as get as much militia with him as possible.

The biggest challenge would be logistics, of course. Going the Lake Champlain route however would ameliorate this, and with Greene's reforms coming into effect, I think it would be possible to carry out such an invasion if given the proper support.
 
Would A 1778 Canada campaign replace the Rhode Island campaign of 1778.

I do not think that the Patriots could capture both Montreal and Quebec.

I do think that they could capture Fort Saint Jean again as well as Fort Niagara and make a defense of the Richelieu River. Basically, the Patriots would have everything west of the Richelieu and the British everything east.

With these two forts, Fort Detroit may be weakened and vulnerable as well to an attack by Clarke.

In the treaty of alliance, the French gave up claims of Quebec to the Americans. So there is no competing among the allies. Just that the French are going to be less likely to aid.

Where Lafayette comes in is that he made good in roads with the Oneidas. He may have been able to recruit more tribes as well. In the long run, this may have effected American policy towards Indians, could have been more inclusive.

If the Patriots are able to hold a portion of Quebec, the Montreal portion, Lafayette could be used to smooth relations with the habitants, heal some of the friction caused by David Wooster.

At the peace table, would the Patriots get Quebec, would it remain British or would it be independent? Would the British maintain their portion with Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and the Patriots get what they have occupied? Those are good questions. I think that the Pats would get all of Quebec and southern Ontario.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
Would A 1778 Canada campaign replace the Rhode Island campaign of 1778.

Its possible, as there was evidence that Newport was undergoing evacuation preparation as early as December of 1777. The reason the Newport campaign was launched was only because there happened to be a French Fleet in the region and Sullivan wanted to take out those 6000 British troops before they could add to Clinton's strength in New York. The campaign actually could have had a chance at success had it degenerated into a siege, as French troops would have landed and the New England Militia would not have returned home.

Lafayette wanted Sullivan to take almost all of his troops besides the ones from Rhode Island who would keep an eye on Pigot's garrison and march them to Albany to join the mostly New York force that comprised the Northern Department, along with taking along all the militia he could raise. The campaign would have to begin in spring to avoid the Canadian winter, so yes, this campaign would replace the attempt to seize Newport. That might mean the French Fleet go to the St. Lawrence River instead if they arrive at a similar point assuming the campaign is successful enough to push that far north quickly enough, which I think it would be if the army departed from Ticonderoga as early as May.
 
Top