WI: Wellesley Killed In India in 1803

While crossing the Kaitna River in 1803, Arthur Wellesley was early killed when an enemy artillery barrage decimated his column, and a cannonball decapitated his orderly, who was riding just behind Wellesly at mid-channel.

So what if Wellesley, instead of his orderly, was killed by the cannonball, and the British lose the Battle of Assaye, where they were outnumbered six to one? What effect does this have on the British in India, and in the Napoleonic Wars in general?
 
While crossing the Kaitna River in 1803, Arthur Wellesley was early killed when an enemy artillery barrage decimated his column, and a cannonball decapitated his orderly, who was riding just behind Wellesly at mid-channel.

So what if Wellesley, instead of his orderly, was killed by the cannonball, and the British lose the Battle of Assaye, where they were outnumbered six to one? What effect does this have on the British in India, and in the Napoleonic Wars in general?

slydessertfox

Could be very messy. Britain is still likely to end up dominating India because its already the most powerful force in India and the region is too wealthy. [At least unless it suffers a serious defeat in the Napoleonic Wars but that is unlikely].

In Europe its difficult to tell how the war would have gone without Wellesley. If Britain was lucky we might get compensation with Moore surviving instead. Otherwise I'm not sure if anyone else could have been as successful as Wellesley and some possibly candidates for the role might have been much worse. Possibly Craufurd might have been the best option? On the other hand the French have a pretty hopeless position once the rebellion starts and its in Britain's interests to support it and help defend Portugal.

The other thing of course would be what happened after the war. Would any general have Wellesley's political influence post-war?

Steve
 
If Wellesley dies in 1803, the peninsular campaign is going to be very different and much shorter. No Torres Vedras fortifications, ... etc.
 
slydessertfox

Could be very messy. Britain is still likely to end up dominating India because its already the most powerful force in India and the region is too wealthy. [At least unless it suffers a serious defeat in the Napoleonic Wars but that is unlikely].

In Europe its difficult to tell how the war would have gone without Wellesley. If Britain was lucky we might get compensation with Moore surviving instead. Otherwise I'm not sure if anyone else could have been as successful as Wellesley and some possibly candidates for the role might have been much worse. Possibly Craufurd might have been the best option? On the other hand the French have a pretty hopeless position once the rebellion starts and its in Britain's interests to support it and help defend Portugal.

The other thing of course would be what happened after the war. Would any general have Wellesley's political influence post-war?

Steve
Hmm...interesting. I partially agree with Matteo, the peninsular war could
be shorter, but I don't know enough about it to really take a side.
 

katchen

Banned
France's position in Spain and Portugal may be hopeless when the rebellion gets going, but if the rebels defeat Napoleon's armies in Iberia by themselves as opposed to being helped significantly by British forces, will we see a restorations in Iberia or will the rebels choose their own governments and if so, how will that butterfly Latin America and the rest of Europe after Napoleon is defeated? Will the King of Portugal stay in Brazil and if so will all of the Portuguese Empire including Goa and Macao become the Brazilian Empire?
 
The rebels won't contain and then roll back France's armies in Spain if they have no Wellington to lead the British forces in Portugal and Spain.

Wellington was a great strategist and a key asset for the brits.

Without Wellington, it is highly probable that there will be no more organised spanish and english armies in the peninsula by 1810/1811.
 
Top