Could the Brits Have Won the American Revolution?

Another look at what might have been had key people not been incompetent...

In 1775 the United Kingdom ended up with a violent rebellion in their American colonies and by 1776 those colonies had openly declared independence.  Historically, most revolts and rebellions don’t succeed, but this one would with at least some minor implications for the course of human history in the centuries following.  For our counterfactual today…could the Brits have won the American Revolution (in which case it wouldn’t have been called that, of course) and what would the implications have been for history?

I generally agree with Barbara Tuchman’s conclusion that the best way for the British to have won the American Revolution would have been never to have fought it in the first place.  What she meant by this was that the UK should have taken a somewhat more conciliatory approach to the colonists’ concerns and found positive directions for compromise rather than taking the punitive approach they actually did. 

Wars were expensive then as they are now and after the 7 Years War (or French and Indian War as it was called in the colonies), the UK was heavily in debt despite winning that war.  These debts were increased by stationing troops in the colonies, ostensibly to protect them from other European powers and the Indian tribes, but progressively to manage the colonies themselves and prevent the colonists from expanding West, which they wanted to do.  Prior to this, the Brits hadn’t maintained a heavy permanent military presence in the colonies. 

The Brits figured it made sense to pass the costs on to the colonists in the form of heavier taxes.  The colonists didn’t really want the troops in the first place and, understandably, resented also having to pay for them. The Brits treated the colonists like a stubborn child who needed spanking and the recipe for war was born.

It’s worth noting that the belief that slavery was a key facet of the Revolutionary War is a fiction created in modern times during our 2020 era race panic.  Abolition hadn’t gained momentum yet in the UK (slavery would be abolished in 1833, with the trade of slaves ended earlier in 1807), and the initial instigators of the Revolution were in New England, where slavery was less critical to the economy than in the south. 

The Brits went into the war with major disadvantages.  Their army, although one of the best in the world, was small, too small to comprehensively hold significant territory in the American Colonies.  Communication between the army in America and the UK Parliament was understandably slow given the speed of transatlantic communication at the time.  Communication was also poor with the British Navy, which found itself stretched once the French entered the war, and between British commanders in the field.

Historically, the British often had good luck with battlefield commanders such as James Wolfe during the French and Indian War just prior and the Duke of Wellington during the Napoleonic Wars just after.  But their luck ran out on them during the Revolutionary War with their leadership often sluggish and lacking initiative, with significant strife and jealousy among the commanders themselves.  As such, coordination between leaders was often poor.  Probably the best British general was Charles Cornwallis, who showed some real initiative and tactical skill, but was poorly supported by fellow commanders.  That Cornwallis is both the best British general of the war and most famous for losing the entire war given his surrender at Yorktown tells you all you need to know about British leadership.

Unfortunately, the British had a poor system for promoting good leadership.  Officer commissions were bought, limiting them to higher social classes, and often promoted regardless of actual skill or merit. 

My perspective is that the British basically lost the war in 1777 at the Battle of Saratoga which resulted in the French entering the war.  The French played a big role both in stressing the British Navy, and training the American troops so they were a more professional force.  So, if 1777 is a pivotal year, what could the Brits have done to win the war?

·         Don’t fight the Battle of Saratoga.  Ok, this one is obvious hindsight bias, but the Saratoga Campaign was a shitshow of poor communication and coordination between British commanders.  Conceived as a three-pronged attack to separate New England from the other colonies, it was very ambitious given the poor communication and logistics available at the time.  Expecting key generals John Burgoyne and William Howe to get along was unrealistic and, sure enough, Howe essentially abandoned Burgoyne to his fate. The Brits should have stuck to simpler strategic plans.

·         More initiative in pursuing Washington’s Army.  One of the key factors in the American Revolution was Washington’s remarkable ability to keep the Continental Army in the field despite losses and poor conditions.  Certainly, there were other American armies and guerilla forces, but the Continental Army was symbolically essential.  I tend to view Washington’s critical virtue less as a tactical or strategic genius and more his simple determination and ability to inspire his troops even in the face of defeat and hardship.  Unfortunately, the Brits had a habit of failing to press their advantages, letting Washington and his army escape and survive.  The famous 1776 Battle of Trenton is perhaps a prime example of this.  The Brits were on the verge of destroying the Continental Army but let them escape.  While the Brits settled in for a long winter, the Americans seized the initiative securing a surprise victory over the British Hessian mercenaries at Trenton on the day after Christmas when the latter were basically drunk and asleep. 

·         Better generals. As noted above, the Brits really weren’t lucky with generals and had a habit of sticking with underperforming generals like William Howe for longer than they should have.  The British government should have worked harder to promote aggressive, competent generals. 

·         The Royal Navy should have prioritized North America.  The absence of the British Navy at Yorktown contributed to Cornwallis’ defeat¹.  The Navy actually started with a good commander, Richard Howe (brother of William, the general), but he became sidelined with both medical issues and UK politics.  To be fair, the task before the Royal Navy was impossible, but prioritizing the American coast could have meant defeating the insurgency, then pivoting to recovering whatever colonies might have been lost to the French and Spanish in the Caribbean once the American Revolution had been won for the British.  In other words, the Navy should have abandoned the Caribbean for a bit, to focus more exclusively on North America.

·         More Benedict Arnolds.  Perhaps the crowning achievement of the British during the American Revolution was turning the American General Benedict Arnold to their cause.  Although aspects of the plan failed, the treason of Arnold was a major morale blow to the Americans.  Had the Brits managed to turn more disaffected American commanders, they could have sown more chaos and distrust among the American ranks. 

Basically, for the Brits, the Revolutionary War was a blundering, uncoordinated affair.  They needed better leadership, more aggressive initiative, and the ability to make hard choices about where to prioritize the Royal Navy.  So, what would history have looked like had the British won?

Very likely, the US would have evolved like a bigger Canada.  The big winners of this alternative history would have been the African slaves, who would have been emancipated thirty years earlier in the American south (though it’s possible this would have kicked off yet another revolt, though probably limited to the southern colonies).  The wars of conquest across the American west would have proceeded more slowly, albeit the outcome would have been the same, as in Canada.  Immigration to the American colonies would have been less than occurred in real life, leading to a smaller, less influential America.  The emergence of an independent America probably would have been on a parliamentary system similar to Canada, with a constitutional monarchy based on the British monarch.  Very likely there would be no real distinction between Canada and America.

On the downside, the World Wars still likely would have happened…or at least WWI.  The ability of North America to help the British side would have been greatly reduced, vastly increasing the probability of a German victory in WWI (and certainly in WWII had that occurred).  The vast cultural and technological revolution fueled by the United States in the 20^th century would never have happened…technological progress would have continued apace, to be sure, but not with the swift tempo that it did in the real timeline. 

Overall, losing the American Revolution was probably good for the United Kingdom, unexpectedly producing what would become a powerful and loyal ally.  So…I’d love to hear from you…how do you think the Brits could have won the Revolutionary War?

1. TBF they did try to support Cornwallis but embarassingly lost to the French Navy at the Battle of the Capes.