A Short History of the Royal Navy, 1217 to 1688Hannay, David
History
A Short History of the Royal Navy, 1217 to 1688
Hannay, David
Great Britain. Royal Navy -- History
AUTHORITIES.--The Duke of York's "General Instructions" and "Orders,"
together with the "Oeconomy of the Navy Office," give us the form
and theory of the government of the Navy. The inestimable Pepys gives
the spirit and the manner of the execution. The Calendars of State
Papers supply the orders to officers abroad, and their reports.
Clarendon's memoirs of his own administration tell the history of the
outbreak of the war from the English side, while M. Pontalis sums up
the Dutch story with all the lucidity, thoroughness, and criticism of
the modern French historical school.
Three reigns of English kings stand out as of exceptional interest in
the history of the Royal Navy. King John's, for in it we first find
a fixed sea force, and the intelligent use of the power it supplies.
King Henry VIII. comes next, and to him belongs the credit of framing
a regular administration. In the reign of Charles II. the work of his
predecessors was completed. The government, or, to employ the phrase
of the time, the "Oeconomy," of the navy was finally established as
it was destined to remain. Succeeding rulers might have to fill up and
perfect, but, except in details, the navy became, under this king,
what it was destined to continue to be through a century and a half
of war and glory. The defects of Charles's character have, perhaps
justly, made posterity somewhat unfair to him. He took the base view
of his office, that it was an estate to be enjoyed. There is an almost
touching candour in his complaint to Clarendon that his subjects spoke
evilly of Barbara Palmer and her like, instead of imitating the French,
who had a becoming respect for the ladies whom the king delighted to
honour. To Charles it appeared to be a truth so manifest as to require
no demonstration that his kingdom was given him for his pleasure, and
that his subjects were to be expected to revere his amusements. In so
far Charles set a ruinous example, for his servants regarded their
offices as he did his crown. Yet the king was intelligent, knew what
ought to be done, was willing to give orders that it should be done,
and to approve of those who worked well for him. His fatal defect was
that he could never make that sacrifice of his ease which was necessary
if he was really to govern. Therefore, though many excellent measures
had his approval, they were commonly carried out detestably.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account