Famous Sea Fights, from Salamis to Tsu-ShimaAtteridge, A. Hilliard (Andrew Hilliard)
History
Famous Sea Fights, from Salamis to Tsu-Shima
Atteridge, A. Hilliard (Andrew Hilliard)
Naval battles
It was Sunday morning, 31 July, according to the Spanish reckoning, the
21st according to the Old Style still used in England. It was a sunny day,
with just enough wind to help the nimble, seaworthy English ships in their
guerilla tactics. Howard's policy was to take full advantage of the three
factors that were on his side in the solution of the problem, better
seamanship in his crews, better gunnery, and handier ships. To close with
and grapple in the fashion of earlier naval battles would have been to risk
being crushed by superior numbers. His policy was to hang upon the flank or
rear of the Armada, close in and try to cripple one or more ships by
artillery fire, slip away if the enemy turned upon him, come on again as
they gave up the attempt to close, and he was ready all the time to swoop
down upon and capture any ship that might be detached from her consorts. At
the time arm-chair critics on shore found fault with what they considered
the half-hearted conduct of the admiral, and the Queen's Council inquired
why it was that none of the Spanish ships had been boarded. Sir Walter
Raleigh, who, as Professor Laughton notes, "must have often talked with
Howard, and Drake, and Hawkins, while the business was fresh in their
memories," thus explains and defends the admiral's conduct:--[10]
"Certainly, he that will happily perform a fight at sea must
believe that there is more belonging to a good man of war upon
the waters than great daring, and must know that there is a
great deal of difference between fighting loose or at large and
grappling. To clap ships together without consideration belongs
rather to a madman than to a man of war; for by such an ignorant
bravery was Peter Strozzi lost at the Azores, when he fought
against the Marquis of Santa Cruz. In like sort had the Lord
Charles Howard, Admiral of England, been lost in the year 1588,
if he had not been better advised than a great many malignant
fools were, that found fault with his demeanour. The Spaniards
had an army aboard them, and he had none; they had more ships
than he had, and of higher building and charging; so that, had
he entangled himself with those great and powerful vessels, he
had greatly endangered this kingdom of England. For twenty men
upon the defences are equal to a hundred that board and enter;
whereas then, contrariwise, the Spaniards had a hundred for
twenty of ours, to defend themselves withal. But our admiral
knew his advantage and held it; which had he not done, he had
not been worthy to have held his head."
[10] "Historie of the World," edit. 1736, ii, 565, quoted by
Professor Laughton, "State Papers relating to the Defeat of the
Spanish Armada," vol. i, Introduction, p. lxvi.
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