New York Times Current History: The European War, Vol. 8, Pt. 2, No. 1, July 1918Various
History
New York Times Current History: The European War, Vol. 8, Pt. 2, No. 1, July 1918
Various
World War, 1914-1918
There is only one thing certain in naval history, and that is that
every great sea fight--as to the circumstances of which we have
detailed information--has been criticised as indecisive and as not
fought in the way which it should have been. Ex-President Theodore
Roosevelt, whose fairness and accuracy as a naval historian have been
generally recognized, has said: "Every historian ought to feel a sense
of the most lively gratitude toward Nelson; in his various encounters
he never left any possible room for dispute as to which side had come
out first best." Unfortunately, this is going rather too far, for the
merits of every one of Nelson's battles have been disputed, and his way
of fighting each has been adversely criticised. This fate he shares
with the great De Ruyter and with less important men. Rodney and Lord
Howe, as commanders in general actions, were fiercely criticised. Lord
Hawke did not receive the customary recognition of his services until
seventeen years after the great battle of Quiberon Bay. Roosevelt
tells us that: "In every one of De Ruyter's last six battles each side
claimed the victory." If we had minute accounts of the talk that went
on in the gardens and porches of ancient Athens we should, without
doubt, learn that Salamis was far from being decisive and that, anyhow,
it ought to have been fought in a different way. It is just as well to
remember this whenever we are discussing a naval battle, whether of old
date or recent. Land battles have not been treated in quite the same
fashion. Their results have not been disputed so often, nor has the
manner in which they were fought been so often adversely criticised.
Perhaps we may account for this difference in the treatment of
conflicts on the two elements by noting the fact that naval historians
and critics of naval operations have but rarely been men of naval
experience, while the historians and critics of military operations
have usually been soldiers. There has, of course, been some conflict
of opinion as to the results of fighting on shore, as we can see on
comparing the communiques of the contending sides in the present war.
Even after allowing for the unprecedented mendacity of the German
authorities and the unprecedented gullibility of the German public
there is still some sign of an honest difference of opinion. The
difference is not due to lay or unprofessional ignorance.
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