The British battle fleet, Vol. 1 (of 2) : $b its inception and growth throughout the centuries to the present dayJane, Fred T. (Frederick Thomas)
History
The British battle fleet, Vol. 1 (of 2) : $b its inception and growth throughout the centuries to the present day
Jane, Fred T. (Frederick Thomas)
Great Britain -- History, Naval; Great Britain. Royal Navy -- History; Warships -- Great Britain -- History
The battle is mainly of interest on account of Nelson’s part in it.
The Spaniards were sailing in no order whatever, the bulk of them
being in one irregular mass, the remainder in another. Jervis, in line
ahead, proposed to pass between the two divisions, and destroy the
larger before the smaller could beat up to assist them. The Spaniards,
however inefficient they may have been in other ways, saw through this
manœuvre, and their main body was preparing to join up astern of the
British, when Nelson, in the _Captain_, flung himself across them and
captured two ships by falling foul of them and boarding. Three other
ships were captured, the rest escaped. In this battle, as in those of
the year before, the same caution about following up the victory was
observed, and the age of the admiral concerned has again been produced
as the reason. But the thoughtful--taking the previous career of most
of those concerned into consideration--may suspect the existence of
some special secret orders about taking no risks, as yet unearthed
by any historian. The only really workable alternative is Napoleon’s
“destiny” theory already alluded to. Of the two, the secret order
hypothesis is the more practical. Into the whole of these victories not
properly followed up, it is also possible, though hardly probable, that
the mutinous state of the _personnel_ entered.
[Illustration: THE “FOUDROYANT” ONE OF NELSON’S OLD SHIPS.]
In the battle of Cape St. Vincent, the Spaniards had an enormous
four-decker, the _Santissima Trinidad_, of 130 guns. She was the first
ship engaged by Nelson, and was hammered by most of the others closely
engaged as well, but her size and power saved her from the fate of the
rest of the ships that were with her.
It is difficult even now to assess the exact situation of the mutineers
of 1797. The organised self-restraint of the Spithead Mutiny is hard
to understand, when we remember the heterogeneous origin of the crews.
“Jail or Navy” was an every-day offer to prisoners. Longshoremen,
riff-raff, pressed landsmen, thieves, murderers, smugglers, and a
few degraded officers, were the raw material of which the crews were
composed. They were stiffened with a proportion of professional
seamen, and it is these that must have leavened the mass, and kept the
jail-bird element in check.
Pay was bad, ship life close akin to prison life, discipline and
punishments alike brutal, and the food disgracefully bad. It was this
last that brought about the mutiny. There is an old saying to the
effect that you may ill-treat a sailor as you will, but if you ill-feed
him, trouble may be looked for! One or two isolated mutinies, like that
of the _Hermione_, were due to a captain’s brutality; but mainly and
mostly bad food and mutiny were closely linked.
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