The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660-1783Mahan, A. T. (Alfred Thayer)
History
The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660-1783
Mahan, A. T. (Alfred Thayer)
Naval history, Modern; Sea-power
The wind was blowing toward the coast, which here trends nearly north
and south, and the allies were in an awkward position. They had first
to get under way, and they could not fall back to gain time or room to
establish their order. Most of the ships cut their cables, and the
English made sail on the starboard tack, heading about north-northwest,
a course which forced them soon to go about; whereas the French took
the other tack (Plate III., B). The battle began therefore by the
separation of the allied fleet. Ruyter sent one division to attack the
French, or rather to contain them; for these opponents exchanged only a
distant cannonade, although the Dutch, being to windward, had the
choice of closer action if they wished it. As their commander, Bankert,
was not censured, it may be supposed he acted under orders; and he was
certainly in command a year later, and acting with great judgment and
gallantry at the battle of the Texel. Meanwhile Ruyter fell furiously
upon the two English divisions, and apparently with superior forces;
for the English naval historians claim that the Dutch were in the
proportion of three to two.[47] If this can be accepted, it gives a
marked evidence of Ruyter's high qualities as a general officer, in
advance of any other who appears in this century.
[Illustration: Pl. III.]
The results of the battle, considered simply as an engagement, were
indecisive; both sides lost heavily, but the honors and the substantial
advantages all belonged to the Dutch, or rather to De Ruyter. He had
outgeneralled the allies by his apparent retreat, and then returning
had surprised them wholly unprepared. The false move by which the
English, two thirds of the whole, stood to the northward and westward,
while the other third, the French, went off to the east and south,
separated the allied fleet; Ruyter threw his whole force into the gap,
showing front to the French with a division probably smaller in
numbers, but which, from its position to windward, had the choice of
coming to close action or not, while with the remainder he fell in much
superior strength upon the English (Plate III., B). Paul Hoste says[48]
that Vice-Admiral d'Estrées, commanding the French, had taken measures
for tacking and breaking through the Dutch division opposed to him so
as to rejoin the Duke of York, the allied commander-in-chief. It may be
so, for D'Estrées was a very brave man, and not enough of a seaman to
appreciate the dangers of the attempt; but no such move was begun, and
both the English and Ruyter thought that the French rather avoided than
sought close action. Had D'Estrées, however, gone about, and attempted
to break through the line of experienced Dutchmen to windward of him
with the still raw seamen of France, the result would have been as
disastrous as that which overtook the Spanish admiral at the battle of
St. Vincent a hundred and twenty-five years later, when he tried to
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