PREFACE

Although the distinguished seamen, whose lives and professional

characteristics it is the object of this work to present in brief

summary, belonged to a service now foreign to that of the United States,

they have numerous and varied points of contact with America; most of

them very close, and in some instances of marked historical interest.

The older men, indeed, were during much of their careers our fellow

countrymen in the colonial period, and fought, some side by side with

our own people in this new world, others in distant scenes of the

widespread strife that characterized the middle of the eighteenth

century, the beginnings of "world politics;" when, in a quarrel purely

European in its origin, "black men," to use Macaulay's words, "fought on

the coast of Coromandel, and red men scalped each other by the great

lakes of North America." All, without exception, were actors in the

prolonged conflict that began in 1739 concerning the right of the ships

of Great Britain and her colonies to frequent the seas bordering the

American dominions of Spain; a conflict which, by gradual expansion,

drew in the continent of Europe, from Russia to France, spread thence to

the French possessions in India and North America, involved Spanish

Havana in the western hemisphere and Manila in the eastern, and finally

entailed the expulsion of France from our continent. Thence, by

inevitable sequence, issued the independence of the United States. The

contest, thus completed, covered forty-three years.

The four seniors of our series, Hawke, Rodney, Howe, and Jervis,

witnessed the whole of this momentous period, and served conspicuously,

some more, some less, according to their age and rank, during its

various stages. Hawke, indeed, was at the time of the American

Revolution too old to go to sea, but he did not die until October 16,

1781, three days before the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown, which

is commonly accepted as the closing incident of our struggle for

independence. On the other hand, the two younger men, Saumarez and

Pellew, though they had entered the navy before the American Revolution,

saw in it the beginnings of an active service which lasted to the end of

the Napoleonic wars, the most continuous and gigantic strife of modern

times. It was as the enemies of our cause that they first saw gunpowder

burned in anger.

Nor was it only amid the commonplaces of naval warfare that they then

gained their early experiences in America. Pellew in 1776, on Lake

Champlain, bore a brilliant part in one of the most decisive--though

among the least noted--campaigns of the Revolutionary contest; and a

year later, as leader of a small contingent of seamen, he shared the

fate of Burgoyne's army at Saratoga. In 1776 also, Saumarez had his part

in an engagement which ranks among the bloodiest recorded between ships

and forts, being on board the British flag-ship Bristol at the attack

upon Fort Moultrie, the naval analogue of Bunker Hill; for, in the one

of these actions as in the other, the great military lesson was the

resistant power against frontal attack of resolute marksmen, though

untrained to war, when fighting behind entrenchments,--a teaching

renewed at New Orleans, and emphasized in the recent South African War.

The well-earned honors of the comparatively raw colonials received

generous recognition at the time from their opponents, even in the midst

of the bitterness proverbially attendant upon family quarrels; but it is

only just to allow that their endurance found its counterpart in the

resolute and persistent valor of the assailants. In these two battles,

with which the War of Independence may be said fairly to have begun, by

land and by water, in the far North and in the far South, the men of the

same stock, whose ancestors there met face to face as foes, have now in

peace a common heritage of glory. If little of bitterness remains in the

recollections which those who are now fellow-citizens retain of the

struggle between the North and the South, within the American Republic,

we of two different nations, who yet share a common tongue and a common

tradition of liberty and law, may well forget the wrongs of the earlier

strife, and look only to the common steadfast courage with which each

side then bore its share in a civil conflict.

The professional lives of these men, therefore, touch history in many

points; not merely history generally, but American history specifically.

Nor is this contact professional only, devoid of personal tinge. Hawke

was closely connected by blood with the Maryland family of Bladen; that

having been his mother's maiden name, and Governor Bladen of the then

colony being his first cousin. Very much of his early life was spent

upon the American Station, largely in Boston. But those were the days of

Walpole's peace policy; and when the maritime war, which the national

outcry at last compelled, attained large dimensions, Hawke's already

demonstrated eminence as a naval leader naturally led to his employment

in European waters, where the more immediate dangers, if not the

greatest interests, of Great Britain were then felt to be. The universal

character, as well as the decisive issues of the opening struggle were

as yet but dimly foreseen. Rodney also had family ties with America,

though somewhat more remote. Cæsar Rodney, a signer of the Declaration

of Independence from Delaware, was of the same stock; their

great-grandfathers were brothers. It was from the marriage of his

ancestor with the daughter of a Sir Thomas Cæsar that the American

Rodney derived his otherwise singular name.

Howe, as far as known, had no relations on this side of the water; but

his elder brother, whom he succeeded in the title, was of all British

officers the one who most won from the colonial troops with whom he was

associated a personal affection, the memory of which has been

transmitted to us; while the admiral's own kindly attitude towards the

colonists, and his intimacy with Franklin, no less than his professional

ability, led to his being selected for the North American command at the

time when the home country had not yet lost all hope of a peaceable

solution of difficulties. To this the Howe tradition was doubtless

expected to contribute. Jervis, a man considerably younger than the

other three, by the accidents of his career came little into touch with

either the colonies or the colonists, whether before or during the

Revolutionary epoch; yet even he, by his intimate friendship with Wolfe,

and intercourse with his last days, is brought into close relation with

an event and a name indelibly associated with one of the great

landmarks--crises--in the history of the American Continent. Although

the issue of the strife depended, doubtless, upon deeper and more

far-reaching considerations, it is not too much to say that in the

heights of Quebec, and in the name of Wolfe, is signalized the downfall

of the French power in America. There was prefigured the ultimate

predominance of the traditions of the English-speaking races throughout

this continent, which in our own momentous period stands mediator

between the two ancient and contrasted civilizations of Europe and Asia,

that so long moved apart, but are now brought into close, if not

threatening, contact.

Interesting, however, as are the historical and social environments in

which their personalities played their part, it is as individual men,

and as conspicuous exemplars--types--of the varied characteristics which

go to the completeness of an adequate naval organization, that they are

here brought forward. Like other professions,--and especially like its

sister service, the Army,--the Navy tends to, and for efficiency

requires, specialization. Specialization, in turn, results most

satisfactorily from the free play of natural aptitudes; for aptitudes,

when strongly developed, find expression in inclination, and readily

seek their proper function in the body organic to which they belong.

Each of these distinguished officers, from this point of view, does not

stand for himself alone, but is an eminent exponent of a class; while

the class itself forms a member of a body which has many organs, no one

of which is independent of the other, but all contributive to the body's

welfare. Hence, while the effort has been made to present each in his

full individuality, with copious recourse to anecdote and illustrative

incident as far as available, both as a matter of general interest and

for accurate portrayal, special care has been added to bring out

occurrences and actions which convey the impression of that natural

character which led the man to take the place he did in the naval body,

to develop the professional function with which he is more particularly

identified; for personality underlies official character.

In this sense of the word, types are permanent; for such are not the

exclusive possession of any age or of any service, but are found and are

essential in every period and to every nation. Their functions are part

of the bed-rock of naval organization and of naval strategy, throughout

all time; and the particular instances here selected owe their special

cogency mainly to the fact that they are drawn from a naval era,

1739-1815, of exceptional activity and brilliancy.

There is, however, another sense in which an officer, or a man, may be

accurately called a type; a sense no less significant, but of more

limited and transient application. The tendency of a period,--especially

when one of marked transition,--its activities and its results, not

infrequently find expression in one or more historical characters. Such

types may perhaps more accurately be called personifications; the man or

men embodying, and in action realizing, ideas and processes of thought,

the progress of which is at the time united, but is afterwards

recognized as a general characteristic of the period. Between the

beginning and the end a great change is found to have been effected,

which naturally and conveniently is associated with the names of the

most conspicuous actors; although they are not the sole agents, but

simply the most eminent.

It is in this sense more particularly that Hawke and Rodney are

presented as types. It might even be said that they complement each

other and constitute together a single type; for, while both were men of

unusually strong personality, private as well as professional, and with

very marked traits of character, their great relation to naval advance

is that of men who by natural faculty detect and seize upon incipient

ideas, for which the time is ripe, and upon the practical realization of

which the healthful development of the profession depends. With these

two, and with them not so much contemporaneously as in close historical

sequence, is associated the distinctive evolution of naval warfare in

the eighteenth century; in their combined names is summed up the

improvement of system to which Nelson and his contemporaries fell heirs,

and to which Nelson, under the peculiar and exceptional circumstances

which made his opportunity, gave an extension that immortalized him. Of

Hawke and Rodney, therefore, it may be said that they are in their

profession types of that element of change, in virtue of which the

profession grows; whereas the other four, eminent as they were,

exemplify rather the conservative forces, the permanent features, in the

strength of which it exists, and in the absence of any one of which it

droops or succumbs. It does not, however, follow that the one of these

great men is the simple continuator of the other's work; rather it is

true that each contributed, in due succession of orderly development,

the factor of progress which his day demanded, and his personality

embodied.

It was not in the forecast of the writer, but in the process of

treatment he came to recognize that, like Hawke and Rodney, the four

others also by natural characteristics range themselves in

pairs,--presenting points of contrast, in deficiencies and in

excellencies, which group them together, not by similarity chiefly, but

as complementary. Howe and Jervis were both admirable general officers;

but the strength of the one lay in his tactical acquirements, that of

the other in strategic insight and breadth of outlook. The one was

easy-going and indulgent as a superior; the other conspicuous for

severity, and for the searchingness with which he carried the exactions

of discipline into the minute details of daily naval life. Saumarez and

Pellew, less fortunate, did not reach high command until the great days

of naval warfare in their period had yielded to the comparatively

uneventful occupation of girdling the enemy's coast with a system of

blockades, aimed primarily at the restriction of his commerce, and

incidentally at the repression of his navy, which made no effort to take

the sea on a large scale. Under these circumstances the functions of an

admiral were mainly administrative; and if Saumarez and Pellew

possessed eminent capacity as general officers on the battle-field, they

had not opportunity to prove it. The distinction of their careers

coincides with their tenure of subordinate positions in the organisms of

great fleets. With this in common, and differentiating them from Howe

and Jervis, the points of contrast are marked. Saumarez preferred the

ship-of-the-line, Pellew the frigate. The choice of the one led to the

duties of a division commander, that of the other to the comparative

independence of detached service, of the partisan officer. In the one,

love of the military side of his calling predominated; the other was,

before all, the seaman. The union of the two perfects professional

character.

The question may naturally be asked,--Why, among types of naval

officers, is there no mention, other than casual, of the name of Nelson?

The answer is simple. Among general officers, land and sea, the group to

which Nelson belongs defies exposition by a type, both because it is

small in aggregate numbers, and because the peculiar eminence of the

several members,--the eminence of genius,--so differentiates each from

his fellows that no one among them can be said to represent the others.

Each, in the supremacy of his achievement, stands alone,--alone, not

only regarded as towering above a brilliant surrounding of distinguished

followers, but alone even as contrasted with the other great ones who in

their own day had a like supremacy. Such do not in fact form a class,

because, though a certain community of ideas and principles may be

traced in their actions, their personalities and methods bear each the

stamp of originality in performance; and where originality is found,

classification ceases to apply. There is a company, it may be, but not a

class.

The last four biographies first appeared as contributions to the

"Atlantic Monthly," in 1893 and 1894. I desire to return to the

proprietors my thanks for their permission to republish. The original

treatment has been here considerably modified, as well as enlarged. I am

also under special obligation to Mr. Fleetwood Hugo Pellew, who gave me

the photograph of Lord Exmouth, with permission also to reproduce it. It

represents that great officer at the age most characteristic of his

particular professional distinction, as by me understood.

A T. MAHAN.

OCTOBER, 1901.

Types of Naval Officers, Drawn from the History of the British Navy · 第 3 / 25 题