Westie Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 I'm glad you posted this! I totally disagree with Mr. Ingram. Nelson's complete victory at the Nile was, in my opinion, largely possible because De Brueys had his ships anchored. If they would have been at sea, and the French would have been more mobile, I suspect that more of them would have been able to escape. I also think that he ignores the inherent problems that huge battle would have caused if it had been at sea. Here are some things to consider: 1. Nelson's ships were badly damaged during the Battle of the Nile. There is no reason to believe this would not have been the case if the battle had been fought at sea. How would Nelson have captured the transports with an incapacitated fleet? 2. The transports would most likely have sailed on, either back to Toulon (most likely) or to Alexandria during the battle. Nelson didn't have frigates to hound and pursue them, so how would he have caught up with them? It is worth referencing the Glorious First of June, where Howe won a victory over the French fleet, but allowed the vital grain convoy to get through to France. I think the same thing would have happened here. 3. I think the battle would have been harder for the British for two reasons. The first is that the French ships were faster and more maneuverable (in general), but the second (and more important) reason is that the French fleet would have been ready for battle. At the Nile, they were not. They did not expect to be engaged on the landward side (there were stored piled amongst those guns on some ships), they were undermanned because a large number of sailors were out scouring for provisions, and they started the battle with their captains frantically trying to get back to their ships after being aboard the flagship. I think that if the battle had been fought at sea, Nelson would still have achieved a victory, but one where he captured 3-4 ships, and the transports would have escaped back to France with Napoleon on board (along with his bevy of generals). While Napoleon would not have conquered Egypt, he'd be back in France with his army of some 40,000 trained veterans, ready to cause further mischief. Instead, that army ended up being decimated in Egypt and the Levant. Agreed. It is important to not that Edward Ingram is an expert on the British Raj and Empire (I have two or three of his books - worth a read) but he is not a military historian. He would probably be the first to acknowledge that this point of view assumes that the outcome would have been the same at sea, which tacticians will tell you is completely incorrect. In this case, Wiki quotes an "expert" outside of his field of expertise. 1
sandrewn Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 Agreed. It is important to not that Edward Ingram is an expert on the British Raj and Empire (I have two or three of his books - worth a read) but he is not a military historian. He would probably be the first to acknowledge that this point of view assumes that the outcome would have been the same at sea, which tacticians will tell you is completely incorrect. In this case, Wiki quotes an "expert" outside of his field of expertise. Westie I initiallly thought it would be you to jump all over my post, to my surprise it was Mark himself. Good to have you back. Sandrewn 1
Westie Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 Agreed. It is important to not that Edward Ingram is an expert on the British Raj and Empire (I have two or three of his books - worth a read) but he is not a military historian. He would probably be the first to acknowledge that this point of view assumes that the outcome would have been the same at sea, which tacticians will tell you is completely incorrect. In this case, Wiki quotes an "expert" outside of his field of expertise. Westie I initiallly thought it would be you to jump all over my post, to my surprise it was Mark himself. Good to have you back. Sandrewn Nah. I'm a nice guy. Arbour's the hot headed one .... And in fairness, you were using what you would have expected to be reliable source material. It's just that I happen to know of (and be a big fan of) this particular expert that I know that in this arena, his opinion is bunkum.... Anyway, it demonstrates what I keep telling you..... history is a rich tapestry that only develops through conversation.... so keep talking ! 2
centexhairysub Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, like assholes everyone has one... I am not sure who said this but I read it somewhere once. I agree that had the battle been fought at sea the outcome would have been the same but probably not as conclusive for the British. The fact that the French army was really destroyed by the time the officers escaped back to France was a real blow to the country. It is true that many of the French officers and leaders escaped and caused additional problems but the loss of the ships and the tens of thousands of well trained soldiers caused problems for years to come... The truth is all we can do is look back at what happened and marvel. We can never really know what would have happened if the battle had been fought at sea. Mark has done a great job of creating and describing one of the most important battles in all of history. I really felt the fear, death, and victory of those that lived it in this story. I have to wonder if Granger will turn his attention back to getting to London before Maidstone or if Winkler and Jeffries proved able to deliever their message. God I can't wait to see what is next.... 1
Mark Arbour Posted August 6, 2013 Author Posted August 6, 2013 Nah. I'm a nice guy. Arbour's the hot headed one .... And in fairness, you were using what you would have expected to be reliable source material. It's just that I happen to know of (and be a big fan of) this particular expert that I know that in this arena, his opinion is bunkum.... Anyway, it demonstrates what I keep telling you..... history is a rich tapestry that only develops through conversation.... so keep talking ! Doesn't Westie remind you a little of George. Only he's not as randy. 1
centexhairysub Posted August 7, 2013 Posted August 7, 2013 Doesn't Westie remind you a little of George. Only he's not as randy. Well, he does but I picture him much shorter than George... 1
Westie Posted August 7, 2013 Posted August 7, 2013 Well, he does but I picture him much shorter than George... I am neither too tall nor too short, too loud nor too quiet, too meek or too mild. I am exactly what I need to be. Plus a few pounds for padding.... 3
sandrewn Posted August 9, 2013 Posted August 9, 2013 Mark I agree with you about Villenneuve. What I am not so sure is the why (he didn't). Something I have always believed in and curiously found in a story I once read. From 'The Kandric Saga' by Kyle Aarons. In chapter 12, between Capt. Vondum and his slave/squire Conth: " To try and fail means you failed. Failure is second worse to only one thing, fear. To not try, due to fear, means failure and you disgrace yourself in the process." P.S. Kyle, if by chance you read this, please post your next chapter, thanks in advance. 1
centexhairysub Posted August 9, 2013 Posted August 9, 2013 Well, this was truly an interesting chapter. I loved the apperance of Jardines. You know that Nelson will praise him in his post to London and that along with a push from Granger should be able to get him somwhere more to his liking. I do think in some ways that he and Granger compliment each other as lovers but they could never really be more than that to each other. Granger knows just what to say to Nelson and how to praise him without appearing to be brown-nosing him. I thought it was unusual and a mark of just how much Nelson would have thought of Granger to have him explain his decisions and some of the choices that he would make. Unless this is going to be one of the longer stories any either of the sagas that Mark has written; Granger can simply not be on the Leander. It was captured by one of the ships of the line that escaped from the battle and headed north. The officers were held without medical treatment or decent conditions for months before they were exchanged, almost into the new year. The French actually looted the personal belongings of both the British officers and men. Berry and the Captain of the Leander, Thompson, were actually lauded in Britian after the defeat for putting up such a great fight against a ship with almost four times the firepower. I really can't see Mark delaying Granger's travels to the extent that he would have to if Granger boards the Leander. Not sure what is going to happen, but I think something will. Maybe Berry will do something to keep Granger off the ship, if so serves him right to get captured... Can't wait to see what comes next, great job Mr. Arbour...
Daddydavek Posted August 10, 2013 Posted August 10, 2013 Speculating whether or not Granger gets on the Leander is tempting, but I wonder if maybe there will be a break and the point of view will change to one of George's ships racing for London? 2
Westie Posted August 10, 2013 Posted August 10, 2013 So, I can join the debate here since someone else has raised the eventual fate of the Leander. Personally, from both a literary point of view and from the story point of view, I really hope Granger DOES get onto the Leander. In literary terms, If you have a hero whom you constantly place in danger, at some point on the scale you have to reach a tipping point where that hero is captured, injured or (if you were reading something from George Martin...) Killed. I think that Granger's capture would tell an awesome story in a totally new setting. I also think that Mark has made plenty of effort to resolve the Maidstone situation in other ways (via Winkler, not forgetting that we do not know what is happening on board the the Ship). My personal opinion also is that the Maidstone situation was only ever going to be a sideshow in this story. Yes, Granger being captured will extend the length of the story by 6 months... how many chapters that pans out to remains to be seen. However, the title of the story.... Odyssey... does imply a longer and more varied adventure than past books. It also raises questions about the setting of the NEXT book.... but I guess I'm getting ahead of myself there West 4
JimCarter Posted August 10, 2013 Posted August 10, 2013 I am having trouble finding any information about the Leander being captured, so I will just have to remain blissfully ignorant. If Granger is delayed that long, he most surely will lose his ship. I know I am such a worry wart, but I like Granger being frigate captain.
Westie Posted August 10, 2013 Posted August 10, 2013 If Granger is delayed that long, he most surely will lose his ship. I know I am such a worry wart, but I like Granger being frigate captain. I think Granger remaining captain of a Frigate is a remote chance at best. They are running out of ways to reward Granger. He is already a Knight of the Bath. His is a Viscount.... Promotion to Earl is unlikely without promoting his father also, for which achievement his father has done nothing. The King would almost certainly grant some kind of Royal Sinecure either within the Royal Household or Crown Estate. He is 15 years away from promotion to admiral, and given that he is already unbelievably wealthy (and heir to the Lammert fortune also in fact) he is one of the few young captains for whom prize money is no longer such a lure. I would bet that the admiralty is almost forced to give him a larger and more prestigious ship. Probably a second rate, but either a third rate or first rate are also possible. This would normally confine Granger to a fleet, but I suspect Mr. Arbour can find some reason for greater adventures
Clydee Posted August 11, 2013 Posted August 11, 2013 I don't see Granger staying a frigate captain any longer either. I think they will give him a 74 and send him on another mission...lord knows where...just to keep him happy, but only after a long stay ashore. I think he might deserve a break for a while. Being sick like he was must have weakened him, so I would imagine the king would insist he stay home for a while. We'll see if Mr. Arbour agrees with me! He rarely does! :no:. I loved the last chapter, it was like taking a big breath of fresh air after all the stuff that has happened up to this point. I like the idea that Nelson has such high regard for Granger, that he recognizes greatness in someone when he sees it. When England finds out about the Nile and Granger was part of it I think just about anything Granger wants he probably could get! I don't think he wants any more recognition though, but I do think his fame will grow! Man I love this story! 1
Mark Arbour Posted August 11, 2013 Author Posted August 11, 2013 I don't see Granger staying a frigate captain any longer either. I think they will give him a 74 and send him on another mission...lord knows where...just to keep him happy, but only after a long stay ashore. I think he might deserve a break for a while. Being sick like he was must have weakened him, so I would imagine the king would insist he stay home for a while. We'll see if Mr. Arbour agrees with me! He rarely does! :no:. I loved the last chapter, it was like taking a big breath of fresh air after all the stuff that has happened up to this point. I like the idea that Nelson has such high regard for Granger, that he recognizes greatness in someone when he sees it. When England finds out about the Nile and Granger was part of it I think just about anything Granger wants he probably could get! I don't think he wants any more recognition though, but I do think his fame will grow! Man I love this story! And just where the hell have you been? 1
Canuk Posted August 11, 2013 Posted August 11, 2013 I have so missed reading this forum - while i have managed to find enough time to keep up with the story, I never had enough time to include the Forum debate in my reading. I am dropping in now to add to the chorus of people expressing their enjoyment at the direction this story is taking. It is so good to read a story where it all seems real, played out by real characters doing realistic things. I also like the title - when my Minister (of the Crown, not the pulpit) found me reading this, she assumed I was reading Homer - so my reputation in the office has gone up several degrees! 2
centexhairysub Posted August 11, 2013 Posted August 11, 2013 Well, I can see where Westie is coming from; being on Leander would fit the title of the story quite well, but I sort of want Granger to get back to England. I do agree that the issue with Maidstone will probably be resolved or in process before he arrives but George does have other matters to deal with. He has a new child that he is going to take care of, even though he isn't the parent; a new nephew, that might be his son; and his wife may have some health issues as well. While I do love Granger on a ship, and I think Westie is right here as well; he will get a bigger one, I do enjoy him equally on land. Well, whichever way Mark takes us; I will be there glued like a barnacle to the side riding the waves with everyone else... 2
Westie Posted August 11, 2013 Posted August 11, 2013 Well, I can see where Westie is coming from; being on Leander would fit the title of the story quite well, but I sort of want Granger to get back to England. I do agree that the issue with Maidstone will probably be resolved or in process before he arrives but George does have other matters to deal with. He has a new child that he is going to take care of, even though he isn't the parent; a new nephew, that might be his son; and his wife may have some health issues as well. While I do love Granger on a ship, and I think Westie is right here as well; he will get a bigger one, I do enjoy him equally on land. Well, whichever way Mark takes us; I will be there glued like a barnacle to the side riding the waves with everyone else... See... I happen to agree here with the part about Westie being right.... 2
ricky Posted August 11, 2013 Posted August 11, 2013 See... I happen to agree here with the part about Westie being right.... Mark Arbour and centexhairysub like this Like This Well, I guess we can see why there is suddenly so much troika talk. Jeeze, get a room or get a video camera, preferably the latter so we can like it too.
Westie Posted August 12, 2013 Posted August 12, 2013 Well, I guess we can see why there is suddenly so much troika talk. Jeeze, get a room or get a video camera, preferably the latter so we can like it too. I wouldn't call it a troika.... more a Manage á trois....
Daddydavek Posted August 12, 2013 Posted August 12, 2013 I wouldn't call it a troika.... more a Manage á trois.... With more than one, I think you meant menage.....
ricky Posted August 13, 2013 Posted August 13, 2013 Well that answers that question. Granger won't be back onboard Bachantee. At least Maidstone got his due. But poor Humphries. Lost two ships. He's better off with the sharks. I don't think ANYONE could get him out of this one. And they are too far south for the fleet to find them unless one of those lost frigates from the fleet finds them. And all those reals! seems we're about to lose a few good men unless that corvet has only an anchor watch. Thanks for the treat and congratulations Lord Arbour. And to have written yourself a peerage in such a short time is truly remarkable. 1
sandrewn Posted August 13, 2013 Posted August 13, 2013 I would add my congratulations on the big five. Looking forwards to many more. Of note, today is also 'International Lefthanders' Day'. I don't suppose you might be left handed, Mark? As you might of guessed. I am. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Lefthanders_Day http://www.indiana.edu/~primate/left.html#U.S.%20Presidents As I recall, I screwed up with my Dhow Theory. Now here you go and solve the problem with a mere few rocks, just 15 war canoes (dugouts mayhaps?) and 300 some odd and very restless natives. Well done Mr Arbour. Oh, and btw could you please arrange to save Kingsdales' bagpipes.
sandrewn Posted August 13, 2013 Posted August 13, 2013 One more congatulation is in order, I just noticed that you have gone from 9th to 6th on the T.R.S. list of GA. 1
Mark Arbour Posted August 13, 2013 Author Posted August 13, 2013 I would add my congratulations on the big five. Looking forwards to many more. Of note, today is also 'International Lefthanders' Day'. I don't suppose you might be left handed, Mark? As you might of guessed. I am. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Lefthanders_Day http://www.indiana.edu/~primate/left.html#U.S.%20Presidents As I recall, I screwed up with my Dhow Theory. Now here you go and solve the problem with a mere few rocks, just 15 war canoes (dugouts mayhaps?) and 300 some odd and very restless natives. Well done Mr Arbour. Oh, and btw could you please arrange to save Kingsdales' bagpipes. Well, the dhow theory was fun to imagine, and no, I'm a right-hander. But I applaud the lefties. Vive la difference! Well that answers that question. Granger won't be back onboard Bachantee. At least Maidstone got his due. But poor Humphries. Lost two ships. He's better off with the sharks. I don't think ANYONE could get him out of this one. And they are too far south for the fleet to find them unless one of those lost frigates from the fleet finds them. And all those reals! seems we're about to lose a few good men unless that corvet has only an anchor watch. Thanks for the treat and congratulations Lord Arbour. And to have written yourself a peerage in such a short time is truly remarkable. I am fairly positive that Humphreys will make it through a court martial on the loss of Bacchante with no ill-effects, other than he may be considered unlucky. I'm not sure what impact that would have on what the Admiralty decides, as far as giving him another ship goes. Thanks for the congrats!
Recommended Posts