Nelson & His World

With today being the anniversary of the Battle of Cape St Vincent, here is a brief and suitably 'Nelson-centric' video for this forum from maritimenortheast's Channel:

Nelson, with his insatiable thirst for glory, wasted no time in ensuring that news of his daring and success at the battle of Cape St Vincent were transmitted to England for publication in the newspapers.

Along with his keen self-promotion, though, Nelson had a generosity of spirit that was always ready to recognise the endeavours of others, as this extract from a letter, thanking his friend Collingwood for coming to the aid of the Captain, attests:

Irresistible, February 15th 1797

My dearest Friend,

'A friend in need is a friend indeed' was never more truly verified by your most noble and gallant conduct yesterday in sparing the Captain from further loss; and beg both as a public officer and a friend, you will accept my most sincere thanks. I have not failed, by letter to the Admiral, to represent the eminent services of the Excellent. .....

I think I have to disagree. In this instance he demonstrated both sides of his character, and although he acknowledged his closest friend, he was particularly mean-spirited towards some others. In Nelson's own account he incorrectly claimed that the Culloden and Captain were unsupported for a full hour. In fact at least another four ships joined the action immediately behind the Captain, and Sugden points ot that this 'particularly libelled the Blenheim'. When William Parker pointed this out, Nelson very begrudgingly altered his public account with the words 'for near an hour as I believe (but do not pretend to be correct as to time)', and in the ensuing spat, Nelson also refused to acknowledge that the Prince George had also engaged the San Nicolas and San Josef. Although Nelson's goading provoked William Parker also into making an unsupportable claim, there is little doubt that Nelson holds the primary responsibility for the lasting bad feeling that followed.

Can we be sure that it was mean-spiritedness that caused Nelson to exaggerate the length of time it took for support to reach the Colloden and the Captain? In any dramatic or shocking situation, time can seem elastic. (Have you ever been in a car crash? I have. The few seconds as you skid and spin can seem like an eternity.) As Edgar Vincent points out:

''Of course Nelson's account was biased. Battle involves an overpowering assault on the senses. The roar and blast of guns merged with the humming and whizzing of shot, the thump, crash, clang, ripping and twanging as the ship was hit, timber splintered, metal dinted and taut rigging parted; the shuddering of the ship as enemy broadsides found their target, the drunken heeling as their own guns fired; the bedlam of human sounds and activity, shouted orders, cries from wounded and dying men, the bustle of gun crews remustering as men were killed and wounded, the frenzy of carpenters' and boatswains' working parties as they hammered, cut and heaved shattered spars and rigging. And everywhere, clouds of smoke blanked or distorted vision. It is amazing that with such distractions and such demand for focus on his own ship and its opponents Nelson noticed and remembered so much.'

And as Collingwood himself said soon afterwards: 'It is a very difficult thing for those engaged in such a scene to give details of the whole, because all the powers they have are engaged in their own part in it.'

The bad feeling after Cape St Vincent was not unusual: nearly every battle produces resentments of this kind. Nobody sees the whole but everybody sees his own part, and, at a time when recognition was crucial for personal honour and professional advancement, it is not surprising that those who felt their part to be insufficiently recognised became sour and indignant.

Nelson's desire for glory urged him to 'get his story in' and having got it in first, it coloured the public perception. But I believe (though I can't give a precise reference here) that he actually sought out two officers to corroborate his story (Miller and Berry, both 'fans' of his, admittedly.) Could it have been that his vision was 'blanked or distorted' and that this led him to overlook others' contribution, rather than mean-spiritedness? If he reluctantly agreed to change his report, could it have been because of his notorious stubbornness (as he wrote to his brother, 'I am not famous for giving up a point!'), absolutely convinced that he was right? Certainly, Nelson's willingness, eagerness even, to give credit to others is recorded on many occasions so maybe we can give him the benefit of the doubt on this occasion. And even if he is being ungenerous, I think it is the exception rather than the rule.

No, I don't think it was mean-spiritedness that initially caused his incorrect account, it was the smoke that made him unaware how close the other ships were behind him. But once presented with the facts, it was mean-spirited to refuse to accept them, especially so publicly.

This is certainly the most extreme case, and as far as I recall, the only one where he publicly refuted others' claims, but I think that during his rise to glory, his habitual exaggeration of his own achievements necessarily detracted from others.

I have (yet again) to agree with Tony here and believe that Nelson was less than fullsome in his praise of others on this occasion, Collingwood excepted.

If he was sufficiently aware of the situation as to see his opportunity to wear the Captain out of the line to engage the detached Spanish ships, would he not also have been to a certain extent aware of the other British ships in the immediate vicinity? Certainly the smoke would have made this difficult, but not impossible. One especially feels for Parker in the Prince George and one gets the impression that if it had not been for his initially engaging with the San Josef, prior to Nelson's own engagement and boarding of her, the latter's victory may well not have happened.

I am not at all surprised by the ill-feeling after the battle, and especially that Jervis himself seems to have been so blinded by Nelson's actions as to ignore that of others. As to Nelson's, quite frankly, over-the-top praise of himself in his subsequent letters to the Prince Regent and others, if any prospective Nelson scholar were to start by reading these they might very well be put off from becoming one for life!

To put this in context, and taking into account Nelson's personal need for reassurance and recognition, he was still a young man at 39, not yet a Rear Admiral (that honour was to come six days later), had still to make a public name for himself, and was desirous of the medals and honours which were not yet his due. Small wonder then that he put himself forward at the expense of others and was not a little dismissive of them. However, I believe that attitude was to change with time and experience - and honours.