Nelson & His World

Hundreds of biographies have been written about Nelson in the 200 years since his death.

Most admirers of Nelson have their favourite book, or books about him.

I'd be interested to hear members' views on biographies they have enjoyed.

My own favourites?

The very first one I read - 'Nelson: Love and Fame' by Edgar Vincent.
My reasons? It is a very fair book. While it is sympathetic to Nelson, he is not treated as a stereotypical, fault-free hero. His failings and weaknesses are explored as well as his virtues and heroism. As one critic said, 'the author neither demeans the hero nor excuses the man.' There is nothing new in the material Vincent uses, but the psychological insights are very penetrating. He handles both the public and private life of Nelson with equal competence and sympathy. So often, naval historians have to hold their noses while attempting to discuss his relationship with Emma Hamilton, but Edgar Vincent paints a convincing and comprehensive picture of the whole man without awkwardness or embarrassment.

It's a beautifully written book with some magnificent descriptive passages. The account of the storm in which Vanguard was almost wrecked is one of the most powerful pieces of maritime writing I have ever read.

John Sugden's 'Nelson: a dream of glory' will, I think, prove to be the definitive biography, eclipsing even Roger Knight's monumental and scholarly work: 'The Pursuit of Victory: the Life and Achievement of Horatio Nelson'. Sugden's second and final volume is yet to be published but Vol 1 was breathtaking in its scope, in the diligence of the research - here was new material about a man of whom everything seemed to have been said - and in its deep understanding and insight into his subject. There are also fascinatng digressions into the Georgian Navy and into the naval personalities whose careers were intertwined with Nelson's, and yet the book never loses its pace and narrative thrust.

Tom Pocock too is to be mentioned for keeping Nelson's life and achievements to the fore at a time when books about the heroic exploits of great men were rather unfashionable. It was from Pocock too that I learned (but have not seen it mentioned anywhere else) that Nelson's pony was called Tycho. Unfortunately, he doesn't give a source. Does anyone know?

Tycho is mentioned by Nelson in a postscript to a letter of February 5th 1792 to his brother William. It does not say Tycho is a horse, but it would make sense if he was! "I wish you much sport. Tycho is very well, and has afforded me a great deal of amusement. Mrs. Nelson will be obliged to Miss Randall to tell her where honey-water is sold in Norwich."

Thanks for that information, Tony.

In 'The Nelsons of Burnham Thorpe' by M. Eyre Matcham, Parson Gunn told the story of Nelson visiting Parson Gunn's sister and while he was having dinner, he was told that his pony had bitten Parson Gunn's groom. Nelson left his dinner to attend to the man himself.

I wonder if the pony was Tycho?

And I wonder if Nelson rode to Norwich on Tycho to get the honey-water for Mrs Nelson? Honey water is, apparently, an old and excellent cleanser for the skin, easily made by dissolving two tablespoons of honey in a litre of water, so Fanny could have made it at home. (Was it Collingwood who said Nelson had 'married a complexion'?) Perhaps Fanny had honey water to thank.)

I wonder what it is about 'first books' holding a special place in the heart?

Vincent, I like very much for all the reasons Tycho explains, and one that comes off the bookshelf fairly regularly.

The favourite though has to be Jack Russell's 'Nelson and the Hamiltons,' for all sorts of reasons.

Though a bit dated now, it's a pacy, vivid, ever so slightly irreverent glimpse into a short period in Nelson's life. The beauty is in the wealth of detail, packed to the gills with information, yet such an easy, flowing narrative, there's no grind to it.

It's one of the few Nelson biogs that makes me laugh out loud. Some of Russell's asides, particularly on the peripheral characters and events, make wonderful observational comedy. He teases out the absurd as well as the serious comment, but also displays a deep knowledge and understanding of the period as a whole that you don't often find in Nelsonian biography. It's all very connected.

The main criticism, if there has to be a downside, is the lack of sources. Some fascinating quotes in Russell have frustrated attempts to find the original reference. One in particular concerning Francis Oliver's declaration of love for Emma has me tearing my hair out at the moment.

The other thing, is that it was one of two Nelson books I read as a youngster that led to a lifelong interest. The school library stamp on the flyleaf dates it to 1982, a bit of a shock!

Happy memories, although I totally forgot to return the book and dread to think what the fine would amount to now.

Mira, sources - you are so right. It's infuriating when you come across a really good biography, with anecdotes and incidents you've never read elsewhere, and no reference is given. Mollie Hardwicke, for example: her biography of Emma Hamilton is one of the most sympathetic and insightful I have read, but she gives no sources at all.

I read somewhere (source?!) that Terry Coleman's book was the first biography of Nelson to have footnotes and references. I find that quite extraordinary if it's true.

That's an interesting point you've raised there.

If Coleman was indeed the first author to list his sources (for the material he chose to use,) we seem to have moved really quickly into a phase where biography can only be credible if all sources are listed and weighed as unimpeachable.

Is there a place for anecdote and reportage in modern biography?

An example would be the incident where Lady Nelson passes a glass of walnuts which Nelson bats away. Reported by Lady Shelley in 1815, as a version of an earlier recollected conversation she had with Lady Spencer. (Thanks T.)

Nelson biographies contain thousands of them. Where do we draw the line? What are the rules for biographical content today that govern what's in and what should be out?

Sorry for the digression from the main topic.

But an interesting digression!

If it is true about Coleman, then it is also interesting that Emma Hamilton beat Nelson by 100 years in having an annotated biography written about her - Walter Sichel's at the beginning of the 20th century.

The whole question of quoting sources is, as you say, an interesting one. Biography used to be the art of the literary man - it was Southey, a poet, who wrote the first magisterial biography of Nelson. I have just glanced at his copious notes and they are limited almost exclusively to explaining literary references and geographical and nautical terms in the text; sources such as letters, diaries, dispatches etc. are not mentioned.

I wonder at what point biography (not necessarily Nelsonian biography) became a branch of academia that demanded a scholarly footnote and reference for every fact stated? Perhaps it was almost necessary that Nelson should be appropriated by academics since his naval life is concerned with a world which demands a huge amount of specialised knowledge of ships, the sea, battle tactics etc. which is the province of scholars and enthusiasts rather than the layman. And yet his personal life also exerts a fascination on many who have no particular knowledge of or enthusiasm for naval affairs. So any biographer of Nelson is confronted with the problem of 'a life divided': if he is a 'naval man' how does he deal with the personal side which he may have no particular interest in? If he is interested in Nelson as a personality beyond that of naval commander, how does he explore and manipulate the daunting amount of material and the specialised knowledge required to evaluate the nautical events which were also the dominant and inescapable part of his life? Southey himself was apprehensive about this, describing himself as a cat in a pantry terrified of causing wreckage.

Some have solved it by narrowing their focus of interest. Geoffrey Bennett called his book, 'Nelson the Commander' and stressed that he would write little of his personal life. Christopher Hibbert, on the other hand, called his 'A Personal History'. To write a book of literary excellence that will satisfy both the reader who is a naval enthusiast and the reader who is more interested in the psychological complexities and wider personal experiences of a great but flawed man is the challenge confronting any biographer of Nelson. Maybe the task is impossible; maybe that is why biographies of Nelson continue to be written?

And your other point about 'anecdotage', to coin a phrase. The more you become engrossed by a character, the more you demand authenticity. But this is not just a question of tracing the source, though it is always satisfying to know this, but how much you trust it once you have found it. Can you trust Mrs St George's opinion of Emma Hamilton, authentic as its origin is? Can you trust a second hand report (e.g. Lady Shelley's) not to be embroidered in the re-telling? And perhaps this is the fascination and frustration of biography. Even a primary source can be tainted if the account is coloured by malice or prejudice; a secondary source might suffer from the Chinese whisper effect, or the tendency of human beings to dramatise events that are a focus of interest. It must apply to the accounts of battles too: the aim was to defeat the enemy but there was huge competition for glory and recognition which must have led to exaggerations and perhaps self-deception. How do you piece together and evaluate the confused and fragmented narrative of a battle, bearing in mind that everyone's experience, even if recalled accurately, is partial both in the sense that each man can only see a small piece of the total picture and his view may be coloured or distorted by all sorts of factors he may not even be consciously aware of?

I haven't answered your question about the rules for governing what's in and what's out. I think it's fair enough to include everything you feel is relevant. If you can give a source, fine; if you need to preface an anecdote with 'the story goes....' that seems to me to be fine too. You can leave it to the reader to judge its relevance and/or interest. I just like to know that if there is no reference it is because there is definitely no authoritative primary source and you can stop looking rather than because the author simply hasn't included the reference.

A more difficult question is authorial stance. A flat chronicle would be boring - writing biography requires the creation of a character as well as a narrative of events and it is this that demands that the writer be scrupulous and honest about his own motives. It may be that you feel strongly about your subject, either positively or negatively, but this is no excuse either for the biased interpretation of evidence or the suppression of it. It is possible to draw a negative caricature of any life simply by suppressing the positive. You need not lie to distort the truth. Interpretation, for or against the subject, is the right, indeed the responsibility of the biographer, but fairness is all.

Hmm. Now there's a challenge! I will get my thinking cap on, and add my list as soon as I can!-t

by the way, does anyone know when the next part of Sugden is due - I for one can't wait to read it!-t

Tay,

Amazon are taking orders for Sugden Vol 2 - no other title given - prior to publication on April 3rd, price £25.

Like you, I can hardly wait.

And the Easter Bunny has been particularly kind to you this year, Tay.

Amazon.com is trailing the DVD you've been looking for for such a long time.

'I Remember Nelson' is finally released on DVD on April 15th.

It's only taken 26 years!

If this needs to be moved to another (non book) thread, just let me know.

I think we're all, and particularly Tay, delighted to see that post anywhere at all!

But perhaps in future, it might be an idea to put books we've read and want to discuss on the the 'Book Report' thread and keep the 'Booksearch' thread for books we're looking for and want to buy?

I'm looking for a complete set of the Diaries of Joseph Farington R.A.

"From July 13, 1793, to Dec. 30, 1821, he kept a diary in which he recorded a wealth of information about his period and the people in it. The Diary was found in 1921 by a firm of auctioneers in London and was later bought by the Morning Post for 110 guineas."

Many quotes, sometimes out of context, have appeared from these diaries in Nelsonian literature, and I believe they were published in their entirity in about 8 volumes.

I'd be very grateful for any pointers to where a full unabridged set could be acquired.

Thanks for any help.

There's a bookseller offering Farington's diaries in 17 volumes with index.

They are reprints (1978 to eighty eight) - (had to do that to thwart the guy with the shades), and cover the period July 1793-1821

A snip at £495 plus £10 postage.

www.antiqbook.co.uk/boox/mart/38949.shtml

You could try an offer.

Blimey! Better sell the house and mortgage the children.

Seriously though, many thanks and I'll send you a PM for details if that's ok.