Nelson & His World

I have just read – in dribs and drabs, my life being so hectic at the moment – ‘The Great Gamble’ by Dudley Pope, which deals with the Battle of Copenhagen. I will post a fuller comment on the Book Reports thread in due course, but in the meantime, here is an anecdote about Captain William ‘Bounty’ Bligh, which confirms, if confirmation were needed, what an oddball he was.

To précis:

Bligh commanded HMS Glatton at Copenhagen and had some Danish officers held on board who were collected after the battle by Lt Uldall. One of the officers, Lt Winkler, asked Uldall to retrieve his sword from Captain Bligh. Captain Bligh refused, saying it had been sold to him for a pound by Lt Lorenzen, another Danish prisoner. This, in fact, turned out to be true, and Bligh steadfastly refused to return the sword and accept his pound back. Eventually, Lt Uldall, with great tact, asked Winkler if he would make a present of the sword to Capt Bligh and he agreed to do so. Bligh accepted, but then began insulting Lt Lorenzen and urged the money on him. Lorenzen refused to take it. Lt Uldall reported that he finally got everyone in the boat, told Captain Bligh that his behaviour toward Lorenzen was most incorrect, then left the ship.

Well, what a bizarre incident – Lorenzen selling his brother officer’s sword, the cad; Bligh entering into such a strange transaction, and behaving so oddly after Uldall’s diplomatic attempts at resolution.

Query 1: Bligh wrote a strange letter to Nelson asking for a testimonial that he had behaved well in the battle, to which Nelson replied affirmatively, if coolly. Could Bligh have been concerned that news of this episode with the sword might reach Nelson’s ears?

Query 2: was it customary to return surrendered swords to departing prisoners of war? It seemed to be Nelson’s practice to collect them pretty smartly, and one he sent as a present to Norwich, so presumably holding swords wasn’t simply a temporary arrangement until returning them when captive officers were released. (Or maybe Nelson bought the Norwich sword for a pound! Heaven forbid!)

Anna,

The episode, as you say, was bizarre and shows the petulant side to his nature. He seems to have been the type of character who became petty and childlike if he didn't have his own way, perhaps a perfectionist who railed against those who didn't, or couldn't, match his high standards. It was this that partly led to the famous mutiny.

One point perhaps worth mentioning is that Bligh rose from the lower deck, and was conscious of it. Christian of course came from an aristocratic family and was thus a 'gentleman' from birth. This difference between the two partly led to the disagreement between them. Bligh probably did not feel particularly comfortable in the officer role and commanding men from his own social standing. Strange as it may seem too, a ship's compliment often resented being led by 'one of their own', believing that they were entitled to being commanded by a proper officer and gentlemen!

Although the business over Lt. Winkler's sword may have had something to do with it, I think the real reason for Bligh's request to be vouched for by Nelson at Copenhagen really stems from his insecurity – especially after the mutiny – in that he needed assurance he was doing the right thing. To a certain extent one has to feel a little sorry for Bligh, since he was exceptional in other areas, and the mutiny episode appears to have dogged him for the rest of his life. I believe he was dubbed both 'Bounty Bligh', and worse, 'that Bounty *******!' However, I do think he was his own worst enemy.

The surrendering and returning of the sword of a defeated officer had a certain amount of honour attached to it - after all it marked him out as an officer and a gentleman – so both the weapons and the man who gave it were treated with a certain amount of respect. This would have been so in all the three navies and certainly so with the Spanish, who were probably the most aristocratic. Thus presumably Nelson's remark that one of his bargemen, Fearney, put the swords of the defeated Spanish officers at St. Vincent, with the greatest 'sang froid' under his arm.

I don't know for certain, but I would imagine many if not all of these were returned soon after the battle, as was customary, since Nelson would probably not have been of a mind to breach protocol. Bligh was not seemingly driven by the same feelings. Nelson could not have returned Rear Admiral Winthysen's sword to him even if he had wished to, since he died of his wounds. This is the sword now in the Guildhall in Norwich. Unlike Bligh, I can't imagine Nelson stooping so low as to paying money for it since he would have had some regard for the man to whom it had belonged.

Bligh's request of Nelson for a recommendation to the First Lord seems perfectly reasonable. No doubt he wished to be removed out of the ex-East Indiaman, GLATTON, armed with carronades, into something better. He was appointed to the IRRESISTIBLE 74 in the same month.

Vela: many thanks for that clarification. I am still curious about the tone of Nelson's reply. His letters to officers who had acquitted themselves well always seem to be warm, even effusive, in their language. His comment to Bligh, though positive, seems to lack his usual generosity in these circumstances.

Today, I think it would be recognised that Bligh exhibited many of the characteristics of Asperger's syndrome - the obsessiveness and focus that made him such a master of navigation and seamanship, for example, coupled with a total inability to 'read' or relate to other people, or to manage and motivate them positively.

Dudley Pope quotes another instance of Bligh's unfortunate behaviour.

To précis:

Bligh had been put in command of the Monarch by Sir Hyde Parker and immediately crossed his officers by his criticisms and high-handedness. Finally, having given them the impression that he would steer for Yarmouth (no port having been specified to him) where many of them had connections and where there was a hospital (the Monarch had a hospital ship in company,) Bligh then announced that all the wounded officers should be removed to the Holsteen, and the Monarch would proceed to the Nore. This was made known as Yarmouth lay within sight, and the night was spent removing wounded officers from the Monarch to the Holsteen. No reason was given for the decision, though Pope suggests that he did not wish to encounter at Yarmouth Admiral Dickson with whom he was also on bad terms. To transfer wounded men, unnecessarily, at night in open boats seems chillingly inhumane.

As you know, this letter was written by Nelson to St. Vincent and was semi-official (and the full text includes a reference to another officer). Given the language of the time, I would describe it as measured rather than cool! Nelson had called Bligh on board the ELEPHANT after the battle to thank him for his conduct – a gesture not extended to all commanding officers. This was a tribute well deserved as the carcasses fired from the GLATTON’s 68pdrs resulted in the destruction of the Danish flagship and her fire contributed to the disablement of the latter’s seconds.

With respect to the MONARCH’s return to England, she and the ISIS had been considerably injured in the action and were returning for repair (the MONARCH refitted at Chatham over a four month period). The Nore would, therefore, be an obvious destination and entering Yarmouth a diversion. Criticism and high-handedness are by no means rare attributes in a commanding officer!

The MONARCH had been Admiral Dickson’s flagship before being sent on the Copenhagen expedition (against Dickson’s wishes) and some of her officers were Dickson’s followers. This should be borne in mind as we presumably do not have Bligh’s version of these events (I have not read Pope’s book). Perhaps the wounded officers should have been embarked on board the HOLSTEEN. There may have been navigation or weather reasons for Bligh’s actions.

Bligh had an ungovernable temper and upset many of his subordinates (the WARRIOR courts-martial provide a good sample of his troubles) but he always did his duty as he saw it and could be rough on anyone who got in the way. As Bligh himself put it: “I candidly and without reserve avow that I am not a tame and indifferent observer of the manner in which officers placed under my orders conduct themselves in the performance of their several duties….”.

Thanks again, Vela, for that informative reply.

Dudley Pope's book was written in 1972 and he may well have been superseded by subsequent and better scholars but I, as a relatively new enthusiast rather than an expert, enjoyed it greatly. The fuller background and context you supply, however, does reveal his subjectivity and selectivity in this instance which may well apply to other areas of the book, but which I, as someone of little knowledge, have to take at face value until better informed. (Thanks!)

When I get time, I'll write a fuller comment for the Book Reports thread.

I can see that I must read Pope's book. It may change my opinions!

With reference to the title of this thread, I did look into a Danish account of this battle - Ole Feldbaek's "The Battle of Copenhagen 1801" (title of the English translation) in the hope that there might be some reference to the matter of the sword. Whilst many Danish officers are mentioned, including Uldal, the book is silent on this little contretemps.

I've made a short post on Pope's Book on the 'Book Reports' thread on the Information Forum.

Pope gives the source for the sword contretemps as 'Lt Uldall's report to Fischer, Rigs. Adm. In-letters, Reports to Fischer No. 1202.'