Nelson & His World

And more specifically, perhaps a very important reason for Davison providing the captains with a gold medal is that he wanted their approval for him being appointed sole prize agent for all the ships taken at the battle...

Tony,

Well, that seems to have sorted that out!

I agree with your interpretation, having juggled and manouvered the maps about, and although I can't quite see the French Commissary's face, I think his gesticulating arm gives some indication as to his state of mind!

Your researches certainly suggest that the Davison/Boulton medal is right in the detail and that Mayo's description is wrong. However, one gets the impression that Davison wouldn't have let the geography bother him, just so long as the masonic symbols were included – and I certainly think the inclusion of the sun, setting rising or whatever, was down to him and probably engineered at the last moment. On the face of it, it was probably a good thing that the down-to-earth Boulton was there to keep things on a relatively even keel!

The eventual wording on the medal was, apparently, not arrived at until after some heated debate and difference of opinion between Davison and Boulton and others in their employ. It would appear to have been altered several times before production and one gets the impression that the final one was arrived at almost as the machinery was rolling! I believe that the venture between the pair of them and which they obviously hoped would prove a good business investment, broke down into mutual distrust and recrimination before they were finished. However, one can't help but feel some sympathy for Boulton!

As you say, Davison would also have wanted to make sure of his position as the British prize agent and his provision of medals may have gone some way towards that.

Hi Tony , Kester et al,
I just posted a comment and then realised that you Tony had already posted a piece with a great explanatory pic, so I deleted mine.

I am still puzzled by the position of the British fleet i.e is that the rear or the van in the foreground; the way the French fleet is facing and even the depiction of the French flags—horizontal bars(?) instead of vertical.

Am I being too picky? Anyway herewith another close-up of the Davidson medal for your perusal.

Ed

Ps: Where do I get Info on posting pictures as I noticed Tony’s pic was over 500kb and I was turned down at about 260kb earlier?

Well, that seems to have sorted that out, I said – when obviously it hasn't!

EMP you raise a point here, or rather more than one, in that the depiction of the opening moves of battle shown on the medal clearly needs rather more clarification, as it would seem that Davison/Boulton haven't the details of the ships themselves correct – not that Davison would seemingly have cared that much!

The French fleet would indeed appear to be pointing in the wrong direction, with their bows towards the south rather than to the northward. The curve of the anchored ships is also rather exaggerated, but this may have been due to the fact that the scene was better depicted thus on the medal. The British ships too are shown in one long column, all seemingly passing inside the French line, whereas of course in reality, I think only the five leading ships took such action, Orion, Audacious, Zealous, Goliath and Theseus. The rest of the British ships, led by Nelson in the Vanguard, passed down the outside of the French line (apart from of course the Culloden, which had gone aground) and it might just be that the scene depicted is just before Nelson turns to larboard to pass outside.

Actually, the Vanguard would seem to be the ship just to the left of the centre forground, which has what looks like a rear admiral's flag at the mizzen – which would probably make the next ship astern of her the Minotaur and of which you can only see the bowsprit! As regards the flags, EMP you are right in that the French fleet would appear to have horizontally-striped, or Dutch, ensigns but I believe this was a common mistake. You will also note that the British ships are also wearing a Union Jack from an ensign staff, rather than an ensign from the mizzen gaff. The Jack was probably not worn and in reality the ensign staff was very likely not shipped at all! However, this again may have been because it was more important to show which ship belonged to whom on the medal and a Jack would have been much more recognisable. (It is also likely that Davison and Boulton were not that knowledgeable about naval flags either).

The first of the Davison/Boulton medals seem to have been produced by March 1799 and, presumably, any details or information the pair would have gleaned from the participants in the battle or other sources, may have been rather piecemeal. In the end, presumably the mere detail of the French ships being the wrong way round or other features not being correct was perhaps overridden by the desire to get them to the recipients - and I can imagine that Davison would not really have cared that much about the details, provided the engraving was right and the sun present! Poor old Boulton was probably just thankful the whole harrowing process was over!
.

Thanks for that Kester, I think I shall now let the matter rest, although I am wondering whether Nelson noticed the errors and turned the proverbial blind eye
Ed

Ed,

That might be a good idea, unless Tony wants to add anything else, as we have given it a good airing! As to Nelson's turning a 'blind eye' on this occasion, he may very well have done – perhaps not wanting to give Boulton, and possibly Davison, heart attacks!

Kester, you know I would never pass up an invitation like that!

Ed, as Kester has said, you are undoubtably right that the French ships are facing the wrong way. Perhaps as they were at anchor, it was not thought important to check this detail. I turned to the diagram in Roger Knight's 'The Pursuit of Victory', and to my surprise the French ships are shown anchored both bow and stern (in contradiction to his text) in a line roughly west to east. That seems to be wrong on both counts as all the evidence is that they were at single anchor in a line NW to SE, or NNW to SSE. With the wind northerly, they were not necessarily swinging in direct line ahead, although some accounts also have the wind as NNW. I am more inclined to forgive Davison, Clevely and Boulton their inaccuracies than Roger Knight (or whoever drew his diagram).

Captain Miller's letter does describe the line being anchored in a curve - but curving the opposite way to that shown on the medal: 'in the form of a bow, with the convex part to us [during the approach]...the string of the bow being NW and SE'.

But Kester, the medal does show the British fleet doubling the French line, with three ships outside the French line. There are two British ships on the left, above the masts of the leftmost foreground ship (that you suggest is the Vanguard with a flag at the mizen). They are definitely British ships with Union flags flying at the ensign staff - I think Ed and I may have an advantage here, with magnifying glasses and higher resolution photos offline. There is a third ship further ahead of them, approaching nearly the centre of the French line, which must also be British. The Vanguard certainly appears to be following the other ships inside the French line, but I suppose it is understandable that they should wish Nelson's ship to be portrayed in the immediate foreground.

I think the detail on the medal is amazing. We are viewing enlargements, but the largest of the flags on the medal is less than 2 millimetres wide. It is incredible how clear the Union Jack is, but correctly depicting an ensign might have been asking too much of the engraver!

As you can see from both Ed's and my photos, some recipients looked after their medals with very great care. Nathaniel Kinsman of the Minotaur was only a landsman, and would have been issued with a bronze medal. But having seen how good the petty officers' gilt bronze medals looked, he evidently took his to a jeweller (probably in Palermo), had his name engraved and the medal gilded. I suspect that quite a few of the recipients may have done this.

Ed, I will see if I can find out how the file size limits for images work here. My image was a PNG file rather than a JPG, and I don't know whether different limits apply for some strange reason. We can probably get these limits changed if there is something specific anyone wants to post - provided we don't use up too much of Anna's disk space and bandwidth. So do always ask.

Tony,
The last word goes with you, unless . . .

The strange thing with picture sizes is that my pic of 'Sir AJB and medal' was only a 220 kb JPEG saved from one of my PDF pages and to my surprise overfilled the screen. There is still too much to learn!
I missed seeing your posting with the explanatory medal pic because the 'View new posts' seems to clear itself rather rapidly, or is that imagination?
Ed

Unless...

Tony,

I have looked at the pictures posted again, and you would appear to be right... again! The three ships you mention as doubling the French line are indeed British, even though I can't clearly see the Union Jack which, as you suggest, is probably more clearly visible to you and Ed! The more obvious fact that they have their sails (seemingly topsails only) set I completely missed and which, more than any flag, would have suggested they were not French! (I don't think any of the French ships would have had their sails set at anchor!) However, why then are these three ships seemingly on the outside of the French line, whereas the majority of the British fleet are on the inside and passing between the enemy and the shore? This is surely the opposite of the case. Is this another instance of Davison/Boulton and co. being mistaken? It also seems to me that the Vanguard (if that is her in the foreground, which seems likely) could still have occupied the centre of the scene, if the ships had been depicted correctly, i.e. going to the left. Nelson's flagship was overtaken by those following her, who then anchored by the stern and were thus strung out ahead of the Vanguard, and as shown on the right on the medal. However, they too would then very likely have had their sails furled... As you say, one can rather more forgive the 'production company' back at home, who presumably had various officers' (conflicting?) reports of the scene to go on and who, also presumably, had not been anywhere near Aboukir Bay! Similarly I agree with you over the Union Jack v. the ensign and its depiction.

Knight's diagram, which I agree would indicate that the French fleet anchored by both bow and stern is not, I think, the only such mention of it, but it would not seem right (and, as you say, it is corrected in his text) since the British themselves (or at least Foley) picked up on the fact that they were at single anchor and thus could swing and allow the British to pass. Hence the action by the five British ships that followed and which was pivotal (sorry) to the battle.

The depiction of the battle (or any sea battle come to that) would obviously have taxed the skill of the engraver to the limit and that, I assume, is why the British ships appear to be under topsails alone! Ships habitually furled their courses in action, but it would have certainly been easier not to have shown any other sails from a production point of view!

Thanks for the information regarding Nathaniel Kinsman's Minotaur medal, as I had been meaning to ask about that!

I have a feeling you might like to come back on this...

OK let's keep going then!

Captain Hood's letter records that they shortened sail gradually as they approached the French van ship, so the medal may be accurate that they were then under topsails only. I think on the medal, the British ships furthest away inside the line do have all their sails furled, but it is hard to tell.

There are actually some more interesting differences between Robert Clevely's design and the final medal. Clevely's design shows the Vanguard with her courses not yet fully furled. I think the design shows the British ships with white ensigns, but again it is hard to tell. It also shows two less British ships inside the French line, but still three ships outside it. But the Vanguard is still one of the ships apparently heading inside the line. The French ships are all shown with their bows pointing out to sea (to the left) as they would have been if swinging under single anchor in a northerly wind. With the curve of the line, they are therefore not in 'line ahead' around the curve as they are on the medal.

The Government also interfered with the design in the person of William Budge, private secretary to Henry Dundas, who even insisted that the waves were too regular and should be 'broke a little'. I must admit that I think the final medal is 'more pleasing on the eye' if less accurate than Clevely's design. Budge also complained that on the obverse, Hope's nipple was not visible, and asked Boulton to ensure he and Kuchler did her justice.

Tony,

Interesting. Any chance you can post Clevely's design?

Yes, Budge was one of the other main players, an apt name in view of his own dealings with poor old Boulton as it appears it was difficult to get him to!

Clevely's design is illustrated on page 122 (or 158) of Martyn Downer's 'Nelson's Purse'.

There is also a very poor quality illustration here: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=f07I ... &q&f=false

Tony,

I have looked again at Clevely's design in Martyn Downer, actually page 158 in my edition, and note the interesting differences you mention.

One other small point; the British fleet would all seem to have worn the white ensign at the Nile, and they are visible in many of
the pictures I have looked at, including Pocock's famous painting (where you can see them with difficulty) and that by Geoff Hunt (where they are rather more obvious.) However at the time of the Nile, Nelson was a Rear Admiral of the Blue so, theoretically, I would have thought that the fleet under him should have worn blue ensigns. Obviously they didn't - and the Vanguard even seems to have worn Nelson's blue command flag at the mizzen truck, whilst wearing a white ensign at the mizzen gaff (at least according to Geoff Hunt – and its a toss up as to what colour the commission pennnant is!) I imagine that perhaps this was a case of Nelson's ordering the white ensign to be worn, to avoid confusion with the French tricolour?

I have certainly read that Nelson used the white ensign for easier identification, and when you consider that it was rapidly going dark, using a blue ensign would probably have been a very bad idea indeed!

Tony,

Very true!