PDA

View Full Version : the bigest defeat of nelson



Blas_de_Lezo
1st Jan 2005, 18:19
Attack on Santa Cruz de Tenerife

21st. and 24th. July 1797

".... a left-handed admiral will never again be considered as useful".
Nelson, 16th. August 1797.

For two hundred years, the Royal Navy had considered, pondered and imagined the prospect of capturing a Spanish treasure-ship homeward bound and laden with the riches of the silver mines of Spanish America. But how ? In the absence of radio, radar and the technology that the late twentieth century takes for granted, in those days if you couldn't actually see the enemy then it was anyone's guess as to where he was. How do you find a single ship in the vastness of the Atlantic Ocean by eyesight alone ?


Tenerife, a Spanish island, was a known land-fall and watering base for Spanish ships on their way home to Cadiz. Santa Cruz, a fortified town and harbour on the island, often acted as a safe haven for the galleons and their escorts on their long journeys from the Caribbean to empty their holds into the treasure chests of Spain. It was to Santa Cruz that Nelson now turned his attention. Reports suggested that a Spanish galleon was due there and on 14th. July, Lord St. Vincent, the Commander-in-Chief, sent an order to Nelson:

"You are hereby required and directed to take the ships named in the margin under your command and to proceed with the utmost expedition off the The Island of Tenerife and there to make your dispositions for taking possession of the Town of Santa Cruz by a sudden and vigorous assault." Thus, Admiral Nelson took a squadron of four battleships and three frigates and the cutter Fox southwards to Tenerife.

As always, Nelson planned his attack carefully and he briefed the captains on exactly how they would make a dawn attack by their ship's oared boats upon the unsuspecting sentries patrolling the walls and perimeter of the town and harbour. Arriving in the vicinity of Tenerife, they would stay over the horizon until night-fall. Then, under cover of darkness, they would launch their boats with about seven hundred sailors and marines to row silently towards the objective and then, landed in their positions, would make a sudden early morning rush at ill-prepared and half-asleep defenders. It was a good plan that looked right on paper and had the support of all the officers concerned.

It didn't work. By daybreak, strong tides and adverse winds had scattered the boats and only a few had managed to get ashore. When Nelson heard what had happened he ordered HMS Theseus, his flagship, and other ships to carry out a bombardment of the defences but there were too few men ashore to make an assault and at dusk they were ordered to make their way back to the squadron far out at sea. It had been a complete failure. The defenders were now neither ill-prepared nor half asleep - a British squadron had come close to catching them unawares and the defenders were not going to let that happen again. Reinforcements were drawn from other parts of the island and distant white sails were a clear sign that the attackers hadn't gone away.

The element of surprise had gone, an essential factor in any such attack, but a head-strong admiral decided to have another go at what still looked to him like an easy objective. After all, a German merchant trader caught up in the excitement had told Nelson that the town was poorly defended and this encouraged the admiral in his resolve. Whether the merchant intended to deceive we don't know, but his advice was desperately wrong and it nearly cost the admiral his life.

Now Nelson made a new plan. This time he would personally lead a boat attack, mounted at night, head- on at the harbour and town walls. One thousand officers, sailors and marines, almost the entire manpower under his command, would embark in their ships boats and, in the dark, pull straight for the objective.

It went disastrously wrong. This time the defenders were ready. Lieutenant William Webley of HMS Zealous described what happened:

"We proceeded in four lines, Captains Troubridge, Hood, Miller and Waller leading the boats; Captains Bowen, Thompson and Fremantle attendant on the Admiral in their boats. We proceeded on until one o'clock ... when we were ordered by Captain Bowen to lay on our oars as we had just passed the mole, the intended place of landing. At this instant the cutter was discovered and fired upon - and, before the boats could pull round in order, the Admiral pulled in for the mole with orders to follow. The alarm now became general and they opened a cross-fire from all sides of cannon and musketry so truly warm !"

Canon fire and musket flashes lit up the night as Nelson led his men into the teeth of a fire that wrecked some of the boats and felled men as soon as they set foot upon the land. Nelson, sword in hand leapt from his boat only to fall suddenly backwards in a hail of grape-shot that shattered his right arm just above the elbow. His sword clattered to the ground and blood poured from the sleeve of his tunic. His step-son, Lt. Josiah Nisbet grabbed him and applied a tourniquet while sailors lifted him back into the boat.




Lt. Nisbet ordered the boat to pull away into the dark in search of a ship and its surgeon to treat the wounded admiral. They found HMS Seahorse but, when Nelson realised where they were he refused to go on board. Betsy Fremantle, the Captain's wife, was aboard and he didn't want her to see him wounded because her husband was ashore with his own ship's company; it would worry her for her husbands safety. Instead, he ordered the boat to pull away into the darkness to try and find his flagship HMS Theseus.

In the early hours of the morning Thomas Eshelby, Surgeon of HMS Theseus, wrote in his log: "1797. July 25. Admiral Nelson. Compound fracture of the right arm by a musket ball passing through a little above the elbow, an artery divided: the arm was immediately amputated and opium afterwards given." There was no anaesthetic. First the shockingly cold knife through flesh, and then the grating, rasping of the agonising saw through shattered bone. Nelson tolerated the pain as thousands before him had done but the terrifying shock of cold instruments compelled him to issue an order that, in future, surgeons would put their instruments in warm water before using them.

Meanwhile, the situation ashore was becoming desperate. Captain Bowen had been killed and Captains Thompson and Fremantle wounded though still in action. Through sheer courage they and their men had charged straight into the gun batteries and managed to subdue them, spiking the guns and then moving deeper into the town but suffering serious casualties in the process. Captains Hood, Miller and Waller were faring no better. The town was well-prepared and snipers and concealed guns took a heavy toll upon the attacking sailors. Captain Troubridge and his men had missed the mole completely and landed through heavy surf and, finding their powder wet and unusable, had fought with cutlasses, swords and pikes in their fruitless search for Nelson's group. He found Captain Waller. It was now, just as day broke, that Troubridge resorted to bluff, the only thing left to the attacking force. He raised a flag of truce and sent a Marine sergeant to offer the Spanish a way out of the situation: If the Spaniards didn't surrender then he and his men would burn the town. No deal, and fighting resumed.

Now Troubridge had found Hood and Miller's groups so Troubridge tried another "ultimatum" that was again rejected. The British force found refuge in the convent of San Domingo which offered a reasonably defendable position and, once again, Captain Troubridge, who was doggedly persistent in his pursuit of the original objective of the attack, devised another stategy. This time he sent two of the friars to deliver another message: In return for the surrender of the contents of the Royal Treasury and that of the Royal Company of the Phillippines, he and his men would go back to their ships. This too was rejected.

As the sun rose it soon became apparent that the British were in a hopeless position. Captain Hood, accompanied by Lt. Webley went to the Spanish commander to request terms of surrender suggesting that the British should be allowed to return to their ships without loss of honour in return for a promise that they would not make further attacks upon the islands. Don Antonio Gutierrez, the Commandant General of The Canary Islands acted as a gentlemen and, with great generosity, accepted these terms. It went further than this; the Spanish helped to ferry British wounded back to their ships and invited the officers to dine with them that evening. Nelson understood and accepted with humility the generosity shown to him in his defeat. In return for this he sent a barrel of English ale and a cheese to Gutierrez and the offer to carry the Commandant General's dispatch reporting his victory to the Spanish authorities in Cadiz.

One hundred and fifty-three officers and men had been killed or wounded and Nelson, himself wounded and dejected accepted full responsibilty for what had happened. Pride and over-confidence had lulled him into believing that he and his men were invincible. Now he knew that he wasn't and nor were they who served under his command.



to see pictures of the battle click here : (http://todoababor.webcindario.com/articulos/tenerife1797.htm#)


and to kwon all abaout the battle of "Cartagena de Indias" in 1741 when 23.600 english marines and soldiers , americans recruit and jamaican slaves whit the almirant Vernon and the general Lawrence Washington brother of George Washington , lose versus 3000 spanish soldiers and 600 indigenous archers , please visit this web : http://todoababor.webcindario.com/articulos/art_2.htm

the problem it ´s that it was in spanish, :( :( :(
i lose but i don`t know enough english to can translate it at english, and in internet there are not english text abaout this battle...

Willmore
1st Jan 2005, 23:16
Ok. An interesting read, but I honestly don't see it's point pertaining to Imperial Glory. Also, "Nelson's biggest defeat" is somewhat over-dramatic for lack of comparison. Teneriffe being his only defeat.

Also, since Drake has captured a Spanish Silver Train some two hundred years prior it's not a novel idea, and not an unaccomplishable one. The idea of lack of radar and radio is dubious, you make it sound like a common pirate in those times was completely out of luck. Through common trading lanes, and simple rumour mills working in every tavern one could easily know the location of a ship.


That said, I return to my original point ... what was the reason for this post ?

Arctic_Wolf
2nd Jan 2005, 01:41
Originally posted by Blas_de_Lezo
the problem it ´s that it was in spanish, :( :( :(
i lose but i don`t know enough english to can translate it at english, and in internet there are not english text abaout this battle...

The story seemed to be in quite good english. And as for there not being any texts about it in english, I suppose its for the same reason that some spanish texts tend not to say much about how inexperianced the leader of the Spanish Armada was, what with him just being the most conveniant noble for the job and instead focus on how bad the weather was, everone has some level of bias. Especially us Westerners.

Willmore
2nd Jan 2005, 05:36
I've recently written a paper on the Spanish Armada, and based on my research, it seems the "Most covenient noble" idea is far too common in the Spainish military system. :-)

BlackCoat
2nd Jan 2005, 16:19
as far as i understand it, the expedition to lake-nicaragua up that river (san juan?) wasnt all that much of a success either... he never got past the fort with the ships.

But atleast some intelligence could be gathered.


(not exactly as the sources put it, but sources lacking and i sort of got this total view)

Blas_de_Lezo
2nd Jan 2005, 16:26
First of all i lose but my english it `s very bad ( although i was try learn this good language).

Willmore : "That said, I return to my original point ... what was the reason for this post ? "

The same that have other persons to put other text abaout Nelson for example in Trafalgar, i only put it because it was relate whit the period of Imperial Glory. Or you only want that people put only the victorys of the british?
Furthemore i like that people put notes abaout history, because i like to know what thinks the persons of other countrys about some history reports.

Willmore : "Nelson's biggest defeat" is somewhat over-dramatic for lack of comparison. Teneriffe being his only defeat.

ok, you can have the reason, it`s more say"Nelson's biggest defeat", but i see that you take ( quit ?, please say me who is the correct form ) importance this lose , and the english do this more, opposite the english show your victoris like it where importants although it havent importance. ( i dont say that all english victorys dont have importance ) . And you have to remember that Nelson lose here his arm , and we were the only to win to him.

Willmore : I've recently written a paper on the Spanish Armada, and based on my research, it seems the "Most covenient noble" idea is far too common in the Spainish military system

this is true, it says and spanish poem " poderoso caballero es don dinero " -- " Powerfull gentleman, it´s Mr`Money "
AND? what happen if they are nobles? they are bad militars?
The duke of Alba, was noble , and he incorporate Portugal to the spanish Crown, and win the french in the war of 1557 , and the Netherlands revels.
The Marque of the Ensenada , other noble that reform the Spanish Armada in the XVIII century doind it the 2º most powerful of the world, or Albaro de Bazan that was one of the best marines of the XVI century, or Juan de Austria , Alejandro de Farnesio etc... all are nobles and good militars, and more times the pay the troops whit their own money, because the stupids spanish kings spend the money in other stupids things , and dont have enough to pay their soldiers.


Artic_Wolf : "And as for there not being any texts about it in english, I suppose its for the same reason that some spanish texts tend not to say much about how inexperianced the leader of the Spanish Armada was"

first, for example the battle of Trafalgar , spain lose, and it was the end of the spanish powerfull Armada in the XVIII, XIX and XX century , but see this :
http://www.batalladetrafalgar.com/periodic.htm

web only abaout this battle, and it was spanish, and i can say you more webs like this, but you can say me any english web of the battle of Cartagena de Indias ? of the battle of Tolon ? of the first battle of Cabo de San Vicente ?
And if " some spanish texts tend not to say much about how inexperianced the leader of the Spanish Armada was" it s because the spanis leader of the Armada .
DONT WERE INEXPERTS

Do you have to remember that the spanish discover America ( and now Australian cientifics were studing the posibility of the spanish can discover Australia before the english) , we were the first to contact to the Japanese in the other part of the word, to do the first to turn over araound the world , and in the military field , we were the first to incorporate cannons in the ships , we win to the Ottomans fleet in 1571 in the battle of Lepanto, Aragon and then Spain dominate the Mediterranium IV centurys , we were all the history fighting versus the pirates , we stay all the XVI century having naval battles versus the french , we win the english in Tolon , Cabo de San Vicente , Cartagena de Indias , etc ... we have good marines like Blas de Lezo , Luis Vicente Velasco ,we conquered four times the important city of Oran , we build the Santisima Trinidad , and more things more , so please dont say that the spanish were inexperts marines. We were one of the countrys ( i think that first British, sencond Spain , and then Portugal , France and Italy ) whit the best marines , and in more times our Armada was most Powerfull that the english dont forget this.

Casaca_Blanca
2nd Jan 2005, 18:29
I am agree with Blas, the Spanish Navy, and Army were really strong, they had the best almirants and generals in their time.

In Napoleonic era, the Spanish empire was falling but the generals were excellent, and the french said that they would change ten of their soldiers for one Spanish, just anecdotic.

The fact is Spain has a rich military story but the most recent empires that ruled in Earth as British and American only wanted to promte the "Spanish black legend", with the defeats and the inquisition and the cruel war aganist Aztecs and Incas and... etc.
Because Spain, first had a total control over Europe in at least 200 years and the cultural movement that happened, maybe was bad for Anglo-Americans Empire.
I have to say that Spanish texts about Trafalgar (the ones I've read) don't excuse the defeat with the forecast or the inexperience, they only say what happened, why and who did it.


and now Australian cientifics were studing the posibility of the spanish can discover Australia before the english
They did, why is called Australia? Because the Spanish crown was the family of Autria, as the Philipines, the name of the Spanish king Felipe II, the Mariannes Is. the name of the Spanish queen, and most of the isleans in that area.

I don't understand why Spain is not in the game.

Blas, poderoso caballero es Don dinero, gran cita de Quevedo:D, un saludo y felicidades, creo que eres el primero que sale a defender España :D a ver si te puedo ayudo :D

Arctic_Wolf
3rd Jan 2005, 10:25
Blas_de_lezo: Can you rephrase some of that please? I can't reply to it if I can't understand it.

Blas_de_Lezo
3rd Jan 2005, 12:55
ok , :p but tell me the phrase that you dont understand , and i will try to rephrase it . ;)

Arctic_Wolf
4th Jan 2005, 20:03
Mostly this,


web only abaout this battle, and it was spanish, and i can say you more webs like this, but you can say me any english web of the battle of Cartagena de Indias ? of the battle of Tolon ? of the first battle of Cabo de San Vicente ?

And if " some spanish texts tend not to say much about how inexperianced the leader of the Spanish Armada was" it s because the spanis leader of the Armada .
DONT WERE INEXPERTS

and I think this,


and in more times our Armada was most Powerfull that the english dont forget this.

Is a misunderstanding. From an English point of view Spain only had one armada, the one that tried to invade England. An armada isn't the same as a navy. i.e the Spanish Navy was more powerful than the British Navy not armada. Also I why are you giving me all this,


Do you have to remember that the spanish discover America ( and now Australian cientifics were studing the posibility of the spanish can discover Australia before the english) , we were the first to contact to the Japanese in the other part of the word, to do the first to turn over araound the world , and in the military field , we were the first to incorporate cannons in the ships , we win to the Ottomans fleet in 1571 in the battle of Lepanto, Aragon and then Spain dominate the Mediterranium IV centurys , we were all the history fighting versus the pirates , we stay all the XVI century having naval battles versus the french , we win the english in Tolon , Cabo de San Vicente , Cartagena de Indias , etc ... we have good marines like Blas de Lezo , Luis Vicente Velasco ,we conquered four times the important city of Oran , we build the Santisima Trinidad , and more things more , so please dont say that the spanish were inexperts marines. We were one of the countrys ( i think that first British, sencond Spain , and then Portugal , France and Italy ) whit the best marines , and in more times our Armada was most Powerfull that the english dont forget this.

I wasn't trying to get into an argument about the British Navy versus the Spanish. I was merely putting forward an example, you put a British defeat and a question, I put a spanish defeat and a possible answer. If you want such an argument then you are barking at the wrong person, I just know that Britain had one of the best and later the best navy since the late 16th, early 17th Century, I'm not an expert in Naval History.

Blas_de_Lezo
5th Jan 2005, 13:45
Arctic_Wolf : " I wasn't trying to get into an argument about the British Navy versus the Spanish. I was merely putting forward an example, you put a British defeat and a question, I put a spanish defeat and a possible answer"

aaaaa ok ok , when i read this the first time, i interpret whit other meaning , i think that you are saying that the marines of the spanish navy were inexperts.

Arctic_Wolf : "Is a misunderstanding. From an English point of view Spain only had one armada, the one that tried to invade England. An armada isn't the same as a navy. i.e the Spanish Navy was more powerful than the British Navy not armada."


aaaaaaamm, the problem is that in Spain , our navy calls " Real Armada " , and in Englad your navy it `s the-- " Royal Navy " ??, ok ok , it was a mistake. ( so when you say Armada , for me it means our navy ).


But you say : "tend not to say much about how inexperianced the leader of the Spanish Armada was, what with him just being the most conveniant noble for the job and instead focus on how bad the weather was, everone has some level of bias."

The " Armada Invencible " that in 1588 wants to invaded englad , was destroy for a bad weather , remember that Englands ships only destroy 1 ship of the Armada , and then for a big storm , the Armada have to change their course arround the english coast to return to spain , because the storm destroy the ships.

I put a british defeat ( it was relacionate whit the period of Imperial glory ) because other put a spanish defeat ( Trafalgar) , it `s the same , and if you put other battles abaout the period of IG it ´s perferc , because they were a part of the game . ;)

Arctic_Wolf
5th Jan 2005, 15:59
Originally posted by Blas_de_Lezo
i think that you are saying that the marines of the spanish navy were inexperts.

No I was saying that that the person who was in command of the "Armada Invincible" was inexperienced, he wasn't an admiral and he often couldn't even bear to be at sea. I think he was Medina Sidonia or some such.


Originally posted by Blas_de_Lezo
Arctic_Wolf : "Is a misunderstanding. From an English point of view Spain only had one armada, the one that tried to invade England. An armada isn't the same as a navy. i.e the Spanish Navy was more powerful than the British Navy not armada."

aaaaaaamm, the problem is that in Spain , our navy calls " Real Armada " , and in Englad your navy it `s the-- " Royal Navy " ??, ok ok , it was a mistake. ( so when you say Armada , for me it means our navy ).

Yes, that is why I said there was misunderstanding. :D


Originally posted by Blas_de_Lezo
The " Armada Invencible " that in 1588 wants to invaded englad , was destroy for a bad weather , remember that Englands ships only destroy 1 ship of the Armada , and then for a big storm , the Armada have to change their course arround the english coast to return to spain , because the storm destroy the ships.

Well it was more than bad weather that defeated the armada, rushed and incomplete planning, poor preperations, logistical idiocies and an inexperianced leader that did a lot more damage, most ship even had the wrong size cannonballs for their cannons. And while the english didn't destroy or even do very serious damage to the armada, they stopped it from meeting up with the duke of parma's army and scattered it at Calais with fireships, the captains cut their cables and left their anchors behind. It was only after the battle of Gravelines when the Armada sailed back that the weather destroyed them. And if they were sailing home, doesn't that mean they'd admitted defeat? :rolleyes:

I won't pretend that the english won that outright, they had a great deal of luck on their side, however they did have some part in it.


it `s the same , and if you put other battles abaout the period of IG it ´s perferc , because they were a part of the game .

I completely see where you are coming from now. At first I thought that you were posting for just a 'spur of the moment', random, reason. I look forward to further contributions from you, however I don't know much at all about the napoleonic period, its something they never taught me in school and I've been to lazy to find out myself. :rolleyes:

jones sgs
6th Jan 2005, 00:32
From what i remember about the Commander of the Spanish Armada he was actually a Nobleman in the Spain not even a Sailor this led to him misunderstanding/ misreading the situation and some of the errors he made. His biggest problem was that he had to meet with Spanish army in Calais.

Willmore
6th Jan 2005, 03:16
You are correct, in fact, the nobleman didn't want the command. He even told Philip II that the only time he was on water, he got sea-sick ! Despite all that, he was given the command.

Isn't that something ?

Blas_de_Lezo
7th Jan 2005, 18:54
yes , the person who command the "Armada invencible " was the duke of Medina-sidonia, and he was bad marine , ( and he miss the oportunity of destroy the english fleet ) , but later of the battle of Gravelines the spanish Army semi-group and in conditions to pick up the troops of the duke of Parma that were in Dunkerke , and then invaded England whit the famous " tercios españoles " ( the english fleet speend all his gunpowder and they have to return to home ) but the bad weather chage all .

It`s true that Medina-Sidonia was inexpert and bad marine, but he hold the english atacks of Drake .
The spanish army lose for the bad weather , and for the bad organization ( the duke of Parma have to stay in Calais , but he was in Dunkerke ) .



Willmore : "Teneriffe being his only defeat. "

In other post i put the same , bad this is false .
When Nelson was comodoro , lose a little naval battle 1796 versus the spanish navy ( only where 2 english ships and 3 spanish ) , this lose don`t have importance .
And in 1798 Nelson and Jervis lose in their try to conquer Cadiz, that was defendant by Mazarredo . ( other lose no more important )

I don`t know if he lose other battles .



"De qué le sirve a los ingleses
tener fragatas ligeras
si saben que Mazarredo
tiene lanchas cañoneras"

marine_fran
8th Jan 2005, 14:20
Blas de Lezo, i'm sure you read the history in Meristation. ;) ;) ;)

The history is interesant, but the game is for Napoleonic Wars.

Bye

Blas_de_Lezo
8th Jan 2005, 17:51
Que yo sepa meristation es de juegos y no de historia .
Ya se que es de la epoca napoleonica, y mi primer mensaje fue de dicha epoca , pero luego salieron hablando de la armada invencible , y unicamente me he limitado a contestales .
jeje me alegro de ver otro español por aqui ;)

sick
8th Jan 2005, 23:25
Dude, please speak a language we all understand. Thanks.
Interesting post by the way, I quite enjoyed it.:)

Cmdre Caldwell
10th Jan 2005, 17:57
No offence but by the time of the Napleonic Wars.... Spain was a spent force and nothing more than a French Puppet, the basques in the north were the only real resistance to french occupation and we all know they arn't spanish anyway.

Why are you concentrating on skirmishes rather than decisive sea battles during the Nap Wars.......?

Casaca_Blanca
10th Jan 2005, 18:45
Yeah, of course...battles in Saragosse, Vitoria, 2th May 1808 in Madrid, Bailén, Talavera, Albuera, Valencia...were not important???
Were skirmishes...of course.
And... even more, those cities (except Vitoria) were not basques!!!! Wow, you are leaning!!!!

(Saragosse is a legend for our century, Lord Byron)

I'll just tell you that basques in XIX cent. were one of the most Spanish nacionalist people in the country. Simply, you don't know nothing about Spain and you post...

I also guess that you've never been in a boat, mr. comodore.

One last thing... the battle of Trafalgar, was not aganist Russians.

Reading is not a bad thing my friend.

Cmdre Caldwell
10th Jan 2005, 21:13
Did you read my post?

I said sea battles.........And the battles you mentioned were land battles, this whole thread is about spain at sea, and the battles you mention yes I know about them, quite alot infact as Im well read on the 'Peninsular War' and battles within Spain.

As for me knowing nothing about spain or its history, yep i suppose you're right having a Basque girlfriend and only just returned from spain yet again after celebrating my 5th Xmas with her family and friends means nothing. I have to know something about spanish history believe me.....I'd not be forgiven.

As for the Euskalun, dont confuse pro-monarchy for pro napoleon, ever heard of Division de Navarra? If not, you better read up on your spanish history.

Me been in a boat, yep many atime, you?

Trafalgar.... Not against russia!!!! really.....(checks history books) Yep you're right, gee you're clever.

Look perhaps you think Ive got something against spain, your wrong, its a great nation with wonderful generous people....I was stating my opinion on spain during the occupation of Napoleon. So just chill hombre!

Casaca_Blanca
10th Jan 2005, 21:33
Well, I'm sorry for speaking before knowing. Sorry.

But, Spain was not a puppet of French, plese, read the post "Why is not Iberi?" .

SEA battles like Trafalgar were in Spain.

This post is not only for sea battles, it's a way to make the question to the developers of why is not Spain included?

Last time I saw the map of Spanish provinces... Navarra was not part of the Basque province.

I also have Basque friends and they consider themselves as Spanish... you can't say that someone is not from a country.
I supose that you are proud of been British... so... I won't say you are not British.

Best wishes

Cmdre Caldwell
10th Jan 2005, 22:33
Look Im not here to talk about current spanish politics..... we know how heated that can get. I'm only interested here, on this thread, about Spain and its navy during the Napoleonic War.

As for Spain not being a puppet of France under napoleon, please....what of Joseph Bonaparte!!!!!

Casaca_Blanca
11th Jan 2005, 14:14
Did you read the post I recomend you?

One thing was the wishes of Napoleon of placing his brother in the Spanish trone.

In the other hand, it's the real life.
Spanish didn't fight for Napoleon... we fought Aganist Napoleon, and you should know that he refered to us a the "Spanish ulcer".
When you have a puppet, you (ussually) don't call it "ulcer".

350.000 French dead... numbers speak for their own.

"This self-denial, transformed in heroism made the glory of Spain" Ernest Merimée

Cmdre Caldwell
11th Jan 2005, 18:45
I have read the Iberia post....

I'm confused where you are getting your information from by saying that spain never fought alongside Napoleon!

Have you ever heard of Casapalicious's Division who fought at Vitoria with the french?

Have you heard of Lieutenant-General Juan Caraffa and his corp of 5,000 men who fought under Junot in the invasion of portugal?

I'm cant believe your not aware of the Invasion of 1807, spanish forces numbering some 17,000 formed up in vigo, badajos and Cuidad Rodrigo to attack its neighbour with France. Yes as the War went on, spain slowly allied with Wellington, but at first you were a full blown ally of Napoleon and turned later.

Casaca_Blanca
12th Jan 2005, 16:49
Yes, and a invading force to conquer Denmark.
But, what I'm traying to tell you is that it was not the complete army. I can assure that maybe 1/4.

Of course there was a pro-french side, and also in G.B. that wanted to deal with Napoleon.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, Are you saying that Spain was a fickle nation?
When Napoleon came...we where with Napoleon and
When Wellington came... we went with Wellington???

Cmdre Caldwell
12th Jan 2005, 19:11
Originally posted by Casaca_Blanca
Of course there was a pro-french side, and also in G.B. that wanted to deal with Napoleon.

Pro-Napoleon in GB, Pro French in England!!!! Are you serious.... Never sir, where are you getting these facts from or is this what you think happened!


Correct me if I'm wrong but, Are you saying that Spain was a fickle nation?
When Napoleon came...we where with Napoleon and
When Wellington came... we went with Wellington???

No I'm saying you stood no chance in a war against the super power of Europe France, so you did what you had to do to survive. Which in this case was to Ally and support France....

When Britain entered Portugal some in Spain saw an opportunity to regain control of their nation, from the hands of the French oppressors.

As for a 1/4 of the army supporting Napoleon against Portugal, no sir it was all of the Spanish forces under French overall command.

I sorry Casaca_Blanca but have you read Napoleonic history or are you just commenting on things you've heard, its serious question . I know history has many versions but Im interested in which Author thinks this stuff up?

Blas_de_Lezo
22nd Jan 2005, 20:44
Cmdr_Caldwell : "No offence but by the time of the Napleonic Wars.... Spain was a spent force and nothing more than a French Puppet"


In napoleonics wars spain was the most bigguest imperium ( in extension ) lake 100 prusias or 50 austrias , was the first country to win the frenchs in a land battle , the spanish navy capture the french navy in Cadiz , have the 2º most powerfull navy , in spain die 475000 french soldiers and the same napoleon said that his biggues mistake was invade spain... i think that you don`t know nothing abaout the role that play spain in this period.


Cmdr_Caldwell : "the basques in the north were the only real resistance to french occupation "

And Galicia, Navarra ,Zaragoza ,Cataluña ,Madrid , Valencia, Palencia , Leon ? , only in the basque country ? you are sure?

Cmdr_Caldwell :"and we all know they arn't( the basques ) spanish anyway."

What??????? that the basques aren`t spanish ??? :mad: :mad: :mad:
Why do you speak abaout the nacionalism basque if you don`t know nothing abaout it?
The basques were of Castilla since the XI century , basques are Blas de Lezo ( that destroy the english in Cartagena de Indias ) , or Churruca ( that die in the Battle of Trafalgar fighting for spain ) , or El Cano ( that do the first travell round the worl of the history ) , a big part of the expedition of Colon that discover america were basques and more of the soldiers that conquer de Aztec and Maya imperiums , the basques were in the war of Castilla versus Portugal ( in the XV century )the most faithful soldiers of castilla , and the basques capture in the battle of Pavia ( 1525) the french king Franciso I ,and more...
Introduce the basque nacionalism in a post of the Napoleonics wars it`s stupid , because the basque nacionalims was invented by Sabino Arana Goiri in 1860.
If you want to speak abaout nacionalism , you can speak abaout scotland or wales or of the north of irland, but don`t speak of something that you don `t know.

Cmdr_Caldwell :"Why are you concentrating on skirmishes rather than decisive sea battles during the Nap Wars.......?"

aaaaaaaa, it`s only a skirmishes because the english lose ?? , i put because i thing that it`s interesting . If you read some of the post you can see that some people thinks that Nelson never lose a battle . You want important battles of the napoleonics wars ? put a post of they , put post abaout the Battle of trafalgar or of the Cabo de San Vicente . ( if you put it , i go to read they and participate , or if you prefer put a reply whit other battle that you think that it`s important and interesting). i think that you are angry because i put battles that the english lose.

Cmdr_Caldwell: "As for the Euskalun, dont confuse pro-monarchy for pro napoleon, ever heard of Division de Navarra? "

Navarra it`s one thing , and the basque country it`s other . Navarra wants to continue being spain , and the basques said that navarra was of the basque country, but this is false , because navarra never be of the basque country .



Cmdr_Caldwell :"When Britain entered Portugal some in Spain saw an opportunity to regain control of their nation, from the hands of the French oppressors."

this it`s false , spain don`t start the war when the english came . The english came to help the spanish when all the country was fighting versus the french, ( and only 75000 engish soldiers , that were feed by the spanish ).

Cmdr_Caldwell : "As for a 1/4 of the army supporting Napoleon against Portugal, no sir it was all of the Spanish forces under French overall command."

Because they were allied , but when the french soldiers were in spain to conquer portugal , they betray to spain , and attack it , so the war starts.
If you want speak abaout battles of the Napoleon period put a post of they , no of thing that you dont know like the basque nacionalism .


Pd : i write a reply but it dessapear , and now i have to repeat it . Someone knows why ?? :confused: ;) :p

sick
22nd Jan 2005, 20:49
The forum got upgraded and I think the latest database backup didn't contain your post. :(

Casaca_Blanca
23rd Jan 2005, 01:02
Comodore, I'll tell you many times as you want... it's not the same an allied than a puppet.
Are you a fan of the Muppets? you've got an obsession with Spain was a puppet of France.

They were allies by the terms of the treaty of San Ildefonso, the troops of Spain, were commanded by the Spanish.
We made our part of the deal...they wanted to invade Portugal, so we opened our border to the French to come in.

But, oh, surprise it was the way the french were trying to conquer Spain. They placed their troops in the fortresses and... the war begun, the regular army and the civilians took the weapons a fought the french.

Wich book did I read for take this Information?
Many, since books of English hispanists of university of London, to "Episodios Nacionales" by Benito Perez Galdós.

One last thing... In G.B. there was a part of the goverment that wanted to pact a peace with Napoleon. And now... tell me what did you read for saying that any one was pro-french in U.K?????