see, the oft-repeated assertion
that it was imitated from the Dutch is contrary to all the evidence
and quite untenable. The only experience the framers of the order of
1653 can have had of a line ahead formation must have been in our own
service.

The clearest proof of this lies in the annexed orders which Tromp
issued on June 20, 1652, immediately before the declaration of war,
and after he had had his brush with Blake, in which, if Gibson is to
be trusted, Tromp had seen Blake's line. From these orders it is
clear that the Dutch conception of a naval action was still
practically identical with that of Lindsey's instructions of 1635,
that is, mutual support of squadrons or groups, with no trace of a
regular battle formation. In the detailed 'organisation' of the fleet
each of the three squadrons has its own three flag officers--that is
to say, it was organised, like that of Lord Wimbledon in 1625, in
three squadrons and nine sub-squadrons, and was therefore clearly
designed for group tactics. It is on this point alone, if at all, that
it can be said to show any advance on the tactics which had obtained
throughout the century, or on those which Tromp himself had adopted
against Oquendo in 1639.

Yet further proof is to be found in the orders issued by Witte
Corneliszoon de With to his captains in October 1652, as
commander-in-chief of the Dutch fleet. In these he very strictly
enjoins, as a matter of real importance, 'that they shall all keep
close up by the others and as near together as possible, to the end
that thereby they may act with united force ... and prevent any
isolation or cutting off of ships occurring in time of fight;' adding
'that it behoved them to stand by and relieve one another loyally, and
rescue such as might be hotly attacked.' This is clearly no more than
an amplification of Tromp's order of the previous June. It introduces
no new principle, and is obviously based on the time-honoured idea of
group tactics and mutual support. It is true that De Jonghe, the
learned historian of the Dutch navy, regards it as conclusive that the
line was then in use by the Dutch, because, as he says, several Dutch
captains, after the next action, were found guilty and condemned for
not having observed their instructions. But really there is nothing
in it from which a line can be inferred. It is all explained on the
theory of groups. And in spite of De Jonghe's deep research and his
anxiety to show that the line