order of battle such as he had been
accustomed to ashore. The fleet had already been divided into three
squadrons, the Dutch contingent forming a fourth, but beyond this, we
are told, nothing had been done 'about the form of a sea fight.' Under
the new system it will be seen each of the English squadrons was to be
further divided into three sub-squadrons of nine ships, and these
apparently were to sail three deep, as in Drake's parade formation of
1588, and were to 'discharge and fall off three and three as they were
filed in the list,' or order of battle. That is, instead of the ships
of each squadron attacking in succession as the previous orders had
enjoined, they were to act in groups of three, with a reserve in
support. The Dutch, it was expressly provided, were not to be bound by
these orders, but were to be free 'to observe their own order and
method of fighting.' What this was is not stated, but there can be no
doubt that the reference is to the boarding tactics which the Dutch,
in common with all continental navies, continued to prefer to the
English method of first overpowering the enemy with the guns. This
proviso, in view of the question as to what country it was that first
perfected a single line ahead, should be borne in mind.
As appears from the minutes of the council of war, printed below,
Love's revolutionary orders met with strong opposition. Still, so
earnest was Cecil in pressing them, and so well conceived were many of
the articles that they were not entirely rejected, but were recognised
as a counsel of perfection, which, though not binding, was to be
followed as near as might be. Their effect upon the officers, or some
of them, was that they understood the 'order of fight' to be as
follows:--'The several admirals to be in square bodies' (that is, each
flag officer would command a division or sub-squadron formed in three
ranks of three files), 'and to give their broadsides by threes and so
fall off. The rear-admiral to stand for a general reserve, and not to
engage himself without great cause.'[2] The confusion, however, must
have been considerable and the difference of opinion great as to how
far the new orders were binding; for the 'Journal of the Vanguard'
merely notes that a council was called on the 11th 'wherein some
things were debated touching the well ordering of the fleet,' and with
this somewhat contemptuous entry the subject is dismissed.
Still it must be said that on the whole thes
|