![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Title: The Sea Warriors
Author: Richard Woodman
Genre: History (19th C British naval warfare)
Thingummies: 2
Synopsis: All the minor naval battles of the Napoleonic era.
Thoughts: When writing history, there are two different strategies. You can write at a very high level, talking about overall themes of events, or you can write from the trenches, giving the blow-by-blow. This book, unfortunately, chooses a middle route, giving just enough detail to be really boring.
So I now "know" (although I doubt I'll remember, as they all blend together) about dozens or perhaps even a hundred extremely minor naval battles between ships that are nearly interchangeable and quite a few officers who might as well be interchangeable, too. He relates the details of each battle. But not from a personal viewpoint of a combatant, so it isn't exciting. Nor does he explain why the commanders chose either their tactics or strategy, so you don't really learn much. Nor does he explain in much detail how the overall war creates the circumstance of any given battle, nor how the battle influences the war.
My guess is that the latter is missing because for the most part, these battles don't influence the war. Woodward seems to have made a very deliberate choice to not include anything that is important. Perhaps he feels others have covered the important battles, so he shouldn't have to. But the destruction of Napoleon's fleet in Egypt is only alluded to, the Battle of Copenhagen gets about two lines, and Trafalgar itself receives a paragraph. We get an entire chapter on the mopping up after Trafalgar, though. Nelson basically doesn't appear in this book. Instead, we learn a great deal about the time this one minor French captain beat an Indiaman, and the time this other British guy beat an American ship. None of which is important.
The glossary at the back is pretty great, though.
Author: Richard Woodman
Genre: History (19th C British naval warfare)
Thingummies: 2
Synopsis: All the minor naval battles of the Napoleonic era.
Thoughts: When writing history, there are two different strategies. You can write at a very high level, talking about overall themes of events, or you can write from the trenches, giving the blow-by-blow. This book, unfortunately, chooses a middle route, giving just enough detail to be really boring.
So I now "know" (although I doubt I'll remember, as they all blend together) about dozens or perhaps even a hundred extremely minor naval battles between ships that are nearly interchangeable and quite a few officers who might as well be interchangeable, too. He relates the details of each battle. But not from a personal viewpoint of a combatant, so it isn't exciting. Nor does he explain why the commanders chose either their tactics or strategy, so you don't really learn much. Nor does he explain in much detail how the overall war creates the circumstance of any given battle, nor how the battle influences the war.
My guess is that the latter is missing because for the most part, these battles don't influence the war. Woodward seems to have made a very deliberate choice to not include anything that is important. Perhaps he feels others have covered the important battles, so he shouldn't have to. But the destruction of Napoleon's fleet in Egypt is only alluded to, the Battle of Copenhagen gets about two lines, and Trafalgar itself receives a paragraph. We get an entire chapter on the mopping up after Trafalgar, though. Nelson basically doesn't appear in this book. Instead, we learn a great deal about the time this one minor French captain beat an Indiaman, and the time this other British guy beat an American ship. None of which is important.
The glossary at the back is pretty great, though.
