Rebels and Traitors: An Epic Novel of the English Civil War

[Cubster]

Sorry, I fail to see how a couple of photographs of your models proves the El Gamo's guns were not higher than the Speedy's. What you've shown us is some photographs of your models, showing neither HMS Speedy nor the El Gamo. Since there is no set template for the size of an 18th century brig-sloop, nor a frigate-xebec, nor a way of knowing how low in the water either vessel was during the action, please explain how you know the El Gamo's guns were not higher than the Speedy's.

[Invisible officer]

Speedy had a hull of Cutter form but with Brig rigging, very similar in hight to my Cutter. A good contemporary watercolour is in National Maritime museum NMM ref PAF 7970. The plan is available: NMM neg DR 3577. I have copies but can not post them for copyright reasons. But you will find them in books like Nelson against Napoleon, edited by Gardiner.
The Spanish plans in Museo Naval in Madrid show a typical Xebec hull with a low gundeck.The story of the overshooting guns caused by hight is not to be found in Cochranes own report from 1801.

Cochrane told nice stories, if he was able to wear 7 x 4pdr balls in his pockets (as claimed by him as a joke) he must have had big pockets. Explains why he was so prize money hungry to fill them.

Cochrane complaint a lot that El Gamo was not purchased by the RN, that would have brought him much more prize money. There had been Polacre rigged shipy in RN in that area so the rigging was not the reason. In fact El Gamo's rigging looked like a sloops one. (=a mini frigate). But it was found not be usefull as a warship, being not very seaworthy. Strange for a high bord frigate
Since staff officers participated in prize money we can be sure that it was nothing personal against him. Everything usefull was bought (or hired) for the RN.

Cochrane promoted the story of the "frigate", it was one by name only. In 1750 ships like that served as frigates but in 1801 they are just sloops. A good watercolour of a Spanish ship of El Gamo type with 11 guns in main battery is to be found under NMM ref PAF8226 Much lower than a frigate. Cute vessel.
Even if balls would miss the Speedy a load of grape would have hit in any case and the gun blast of a 12pdr is not funny too.
Sorry to insist, but I did a lot of research on Napoleonic ships for modelling.Going back to the original reports, plans and pictures, not those done much later. We all know the stories told by veterans. Every German tank became a king tiger.

[Invisible officer]

And now my praise of Cochrane.
He won by clever use of the wind. The Spanish guns missed simply because the wind caused the Spanish ship to heel. The Spanish Commander was unable to alter his sail setting to rectify that. He would have lost speed and Speedy (fitting name) would have danced around him, hitting him at will from the bow. Add bad gunnery training and low moral and........
Aubrey wins by a fictional tactical disadvantage of the Spaniard. Cochrane by good seamanship and with a superior crew. He praised the training standard that his men got by his predecessors.

[Cubster]

So you guessed then.

Or inotherwords ... you don't know.

Funny how this unsuitable and unseaworthy vessel was deemed suitable by the Spanish to house 32 guns (as against the Speedy's 14).

In case anyone missed that, the queston remains unanswered and rather than subject the board to more assumed superiority and didactic evasion I just recommend they read the account of the action themselves.

Lesson one, anyone can claim anything on the internet.

[mikeland]

But going back to the actual pint of the tread, the enjoyment of fiction by an individual depends often on their ability to suspend disbelief. If you can believe the events of the story without characters actions etc 'pulling you out' of the fiction then you will probably enjoy the story (book, film, t.v., a painting, whatever). However if something pulls you out of that, e.g. a badly written character, bad acting, shabby special effect's in films even, then this can spoil the enjoyment.

So often our enjoyment of a work of fiction depends on how far we are willing to 'suspend our disbelief'. For example if I were reading a Commando comic library I would probably be expecting a lower level of historical accuracy than I would out of a book like Rebels and Traitors, so I don't mind that not everything in the commando story is entirely plausible. As a result it often depends on your own attitude when you pick the book up to read it.

The other thing that effects this is how much knowledge we have of a particular time period. The ECW is a period of history I have studied and read up on for over 20 years and as a result I would notice more flaws in a fictional account if the ECW than I do when reading the Sharpe books (my knowledge of the Napoleonic wars is fairly basic).

I wont, on reflection, even be trying Rebels and Traitors, because I have found nearly all fiction about the ECW irritating and so I wont invest my cash or time in it. But I'm sure others will read it and love it, and it might inspire them to go and make a great big 28mm Civil War army... all good

[Cubster]

Commando comic rocks. I used to love all the little 'Factfile' pages with technical info on various weapons and vehicles.

[mikeland]

Commando comic rocks. I used to love all the little 'Factfile' pages with technical info on various weapons and vehicles.

Yes, they are great. I have loved them for decades, till pick the odd one up now and then from smiths if the title catches my eye, I always like the Infantry, or airborne, never seem to get along so well with the naval ones... again all personal choice.

[Invisible officer]

Sorry, no guess, hard facts. Research in museums and original reports produces informations, for historic facts reading novels is just waste of time.

If you decide to ignore the original plans and drawings (I even gave advice how to find them ) and Cochranes own 1801 report (In London Gazette Issue 15393 published on the 1 August 1801. Page 3 of 12 ) and decide to believe O*Brians fiction IO can just surrender.

Lesson one, anyone can claim anything on the internet. may be understood by me that you want to imply that I invent the informations. With the sources finding places given a strange idea. Would be a little bit risky if someone have a look. (For those who own the book mentioned, see p. 94 for the Speedy plan and p. 96 for the El Gamo type Xebec watercolour from 1780)

Audley is a bad carricature of the superb seaman and noble born gentleman Cochrane. But excactly what some novel readers seem to like to read about the Audleys and Sharpes. Fiction showing underdogs copied from the deeds of historic gentlemen of quality. For a chapter of the Sir Harry Smith Autobiography I would burn all Cornwell novels.

[Cubster]

Your original complaint was - "And his fight of a frigate chebeque shows that he never looked at the ships plan, claiming it to have a high freeboard and its gun firing over the heroes vessel."

Let's ignore the fact that this is incorrect. He says the xebec's deck was low in the water, but the sloop's was lower, not that the xebec had a high freeboard. He is writing of two fictional vessels, albeit based on actual vessels. Nothing you have since claimed explains how you know the El Gamo's guns were not higher than HMS Speedy's, nor how the two fictional vessels cannot be thus. Plans and watercolours show absolutely nothing, what you need to prove for your assertion to ring true is that at the time of the action, the deck, and thus the guns, of the El Gamo were not in fact higher than those of HMS Speedy ... and in fact that no xebec's guns could be higher than a sloop's. Given the various factors which influence this, your claim is based on ... guessing.

[Invisible officer]

I have signed the capitulation and you still shoot at me.


O'Brian, Cornwell, Kent, they all wrote for an audience that want action. Riflemen with heavy Cavalry swords or Nock volley guns, Frigates with 32pdr Carronades, family swords, close friends among the non officers, all these nice fictious spleens of the heroes.
And O'Brian invents ships that never existed like the high board Xebec (a contradiction) , an officer trying a gun of impossible size for his small vessel and a ship doctor that behaves like an idiot in naval matters and a genius on land. I realy hated this figure. On his first RN trip I may take that but being on sea again and again? Can you imagin such a person?