RE: [eia] Napoleonic Naval Site

[Michael Gorman <mpgorman@xxxxxxxx>]

At 11:28 PM 12/12/2004, you wrote:
> I'll insert a little follow-on to Mike's observation regarding the
> success of the Royal Navy : Theodore Roosevelt wrote what I think is
> still widely held to be the premier analysis of the naval conflict in
> the War of 1812.  In it, he notes that during the 20 years preceding
> 1812 there were over 200 one-on-one battles between a British ship and a
> ship of another nationality in which the nominally weakest ship was no
> less than half the strength of the more powerful vessel.  (Roosevelt
> spent some time developing metrics to assess the relative strength of
> warships.)  Roosevelt noted that of those 200 battles over 20 years the
> British ship was defeated in only five.  Certainly not all of the others
> resulted in the British capturing or destroying their opponent, but
> disparity was nevertheless huge.  He goes on to gloat (yes, gloat) that
> in 1812 the British subsequently went 0 for 5 against the Americans,
> losing three frigates and two sloops.  Say it with me: USA! USA! USA!
>
> Here's Roosevelt's book on Project Gutenberg.  It's good stuff
> historically, as well as a very insightful example of how writing
> standards have changed over the centuries.
>
> http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/9104

Yeah, there are several comments I've seen that when the British went and 
sent more ships over and started strengthening blockades and defeating some 
of the American frigates that it was a major psychological comfort for the 
British who weren't used to hearing about defeats.  But even after that I 
noticed the Constitution and the Wasp featured frequently in British losses 
throughout the war of 1812.

_______________________________________________
eia mailing list
eia@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia