Painting from the 15th Century Chronicles by Jean Froissart. Sluys was a decisive naval battle at the start of the Hundred Years' War. 190 French ships and 16-20,000 men were lost compared to 2 ships and 4-600 men for the English. Sluys ensured that the English Channel remained under English control.
Damage sustained by the brig in battle
On May 19, 1829, the Mercury, an 18-gun brig of the Russian Empire's Black Sea Fleet, engaged in battle with two Ottoman ships of the line. The Mercury was built in Sevastopol in 1820, carrying 18 24-pounder carronades and 2 8-pounder guns, with a crew of 115 men.
In May 1829, three Russian ships—the 44-gun frigate Standart, the 20-gun brig Orpheus, and the 20-gun brig Mercury—were cruising near the exit of the Bosphorus Strait. On May 14, an Ottoman squadron of 6 ships of the line, 2 frigates, and 2 sloops appeared. A chase ensued, and the Standart raised the signal: "Each vessel to choose the course on which it has its best speed." The Mercury fell behind, and two Ottoman ships were able to catch up.
It must be said right away that completely reconstructing the events of that day is currently an impossible task. Very little is known from the Ottoman side; there is only a mention that the Turks pursued and unsuccessfully fired upon the brig. From the Russian side, we have Captain Kazarsky’s report and a damage report of the brig with a diagram. Due to the lack of clarity from the Turkish side, we do not even know exactly which ships opposed the brig—one was identified as the 110-gun Selimiye (it was indeed part of the Turkish squadron and, apparently, truly participated in the battle), while the second was identified as the 74-gun Real-bei. This is a problem, as no such ship exists in the Turkish fleet lists. Which ship Kazarsky actually had in mind remains unknown.
Nevertheless, let us continue. The Ottoman ships were overtaking the brig, which was attempting to escape using oars, and had already begun firing their bow chasers.
A council of officers was gathered on board the brig. It is unlikely that any of them doubted that accepting battle would be the brig's last. As Kazarsky writes in his report to the commander of the Black Sea Fleet, Admiral Greig, Navigator Corps Lieutenant Prokofiev was asked to speak first. He proposed: "To blow up the brig when it is driven to the extreme." Kazarsky continues: "As a result of this opinion, adopted unanimously by all, it was decided to defend ourselves to the last possibility, and if the masts and rigging are shot away or a major leak opens, then to grapple with the nearest enemy ship, and whichever officer remains alive must ignite the powder magazine, for which a pistol was placed upon the capstan."
The brig maneuvered, preventing the ships of the line from firing a broadside while returning fire, attempting to damage their rigging. The shelling yielded results—in his report, Kazarsky writes that first, the 110-gun ship’s water-stay was shot through and its main rigging was damaged, after which the ship hauled to the wind and lay-to, ending the pursuit. Then, according to Kazarsky, the second ship’s fore-yard was shot down, and the sail covered the ports of the bow guns. The chase was called off, and the Mercury escaped. As a result of the battle, the Mercury sustained 22 hits to the hull, 133 holes in the sails, 16 instances of damage to the masts and spars, and 148 to the rigging. One carronade was damaged, and all rowing boats were destroyed. 4 people were killed and 6 wounded, including the captain.
The case is, without a doubt, interesting. In the official Russian version, everything sounds much more definitive and victorious, but I have tried to express a more neutral point of view. To be honest, I doubt that the Selimiye actually stopped the pursuit due to rigging damage—the distance was likely at least 400 meters, and Kazarsky could easily have seen what he wanted to see. However, I am more inclined to believe in the downed yard on the 74-gun ship—lucky shots do happen, and Kazarsky could hardly have mistaken a falling fore-yard for something else. The massive number of holes in the Mercury raises questions for me, but is likely explained by the Turks using heavy grapeshot. In any case, it is a unique instance—a brig gave battle to ships of the line, was fired upon by them, and survived, while its opponents failed to achieve their goal. This event reminds me very much of the battle between the Sophie and French ships of the line from the book Master and Commander. Only this time, Kazarsky proved luckier than Captain Aubrey. And, of course, this story brings to mind the Greek brig Ares, which became famous around the same time
Interestingly, the brig received its name from the naval sloop Mercury (purchased in England; commander—Robert Crown, a British subject in Russian service), which during the Russo-Swedish War of 1788–1790 captured the Swedish 44-gun frigate Venus.
Today marks the anniversary of Admiral George Anson's victory at the Battle of Cape Finisterre, 1747. Anson's western squadron of 14 ships of the line captured the 4 French ships of the line escorting a merchant convey into France. They also captured 4 of the 8 frigates, all 4 corvettes and 6 of the 30 merchantmen in the convoy.
After initially attempting to form a line of battle, Anson abandoned the line and ordered a general chase in response to a French attempt to frustrate a battle. Anson had been anticipating this sort of event, especially after the failure at Toulon, and had issued specific fighting instructions to his captains for fighting out of formation when chasing. The Devonshire (66) of Rear Admiral Warren, Namur (74) of future Admiral Boscawen and Centurion (50) were heavily involved in the fighting.
The battle was notable for several reasons. Firstly, it proved the strategic effectiveness of Anson's western squadron - that is, a squadron of ships patrolling between the Scilly Isles and Brittany - in excersizing Sea power. It also saw the capture of L'Invincle (74), a French ship described by her captors as fit for 'all purposes desired of a ship of war', which would set in motion a revolution in British ship design that copied the successful French 74s (13 of Nelson's 14 ships at the battle of the Nile were descendant's of L'Invincible). Anson also successfully implemented a battle strategy that involved abandoning the established practice of forming a line and fighting what Nelson would describe as a 'pell-mell battle'. Needless to say, this strategy would be copied in future generations when the need to force a battle was paramount.
The battle was fought off the south coast of Ireland, where the French had been resupplying a Jacobite-Irish-French rebellion under the command of the recently deposed King James II. On spotting the English fleet of 19 ships, the French Admiral Châteaurenault (with 24 ships plus frigates) gave orders to weigh anchor and a running battle ensued in which the English were chased out of the bay and away from the landing site.
After four hours of long distance fighting the battle ended with a small French tactical victory - with the English suffering slightly more damage and casualties - and a significant French strategic victory, with Earl Torrington's fleet forced to retire to Portsmouth. However, the French Admiral failed to follow up on this advantage and returned to Brest.
The sole account is in the diary of John Wilson Croker, as told to him by Wellington when Croker visited him at Walmer Castle (official residence of the Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports) on 1 October 1834. Croker asked him a question about Nelson’s reputation for egotistical and vain behaviour, and received the following reply:
“Why,” said the Duke, “I am not surprised at such instances, for Lord Nelson was, in different circumstances, two quite different men, as I myself can vouch, though I only saw him once in my life, and for, perhaps, an hour. It was soon after I returned from India. I went to the Colonial Office in Downing Street, and there I was shown into a little waiting-room on the right hand, where I found, also waiting to see the Secretary of State, a gentleman whom, from his likeness to his pictures and the loss of an arm, I immediately recognized as Lord Nelson.
He could not know who I was, but he entered at once into conversation with me, if I can call it conversation, for it was almost all on his side, and all about himself, and in really a style so vain and so silly as to surprise and almost disgust me. I suppose something that I happened to say may have made him guess that I was somebody, and he went out of the room for a moment, I have no doubt to ask the office-keeper who I was, for when he came back he was altogether a different man, both in manner and matter. All that I had thought a charlatan style had vanished, and he talked of the state of this country and of the aspect and probabilities of affairs on the Continent with a good sense, and a knowledge of subjects both at home and abroad that surprised me equally and more agreeably than the first part of our interview had done; in fact, he talked like an officer and a statesman.
The Secretary of State kept us long waiting, and certainly for the last half or three quarters of an hour I don’t know that I ever had a conversation that interested me more. Now, if the Secretary of State had been punctual, and admitted Lord Nelson in the first quarter of an hour, I should have had the same impression of a light and trivial character that other people have had, but luckily I saw enough to be satisfied that he was really a very superior man; but certainly a more sudden and complete metamorphosis I never saw.”'
Open question.
Some of the limitations of the aerostat were that it couldn't make out details of enemy movements or supply information effectively in real time, but would these limitations still be relevant at sea?
Battle on land required rapid communication for effective command, but communication at sea had less emphasis on this due to the natural, accepted issues with communicating by signal. In fact in the heat of battle it may have been easier to see signals relayed by aerostat than by flagship. At the same time, finding your enemy was a serious problem - not usually relevant on land - and aerostats could be used for aiding with this purpose.
