The host for the evening introduced “Cochrane the
Dauntless” by David Cordingly (2007) by explaining the reasons for his choice.
He had first heard of Admiral Cochrane when visiting the famous M.V. Gardyloo
in the company of a Government Minister. The Gardyloo was a sewage boat which sailed from Leith and deposited its cargo in the Firth of
Forth. During this trip the Captain of
the vessel enthused about the life and adventures of Cochrane, and insisted on
giving two books from his extensive library to the Minister, who was himself a
fan of Cochrane.
More recently the National Museum of Scotland, in
partnership with the National Records of Scotland, featured an exhibition about Cochrane’s life and times. That
exhibition,
between October 2011 and February 2012, also promoted the book by Cordingly.
The decision to recommend the book was encouraged by
the view that Cochrane was a Scot who had led a quite remarkable life. He had fought highly dramatic battles in Napoleonic times, becoming much celebrated,
but had also been accused of conspiracy and fraud. He had recovered to have a whole new and highly celebrated naval career in South America. His life as so exciting that
he was the inspiration for much naval fiction, including the work of Captain
Marryat who served under him, C.S.Forester’s Horatio Hornblower, and more
recently Patrick O’Brian’s Jack Aubrey. The Government of Chile was still so
grateful to Cochrane that they held an annual memorial service to him in
Westminster Abbey. Yet Cochrane was little known to most Scots, and little
celebrated in Scotland.
The purpose of the recommendation was therefore to
promote Cochrane rather than the book per se. However, the book had the merit
of being a serious and properly referenced work of history, rather than the
sort of sensationalist work that Cochrane often attracted.
With a number of members on holiday and others
committed elsewhere, several of those unable to attend helpfully submitted
their views on the book and these helped to stimulate the discussion.
The Group agreed that the most impressive features of
the book were the quality and thoroughness of the research.
However, for some, this was also a negative feature
reducing the book’s fictional feel. The lack of speculation about “the why and
wherefores” of the action or the absence of “embroidery” around the
interpretation of decisions or events was considered by them to have robbed the
reader of a better appreciation of the man. One of our absent colleagues
commented that he felt that “the man disappeared behind the detail”, while
another by contrast suggested that Cordingly might have sacrificed insight in
order to achieve an easy read.
The opposing view was that it was a merit of the book
that it did not project the author’s own speculations on to his subject, as
more populist biographers like to do, but instead recorded what was actually known,
allowing readers to draw their own conclusions. This group felt that a very
clear picture emerged of Cochrane’s strengths and weaknesses.
The initial discussion centred on the reasons for
Cochrane’s successes. We identified as important his positive attitude, his
innovative and creative approach to problem solving, and his determination to
master all of the practical skills/crafts associated with the maintenance and
sailing of ships. In addition, his fearlessness and his desire to lead from
the front in naval battles were important. He was greatly respected by those
who served under him, both because his ships suffered relatively few casualties
and because his crew shared in the prize money won through his lucrative
actions. These factors, together
with his indefatigable spirit, were considered to be the features that made the
greatest contribution to his successes. One described him as an extraordinary
polymath, moving from state sanctioned pirate to politician to inventor with
varying degrees of success.
The importance of the navy in the war with the French
had not been fully appreciated by the group before, but the “piratical” nature
of the warfare clearly suited Cochrane’s maverick nature. The Admiralty made
the most of this, appreciating his seamanship and his worth to the service, and
cleverly deploying Cochrane’s potent mix of assets. It ensured his promotion
and marked him out as “one to be watched”. The Admiralty was shrewd, and
generally tolerant, in their deployment of Cochrane. They supported him when it
suited, but finally closed ranks against him when his challenge to the
establishment got out of hand.
We noted that patronage was a major factor affecting
progress within the navy, and Cochrane benefited from family - and friends of
family - interventions to secure positions at critical points in his career.
Some of our group considered Cochrane a flawed man,
impulsive and reckless in both his deeds and in his total disregard for the
establishment and authority. He was motivated by money to an excessive degree,
no doubt reflecting his financially insecure upbringing. He also displayed a
degree of paranoia on many occasions.
But we all marvelled at Cochrane’s resilience, deeply
hurt by the stock exchange scandal. His move to South America, where he helped
to liberate Chile, Peru and Brazil from their colonial masters, salvaged his
pride and cemented his reputation as a great naval commander.
The group debated the reasons for British naval
advantage at this time. Factors such as the design of ships and the quality of
their build, the standard of equipment, the quality of training and tactics
were all suggested as contributing factors. In addition, and perhaps most
importantly, superiority came from the organisation and control exercised by
the Admiralty itself. A combination of a skilled workforce, documented rules,
slick processes and effective communication systems were developed, managed and
deployed to great advantage.
Moreover, the financial model, which was built on the
proceeds of the capture and disposal of enemy assets, was able to sustain the
necessary scale and quality of the shipbuilding and ship repair industries to
support the British fleet.
The conversation drifted into a discussion about other
notable Scottish persons who, like Cochrane, had not been given credit for
their achievements in Scotland. Adam Smith and James Clerk Maxwell were the
first to be identified, but a virtual tsunami of names followed and the
discussion lost coherence as differences of view emerged.
In order to remain united we returned to Cochrane and
confirmed that with only one exception the entire group enjoyed the book. All
were impressed by Cordingly’s research, but many wanted to learn more about the
man and his relationships.
One member observed that it was a good idea to
introduce a book about someone everyone knows a little about but not enough.
Having read and discussed the book, I suspect most of our group would agree
that they now know a little bit more about Cochrane, but not yet enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment