The British ship designers who plied their trade between 1870 and 1881 have long been criticized for being retrogressive and emblematic of the so-called dark ages of the British Admiralty. In this revisionist study, John Beeler goes beyond a purely technical analysis to examine crucial external factors that affected ship building--politics, finance, bureaucracy, strategy, and foreign threats. He makes a persuasive case that the Admiralty's sensible approach to the many problems of the decade laid the foundation for modern battleship design. Based largely on primary sources, the author's argument is backed up with solid details and many original plans that are reproduced here for the first time. This major new work will please both technical historians and everyone interested in the legend and lore of battleships.
--This text refers to an alternate
Hardcover
edition.
| ||||||||||||||||||
Book Description
Editorial Reviews
About the Author
John Beeler, an associate professor of history at the University of Alabama, is the author of several books on British history. He lives in Tuscaloosa, Alabama.
--This text refers to an alternate
Hardcover
edition.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Casting light onto the "Dark Ages" of Battleship History,
By
This review is from: Birth of the Battleship: British Capital Ship Design 1870-1881 (Hardcover)
Having just finished reading Beeler's Birth of the Battleship I would consider this a welcomed addition to any armchair admiral's collection. This is a very interesting recount of the processes that lead to the design of British battleships between 1870 and 1881. Beeler discusses the tremendous strategic, technological and tactical problems that occured in naval construction during this time period. With the rapid developments in guns, armour, steam engines, torpedoes, etc. it is surprising that the British Admiralty, and particularly Nathaniel Barnaby the Director of Naval Construction, was able to both keep up and make accurate predictions of future trends in naval combat. Why did the Royal Navy keep building battleships with sails and masts well into the 1880s? Beeler shows that the early naval steam engines were unreliable and underpowered, the ships would be operating in areas (like the Pacific) where coaling stations were few and far between (this changed of course by the 1880s) - all very logical, but hardly ever elaborated in such detail by other authors, such as Oscar Parkes. There are many excellent photographs and blueprints presented. There is a whole chapter about HMS Inflexible, and the following central citadel form of ironclads. The torpedo ram Polyphemus is profiled and the quest to designing the first cruisers given in detail. This is an excellent reference book which does shine a beam of light onto a very interesting, and often unnecessarily criticized, period in naval design history.
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
birth of the battleship: british capital ship design 1870-81,
By
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Birth of the Battleship: British Capital Ship Design 1870-1881 (Hardcover)
The title of this book suggests that it contains the design histories of the 11 classes of British capital ships laid down during the time frame indicated. However, this is not the case. Instead, it deals with the underlying political, economic and strategic considerations which determined the design philosophy of these ships.Much of this information is new and interesting and there is some detailed design information on some of the better known ships. In addition, the photographs are numerous, large and for the most part well reproduced although they seem to emphasize the ADMIRAL class ships. However, those looking for detailed design information on these more or less neglected ships will have to look elsewere.
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A long overdue retrospective of the steam navy's formative years,
By
This review is from: Birth of the Battleship: British Capital Ship Design 1870-1881 (Hardcover)
Apparently it took some distance to do justice to the attitudes and attempts of the British Admiralty (and the engineers designing capital ships on their orders) to provide their navy with the right means for keeping up the Empire. John Beeler is as distant as an author can be: an American from Alabama, writing more than 120 years after that period.
The result is a scientifically competent study of the first twenty years of British ironclad design when the Royal Navy was confronted by multiple challenges, both technically and politically. Many historians and naval writers alike have regarded this time as a period characterized by conservatism, backwardness and outright confusion on the part of the Admiralty, and they prove this by the assortment of ships assembled in this period - ranging from clumsy sailing affairs to almost modern battleships. Beeler truly records all these arguments and then dismantles them, point by point, founded on solid evidence derived from contemporary primary and an even greater wealth of secondary sources. He points out that the building policy followed through by the admiralty was influenced by a lot of factors - the worldwide commitment of the navy (necessitating the retaining of masts and sails for lack of the network of coaling stations necessary for an all-steam navy with global commitments), the rapid technological advance, particularly on the part of guns and armour, by which ships were deemed advanced when being laid down, obsolescent when commissioned and outright obsolete only a few years into their service, and finally the economical constraints (forcing the admiralty to try to get out the most of single ships.) Most important however, and he clearly makes this point, was the tactical conundrum the Admiralty was stuck with: it was clear that the new navy of steaming, heavily armed and armoured ironclads necessitated new tactics, but there was no way to say for sure which ones, and that in turn gave room to wild tactical ideas and the ensuing variety of designs. He also points out that the Royal Navy of the 1870s and 80s was derided by historians on the grounds of hindsight perception. I found it quite refreshing to read a sentence like this one: "It may appear obvious once pointed out, but it is important to bear in mind that in the event of war (...) the Royal Navy would have faced the Russian fleet - such as it was - rather than its own counterpart of twenty years later." It is, indeed. To be true: Beeler is not the first historian to air these statements. The merits of his book lie in the fact that, for the first time, all these points are compiled into a general case for the restoration of the Admiralty's, naval architects' and politicians' reputations, by putting their decisions into the overall political and historical, economical and social context of the time. A book therefore long overdue. Also long overdue is the re-appraisal of the work of Nathaniel Barnaby who has been blamed (most prominently by Oscar Parkes) for turning the Royal Navy into a 'collection of samples'. Beeler doesn't make a secret of his fondness for the man whom he credits with having done the least rewarding job at the time (rather than working, for better pay, for clients who would actually have heeded his advice) against much ignorance from their Lordships. He portrays Barnaby not as the stupid draughtsman he has been regarded by many authors, mostly due to his lack of eloquence and his moderate nature, but as a gifted theoretician of naval warfare who predicted many of its developments rather accurately, and based his suggestions on these visions. In this respect, he introduces Barnaby not as a successor to Edward Reed (whose brilliant eloquence made him look better to contemporaries and historians alike) but as a tutor to William White whose designs owe much to the ones by his great teacher. As to the book proper, many images illustrate a well-written if heavily annotated text (the annotations for readabilitiy's sake always being set up as footnotes on the same page, though.) An exhaustive bibliography completes the book. The edition I had in hand (2003) suffers a little from sloppy revision which has allowed some errata into the book, but not sufficient to justify the book's devaluation.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
