Customer Reviews

Voyage of the Armada (Cassell Military Paperbacks)

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The story of the Spanish Armada, as told by David Howarth, is built from his research of original Spanish archives. Apparently, he may have been the first to do so. Other historians had relied on English sources. That principal fact makes the story more compelling than other histories of the event.

Secondarily, Howarth reports on innovations and errors. For example, the Spanish invented the "convoy" and convoy tactics. This prompted the English to invent the "wolfpack." Maritime historains will be interested in the accidental development of these strategies.

Business management students will get to study the consequences of central planning and micromanagement by the Spanish King. Howarth does a good job contrasting the Spanish model with the decentralized style of the English.

A good read on several levels.

This wonderfully descriptive book by the English author, David Howarth, is well worth reading if you have a desire to learn about the Spanish Armada and the "Enterprise against England". Although this book, `The Voyage of the Armada' (1981) is not as detailed as `The Armada' (1959) by Garrett Mattingly, its still a great story and well worth the time to read.

By all accounts this story of the enterprise is told as it was seen through the eyes and experiences of the Spanish soldiers and sailors and is very well done in that regard. Using first hand accounts found in numerous Spanish letters and reports, many previously not utilised before, the story comes alive and gives you a real feeling and understanding of the participants, many who did not survive to tell their tale.

One aspect of the book that I found pleasing was that the author took the story past the battle with the English fleet. David Howarth provides the reader with an account of what happened to the ships and men who actually survived the "dash" up the Channel. Those who were shipwrecked along the Irish coast were subjected to even more terror than they had experienced so far and very few survived.

The real hero of this story is Medina Sidonia, the commander of the Spanish ships, and I found myself wondering could anyone have done any better under similar circumstances? This is a great story with an exciting narrative and although it only runs to 250 pages (hardback edition) I found I came away with a better understanding of what happened and why. This book would be a great companion volume to `The Armada' by Garrett Mattingly but can stand alone as a decent and well presented account of the "Armada".

Howarth, an English historian, takes a look at the Spanish Armada debacle from the Spanish point of view, using letters and documents culled from the Spanish national archives. He awards first prize for the disaster to King Philip, a first-rate numbskull whose foolhardy strategy and tactics doomed the fleet before it ever left port. Thanks to him, Spain has been a second-class power ever since. Duke Medina Sedonia, fleet commander, gets far more sympathetic treatment than his boss: despite having not a shred of military or nautical experience, he displays heroic courage and equanimity in the face of near hopeless odds. Besides these two, Horwath delves deep into the personalities of many other key participants on both sides, including Drake, Frobisher, the de Valdes cousins, Recalde, and the energetically inactive Duke of Parma. The narrative is compact yet sweeping: in a mere 250 pages, Horwath gives good account of the religious and political motives behind the mission, the military strengths and weaknesses of both sides, tactical and strategic developments in sixteenth century naval warfare, and the misery endured by the sailors and soldiers of the Armada. He describe of the various fates of the doomed Spaniards with heart-wrenching passion, but includes some rousing tales of survival and escape that truly lift the spirit. Well done!

Don Juan, the hero of the Battle of Lepanto, conceived an idea for the invasion of England and got King Phillip's approval. He drew up plans for the invasion and then died. Phillip appointed the Duke of Medina Sidonia to lead the invasion, and thus set the stage for one of the greatest naval disasters of all time.

Some might argue that the venture would have turned out differently had the more capable Don Juan been in charge of the expedition, but Don Juan won his victory with galleys on an inland sea, whereas Medina Sidonia met defeat in galleons on the high seas. Howarth gives a catalog of problems, minor disasters, and inadequacies which Chester Nimitz might not have been able to overcome.

The Spaniards had inferior Naval Doctrine, inferior ships, inferior cannon, inferior ammunition, and they were taking the battle to the English. Add to this some abominable luck, and they faced an almost insurmountable challenge. The English were inferior only in numbers, and they were fighting for their very existence.

Howarth gives a compelling account of the disaster from the germ of Don Juan's idea to the final landing of the defeated survivors. He critiques the Spanish effort fairly and insightfully. Anyone interested in the history of the Invincible Armada would find this book helpful.

Howarth is a great story teller for historians. In this book, he shows the Spanish side led by the Duke of Medina Sidonia. The Duke was a very courageous though inexperienced sailor. His commanders were also very able. The problem was the campaign as formated by Philip II. Philip micro managed but at the same time did not present what the ultimate objective was to be. Would he name himself King of England? One has to fill in the blanks, and Howarth does a good job of giving details of what Philip intended to do.
Unlike others, Howarth details why the Spaniards were the underdog in this campaign. The English ships were sleek and maneuverable, whereas the Spaniards were clumsy. The numbers were not as great as one supposed. All told, the Spanish were the underdogs since they were operating far from base. The result were running battles, with the English besting the Spaniards. On the trip around the isles, poor weather, lack of provisions, and unseaworthy vessels killed more than the battle itself. Howarth does a great job in describing this agony of sailors and soldiers seeking home, but ultimately killed in Ireland.
The only wish for this book is that Howarth could have expanded his study. This is an interesting subject, but the book was short.

Told from the Spanish point of view, Howarth follows the doomed expedition from beginning to end. Quoting from letters, logs, and other documents, Howarth is able to put the reader-listener into a 16th century mindset -- to understand how people can continue on a path many knew would fail. And how a king, confusing God's will with his own, could brush off every problem in the belief that God would take care of it. Even those who believed in the mission would have had misgivings about the seaworthiness of the ships when, as Howarth says, after 11 days of hard sailing they were further from England than when they had started. To readers only familiar with the defeat of the Armada as a great naval victory, here's the rest of the story

Howarth dispels the accepted story that luck, the weather, and incompetent Spanish commanders gave the English fleet an opportunity they did not waste and thereby saved England and her Queen Elizabeth from a Spanish invasion. Other factors were decisive.

First, while the Spanish were unlucky with winds, they did in time arrive in more or less good shape and with most of the men healthy, but just.

Second, the Armada's commander Duke Alonzo was a wise thoughtful man who understood his limitations and without relinquishing the responsibility of command, heeded the expert advice of sailors and soldiers serving under him.

Third, while the fleet met with rough seas on the way back, the weather wasn't unusually bad. More to the point was that the Spanish weren't familiar with North Atlantic weather.

The Duke was given an impossible task and Howarth proposes other factors that decided the failure of the Armada.

For starters, few of the Armada's vessels were built for war or for the rigors of the northern Atlantic ocean. As the boats were tossed and shaken, the hulls worked themselves apart and leaked. Also, firing canons too heavy for the boats to bear added to the stress on the hulls.

The English ships sailed faster and more nimbly than did the Spanish ships allowing the English to decide when to engage and when to avoid battle.

English canon balls were of better quality so that when the fleets finally engaged in battle, English shot at point blank range pierced Spanish hulls while Spanish shot shattered on impact against the English hulls.

Soldiers, not sailors, led the Armada. The English had accepted for some years that the captain was second only to God aboard a ship but Spanish soldiers overruled their captains time and again.

But if any one man is to blame for the Armada's disaster it is King Philip. He managed his unworkable enterprise from his private study and never allowed the Armada's commanders to meet with the Spanish forces in Holland that they were supposed to ferry across the Channel to England.

Among other orders from the micro-managing King Philip, the Spanish were told to sail through the Channel along the English coast, this giving the English ample warning and time to prepare. King Philip's idea was that this would encourage the supposedly oppressed English to rise against Elizabeth.

Finally, England was never at risk. Even if by some miracle the Spanish had landed at Tilbury they would have found no support among the people. To succeed once landed the invasion needed the support of the English people, who were presumed oppressed by a protestant Queen Elizabeth. As it was, the English were attached to their queen and their church so that the enterprise was doomed to fail.

The Spanish Armada might have been the largest fleet the western world had yet launched, but the Spanish learned the hard way that size isn't everything.

Vincent Poirier, Tokyo

David Howarth is the kind of history teacher all children and college students should be privileged to have. He writes a compelling story, fully immersed in the historical context, while also seeing the contemporary picture with clarity and insight. This book is full of nautical terms, so for the fullest understanding, keep a computer or dictionary close by and be prepared to go slowly if you want to deeply visualize the scenes he describes.

If you're inclined to move a little more quickly through the book, and just get the plot points of the story, that is also possible--you'll still get a new understanding of what actually happened during that voyage. And it is NOT the story you learned in World History back in the day. It's a much more complete picture, giving you a sense of the many interdependent factors that influenced the outcome, which was of course a real game-changer for Europe.

This kind of well-researched and thoughtfully analyzed treatment of history does more than just tell us what happened, though. It teaches us complexity. If we are aware that (as individuals and as groups/nations) our decisions, policies, understandings of issues, etc, are influenced by multiple factors, then we're better able to make those decisions, develop policies and form opinions that get to the heart of the matter and produce better results.

I also recommend 1066: Year of the Conquest by D. Howarth. Great book!

I picked up this book almost at random to write a book review for my Tudor-Stuart English class. The book is written in a narrative format that really helps you follow the story - for an avid fantasy book reader, it came across almost as a real book and not just a dry history text. The book has a real narrative feel that gives it a lot of strength. Recommended if you are interested in the Armada, or historical naval battles.