Educating the Royal Navy

This book constitutes the first comprehensive history of education and training for officers of the Royal Navy in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It covers the development of educational provision from the first 1702 Order in Council appointing schoolmasters to serve in operational warships to the laying of the foundation stone of the present Royal Naval College Dartmouth, almost two hundred years later. This period contained many significant educational way marks including the establishment of the Royal Navy’s first naval academy, the commissioning of the officer training ship HMS Britannia, and the whole conduct of education at sea by the naval schoolmaster and his successor the naval instructor. The period also witnessed the birth of higher education in the Service with the opening of the Royal Naval College Greenwich and the provision of technical education and training for a new category of officer, the naval engineer. Educating the Royal Navy is the first full length work to attempt to draw these strands together. Employing extensive primary sources, it challenges the limited existing commentary and presents significant new information. It is an indispensable aid to understanding the two-hundred-year evolution of the officer corps of the most powerful navy in the world. This volume will be essential reading for students of naval history and naval education, and of much interest to professional military colleges study- ing the development of naval training.

H. W. Dickinson teaches in the Defence Studies Department, Kings College, London. In 1997 he was awarded the Julian Corbett Prize for Modern Naval History. CASS SERIES: NAVAL POLICY AND HISTORY Series Editor: Geoffrey Till

This series consists primarily of original manuscripts by research scholars in the general area of naval policy and history, without national or chronological limita- tions. It will from time to time also include collections of important articles as well as reprints of classic works.

AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN NAVAL POLICY, 1904–1914 Milan N. Vego FAR-FLUNG LINES Studies in Imperial defence in Honour of Donald Mackenzie Schurman Edited by Keith Neilson and Greg Kennedy MARITIME STRATEGY AND CONTINENTAL WARS Rear Admiral Raja Menon THE ROYAL NAVY AND GERMAN NAVAL DISARMAMENT 1942–1947 Chris Madsen NAVAL STRATEGY AND OPERATIONS IN NARROW SEAS Milan N. Vego THE PEN AND INK SAILOR Charles Middleton and the King’s Navy, 1778–1813 John E. Talbott THE ITALIAN NAVY AND FASCIST EXPANSIONISM, 1935–1940 Robert Mallett THE MERCHANT MARINE AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 1850–1950 Edited by Greg Kennedy NAVAL STRATEGY IN NORTHEAST ASIA Geo-strategic goals, policies and prospects Duk-Ki Kim NAVAL POLICY AND STRATEGY IN THE MEDITERRANEAN SEA Past, present and future Edited by John B. Hattendorf STALIN’S OCEAN-GOING FLEET Soviet naval strategy and shipbuilding programmes, 1935–1953 Jürgen Rohwer and Mikhail S. Monakov IMPERIAL DEFENCE, 1868–1887 Donald Mackenzie Schurman; edited by John Beeler TECHNOLOGY AND NAVAL COMBAT IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY AND BEYOND Edited by Phillips Payson O’Brien THE ROYAL NAVY AND NUCLEAR WEAPONS Richard Moore THE ROYAL NAVY AND THE CAPITAL SHIP IN THE INTERWAR PERIOD An operational perspective Joseph Moretz CHINESE GRAND STRATEGY AND MARITIME POWER Thomas M. Kane BRITAIN’S ANTI-SUBMARINE CAPABILITY, 1919–1939 George Franklin BRITAIN, FRANCE AND THE NAVAL ARMS TRADE IN THE BALTIC, 1919–1939 Grand strategy and failure Donald Stoker NAVAL MUTINIES OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY An international perspective Edited by Christopher Bell and Bruce Elleman THE ROAD TO ORAN Anglo-French naval relations, September 1939–July 1940 David Brown THE SECRET WAR AGAINST SWEDEN US and British submarine deception and political control in the 1980s Ola Tunander ROYAL NAVY STRATEGY IN THE FAR EAST, 1919–1939 Planning for a war against Japan Andrew Field SEAPOWER A guide for the twenty-first century Geoffrey Till BRITAIN’S ECONOMIC BLOCKADE OF GERMANY, 1914–1919 Eric W. Osborne A LIFE OF ADMIRAL OF THE FLEET ANDREW CUNNINGHAM A twentieth-century naval leader Michael Simpson NAVIES IN NORTHERN WATERS, 1721–2000 Edited by Rolf Hobson and Tom Kristiansen GERMAN NAVAL STRATEGY, 1856–1888 Forerunners to Tirpitz David Olivier BRITISH NAVAL STRATEGY EAST OF SUEZ, 1900–2000 Influences and actions Edited by Greg Kennedy THE RISE AND FALL OF THE SOVIET NAVY IN THE BALTIC, 1921–1940 Gunnar Aselius THE ROYAL NAVY, 1930–1990 Innovation and defence Edited by Richard Harding THE ROYAL NAVY AND MARITIME POWER IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY Edited by Ian Speller DREADNOUGHT GUNNERY AND THE BATTLE OF JUTLAND The question of fire control John Brooks GREEK NAVAL STRATEGY AND POLICY, 1910–1919 Zisis Fotakis NAVAL BLOCKADES AND SEAPOWER Strategies and counter-strategies, 1805–2005 Edited by Bruce A. Elleman and Sarah C. M. Paine THE PACIFIC CAMPAIGN IN WORLD WAR II From Pearl Harbor to Guadalcanal William Bruce Johnson ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE IN WORLD WAR I British naval aviation and the defeat of the U-boats John J. Abbatiello THE ROYAL NAVY AND ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE, 1944–49 Malcolm Llewellyn-Jones THE DEVELOPMENT OF BRITISH NAVAL THINKING Essays in memory of Bryan Ranft Edited by Geoffrey Till EDUCATING THE ROYAL NAVY Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century education for officers H.W. Dickinson EDUCATING THE ROYAL NAVY

Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century education for officers

H. W. Dickinson First published 2007 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2008. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.” © 2007 H. W. Dickinson

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Dickinson, Harry W., 1949– Educating the Royal Navy: 18th and 19th century education for officers / H.W. Dickinson. p. cm. – (Naval policy and history) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Naval education–Great Britain–History–18th century. 2. Naval education–Great Britain–History–19th century. 3. Great Britain. Royal Navy–Officers–Training of–History–18th century. 4. Great Britain. Royal Navy–Officers–Training of–History–19th century. I. Title. V511.D53 2007 359.5Ј5094109033–dc22 2006024147

ISBN 0-203-93825-9 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN10: 0–415–37641–6 (Print Edition)

ISBN13: 978–0–415–37641–9 CONTENTS

List of illustrations ix Acknowledgements xi

Introduction 1

1 All at sea: the naval schoolmaster 1702–1837 9

2 ‘A sink of abomination . . .’: the Portsmouth Naval Academy and the Royal Naval College Portsmouth 1733–1837 33

3 Pitchforks and professors: educating the young officer 1837–62 57

4 Inklings of a system: continuing and higher education to 1869 76

5 Britannia at Dartmouth, 1863–74 94

6 ‘While their minds are docile and plastic . . .’: The Shadwell Report 1870 113

7 ‘As much by wisdom as by war . . .’: The Royal Naval College Greenwich 1870–1902 131

8 The fortunes of HMS Britannia 1874–1902 152

9 ‘Engineers are not gentlemen . . .’: education and training for naval engineers 177

Conclusion 199

Notes 214 Sources 238 Index 249

vii

ILLUSTRATIONS

1 ‘Duties of the Naval Schoolmaster’ – an extract from the 1731 Regulations and Instructions 14 2 Jane Austen’s brother is accepted for the Naval Academy 41 3 Student sketch of the Royal Naval College, Portsmouth, about 1812 48 4 James Inman, First Professor of the Royal Naval College, Portsmouth 84 5 HMS Britannia – fourth of the name at Dartmouth 1863–69 105 6 The fifth Britannia with Hindostan – cadet training ships 1869–1905 161 7 Architect’s sketch of the Britannia Royal Naval College about 1902 179

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am pleased to have the opportunity to thank a number of friends and colleagues who have assisted in the production of this book and with the research work associated with it. I was fortunate to be able to pursue my interest in the history of naval education and training for some years at the Institute of Education, University of London, where Dennis Dean and Joan Lewin took more trouble over my endeavours than their professional duties required. Richard Aldrich, Professor Emeritus, was unstinting in his encour- agement over a long period and without his inspiration and support I would never have taken the first steps on the road to the publication of this work. During my time on the teaching staff at the Royal Naval College Dart- mouth, I benefited greatly from my discussions with Evan Davies whose generosity and kindness, often in very trying times, remained constant. Much of the research for this book was conducted when the subject of naval history did not enjoy the popularity at the College that it does today and several members of staff, Alan Machin and Richard Alexander in particular, remained resolute in their support of both the subject in general and my work in particular. Richard Kennell, Janet Kennell and Robert Wardle were unfailingly diligent and helpful on my behalf in the College Library and Roy Clare, Richard Porter and Jane Harrold encouraged me to explore the Col- lege Archive and assisted with illustrations. I am also grateful to Christopher Cobb and his wife Helen (née Inman) for their hospitality and assistance regarding the Inman family history. In my present post in the Defence Studies Department of King’s College London, Andrew Gordon, Geoffrey Till and Greg Kennedy have supported my endeavours and the Library Staff of the Joint Service Command and Staff College have been helpful in dealing with numerous enquiries. Colin and Ann Smith were generous with their hospitality on numerous visits to London. Andrew Polakowski provided valued assistance with the preparation of the illustrations for the book and the editors of Mariners Mirror and Historical Research were kind enough to publish articles that form the basis of several of the chapters. At the Ministry of Defence Naval History Library, at that period located

xi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS in London, Fred Lake was a tower of strength and at the Naval History Branch Chris Page and Stephen Prince kindly made facilities available to me. Alan McGowan and Kate Jarvis guided me through the archive of the Royal Naval College Greenwich, now in the care of the National Maritime Museum. Fiona Colbert and Alison Pearn of St John’s College Cambridge provided biographical information with speed and efficiency. A reading of this work will reveal my debt to the publications of the Navy Records Society and I am grateful to Andrew Lambert not only for his work in this regard but also for his interest in this particular subject and his steadfast support for continued naval history teaching at Dartmouth. I am also obliged to the late F B Sullivan for permission to read his doctoral thesis and although I disagree with many of the conclusions, his work informed much of my early interest in the subject. In America Bill Cogar provided not only hospitality and friendship but also the opportunity to read a paper on early naval education and training at the 1995 Naval History Symposium at the United States Naval Academy, Annapolis. Simon Davis at the City University of New York and Phil Catton at Stephen F Austin State University have been constant friends, and Eugene Rasor at Emory and Henry College has taken a continual and kindly interest in my work. Above all I am grateful for the support of my wife Yve and my children, J P, Tom and Emily.

HWD Dartmouth, 2006

xii INTRODUCTION

On the great chart of British naval history the subject of officer education and training has been something of a backwater. How those who aspired to the quarterdeck mastered both the rudiments of their profession as fighting seamen, and the broader knowledge required for effective leadership, has attracted little detailed attention. In a sense this is surprising. Officers were and are important people in any military organisation – how they have been selected, trained and educated, and subsequently advanced, promoted and eventually retired, lies at the heart of any successful naval economy. Given that by the end of the seventeenth century the officer corps of the Royal Navy had already taken on a recognisable ethos and that this was refined into the profession at the helm of the world’s most powerful navy, we might have expected education and training to have been analysed more fully. The shortcoming is all the more notable because, as this work will show, some form of official educational provision had been around for more than three centuries and in its various forms has run like embroidered thread through the broader social history of the Service. Yet although several academic theses and learned journal articles have considered aspects of the topic, no dedicated book length study of how officers have been trained and educated has previously been written. Even the principal institutions associated with the task, the training ship HMS Britannia, the various Royal Naval Colleges at Portsmouth, Dartmouth and Greenwich, and the establishments dedicated to technical education, the Royal Naval Engineering Colleges at Keyham (and later Manadon) have attracted relatively little detailed historical attention. In this book I have attempted to gather together strands from the limited published material and with the help of previously unconsidered primary sources, to both challenge existing commentary and present significant new information. It has been a considerable task covering a period from the origins of the Service as a professional organisation in the late seventeenth century, to the modern fighting force of today. The aim of this particular volume is to cover the first 200 years of educational provision for officers of the Royal Navy, from the first Order in Council authorising the appoint- ment of schoolmasters in operational warships in 1702, to the laying of the

1 INTRODUCTION foundation stone at the Royal Naval College Dartmouth and the announce- ment of the Fisher–Selborne scheme for naval cadets in December 1902. This time span contains many significant educational way marks including the estab lishment of the Naval Academy at Portsmouth, its successor, the first Naval College, the whole of the history of the officer training ship HMS Britannia, and the conduct of education at sea by the naval schoolmaster and later the graduate naval instructor. The period also witnessed the birth of higher education in the Service from a faltering, informal start in draughty and damp buildings within Portsmouth dockyard, to the establishment of a naval ‘university’ in the magnificent surroundings of the Royal Naval College Greenwich. The provision of technical education and training for a new category of officer, the naval engineer, first in the old hulk HMS Marlborough at Portsmouth and later at the Royal Naval Engineering College at Keyham, Devonport, is also considered and outlined. My work commences with the origins of formal instruction at sea for naval officers following the introduction of the first qualifying examination for the post of lieutenant, by Samuel Pepys in 1677. It surveys various unofficial sources of training for the young seafarer, particularly the private schools and mathematical academies along the banks of the Thames. From 1702 an Admiralty Order in Council authorised the employment of naval schoolmasters in sea going ships and Chapter One outlines their activities over the span of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. It demonstrates that schoolmasters were more frequently employed than has been generally accepted and using primary sources challenges the view, advanced by Michael Lewis and others, that naval schoolmasters were little more than vagrants.1 Numerous examples of high quality, diligent individuals undertaking a difficult and demanding job are cited and various pen portraits are given. The broad thesis of this chapter is that the naval schoolmaster system, while inefficient and under resourced, found favour with many sea officers not because it was educationally superior but because it allowed youngsters to pursue their studies in a demanding practical environment, where the values of character and leadership might be more effectively instilled. The second chapter considers the progress of the Portsmouth Naval Academy and its successor the Royal Naval College, which for most of its lifetime operated in parallel with the schoolmaster scheme. Again working from primary sources it challenges the views of commentators such as Christopher Lloyd2 and F B Sullivan3 that the Naval Academy was a dissolute and chaotic establishment, characterised by indiscipline and absenteeism. It sets the Academy more broadly in the context of the unreformed eighteenth- century English public school system and by detailed examination of records suggests that the institution saw more pupils, better taught and more prop- erly regulated than previously believed. The reformed Royal Naval College Portsmouth of 1808 and the work of its principal, James Inman are considered. I suggest that in strictly educational terms, the quality of the

2 INTRODUCTION curriculum, standards of teaching and the nature of the environment, the College offered a far superior regime to the parallel schoolmaster at sea system – yet in 1837 it was the latter that prevailed. The reasons for this are considered in detail and the decision to close the College, particularly its financial, social and professional dimensions, is examined in the context of the Navy of the late 1830s. Chapter Three starts by considering the reorganisation of naval education for young officers in 1837 and in particular the abandonment of the previous ‘twin track’ approach, in favour of sending all youngsters directly to sea, under what was known as ‘the pitchfork system’. The replacement of the naval schoolmaster by the new naval instructor is described, and claims by F B Sullivan4 and others that this represented a new and firmer footing for naval education are discussed and subsequently challenged. The origins of new training methods leading first to the commissioning of training brigs, and later harbour training vessels, are examined. The work of the Parker Committee and Pelham Committee in modernising training is considered. A detailed description of early officer training in HMS Illustrious from 1857, and her successor HMS Britannia from 1859, is also given. The career of the Britannia during her time at Portsmouth and Portland is examined and again existing commentary is challenged. The health and habitability of the ship and her training regime in the pre-Dartmouth period is subjected to new interpretation. Even a preliminary examination of the processes of officer education demonstrates that the activity had broader bounds than the gates of the naval college or the wooden walls of HMS Britannia. Chapter Four thus considers the young officer education provided in operational warships during what was known then (and now) as young officers’ ‘fleet time’. The provisions of the relevant Admiralty Circulars 288 and 393 are thus outlined and evaluated and the work of the sea going naval instructor, the successor to the old naval schoolmaster, is considered. Admiralty attempts to combine his post with that of the chaplain are discussed and the increasing influence of the naval clergyman on naval education is described. The emerging requirement for a tripartite system of education is identified and the subsequent decision to reopen the Royal Naval College Portsmouth in 1839 is examined. The contribution of this institution to the Navy’s industrial revolution, previously largely ignored, is analysed. This chapter stresses the gradual evolution of a pattern of education based on the Britannia, the Fleet and then time spent in Portsmouth at the College. The fourth aspect to be considered is the decision taken in 1864 to appoint a Director of Education for the Admiralty, a curiously neglected and under regarded post both then and since. This position is analysed in depth and the role of the only nineteenth-century incumbent, Joseph Woolley, in promoting and super- vising naval education is outlined. Much of the coverage in this chapter has not been previously considered.

3 INTRODUCTION

Chapter Five considers the history of the officer training ship HMS Britannia from her arrival at Dartmouth in 1863, to the advent of the first major enquiry into cadet’s education led by Rear Admiral E B Rice 11 years later. It sheds much new light on life in the ship, challenging common assertions of an institution supposedly clinging to the values of the past and pursuing a syllabus wedded to the days of sail. In particular it demonstrates that conditions on board varied considerably according to the individual commanding officer. It shows for example that despite its fearsome repu- tation, the incidence of corporal punishment in the ship at this time was remarkably small. Conversely the health and habitability problems of the Britannia were much greater than previously outlined. Examination and entry procedure is considered, in particular the attempts to introduce elements of competition into the entry process. The hostile reaction of the officer corps to an apparently modest and improving measure is accounted for and analysed, as are the first attempts to validate Britannia courses. Drawing heavily on the contents of the archive at the Britannia Royal Naval College (BRNC) the chapter constitutes the most detailed account of the training of the mid Victorian naval officer yet written. The following chapter identifies the quickening pace of educational provision in the Service coincidental with the arrival of the 1868 Gladstone administration and the enigmatic and temperamental H C E Childers – considered by many historians to be the most mistrusted and unpopular First Lord of the century. A new view of Childers is advanced which while acknowledging the short-sightedness of some of his activities, shows him as a genuine reformer whose contribution to the development of both initial and higher education was indispensable. The work of the Shadwell Committee, set up by Childers, and the first major enquiry into officer education, is considered in detail. The factors behind the split decision on the location of the new naval college are considered and the work of the previously unconsidered Tarleton Committee in this regard is outlined. The chapter also discusses the role of individuals interested in naval education, particularly reformers such as Rear Admiral A P Ryder, Capt J G Goodenough and Professor John Knox Laughton, and it briefly considers the role of the Royal United Service Institution (RUSI) as a forum for debate and discussion on naval educational matters. Chapter Seven starts with the split decision by the Shadwell Committee on the location of the new naval university. It examines the process by which one of the most financially retrenched governments of the century, Glad- stone’s 1868–74 administration, opted for the least popular, most expensive option and explains how this happened. In particular it demonstrates that the decision to go to Greenwich was taken in the face of overwhelming Service opposition and was largely a matter of political expediency and local interest. The early days of the college are discussed and its progress is outlined via reports in the Service press, RUSI debates and the work of the

4 INTRODUCTION first examining group, the Gordon Committee of 1877. The contribution of its most distinguished lecturer J K Laughton is further considered. The chapter argues that the conditions of its foundation meant that the Royal Naval College could never achieve the status originally envisaged. In particular the refusal by successive Admiralty Boards and admirals president to broaden the syllabus or allow academic staff anything more than a secondary role consigned the institution to the status of a senior technical school, rather than war college or university. The theme of the chapter is thus one of missed opportunity and its consequences. The next chapter in a sense complements Chapter Five by continuing the story of the training ship at Dartmouth up to the end of the century. It thus describes, in previously unconsidered detail, the education and training undertaken by generations of officers who would lead in the two world wars of the twentieth century. It starts in 1874 with the enquiry into cadets’ training undertaken by the Rice Committee and the subsequent corrosive effects of its findings on the original Childers reforms. The quest to dispense with the Britannia and replace her with a college on shore is explained and the reasons for the failure of this policy are given. Changing approaches to admission procedures are outlined and the nomination system is explained. Everyday life in the ship is also considered in detail, in particular the syllabus, the routines and the innumerable regulations so characteristic of the later Britannia system. The pioneering work of the Luard Committee of 1885 is related and the reasons for the rejection of its recommendations are analysed. The last days in the ship are described, the process by which shore training gradually gained favour is outlined and the plans for a new naval college are given. The piece concludes with the laying of the foundation stone of the new building in March 1902. The final chapter starts by examining the paradox of a Royal Navy approaching the end of the century in the midst of a rapid expansion, spend- ing increasing amounts of money on new technology, yet with an officer corps characterised by shortages in personnel, and tensions between its civil and military branches. The training and education of non-executive officers (paymaster, naval instructor, Royal Marine and chaplain), such as it was, is briefly considered but the chapter concentrates principally on the naval engineer – by 1900 a man absolutely crucial to the efficiency of the modern fleet yet subordinate in terms of pay, conditions and status within the ship’s hierarchy. The evolution of the naval engineer from his first appearance in the Service as a ‘mechanic’, to his gradual acceptance as a warrant officer and eventually as a wardroom member, is outlined and considered. The roots of formal training for engineers are revealed and the contribution of the dockyard schools system is briefly outlined. The major report on the supply and training of naval engineers conducted by Admiral Sir Astley Cooper Key in 1876 is analysed and the first training establishments for naval engineers, HMS Marlborough, and its eventual successor the College

5 INTRODUCTION at Keyham (the progenitor of the Royal Naval Engineering College Mana- don), are examined. This chapter concludes by summarising the so called ‘engineer question’ faced by the Navy in 1902 and the answer offered by Admiral Sir John Fisher, via the concepts of common training implicit in the new Selborne scheme. Throughout the work I have restricted my comment and analysis to the sort of educational and training activity that might loosely be termed ‘official’ provision, that is that which was provided and promulgated by the Admiralty for its officers at various stages of their careers, either within dedicated institutions, or via the work of designated individuals holding official positions. I acknowledge that much important activity which might be equally and accurately categorised as ‘education and training’ took place at the fringes of this. At the initial level this ranged from the private mathematical and navigation schools of the 1670s, predating the earliest educational Orders in Council, to the Victorian preparatory schools, the naval ‘crammers’ that prepared youngsters to pass entrance examinations to the Britannia and later the Royal Naval College Dartmouth. There is undoubtedly a rich seam of social history to be tapped here, particularly amongst these latter institutions, for they were as central to the cadet’s early experience as time spent later at Dartmouth.5 Nevertheless pressure of space means that private pre-entry training is only considered tangentially to the ‘official’ story. Similarly in higher education organisations such as the RUSI and the lesser known Junior Naval Professional Association (JNPA) per- formed a vital role for the Royal Navy in fostering an understanding of wider professional matters, particularly in the later nineteenth century as it became apparent that the Royal Naval College Greenwich would never assume the status of a true war college. Again I have only considered the activities of the RUSI and the JNPA where they touch upon and inform mainstream naval educational activity. The history of education and training in the Royal Navy is of course synonymous with the development of the officer corps as an organised, permanent and professional body of leaders and my account concentrates specifically on facilities provided for officers, rather than the ship’s company. This is not necessarily an artificial distinction, for the latter were not well served during the period and it is possible to examine officer education as a discrete area of activity. It might be noted that from time to time certain facilities did apply to officers and men alike – the 1731 Regulations and Instructions for example directed the ship’s schoolmaster to teach navigation not only to the volunteers or young officers but also ‘likewise to teach other youths of the ship according to such orders as he shall receive’.6 It is also clear that on an informal level young officers were often taught by warrant and petty officers and learned their trade at the shoulders of experienced crew members. This association was an important one and has been seen as a factor in producing standards of seamanship and navigation that were vastly

6 INTRODUCTION superior to the Royal Navy’s continental counterparts. Occasionally, in the 1850s for example, activity in one domain proved the inspiration for reform in another, thus the concept of the harbour training ship was first applied to the training of boy seamen and only later adopted for the induction of young officers. In an organisation with a long and complex social history there will always be exception and overlap, but in terms of formal provision, the years up to 1902 do allow a reasonably coherent distinction to be made between the general educational provision for officers and the more limited facilities available to sailors. For the bulk of the period covered in this work I am concerned solely with the sea officer, the figure recognisable today as the commissioned member of the ‘executive’ or warfare branch, the man charged with ‘fighting the ship’. Clearly by the middle of the nineteenth-century representatives of other branches, doctors, pursers, chaplains, instructors and engineers, were also living in the wardroom and undertaking important work in the running of the ship, but as I shall show, formal training and education from Service sources for most of my two-century survey was still largely reserved for the seaman officer. Towards the end of the nineteenth century the inklings of naval education for ‘civil’ officers certainly began to appear but those who inhabited ‘professions within the profession’, the doctors and naval instructors for example, were generally expected to have completed their training prior to entry. The paymasters and secretaries, despite their increasing importance at the end of the period, were still expected to acquire com- petencies as they went along. Towards the end of the century as the expertise of the engineer began to impinge on the fighting ability of the ship, he gradually became the recipient of Admiralty directed training and education both at the initial and the higher level. This sphere of activity expanded rapidly from what might be termed limited technical training within a specific branch, to a position by 1902 where a common syllabus would be pursued by young engineers and executives alike. The reader with an interest in contemporary naval education and training will realise that I have made little attempt in this volume to distinguish between the two terms, or indeed to try to define them as separate concepts. I am keenly aware that for modern military staff the definition of, and the relationship between, education and training constitutes an important issue. How the purposeful nature and moral neutrality, particularly of what is termed today the ‘systems approach’ to training, may be combined with the more infinite forms of thinking implied by the word education is an ongoing and important debate.7 For the particular period covered by this book it was less so, indeed early dictionary definitions tended to regard training and education as reasonably interchangeable and associated both with notions of moulding, bringing up and creating patterns of behaviour. While I am certainly not arguing that the processes of education and training in my period of interest were necessarily synonymous, they were invariably conducted

7 INTRODUCTION in close proximity and with less regard for particular distinguishing characteristics. This coalescence is such as to permit them to be discussed here without constant distinction or separation. The generic approach also has the advantage of ensuring that no aspect of the official provision of education and training for officers of the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Royal Navy has been included or excluded on the grounds that it was exclusively one or the other. Yet although this is a historical work it hopefully may make some contribution to contemporary debates on education and training in the military context. Efficient armed forces, regardless of the era in which they operate, have always depended upon human resources as the bottom line of military effectiveness. How personnel, particularly officers, have been selected, trained and educated has been and remains a vital part of the equation – indeed it could be argued that as budgets grow increasingly tighter this human dimension becomes more crucial to military effectiveness. In assess- ing the value of the contemporary naval training regime, itself always likely to be held hostage by financial restraint, it is vital to recognise and identify how the characteristics of the present system were established and devel- oped. The experience of researching and writing this book suggests that naval education and training has constituted a sort of culture like any other, with values, traditions and a considerable legacy. It also suggests that many of the hallmarks of British naval training have demonstrated historical continuity and a remarkable capacity, even in the face of technological advance and budgetary restraint, to retain the characteristics and practices of its formative years. Thus it is likely that the modern naval officer, even one without a particular interest in naval history, will recognise in general form many of the debates and dilemmas outlined in this book.