Royal Naval College Greenwich Centenary 1873 - 1973
The Early Years
The general aim was stated as by
cultivating the general intelligence of officers, to improve their aptitude
for-the various duties which a naval officer is called upon to perform.' Of
necessity perhaps, science dominated - though paradoxically the status of
engineer officers was still so low that they were not allowed to be Mess
members until 1887. Of general studies, only foreign languages was specified,
plus a few lectures on International law to be given by a visiting lecturer.
However, in 1876, the lecturer in meteorology, a mathematician J K Laughton,
with the President's support began giving 6 voluntary lectures on naval
history. These in Laughton's words, were intended as a 'no-nonsense scientific
study' affording 'lessons of very direct and practical meaning' to counter that
'sluggish conservative thinking that encouraged tradition to become dogma.'
Laughton's initiative proved a landmark not only for developments at Greenwich
but for the whole study of naval history. It inspired, at the US Naval Academy,
the great Mahan's interest in the influence of sea-power and, though Laughton
left to become Professor of History at King's College, London in 1885, his was
the guiding hand in the founding of the Navy Records Society (1893). The
lectures were resumed in 1891 by Rear-Admiral Colomb but they did not last
long. Colomb complained that the Admiralty placed such restrictions on him that
he regarded the value of the lectures as negligible. Proposals for a course in
strategy and tactics by Captain Henderson (later Admiral Sir William Henderson
and the first editor of the Naval Review founded in 1912) were turned down by
the President as impractical. 'It appears to me the sort of information that
the Intelligence Committee will collect and which I suppose will be given
confidentially to officers, as thought fit.' Senior Officers indeed found
little of interest at Greenwich. 'They could do little more than rub up the
subjects they had passed in when examined for Lieutenant'.
The study of
war, and indeed staff training of any sort, was anathema to most senior
officers. Fisher, the First Sea Lord, was to write ''Whatever service the past
may be to other professions, it can be categorically stated in regard to the
Navy that history is a record of exploded ideas. What use could there be in
going back to Noah?" he asked. ''Practical' men regarded 'bookish' men as
cranks or lunatics, hunters of soft jobs, and they were quite content to be
left to the guidance of their splendid but not always highly trained
instincts." As Churchill said, 'They did not want a special class of officer
professing to be more brainy than the rest.' There were exceptions to this view
of course, but this neglect of the study of war, compared to our rivals, was
dangerous, particularly in an age of increasing imperialism, militarism and
technology.
|