Alexander Fullerton's WW1 naval trilogy

[bmac]

Wonder whether people have any views about Alexander Fullerton's three WW1 novels: "The Blooding of the Guns" (Jutland), "Sixty Minutes for St George" (Zeebrugge) and "Patrol to the Golden Horn" (Dardanelles). I am half way through the third and find them a good read. I already had a decent idea about Jutland, the battle having been a teenage passion, and have read various books on the subject, The Rules of the Game: Jutland and British Naval Command by Andrew Gordon being the most recent (and a fascinating book to boot). Being sad so and sos my brother and I also spent many happy hours playing Avalon Hill's 'Jutland' game, though I never won (undefeated at Midway, though!). Fullerton's accounts of Zeebrugge and life in a submarine are an enjoyable and informative read and his description of the Zeebrugge attack has prompted me to dig out my late 50s copy of Pitt's book and it is now in the 'pile' waiting to be read.

Most interested to know whether his descriptions of action, life, equipment, etc., are accurate. He is praised for the quality of his research but, I suppose, some time has passed since they were written and, perhaps, even more is now known. I plan to obtain the rest of the 'Nicholas Everard' books (of which these are the first three the others being WWII related) and will do so if only I can work out the title of the seventh volume in the series (anyone know?).

[simonharley]

Wonder whether people have any views about Alexander Fullerton's three WW1 novels: "The Blooding of the Guns" (Jutland), "Sixty Minutes for St George" (Zeebrugge) and "Patrol to the Golden Horn" (Dardanelles). I am half way through the third and find them a good read. I already had a decent idea about Jutland, the battle having been a teenage passion, and have read various books on the subject, The Rules of the Game: Jutland and British Naval Command by Andrew Gordon being the most recent (and a fascinating book to boot). Being sad so and sos my brother and I also spent many happy hours playing Avalon Hill's 'Jutland' game, though I never won (undefeated at Midway, though!). Fullerton's accounts of Zeebrugge and life in a submarine are an enjoyable and informative read and his description of the Zeebrugge attack has prompted me to dig out my late 50s copy of Pitt's book and it is now in the 'pile' waiting to be read.

Most interested to know whether his descriptions of action, life, equipment, etc., are accurate. He is praised for the quality of his research but, I suppose, some time has passed since they were written and, perhaps, even more is now known. I plan to obtain the rest of the 'Nicholas Everard' books (of which these are the first three the others being WWII related) and will do so if only I can work out the title of the seventh volume in the series (anyone know?).

"Blooding of the Guns" is interesting, if slightly unbelievable (a battleship called "Nile", clever, but it would never happen!). I've gone through lot's of Jutland books and reminiscences and still can't tell whether his details are all correct, but they have the advantage of sounding correct. I thought his prose was horrendously dry - one of those books it takes ages to hack your way through.

Gordon's book is exhaustive but he should never have been allowed to publish something with so many cowardly snide comments in it regarding Jutland, as well as foolishly repeating the odd myth. According to his own account (letter to "The Naval Review") he spent 18 months "living" with the Jutland records, and in some cases one gets the impression he must have been snoring with them as well.

Simon

[Gibbo]

According to this website there are 9 books in the Everard series. I once saw the 4th to 6th books in a single volume, which I assume is Mariner of England from the attached list. I didn't buy it as I'd then read only the first book and I'm reluctant to read books from series out of sequence after doing so with a Bolitho book and finding out a few books early that a character who I liked got killed.

[bmac]

According to this website there are 9 books in the Everard series. I once saw the 4th to 6th books in a single volume, which I assume is Mariner of England from the attached list.

Yes, I've identified 8 out of the 9, with 4-6 available as one volume, but book seven is the one I currently cannot find.

Simon, what are the main 'myths' repeated in Gordon's book (or have they been discussed somewhere else here already?)

[simonharley]

Yes, I've identified 8 out of the 9, with 4-6 available as one volume, but book seven is the one I currently cannot find.

Simon, what are the main 'myths' repeated in Gordon's book (or have they been discussed somewhere else here already?)

You may have noticed the amount of invective Gordon piles on Captain Thomas Jackson, mainly about Scheer's "D.K." callsign while in port. "Ridiculous angry blustering", "insufferable", "desk jockey", "buffoon" and "execrable" are the words Gordon uses to describe him in the book, which is grossly unfair. His rather idiotic view of him is based on the testimony of a sanctimonious codebreaker named Clarke, with no corroborating evidence. Both Commander Beesly (author of "Room 40") and Arthur Marder unwittingly exonerate Jackson of a great deal of blame. Beesly labelled the vital information about the change in call signs "gratuitous advice", while Marder stated that anyone in Room 40 could have told Jackson about the differing call signs. So what actually happened is the smart -a***s in Room 40 got the hump and couldn't be bothered informing either the Director of Operations, the Chief of the War Staff or the Director of the Intelligence Division of the important fact that when he went to sea with his flagship he used a different call sign. I have not seen a single history which criticises this outrageous omission. They all instead prefer to criticise Jackson and blame the system, rather than the valiant boffins. Considering what Gordon had to base his retelling of the tale on, his treatment of Jackson is totally unwarranted.

Just by coincidence, yesterday I had an interview with an Army recruiting officer, and he had noticed my interest in naval history on the paperwork. He asked whether I had read "The Rules of the Game". After ten minutes' chat he too said that he had enjoyed the book, but said that before he spoke to me he had accepted everything in it as irrefutable fact. Which reinforces my belief that if a history book is too enjoyable something has gone wrong somewhere.

I'm currently re-reading it with a red pencil going through all the questionable details. Much fun.

Simon

[armourersergeant]

If I recall these Everard books go through both wars don't they? My brother has read them and really enjoyed them. I have read some Fullerton but not the Everard. I started one about naval airship and Mons but never finished it and listened on story tape to one about the Russian revolution which was ok. I can not say I would recommend them but it is each to there own.

regards

Arm