ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΒ  permalink

On this day: 24 July

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Saturday, 24th July 2010

  β€’1704: British marines storm Gibraltar and seize it from Spain following a sustained Royal Navy bombardment.Β 
  
  Were the marines who took Gibraltar in 1704 'British'?

  Link to this forum: On this day: 24 July

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Allan D (U1791739) on Saturday, 24th July 2010

  Since 1603 they were, although the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ might have said Royal Marines which would have been more accurate.

  Link to this forum: On this day: 24 July

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 1.

  This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the in some way.

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Allan D (U1791739) on Saturday, 24th July 2010

  Due to the fact, in both cases, that that is the wish of the inhabitants.

  Link to this forum: On this day: 24 July

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Allan D (U1791739) on Saturday, 24th July 2010

  To be strictly accurate, although the Corps of Royal Marines was not officially established until 1755 marine regiments date back to 1664 when they were known as the Admiral's Regiment. Gibraltar, when they captured the town but not the Rock (which was captured by Royal Navy sailors), was probably their first major battle honour:
  
  

  Link to this forum: On this day: 24 July

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Sunday, 25th July 2010

  They've forgotten about the Dutch
  
  

  Link to this forum: On this day: 24 July

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 6.

  Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Sunday, 25th July 2010

  Re: Message 6.
  
  Triceratops,
  
  as always at the end of the thread you add some interesting and to the point link.
  
  Did some further research and for what it is worth wikipedia confirms:
  
  And confirmation by ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ radio4:
  
  As for the commandant of the invasion: Prince George of Hesse-Darmstadt:
  
  
  Kind regards and with the highest esteem,
  
  Paul.

  Link to this forum: On this day: 24 July

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 4.

  This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the in some way.

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Monday, 26th July 2010

  Thanks for those replies folks. There are 3 main errors with this 'On this day' entry.
  
  Firstly - as pointed out by Trike and Paul - the taking of Gibraltar in 1704 was in large part down to the Dutch Marines under Georg von Darmstadt working in close co-opertion with the English marines under George Rooke.
  
  Secondly - the 'British' marines in 1704 were actually marines (or maritime infantry) of the English Royal Navy. The Royal Scots Navy was still in existence in 1704, Allan, and didn't merge with the English Royal Navy until 3 years later folowing the Treaties of Union in 1707.
  
  Thirdly - the marines (both English and Dutch) did not 'seize Gibraltar from Spain'. Gibraltar in 1704 was claimed by them in the name of the Habsburg Charles III of Spain (Charles IV of the Holy Roman Empire) rather than the Bourbon Philip V. In other words the Anglo-Dutch forces in control of the rock in 1704 still recognised Gibraltar as sovereign Spanish territory.
  
  It was only 9 years later at the conclusion of the War of the Spanish Succession with the Peace of Utrecht in 1713 that Gibraltar was ceded to the new Kingdom of Great Britain.

  Link to this forum: Hidden

  Report message9

• Message 10

  , in reply to message 9.

  Posted by Catigern (U14419012) on Monday, 26th July 2010

  Secondly - the 'British' marines in 1704 were actually marines (or maritime infantry) of the English Royal Navy.Β 
  Surely they were 'normal' army regiments of foot doing service on RN ships, rather than being, in tribal/institutional terms, part of the RN...
  
  I'd suggest that the army was ahead of the game in becoming 'British' from at least as early as the Glorious Revolution, wot with the 25th and 26th Foot (aka King's Own Scottish Borderers and Cameronians) appearing almost out of nowhere to defend the Revolution and go on to form an integral part of King William's army that Marlborough etc. inherited.
  
  The Royal Scots Navy was still in existence in 1704, Allan, and didn't merge with the English Royal Navy until 3 years later folowing the Treaties of Union in 1707.Β 
  
  Didn't the Scots Navy have a grand total of two ships - a frigate for the west coast and another for the east?
  
  
  Just an idea to kick around...
  During the stand-off and haggling that preceded the Union of 1707, could it be argued that Scotland's greatest maritime asset was not, and never could be, her navy, but was in fact her long and awkward coastline that proved highly permeable to smugglers throughout the 17th and 18th centuries? Even the Royal Navy failed to prevent the Covenanters liaising with the Dutch and with their own exiles before the Revolution, as the Jacobites were to do later when seeking to co-operate with potential or real French and Spanish landings. The Swedes were also regarded as having the potential to make trouble via Scotland after the Union. I see these factors as making union more desirable from an English point of view, because it afforded the opportunity to control the Scottish coast to a much greater degree. This ought to have strengthened the Scots hand while they were trying to wangle their way into English imperial trade...
  

  Link to this forum: Hidden

  Report message10

• Message 11

  , in reply to message 10.

  Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Tuesday, 27th July 2010

  They weren't 'normal army regiments doing service on RN ships'. They were specifically maritime infantry trained for sea service - i.e. marines. As Allan has pointed out there had been English marine regiments dating back on and off since 1664.
  
  The question of whether or not Scottish regiments serving as allies of, or mercenaries in, the English army seems to be irrelevent here. Also irrelevant is the relative size of the Scottish and English navies. The important fact is that the Scottish Army and the Royal Scots Navy and the English Army and the English Royal Navy were separate institutions representing separate states in 1704.
  
  I'm not sure that the English had any great desire to 'control the Scottish coast' in 1707. Why should they have had when the Scots themselves (as you rightly point out) only deemed it significant enough to bother defending with only 2 working vessels. Also why would the English have wanted to saddle themselves with the cost of patrolling over 6,000 miles of Scottish coastline when they could quite happily guard the short 60 mile land border between Scotland and England?
  
  I take your point, however, that some form of security evaluation must have played a part in the thinking during the negotiations 1706-7. Those English who were pro-union in 1707 probably saw union with Scotland as a sensible political expedient which would also remove the threat of Scotland being used politically as an ally of a continental enemy. This would also have made a lot of sense in the age of sail. Since the advent of steam-powered transportation, however, the notion of the β€˜island fortress’ has become increasingly redundant.
  
  With regard to β€˜On this day’, however, then a better worded entry would perhaps be:
  
  'English and Dutch marines storm and seize Gibraltar in Spain after a sustained naval bombardment.'

  Link to this forum: Hidden

  Report message11

Back to top