Battle of Trafalgar Essay Example for Free

Battle of Trafalgar Essay The Battle of Trafalgar was the most significant battle won by the British against the combined forces of the French and Spanish fleets during the Napoleonic Wars. This battle also had significant impact on the concept of navigation when it comes to the Naval Doctrine of War. This battle proved that tactical unorthodoxy could win battles; even though you might be outmanned and outgunned by your opponent you can still win battles by deviating from the old Naval Doctrine. This battle was part of a much larger campaign called the Trafalgar campaign which included several different battles that led up to the final battle at Trafalgar. This campaign was a long and complicated series of fleet maneuvers carried out by the combined French and Spanish fleets and the opposing moves of the British Royal Navy during much of 1805. These were the culmination of French plans to force a passage through the English Channel, and so achieve a successful invasion of the United Kingdom. The plans were extremely complicated and proved to be impractical. Much of the detail was due to the personal intervention of Napoleon, who was a soldier rather than a sailor. This was largely because Napoleon failed to consider the effects of weather, difficulties in communication, and the intervention of the Royal Navy. Despite limited successes in achieving some elements of the plan the French commanders were unable to follow the main objective through to execution. The campaign, which took place over thousands of miles of ocean, was marked by several naval engagements, most significantly at the Battle of Trafalgar on 21 October 1805. The naval doctrine at the time dictated that both sides should line up parallel to eachother in a straight line so that they could engage in battle and bring all their guns to bear against the enemy. One of the reasons for the development of the line of battle was to help the admiral control the fleet. If all the ships were in line, signaling in battle became possible. The line also had defensive properties, allowing either side to disengage by breaking away in formation. If the attacker chose to continue combat their line would be broken as well. This type of warfare allowed each side to fight a battle and then to disengage at any time to minimize the losses to their fleet. However with England under threat of invasion by Napoleon and his grand army, British Admiral Lord Horatio Nelson needed to ensure that the British were in control of the seas. In order to do this Nelson needed to fight and win a decisive battle that would clearly establish Britain’s naval supremacy. However in order to do this he would have to make sure that the combined French and Spanish fleets actually remained in the battle long enough to win a decisive victory. What Nelson planned on doing was instead of lining up parallel to the opposing fleet, Nelson would take his navy and charge at the enemy and deliberately cut the their battle line in two. This type of deviation from normal naval warfare in terms of navigation was unheard of at the time. Despite the risk to the British fleet, Nelson believed that this was the best way to engage the enemy fleet in the upcoming battle because it had numerous advantages. The primary advantage was that this would allow the British to cut half of the enemy fleet off, surround it, and force a fight to the end. This is unlike normal engagements where the battle was often inconclusive due to the fact that both fleets would withdraw before a clear winner could be seen. The plan had three principal advantages. First, it would allow the British fleet to close with the Franco-Spanish fleet as quickly as possible, reducing the chance that it would be able to escape without fighting. Second, it would quickly bring on close quarters battle by breaking the Franco-Spanish line and inducing a series of individual ship-to-ship fights, in which the British were likely to prevail. Nelson knew that the better seamanship, faster gunnery, and higher morale of his crews were great advantages. Third, it would bring a decisive concentration on the rear of the Franco-Spanish fleet. The ships in the front of the enemy fleet would have to turn back to support the rear, and this would take a long time. Additionally, once the Franco-Spanish line had been broken, their ships would be relatively defenseless to powerful broadsides from the British fleet and would take a long time to reposition and return fire. The main drawback of this strategy was that sailing the British fleet into the combined French and Spanish battle line, the British ships would be fully exposed to the enemy broadsides without the ability to return fire. In order to lessen the time the fleet was exposed to this danger Nelson would have to drive the fleet straight into the enemy battle line as fast as he could. This was yet another departure from navigation rules of naval warfare. Nelson was also well aware that French and Spanish gunners were ill-trained, nd would probably be supplemented with soldiers. These untrained men and would have difficulty firing accurately from a moving gun platform. This was in stark comparison to British gunners who were well drilled, and the Royal Marines who were expert marksmen. Another advantage that the British fleet had was that the enemy was sailing across a heavy swell, causing the ships to roll heavily and exacerbating these problems. Nelsons plan was indeed a gamble, but a carefully calculated one. The battle itself started exactly as Nelson wanted it to. The British fleet was able to successfully cut the French and Spanish battle line in half thus forcing a close quarter’s battle. Despite the huge risk that Nelson was taking his plan ended up working. Nelson scored a huge victory against the combined French and Spanish fleet. He managed to capture over twenty of the enemy ships and inflicted heavy casualties against while suffering few casualties himself. Unfortunately during the battle Nelson was pierced by a musket ball and died from his wounds before he could see the outcome of the victory. Some argue that his loss outweighed any gains made by the British Navy. Following the battle, the Royal Navy was never again seriously challenged by the French fleet in a large-scale engagement. Napoleon had already abandoned his plans of invasion before the battle and they were never revived. This battle firmly established Britain’s naval supremacy over France. In terms of navigation, this battle was very significant. The most important thing is that it proved that following standard navigational techniques during an engagement won’t always win a battle. The best tactic is to be unpredictable so that the enemy has to adapt to what you are doing thus giving you the tactical advantage. This is exactly what Nelson did in the Battle of Trafalgar and it paid off. He proved that sometimes in battle deviating from the norm of battle navigation is the best thing to do, and ever since navies around the world have looked to the strategies employed by Nelson. What is being done today is that naval commanders are being educated about naval history so that they can learn and even employ these types of strategies if they need to in battle. In conclusion, the Battle of Trafalgar was a turning point in which ships would fight naval battles in terms of navigation due to the tactical unorthodoxy employed by Nelson. This battle has had long term effects and even today commanders look back and employ some of the same strategies used. The importance of this battle cannot be underestimated because not only was it the turning point in the Napoleonic Wars for the British in terms of establishing naval supremacy at the time, it was a turning point in naval warfare. Navigation would never be the same thanks to one man and one decisive battle.

An Explication of Sylvia Plath8217s 8220Daddy8221 Essay -- essays pape

An Explication of Sylvia Plath8217s 8220Daddy8221 It tends to be the trend for women who have had traumatic childhoods to be attracted to men who epitomize their emptiness felt as children. Women who have had unaffectionate or absent fathers, adulterous husbands or boyfriends, or relatives who molested them seem to become involved in relationships with men who, instead of being the opposite of the â€Å"monsters† in their lives, are the exact replicas of these ugly men. Sylvia Plath’s poem â€Å"Daddy† is a perfect example of this unfortunate trend. In this poem, she speaks directly to her dead father and her husband who has been cheating on her, as the poem so indicates. The first two stanzas, lines 1-10, tell the readers that Plath, for thirty years, has been afraid of her father, so scared that she dares not to â€Å"breathe or Achoo.† She has been living in fear, although she announces that he’s already dead. It is obvious that she believes that her father continues to control her life from the grave. She says that she â€Å"has had to kill† him, but he’s already dead, indicating her initial promise to forget him. She calls him a â€Å"bag full of God,† telling us that she considers her father a very strong, omnipotent being, someone who is superior in her eyes. In the middle of the poem, she begins to refer to herself as a Jew, and her father the German, who began â€Å"chuffing me off like a Jew†¦to Dachau, Auschwitz, Belson.† What Plath’s intent here is to allow us to understand that her father was a German, and she relates his behavior as a person to a Nazi. But later, she becomes more enraged, and strips the title of God from her father, and labels him a swastika and a brute. â€Å"Every woman adores a Fascist† is Plath’s way of ... ...r husband were monsters in her life, destroying her, but that she has just noticed. â€Å"Daddy, daddy, you bastard, I’m through† is the last line in the poem. It is not until the end that we realize that not only is she through with the memories of her dead father and the adulterous behavior of her husband, but she is through with herself. This last line is clear – Plath has just announced to her readers that she will be committing suicide again, and plans on being successful at it. So, instead of this poem being Plath’s victorious confession to the horrible men in her life, and finally allowing closure, the poem is an outline of her promising death. Plath is still pained by these men, and cannot completely go on being alive. She believes that death is her only solution, and maybe in a way it was. Perhaps she is finally free, and finally able to â€Å"breath† and â€Å"Achoo.†

International Ballroom

Bachate is a unique dance that I have the privileged to learn in my PE-154 international ballroom dance class taught by professor Jane Edwards. This dance originated from the Dominican Republic. It can be difficult to identify the precise style of the Bachata due to the fact that are so many variations throughout the world. However, in all of these different styles throughout the world there are the same basic steps with a tap with hip movement on the 4th beat. The original style of Bachata was developed with the music in the 1950s and 1960s.This dance was well known in the countryside and rural neighborhoods. The creation of the Bachata is given credit to the servants of large households who were the first ones to use the movements and steps. Musicians would use everyday items like trash cans and fences to create music. The term Bachata is said to mean trash, however, other believe it is actually a word for party. For a time the Bachate was only affiliated with the poorer parts of D ominican society forcing these styles of dance only to be performed in the rougher parts of town like brothels and bars, which only further tarnished its name.Nevertheless, the increased popularity of the music eventually caused Bachata to be accepted by the upper classes of Dominican society. There also are some skeptics that believe that the dance was brought over from Italy from an Italian Ballata. Bachata is known to be connect the emotions of romance and heart ache. There are five main styles of Bachata, the Original, Traditional, Modern, Bachatango, and Ballroom. The original is the basic style that can alternate between an open and closed position.The traditional is a simpler style that was developed in the late 1990s with a basic steps side to side changing direction after every tap. The modern style began around 2005 and is an abbreviation of the â€Å"traditional† style. This still is believed to originate from Spain. The modern has the basic Bachata steps with the integration of salsa, tango, zouk-lambada, and ballroom. The bachatango it true to its name and is a mixture of Baracha and Tango. The Ballroom is a style used in various formal dance competitions and there is an extreme use of the hips all throughout the music.

Berengaria of Navarre Queen Consort to Richard I

Dates:Â  Born 1163? 1165?Married May 12, 1191, to Richard I of EnglandDied December 23, 1230 Occupation: Queen of England - Queen consort of Richard I of England, Richard the Lionhearted Known for: the only Queen of England never to set foot on the soil of England while Queen About Berengaria of Navarre: Berengaria was the daughter of King Sancho VI of Navarre, called Sancho the wise, and Blanche of Castile. Richard I of England had been betrothed to Princess Alice of France, sister of King Phillip IV. But Richards father, Henry II, had made Alice his mistress, and church rules, therefore, forbid the marriage of Alice and Richard. Berengaria was chosen as wife to Richard I by Richards mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine. The marriage with Berengaria would bring a dowry that would help Richard finance his efforts in the Third Crusade. Eleanor, though almost 70 years old, traveled over the Pyrenees to escort Berengaria to Sicily. In Sicily, Eleanors daughter and Richards sister, Joan of England, embarked with Berengaria to join Richard in the Holy Land. But the ship carrying Joan and Berengaria was wrecked off the shore of Cyprus. The ruler, Isaac Comnenus, took them prisoner. Richard and part of his army landed in Cyprus to free them, and Isaac foolishly attacked. Richard freed his bride and his sister, defeated and captured Comnenus, and took control of Cyprus. Berengaria and Richard were married on May 12, 1191, and set off together to Acre in Palestine. Berengaria left the Holy Land for Poitou, France, and when Richard was on his way back to Europe in 1192, he was captured and then held prisoner in Germany until 1194, when his mother arranged for his ransom. Berengaria and Richard had no children. Richard is widely believed to have been a homosexual, and though he had at least one illegitimate child, it is believed that the marriage with Berengaria was little more than a formality. When he returned from captivity, their relationship was so bad that a priest went so far as to order Richard to reconcile with his wife. After Richards death, Berengaria as dowager queen retired to LeMans in Maine. King John, Richards brother, seized much of her property and refused to repay her. Berengaria lived in virtual poverty during Johns lifetime. She sent to England to complain that her pension was not being paid. Eleanor and Pope Innocent III each intervened, but John never did pay her most of what was owed to her. Johns son, Henry III, finally did pay much of the overdue debts. Berengaria died in 1230, soon after founding Pietas Dei at Espau, a Cistercian monastery. Bibliography Ann Trindade. Berengaria: In Search of Richards Queen. 1999. [1851824340]