Научная работа "Адмиралы Ф. Ушаков и Г. Нельсон"

SIMILARITY IN DIVERSITY:

ADMIRAL NELSON AND ADMIRAL USHAKOV

By T. Komarova

School 44

Teacher: Yakovleva G.K.

Introduction

Russia and Britain have been known as the world’s greatest sea powers since the eighteenth century. Who were those daring sailors and officers who created the naval glory of the two countries? Among many famous names the personalities of Fyodor Ushakov and Horatio Nelson, Russian and British admirals, are the most outstanding.

This year we have been participating in the schoolwide project “The History of the Russian Fleet and Nizhny Novgorod Region”. We’ve visited some museums and displays on the subject, met many officers who served in the Navy. From them we learnt about Fyodor Ushakov as the greatest naval commander in Russian history. The fact that he took part in 40 sea battles without losing any of them made me interested in this issue. I decided to compare the two greatest contemporaries: admiral Ushakov and admiral Nelson.

The title of my research work is SIMILARITY IN DIVERSITY. It presupposes the two main questions I have to answer in this paper:

• Why did they become the national heroes in their countries?

• What is similar and what is different in their personalities?

The aim of my work is to compare the biographies of these two great commanders and find the answers to the questions above.

1. Admiral Fyodor Ushakov – Russia’s national hero

I.1. Gaining experience

Fyodor Fyodorovich Ushakov was born in the village Burnakovo in the Yaroslavl gubernia in 1744. At the age of sixteen he was enrolled in the Saint-Petersburg Naval College. He graduated from this institution in the rank of midshipman and took part in the cruises from Kronstadt to Arkhangelsk and Sweden. 

Admiral Fyodor F. Ushakov

His first battle experience was gained in the Russian-Turkish war of 1768-1774. During these years he served first in the Azov Sea and then in the Black Sea as a captain of a small ship where he was actively engaged in military operations for the first time. These cruises were a very important stage for Ushakov in terms of honing his naval skills and becoming a real professional in this sphere. However, it was not enough for him and young Ushakov took a great interest in studying and analyzing the wealth of experience gained by the Russian squadron in the Mediterranean Sea, especially in the Battle of Navarino and the Battle of Chesma as well as actions of the Russian Fleet in the Northern war. In 1776, Ushakov participated in a voyage from the Baltic Sea to the Mediterranean. Starting from May 1781, he, being in command of the battleship Victor that guarded merchant ships from the piratical activities of the English Navy, spent a year sailing the Mediterranean Sea as a part of Admiral Sukhotin’s squadron whose mission there was specified by the famous declaration on armed neutrality signed by Catherine the Great. Soon after coming back to Russia, Ushakov took part in the building and formation of a new Black Sea Fleet; furthermore, he was the first to educate and train the Black Sea sailors.

I.2. Victories in Russian-Turkish wars

It is remarkable that already in the Russian-Turkish war, in the battle of 1788 nearby Fidonisi Island, Ushakov proved to be a fleet commander-innovator. On 18 June, 1788, the Russian troops besieged the fortress of Ochakov. In early July Suvorov was summoned to Ochakov from Kinburn to take command of the left flank of assault troops. The same day, on the 18th of June, the Russian squadron under Voynovich left Sebastopol to head for Ochakov. The squadron consisted of two battleships, two 50-gun frigates, eight 40-gun frigates, one 18-gun frigate, some twenty small sailing ships and two fire ships. 

On 3 July, off the Fidonisi Island, the Russian and Turkish fleets met. An experienced commander, Hassan Pasha knew the weak points of the Russian fleet and directed his main offensive, six ships of the line, at the Russian vanguard, whereas the second column concentrated on the center and rearguard intending to paralyze them and hinder any help to the Russian vanguard led by Ushakov.
In spite of unfavorable conditions, the ships of Ushakov’s vanguard managed to fire accurately at the Turks who were launching unceasing attacks and 40 minutes later the enemy attack was eventually repulsed and his line of ships disrupted. The flagship of the first column was forced to leave the line. The enemy’s attempt to cut off two Ushakov’s frigates, the Borislav and Strela (“Arrow”) failed. Meanwhile, Ushakov on his frigate Saint Pavel taking advantage of the confusion in the ranks of the enemy passed to the offensive. He ordered to set more sails and, approaching it, caused serious damage to the Turkish flagship Kapudania making her sail back. While the enemy ship was turning back, the frigates Borislav and Strela fired in salvoes at him making it impossible for the enemy ship to fire back. The rest of the vanguard ships were helping their flagman firing heavily at the disrupted Turkish column. The battle went on till 16.55, after which the enemy ships set sails and left the battle field in haste. The losses of Ushakov’s vanguard totaled five men in killed and two wounded.

The offensive headed by Ushakov could have been even more successful and could have produced more results but for lack of assistance on the part of Voynovich who was intimidated by the massive Turkish forces and limited his actions to occasional firing at the distant ships of the second enemy column. Nor did Voynovich help Ushakov in chasing the retreating enemy. As a matter of fact, the battle was fought between the vanguard led by Fyodor Ushakov and the first column of the Turkish squadron far outnumbering his own. 

On 1 July, 1788, the Russian troops undertook their first attack on Ochakov. As a result of the success achieved by Suvorov-led army, the Turkish fortress, which had long been considered impregnable, was taken on 6 December, 1788. The battle at Fidonisi is an illustrative example of joint efforts on the part of the fleet and land troops while besieging the well-protected and fortified fortress of Ochakov. Ushakov taking the initiative in his own hands, in defiance of all the established canons of formal line tactics, decides to enter the battle with a superior enemy and, by launching a daring counterattack, he directs his main offensive at the Turkish flagship (the first column).

During the battle at Fidonisi Ushakov broke some other rules of the formal line tactics in accordance with which the flagship was to be in the center of the line of ships. Setting a personal example to the rest of the ships, Ushakov was at the very front line. It was his favorite pattern of behavior during battles which never failed to bring success. On 8 July, 1790, Ushakov headed the battle of Kerch.

By that time, Ushakov had already been appointed Commander of the Fleet to replace the hesitant and timorous Voynovich. On 2 July 1790, Ushakov put to the sea once again holding the flag on the battleship Rozhdestvo Khristovo (“Christmas”). There were 10 battleships, 6 frigates, 1 bombing ship, 1 repeater, 13 light cruising vessels, and 2 fire ships in his squadron. Before embarking, all the ships received the following order: “I want every single man in the fleet remember that the Russian fleet that has become famous for its brilliant victories over enemy fleets has no other way but to enhance the glory of the Emperor’s flag so I order you to demand that each and every soldier, sailor and officer discharge their duties in the finest, praiseworthy and selfless manner”. The battle was successful, it undermined the Turkish plans to land their landing party on the Crimea. Most of the Turkish ships were seriously damaged, at that, one messenger vessels with its crew was sunk. The Turks suffered serious losses in killed and wounded. The losses from the Russian side totaled 29 men in killed and 68 wounded. On 12 July, Ushakov came back to Sebastopol with flying colours. 

With respect to tactics, the battle of Kerch is notable for Ushakov’s self-evident, irresistible urge towards conducting decisive offensive operations. Ushakov seeks to approach the enemy at a minimal distance in order to employ both the artillery (case-shot) and gun fire, thus, inflicting as much damage to the enemy’s landing party on ships as possible. Another distinctive feature of this battle is concentration of fire on the Turkish flagships in order to destabilize the enemy and shake his confidence and fortitude. Such element as leading frigates out of the formation is also worth mentioning; this maneuver allowed achieving maximum density of squadron line forces and enhancing artillery fire efficiency as well as forming the necessary ships reserve corps which could be used by the flagship. Finally, it should be added that at the final stage of that remarkable battle Ushakov, having assessed the current tactical situation, ordered his ships to form up not taking up the positions assigned to them, while he himself chose to stand at the head of his ships, which was against all requirements and rules of the formal line tactics.

After the success of the battle of Tendra (28-29, August, 1790), Ushakov relying on the profound battle experience gained during the recent battles (notably at Kerch and Tendra) suggested assigning a special group of ships for conducting attacks against enemy flagships which was approved by Prince Potemkin. Such a ships group was named the Keiser flag squadron. By inflicting a crushing defeat on the Turkish squadron at Tendra and carrying out further successful maneuvers, Ushakov not only secured the Liman flotilla’s safe transfer to the Danube but he also covered its actions from sea while it was approaching Izmail thus rendering an invaluable service to Suvorov’s troops. Suvorov and Potemkin gave a very high appraisal of the Liman flotilla’s fearless actions. 

The distinguishing feature of the tactics employed by Ushakov in that battle was a surprise attack without re-forming the squadron from marching order to battle one. In other respects, the techniques are much the same as were used in the battle of Kerch (in particular, leading frigates out of the attack line to form them into a reserve corps; approaching the enemy and giving battle at a case-shot distance; attacking the enemy flagships in order to disable them in the first place). Ushakov’s tactical methods should not be regarded separately, i.e., regardless of a whole set of tactical methods and techniques employed by him in every single sea battle. In that way, the tactics of assaulting the Turkish squadron straight off in the battle of Tendra (28-29 August, 1790) would not have produced the desired effect if he had not in due time ordered to form an attack line, form a reserve corps, attack the flagships, chase the enemy, etc. The fact that he would always introduce new tactical devices and was capable of skillfully combining them with those already in use demonstrates how clever he was at assessing the situation and finding the right solution. In his battles, the excellence of his unique, innovative, Suvorov-influenced doctrines of naval art is evident. 

The campaign of 1791 was marked by a string of brilliant victories gained by the Russian troops. Soon afterwards the peace talks between Russian and Turkey were resumed. The Russian government’s desire to make peace as soon as possible was caused by the fact that Catherine the Second intimidated by the revolution organized in France and possible negative consequences believed that now the main goal of her country’s foreign policy should be a struggle against it. Having suffered serious losses on land, Turkey was not capable of waging war in any more or less effective way but, still relying on its strong fleet, did all it could to procrastinate the truce talks intending to bargain for more advantageous articles of the peace. 

Fortunately, the brilliant victory of Ushakov’s squadron in the battle against the Turkish fleet at Caliakria that took place on 31 July, 1791, hastened the course of events. In that battle, Admiral Ushakov, accustomed to being outnumbered, could advance 16 battleships, 2 frigates, 3 bombing vessels, 1 fire ship, and 13 light ships, while the Turks had as many as 18 battleships, 17 frigates, and 43 light ships. The Kapudan Pasha Hussein was in command of the Turkish fleet. This stubborn and violent sea battle, during which the Turkish ships (especially their flagships) were seriously damaged, some disabled, continued for more than three and a half hours. The Russian squadron’s decisive attacks resulted in the Turkish ships’ clustering together and retreating in disorder to the Bosporus. In that remarkable battle, a new tactical trick was employed by Ushakov, namely, an off-shore attack, which was later adopted by the English Admiral Nelson and employed seven years later in the battle of Abukir against the French squadron. 

The glorious victory gained by Ushakov at Caliakria was crucial for the entire campaign. On 29 December, 1791, Turkey initiated the signing of peace treaty to Russia’s advantage. Under the Yass Peace Treaty of 1791, the articles of Kuchuk-Kainardzhyisk Treaty were confirmed; a new Dniester border was established; the Crimea’s annexation by Russia was stipulated. 

I.3. The Mediterranean campaign

The French invasion of the Mediterranean Sea created an extremely difficult military and political situation not only in the Mediterranean but also in the entire Europe. The complexity of that situation was further aggravated by the fact that there started a violent internal struggle within Italy: the Bourbons had been overthrown and Italy had to ask the Russian Emperor Pavel the First for help. Under these circumstances Russia opposed France. 

In order to participate in the Mediterranean campaign, a squadron consisting of 6 battleships, 7 frigates, and 3 message vessels under the command of Admiral Ushakov was assigned, which left Sebastopol on 13 August, 1798. These ships were carrying 1 700 marines on their boards. On reaching the Dardanelles, a Turkish squadron formed of 4 battleships, 6 frigates, and 14 gunboats reinforced Ushakov’s squadron. On 12 September, Ushakov directed 4 frigates and 10 gunboats under the command of Captain Second Rank Sorokin to blockade Alexandria and destroy the French batteries in Abukir because the British squadron under the command of Admiral Nelson had by that time been so seriously battered and damaged after the victory over France that it was no longer capable of fulfilling any naval missions and was planning an urgent retreat to Sicily. On 20 September, the Russian and Turkish squadrons left the Dardanelles. Within a relatively short period of time, from 28 September to 5 November, Admiral Fyodor Ushakov succeeded in knocking the French out from the Cerigo, Zante, Kefalonia, and Santa Maura Islands. This success was soon followed by an effective blockade of Corfu with the purpose of its further capturing. 

Ushakov’s tactical genius was not limited to just sea battles; he was perfectly capable of achieving the same success and impressive results in landing operations, enemy coastline blockade, fortress attacks as well. In military operations, just as in sea battles, he was against any routine and lack of innovative approach. His unique ability to introduce something new to the established naval tactics, his strong character, inflexible will and talent as a commander helped him pull off a victory in the hardest situations. The most glaring example is the siege and capture of Corfu which had always been considered an impregnable fortress. 

The Corfu Island had long been considered the key to the Adriatic Sea. For more than five centuries it had been in the Venetians’ possession who had done a lot to fortify it. After the island was taken by Napoleon, the French naval and construction engineers turned it in an even more fortified and impregnable place. By the first day of the fortress’ siege, it had already had up to 650 guns, 3-thousand-strong garrison and the food supplies that would last them the next six months. From the sea, the fortress was sheltered by two islands – Vido and Lazaretto – the first of which was protected by powerful fortifications with a large number of guns on them. 

The entire period of the three-month-long siege of Corfu abandoned in numerous passages of arms between the Russian and French ships anchored off the island. These skirmishes together with regular bombardments of the fortress by Russian batteries led to the enemy’s complete exhaustion. However, a decisive assault of the fortress required close cooperation and combined actions of all the parties involved which could not be guaranteed since the Turkish Command had failed to fulfill its direct obligations on adequate food supplies and were constantly postponing the date of sending the landing troops promised making the situation in which Ushakov eventually found himself more complicated and even desperate. 

Despite all the difficulties, Ushakov was actively preparing the future assault operation. Having carefully examined the approaches to Corfu, he came to the right conclusion that the Vido Island was the key to the fortress. At the same time he knew that it was practically impossible to take the well-fortified Vido Island with landing troops alone, yet, he was determined to capture it. He planned to give a general signal to storm Corfu together with a signal to storm Vido. Right before the storm, a council of admirals and captains was held at which Ushakov announced his decision and revealed his plan of actions. 

While getting ready for the storm, Ushakov conducted a number of trainings in the course of which he paid special attention to how exactly siege ladders and fascines should be made and how they should be used in a more efficient way. He also spent a lot of time on intercommunication which resulted in developing a special table of 130 flag-signals. 

The Vido Island’s attack was launched on 18 February, 1799, at 7 o’clock in the morning. Admiral Ushakov aboard his ship Saint Pavel accompanied by a frigate checked the correctness of ships’ disposition personally; after that he approached the enemy’s biggest battery at a case-shot distance and, together with the frigate, destroyed it. By 11 o’clock enemy batteries’ fire became weaker. The signal “start landing troops” was given. In all, more than 2 000 men were landed. The ships did not cease fire during the landing operation. At 14 o’clock Vido was captured. Out of the garrison totaled up to 800 men, 422 were taken prisoners. 

Simultaneously, a storm of the Corfu fortress was launched. The troops landed rushed to the attack of outside fortifications. The first attack was repulsed, while the second one was a success. The French commandant sent Ushakov a letter in which he asked to agree on a 24-hour truce for him to sign an act of capitulation. On the very next day, French General Chabot came to Ushakov’s ship Saint Pavel to sign the act of unconditional surrender. 

Ushakov’s capturing the most formidable and impregnable naval fortress was an unprecedented case in history. In that battle he once again demonstrated his unsurpassed naval skill and talent as a commander while the Russian sailors – their perfect training and personal qualities. The success of that battle was, to great extent, the result of Ushakov’s ability to assess the current tactical situation and attack Corfu from sea first and only after that from land even though it was against the established naval traditions, which by that time had already become obsolete, in accordance with which navies were used to block only seaside fortresses. The Corfu battle went down in history as one of the most brilliantly fought naval battles. One little-known fact: during the assault of Corfu, French soldiers preferred to surrender to Russians rather than to Turks. They had all reason to do so because Turks were paid for each dead Frenchman. The Russians were more humane than their Turkish allies: they even bought out French prisoners of war from Turks in order to save their lives.

When Ushakov was leaving the Ionian Islands, the grateful islanders gave him and his squadron a hearty farewell. They presented him with medals that bore the following inscription: “Thou art unanimously proclaimed our father”. 

During the Corfu fortress’s siege and its follow-up capture, Ushakov demonstrated a much more skilled, competent performance and balanced approach than the renowned English Admiral Nelson did, who at that time was storming Malta and its less formidable fortress La-Valetta. For example, it took Ushakov three months to seize Corfu, whereas Nelson spent more than a year on besieging Malta. At that, he returned to England without waiting for the taking to actually take place.

Ushakov’s mission in the Mediterranean did not end with the liberation of the Ionians. Soon his squadron received an order to move to the southern coast of Italy. His legendary compatriot Field-Marshal Alexander Suvorov, who was in command of the Allied Russian-Austrian army, suggested Ushakov sending a ship group to the Adriatic coast to blockade the Ankona because the French ships stationed there could intercept Austrian transport vessels, thus hindering lines of communications which were strategically important for Russia’s ally – Austria. On May, 1799, at Suvorov’s request, Ushakov directed 3 battleships (with one Turkish among them), 4 frigates (two Turkish), and 5 smaller vessels under the command of Rear-Admiral Pustoshkin to Ankona. A bit earlier he sent another detachment formed of 4 frigates, 2 light vessels, and 4 gunboats under the command of Captain Second Rank Sorokin to Otranto. On 9 May, this detachment landed troops under Captain-Lieutenant Belly on the eastern coast of the Apennines (between Brindisi and Manfredonia), which played a very important role in the Russians’ military activities in Italy. With these troops whose overall strength was 600 men belly crossed the peninsula from the east to the west and, having approached the Tyrrhenian Sea on 3 June, 1799, took part in Naples’ assault. In late June 1799, Ushakov with the main body of his squadron (10 battleships, 7 frigates, and 5 other vessels) reached Sicily. After clearing the whole Northern Italy of the French, Suvorov started preparing his advance on Genoa Riviera in early August 1799. In his plan of Riviera attack, Suvorov focused special attention on the fleet. He wrote as follows: “…the joint fleet must be notified of out intentions and future actions in advance so that it could assist us either in covering our water transports or providing any other kind of help”. 

I.4. Ushakov and Suvorov

When he was in Messina in early August, Ushakov received a letter from Suvorov in which the Russian Field-Marshal asked him to assign a ship division for imposing a blockade on Genoa in order to stop French Army’s food supply by sea. Ushakov immediately sent to Genoa a detachment of two battleships and two frigates under the command of Rear-Admiral Pustoshkin, who excelled himself in the recently-fought battle at Ankona. Sorokin was sent to Naples this time. Pustoshkin’s detachment assisted Suvorov until the very last day of his staying in Italy. 

On 13 and 14 September, the great Field-Marshal undertook his world’s famous march across St. Gotthard and the Devil’s Bridge. Meanwhile, the Ushakov-led squadron was in Italy taking thorough preparations for its Rome campaign. Ushakov worked out a plan of this campaign himself. He formed a detachment of 820 grenadiers and 200 sailors and appointed Colonel Sciport its commander. Later on, this detachment was reinforced by 2 500 men from the King of Naples’ army. While the Russians were preparing their attack on Rome, British Admiral Nelson arrived in Rome. Willing to prevent Russians from taking Rome, Nelson sent a military vessel to the port of Chivita-Vekkia (near Rome) proposing the French to surrender before the Russians came to Rome. The terms of capitulation proposed by Nelson were very attractive to France. In particular, they were not deprived of the right to bear guns and wage wars in the future. The British promised to transport them back to France on their ships. The French naturally agreed to such a “capitulation”, the more so because they could throw these troops into the battle against the Allies on the Genoese coast. Ushakov was filled with rage and burning indignation at Nelson’s treachery; however, he did not cancel his Rome campaign. The mission of the Russian squadron’s troops in 1799 campaign was ended with the Russian sailors solemnly entering Rome which had been surrendered by French under the terms of capitulation. In 1800, Emperor Pavel the First summoned Ushakov’s squadron back to Russia, to the Black Sea. 

I.5. Ushakov’s tactics and innovations

Ushakov’s tactics and strategy were dedicated to one goal – the destruction of enemy forces. Just as Suvorov, Ushakov was always after decisive battles. This was reflected in the offensive nature of his tactics, at that, the techniques and methods of Ushakov-introduced offensive tactics of maneuver conduction were richer and more versatile than those employed by European admirals. Ushakov was never afraid of being engaged into battle with a superior enemy. Despite all this, adventurism and ill-considered behavior were absolutely alien to him; moreover, he never defied due caution and prudence. 

Special attention was attached by Ushakov to the level of his squadron’s training. Intensive, unceasing battle training, both in time of peace and war, was a key component and usual style of Admiral’s everyday work. Even in the busiest and hardest days preceding the battle of Kerch, Ushakov would never break off the training of his squadron and in his order of 5 July, 1790, he instructed captains on how to train and teach gunners. The order stressed the necessity to conduct regular firing practice on rate of gun fire; to master direct laying (for that purpose three gunners were assigned to each gun and they were supposed to fire in turns). In addition, captains were expected to conduct examinations and test their gunners’ abilities and efficiency personally. After that in order to summarize the results of artillery preparation, Ushakov would organize combined maneuvers with gunfire. 

Apart from that, Fyodor Ushakov managed to achieve impressive results in the field of proper performance of duties on ships and at seaside fortresses. For this purpose we revived the traditions which had first been introduced by Peter the Great, namely, an exchange of conventional signals to greet ships at sea and on approaching fortresses. Admiral never forgot the importance of reconnaissance at the theatre of war and a preliminary close study of the enemy. 

The golden age of Russian naval art in the second part of the eighteenth century naturally concurred with the flowering of military art as such. From the very day of the regular army and fleet formation under Peter the First the development of Russian military art has always been side by side with the development of naval art and science resulting in a steady growth of the Russian State’s regular armed forces. In this respect, Ushakov had the right understanding of the fleet’s importance and its place in the system of the Russia’s armed forces. 

All the above-mentioned allowed Fyodor Fyodorovich Ushakov to become an outstanding master of organizing close cooperation between the fleet and land troops. Ushakov thought it was strategically important to form regular land forces units (marines) with the fleet. Fyodor Ushakov devoted his entire life to the Russian Fleet. It was Rumiantsev and, mainly, Suvorov who not only preserved the finest battle traditions of the Russian Army but also managed to multiply them, whereas in the Russian Fleet the same great merit belonged to Ushakov. 

Ushakov gave a total of 40 naval battles and lost none and he believed his sailors’ courage and fortitude was the key factor that made all his victories possible. Ushakov would always take care of his team and often, when there were delays in supply, he spent his own money on food and things for his squadron. Ushakov’s humane and kind attitude to sailors and well-thought personnel training system was the very thing that in many respects united him with Suvorov. As for Suvorov, a Russian soldier’s personal qualities, his courage and selfless service were of great value for Ushakov. 

At that time Suvorov’s and Ushakov ‘s innovative educational and training principles were understood and welcomed by a very limited number of people, mostly by the most advanced and forward-looking representatives of the court elite, the most progressive of whom were Rumiantsev and Potemkin. They were farsighted enough to understand that in order to withstand external enemies a strong, highly-trained and skilled army was needed and they also could not but realize that it was impossible to create such by drilling alone. Potemkin and other like-minded persons were perfectly aware of the fact that only a competent commander who carried authority could lead troops against the enemy. Such man in the Russian Fleet was Fyodor Ushakov who enjoyed immense authority with the squadrons’ personnel and earned their confidence and unshakable loyalty. 

The description of Ushakov’s naval career would be incomplete without mentioning his remarkably broad knowledge and understanding of politics and his abilities as a diplomat which became especially evident during 1798-1800. Ushakov’s activity in the Mediterranean Sea was complicated by Admiral Nelson’s hostile attitude. The latter wanted to distract Russians from Malta and the Adriatic Sea and direct the Russian squadron to Levant, thus winning a free hand to fight Malta and preventing Russians from consolidating their positions on the Ionian Archipelago. By doing so, Nelson intended to disengage British troops operating nearby Levant and send them to reinforce the army in Malta, which was of more strategic importance for Great Britain. At that Nelson tried every possible foul means to achieve his end. On the one hand, he was flattering Pavel I as the “Grand Master of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta” sending him reports of honour and presents. On the other hand, he insisted that his ships’ captains do everything they could in order not to let Russians hoist their flag in Malta, and was constantly stirring up Turks’ suspicions and distrust sowing discord between Ushakov and the Allied Turkish admiral. However, Ushakov did not yield to Nelson’s dirty, cunning tricks and stood his ground in a brave and honest manner and pursued his policy aimed at defending Russia’s interests in the Mediterranean. 

I.6. Commemorating Admiral Ushakov

Ushakov’s naval art could have been developed even further but for the numerous obstacles put in his way by some representatives of the upper echelons of the Russian Imperial administration who envied his fame and could not stand his independent behavior. On returning to his native land, Ushakov did not obtain the Tsarist government’s recognition he really deserved. Early in 1802 he was appointed the Commander of the Baltic Sea galley fleet which, basically, meant his removal from active naval service since the importance of the galley fleet as such was weakening. In 1807 the great admiral was compelled to hand in his resignation from the Navy. He settled down in his estate in Temnikov district of Tambov gubernia, central Russia, where he died on 4 October, 1817. 

The Russians and the Russian Fleet have always cherished the memory of Ushakov. A great captain, viewed from the standpoint of any age of military history, he functions as the great captain of the Russian nation, for the character of his leadership responded to the character of the Russian soldier. His tactical art was further advanced by his favorite student and closest associate Admiral Dmitry Nikolayevich Senyavin and through him it became the heritage of the School of Lazarev and was passed on to the famous Russian admirals of the next periods of Russian Fleet’s development and improvement. 

On 3 March, 1944, the Presidim of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR established the Order of Ushakov and the Uskakov’s medal which were awarded to many officers and sailors of the Soviet Navy who distinguished themselves in battles against the fascist aggressors during the Great Patriotic War. The Order of Ushakov, among other decorations, was preserved in Russia upon the dissolution of the USSR, thus remaining one of the highest military awards in the present-day Russian Federation. 

1. Admiral H.Nelson – the defender of Britain’s interests

II.1. Serving in the Royal Navy

 Nelson was born on 29 September, 1758, in Burnham Thorpe, Norfolk, England, the sixth of eleven children. His father, Edmund Nelson, was parish priest and his mother, Catherine Nelson, was a grandniece of Robert Walpole, 1st Earl of Oxford. His mother died when Nelson was nine. Nelson joined the Royal Navy aged 12 on January 1, 1771. Following the traditional system of patronage, he was made midshipman on his maternal uncle, Captain Maurice Suckling's ship.

By 1777 he was made lieutenant and assigned to the West Indies. Here he saw action in the American War of Independence. In June 1779 (aged 20), he was made captain of the recently captured 28-gun French frigate Hinchinbrook - his first command. In 1781 Nelson took part in a landing at the Spanish fortress of San Juan in Nicaragua. His action however (not covered by his orders) led to many of his men catching tropical diseases. Even Nelson's health suffered, and he was forced to return to England for more than a year.

In 1784, aged only 25, Nelson was senior captain of the Leeward Islands station in command of the 28-gun Boreas. On his own instigation, he began enforcing the Navigation Act in the vicinity of Antigua. Despite being told to desist, he continued to harass illegal trade until 1787. Although in the end Nelson was forced to back down, he did however meet Fanny Nesbit, a widow native to Nevis, whom he was to marry on 11 March, 1787 at the end of his tour of duty in the Caribbean. The marriage was not successful or long lasting, and the couple lived separately after Nelson began his affair with Emma Hamilton. In 1789 he was put on half pay, only to be recalled to service in 1793. His first command was the 64-gun Agamemnon and his station was the Mediterranean, specifically the Kingdom of Naples. In 1794 he lost the sight in his right eye after being struck in face by flying stones and sand at Calvi, Corsica.

In 1796, the commander-in-chief of the fleet in the Mediterranean, Sir John Jervis, appointed Nelson commodore. His mission was to blockade the French coast. At this point Agamemnon had to be sent back to England for a refit and Nelson was appointed to Captain.

II.2. Successful career

In 1797, Nelson was largely responsible for the British victory at the Battle of Cape St Vincent. As a result he was promoted to the rank rear-admiral of the Blue. He was later in the same year knighted. He also lost his arm by amputation after being hit above elbow with grapeshot at an unsuccessful attempt to capture Santa Cruz, Tenerife.

In 1798 Nelson was alone responsible for the great victory at the Battle of the Nile, Aboukir Bay, Egypt. Here he destroyed the French fleet supporting Napoleon's expedition to Egypt. For this he received the title Baron of the Nile. He subsequently put palm trees and a crocodile on his coat of arms. He was however piqued that he could not have a higher title than baron.

Although Nelson had met the British Ambassador to Naples (William Hamilton) and his remarkable (and much younger) wife, Emma, in 1793, it was not until after the celebrated Nile battle that Nelson fell in love with Emma Hamilton. Emma hero-worshiped Nelson, and their relationship caused scandal in polite Europe. Nelson and Emma's daughter, Horatia, was born in 1801. Her birth was kept a secret because her parents' relationship remained outside marriage, although Nelson regarded Emma as his wife in the sight of God.

In 1799, he was promoted to Rear Admiral of the Red. In the new second-rate vessel, Foudroyant, he aided Admiral Ushakov with the reconquest of Naples, and was made Duke of Bronte by the Neapolitan king. On January 1, 1801, he was promoted to Vice Admiral of the Blue (the sixth highest rank) and a few months later he was involved in the Battle of Copenhagen (April 2, 1801). In May, he became commander-in-chief in the Baltic Sea, and was awarded the title of Viscount Nelson by the British crown.

II.3. Fighting against the French in the Mediterranean

On the breakdown of the Peace of Amiens, returned to duty and was appointed commander-in-chief of the Mediterranean. He had been assigned to Victory in May 1803. He then spent the next two years in the blockade of Toulon. He was promoted to Vice Admiral of the White while still at sea, on 23 April 1804. The French fleet however slipped out of Toulon in early 1805 and headed for the West Indies. Nelson pursued these vessels to the Caribbean, but they evaded him. When he learned that French forces for returning to Europe, he sent a fast frigate ahead to warn the British government, and he himself retired to the residence he shared with Emma Hamilton and their daughter, Merton, in England.
After two months at 'paradise Merton', he was called back to action on 13 September, 1805. Taking up his station off Spain he blockaded the Franco-Spanish fleets in Cadiz.

II.4. The greatest victory

On October 21, 1805, Nelson fought the Battle of Trafalgar, at which he was shot by a sniper. He lived long enough however to learn that victory had been won. 'Thank God I have done my duty' were his last words.
 
After the battle, the dismasted Victory was then towed to Gibraltar, with Nelson's body on board preserved in a barrel of brandy. On arrival in London, Nelson's body was given a state funeral and he was buried in St. Paul's Cathedral (despite the fact that his battle cry had always been 'Victory or Westminster Abbey'). His coffin was made from the mast of L'Orient which had been salvaged after the Battle of the Nile.

Current scholarship considers that the famous expression 'Nelson Touch' refers to the admiral's renowned ability to inspire his crews. He was voted in the top ten of the 100 Greatest Britons in a BBC poll in the first decade of the 21st century. Alongside the Duke of Marlborough and the Duke of Wellington, he is Britain's most famous military figure.

The conclusion

The comparative analysis of their lives and military careers made it possible to formulate the following conclusions:

Firstly: Both men made a conscious decision to become naval officers in their early teenagehood. Nelson went on his first sea voyage at the age of 12. Fyodor studied in a naval college, which helped him greatly in his future service.

Secondly: Both men were patriotic and loyal to their motherland. Their lives were inseparably connected to the history of their countries.

In the 18^th century Russia created its fleet on the Black sea and built some new cities on its coast, like Sebastopol and Kherson. IT also fought with Turkey for the right to sail in the Black sea. It was Ushakov’s military talent and bravery that led Russian fleet to many victories, the most famous and important of them were the battles at Tendra and Caliakria. As a result, a peaceful treaty was signed, which made Crimea a Russian territory. At the beginning of the 19^th century Russian Fleet took part in the Napoleonic wars in the Mediterranian and liberated the Ionic Islands from the French invaders.

As for Admiral Nelson, he defended the interests of the UK at sea. In those times Royal Navy was extremely strong and fought its enemies worldwide. Nelson took part in Napoleonic wars which made him famous. The most glorious of his victories were the battles of the Nile and of the Trafalgar.

Thirdly: Both admirals were really talented commanders. More than that, they were innovators. First Ushakov and later Nelson refused to follow the orthodox tactics of a single line of battle. Nelson invented the tactics of going straight at the enemy in two perpendicular lines. Ushakov preferred a surprise attack with approaching the enemy at a minimal distance to use the artillery and gun fire. And his genius was not limited to just sea battles. He was capable of defeating armies in landing operations and fortress attacks. The storm of the island of Corfu is a good example of his talent.

And Finally: These great commanders understood that any victory could be gained by all the crew. So, they taught every sailor and young officer the art of combat and gave independence to captains in attacks. Humane and kind attitude to the personnel, belief in their bravery encouraged sailors and officers to do their best in the fights. The flag signal sent by Nelson from his ship before every battle said “England expects that every man will do his duty”.

Admiral F.Ushakov and Admiral Nelson themselves did their duty. I’d dare to say that these two great men influenced the course of history of that time. After the battle of Trafalgar which destroyed French and Spanish fleets Britain remained the only sea power in the world and Nelson who was killed in that fight was called a national hero. He was buried with all honours, a monument was put on Trafalgar square to commemorate his deeds. His flagship “Victoria” was made a museum.

Sadly, Russian Emperor Pavel the First didn’t understand the importance of victories gained for Russia by Fyodor Ushakov. It was thought that Russia didn’t need a powerful fleet. Admiral wasn’t rewarded for his service. Soon he retired and lived modestly in the village near Temnikov, not very far from Nizhny Novgorod. He was buried in Sanaksarsky monastery, where he often prayed being a highly religious person. For a century nobody remembered about the admiral, his grave was unattended.

But during the Great Patriotic war when our country was in danger its great patriots, like F. Ushakov, A. Suvurov, Alexander Nevsky were needed to show the example of heroism. A memorial appeared in the monastery, a film was made about the admiral and the order of Ushakov was designed as an award for naval officers.

Twenty years ago Russian church proclaimed Fyodor Ushakov a saint. He was re-buried inside the cathedral with all honours. We visited the monastery to see the place where lies one of Russia’s greatest men. Now we know well why Count Potemkin, Alexander Suvorov and the peoples of Europe admired Admiral UShakov. He was a true patriot of Russia, a talented commander and a person of high morals.

In conclusion I’d like to say that the people of Britain and Russia should be proud of their heroes who were great naval commanders and innovators, whose deeds influenced the world’s history, whose life was and can still be a good example for younger generations.