In British naval history examples of faulty division are hard to find.  The case most commonly cited is an early one.  It occurred in 1666 during the second Dutch war.  Monk and Rupert were in command of the main fleet, which from its mobilisation bases in the Thames and at Spithead had concentrated in the Downs.  There they were awaiting De Ruyter’s putting to sea in a position from which they could deal with him whether his object was an attack on the Thames or to join hands with the French.  In this position a rumour reached them that the Toulon squadron was on its way to the Channel to co-operate with the Dutch.  Upon this false intelligence the fleet was divided, and Rupert went back to Portsmouth to cover that position in case it might be the French objective.  De Ruyter at once put to sea with a fleet greatly superior to Monk’s division.  Monk, however, taking advantage of thick weather that had supervened, surprised him at anchor, and believing he had a sufficient tactical advantage attacked him impetuously.  Meanwhile the real situation became known.  There was no French fleet, and Rupert was recalled.  He succeeded in rejoining Monk after his action with De Ruyter had lasted three days.  In the course of it Monk had been very severely handled and forced to retreat to the Thames, and it was generally believed that it was only the belated arrival of Rupert that saved us from a real disaster.

The strategy in this case is usually condemned out of hand and made to bear the entire blame of the reverse.  Monk, who as a soldier had proved himself one of the finest strategists of the time, is held to have blundered from sheer ignorance of elementary principles.  It is assumed that he should have kept his fleet massed; but his critics fail to observe that at least in the opinion of the time this would not have met the case.  Had he kept the whole to deal with De Ruyter, it is probable that De Ruyter would not have put to sea, and it is certain Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight would have lain open to the French had they come.  If he had moved his mass to deal with the French, he would have exposed the Thames to De Ruyter.  It was a situation that could not be solved by a simple application of what the French call the masse centrale.  The only way to secure both places from attack was to divide the fleet, just as in 1801 Nelson in the same theatre was compelled to divide his defence force.  In neither case was division a fault, because it was a necessity.  The fault in Monk’s and Rupert’s case was that they extended their reach with no proper provision to preserve cohesion.  Close cruiser connection should have been maintained between the two divisions, and Monk should not have engaged deeply till he felt Rupert at his elbow.  This we are told was the opinion of most of his flag-officers.  They held that he should not have fought when he did.  His correct course, on Kempenfelt’s principle, would have been to hang on De Ruyter so as to prevent