REASONS FOR THE FAILURE OF THE SPANISH ARMADA.


Can you sort out the jumble below into a convincing order to make a clear essay?

PUT THE TITLE 'WHY DID THE SPANISH ARMADA FAIL?'.

Open your own Word document, then copy and paste the boxes into your document in an order that makes sense.

You may decide that you need to add an occasional sentence to make the argument clearer or to make better links between the points!!

You are allowed to OMIT UP TO FOUR of the boxes if you think that the material in them wanders too much from the title or if you think the point made is not really necessary.

What is your CONCLUSION going to be? What do you think was the most important reason?

P.S. The essay in the back of the Armada booklet may help you if you get really stuck, but try and do it by yourself if you can.

INTRODUCTION:
It is very difficult to sort out exactly why the Armada failed. At the time it happened the English and the Spanish had different ideas - the English claimed that they won because they had God on their side; the different Spanish commanders all blamed each other for the failure. Modern historians have suggested that the main reasons for failure can be divided into four categories; English strengths, Spanish weaknesses, Spanish mistakes and Spanish 'bad luck'.

 

Some historians have suggested that the Armada failed because the original Spanish plan was flawed. Philip II had asked two different commanders to put together plans for the invasion. Both the Marquis of Santa Cruz and the Duke of Parma put forward their suggestions. Santa Cruz’s plan was a naval plan; Parma’s was an army plan. Philip II made the mistake of trying to combine the two different plans. The final plan involved sailing the Armada to the Spanish Netherlands to pick up Spanish soldiers who were stationed there before sailing on to invade England's south coast. But there was no obvious port to pick up the soldiers in the Netherlands. In Spain after the defeat many people blamed the Duke of Medina Sidonia for the defeat saying that he lacked courage or that he had been a poor commander. It was certainly unfortunate that Spain's Lord High Admiral, Santa Cruz, the man who had developed the naval plan, died in 1586. Certainly, Medina Sidonia, though a good general, had never been to sea before and when he did get on board his ship, he got seasick. However, he was an experienced soldier and commander - it was not his fault that the plan was flawed.
The Spanish had experienced considerable bad luck in putting together their Armada. In 1587, Drake had attacked Cadiz harbour and destroyed or damaged a number of ships that were in preparation for the invasion. This meant that new ships had to be built very quickly and other ships repaired. Thus the Spanish plan seemed doomed from the start. While it sailed in a crescent shape, the Armada was relatively safe. But part of its plan was to stop, pick up sailors and then sail to England. The simple fact that the plan involved stopping the Armada, meant that it was fatally flawed. Warships on the move and in formation gave the Armada protection. Once the ships were still, they were open to attack.
The unlucky destruction of ships meant that new ships had to be built in such a hurry that they put the stores on board in barrels that were made of new wood which was still damp. This rotted the food and made the water sour. It was even more misguided for Medina Sidonia to expect reliable communications between himself and Parma. He wrongly believed that Parma would have his troops aboard the barges and small ships before the Armada reached the Narrow Seas, and would therefore be ready to put out the instant its sails were spotted.
The Armada first sailed in April 1588. It hit a terrible storm and many ships were damaged. They had to return to port to get repaired. This reduced the size of the fleet. Also, the English gunners were seamen, thoroughly familiar with the guns aboard their vessels and experienced at the tasks of operating them at sea. Those who worked the guns were not expected, as were the Spaniards, to double as soldiers

Other historians point to the weaknesses in the Spanish side, most particularly their failure to fire their guns enough, and argue that this is why the Armada failed. There seem to have been several reasons for this. Firstly, the Spanish had no procedure for disciplined reloading of guns as a standard battle drill (they only expected to fire one broadside before boarding the ship). Secondly, the 18 pound Spanish guns took up far more deck space than the English guns and were difficult to reload.

 

The Spanish had bad luck with the weather. Good weather was essential for Spanish success - it was the least of the miracles they expected from God. They needed good weather to preserve their fragile Mediterranean shipping, calm seas to maximise the effectiveness of their galleasses, mild conditions for Parma's barges, a moderate swell to compensate for the inexperience of their gunners; and above all, an easy, speedy voyage to help keep them safe despite the lack of a northern port of refuge. The storms and 'extreme foul’ weather were a disaster for the Spanish.
Additionally, the English used very effective tactics. For example - the fireship attack. This drove the Armada from its only anchorage, temporarily dispersed it and caused it to lose many irreplaceable anchors and cables. At one point the Duke of Medina Sidonia wanted to turn and attack the English with the whole Armada. but it was impossible, as both wind and and tide were against him, the wind blowing from the NW towards the land.
Thirdly, Medina Sidonia complained that many of his ships couldn't defend themselves adequately because they did not have enough 'projectiles'. However, recent archaeological evidence from the wrecks raised from the sea shows that none of these reasons were the real reason why the Spanish guns were not fired often enough. Archaeologists examining the wrecks have found many unfired cannon balls on board the ships. It would seem that, because the ships and guns were hastily and badly manufactured many of the cannon balls didn’t fit the guns and some of the guns were bored so badly off centre that they probably could never have been fired at all. It is likely that Drake realised that he had little to fear from the Spanish guns, particularly after he captured a Spanish galleon and was able to get on board.

Others say that the English had better ships and better guns, and their seamen were better trained than the Spanish. The English had many advantages as regards to the ships they used. The Spanish put their hope in the power of the galleons. The English used smaller, faster ships which were more manoeuverable. Also, the 24 pound English guns were very efficient (aiming low and hitting enemy ships below the water line as they heeled over)
Elizabeth inspired her troops to fight with determination by delivering a rousing speech. She said, 'I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a King, and of a King of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma of Spain, or any Prince of Europe should dare to invade the borders of my realm.' The weather slowed down the Spanish fleet and made their job very difficult because they didn't have a port they could take refuge in.
Some historians suggest that the main reason the Armada was defeated was because of the strengths of the English side. Firstly, some point out the clever English tactics. The English used their greatest strength - their guns - to do damage to the Spanish and then they sent out a fireship that dispersed the Armada, making it move northwards. This meant that Medina Sidonia lost all hope of being able to link up with Parma. Spanish tactics didn't help them to score victory. Whereas the English just wanted to sink the Spanish ships the Spanish wanted to board the English ships and then capture them. To do this they needed to come up alongside our ships - this left them exposed to a broadside from English cannons and meant that were more easily sunk.