Mutiny: A History of Naval Insurrection

by Leonard F. Guttridge

Examines mutinies that have occurred worldwide over the past two hundred years, offering insight into the factors that contribute to mutiny and ways to prevent it

Genres: History, Naval History

336 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1992

Reviews

[Billy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Could more accurately be entitled "HMS Bounty and Other Mutinies". The book does itself great credit by not just going through the salacious details of famous events like Bounty and the mutinies at the Nore and Spithead, but also delving into the legal morass of what exactly is the definition of mutiny and what separates it from the lesser offenses such as simple insubordination. Interestingly, even to this day, there is no firm definition of the act. Also, be aware that the book only considers naval mutiny, so if you're looking for famous army mutinies such as the Sepoy Rebellion, look elsewhere.

However, the book has some very strange structural quirks. Foremost is the author's bizarre use of chapters. Traditionally, if a chapter is about, say, the mutiny at Spithead, one expects the chapter to begin perhaps with a reminder of the conclusion of the previous chapter if necessary and then conclude perhaps with a nod towards what is to come. In this case, do not be surprised to be halfway through a chapter and find yourself reading about something completely different. As an example, the author describes a mutiny in the Soviet Navy in 1975 in the final pages of the conclusion. Additionally, some of the events seem to get disproportional weight, beginning with the focus on Bounty. I would have preferred to read a lot more about Nore and Spithead as opposed to the racial disturbances aboard USN aircraft carriers during the Vietnam War; the former were most assuredly mutinies, the latter most probably were not.

Still a good resource if you're interested in naval (only) mutinies.

[Tim Martin · Rating 4 out of 5]

_Mutiny: A History of Naval Insurrection_ by Leonard F. Guttridge is a thorough account of mutinies from the days of Magellan to the present, examining the concept, causes, and solutions to mutiny as well as looking in detail at a number of examples throughout history.

Surprisingly, defining just what a mutiny is has been the subject of some debate, as different people at different times around the world have not agreed on just what constitutes mutiny. Whether they were writers of naval codes and regulations, judges presiding over a mutiny-related court martial, or a captain on a ship confronted with it, people have been in relatively little agreement on what exactly should be considered mutinous behavior, often changing the definition of mutiny from case to case of "collective insubordination" (one of the many euphemisms used instead of mutiny, a word avoided by many as it carries "its own exclamation;" other euphemisms have included "combat refusal," "disciplinary problem," and "demonstration of grievance").

So what is mutiny? Is it merely refusal to obey a superior officer? Does mutiny require a large number of men, merely two or more, or can one individual be guilty of mutinous behavior? Should mutiny be more narrowly defined as a "conspiratorial determination to overthrow authority and seize control" of a ship? Must there violence to warrant the use of the term mutiny; can there be a passive mutiny, such as a sit-down strike? Should mere talk of mutiny be treated the same as actual mutinous physical activity? Can mere disrespect (rather than outright disobedience) be considered mutinous, such as perhaps unflattering gossip, satirical cartoons circulated below decks, or even ugly glances at officers?

There has also been debate over who gets to declare a mutiny is occurring over the centuries. Most might think that it would be the ship's captain or an admiral with the fleet, but many have felt it necessary that either other impartial witnesses must testify to the fact or instead believed it better that any alleged mutineers merely be detained and whether they were guilty of mutiny or not (and their punishment, if any) to be decided upon by a court martial back in port.

Of course, particularly in the age of sail, when a vessel might be gone for months or even years and there were no rapid means of communication, locking up mutineers and especially waiting to decide whether or not a mutiny occurred and what punishment to inflict was highly impractical. During the days when many sailors were forced to work thanks to the efforts of press gangs, the gulf of class differences between officers and the lower decks was huge, and living conditions onboard could be quite bad, swift action in the face of mutiny was vital.

What action might that be though? Throughout much of history death was the automatic punishment, but this was not always deemed practical, such as on small ships far from home, where every member of a crew was needed and replacements were not to be had, when hundreds or even thousands of sailors were disobedient, or when political opinion at home tended to be sympathetic. If punishment was not to be the death sentence, then what should it be? Also, must every act of disobedience be dealt with harshly or even punished at all? Authorities were often sharply divided over whether light sentences were a good thing or not and even more over the notion that on some occasions the sailors might have legitimate grievances and that the authorities might bargain with them or even grant their demands. Some naval authorities were adamantly opposed to this, not even wanting to acknowledge the fact that any sailor could be spoken to as a representative and that any type of bargaining would erode naval authority and provoke calls for yet more demands, while other authorities were equally convinced that it was only wise and prudent to allow for some outlet for grievances and that it vital to maintain ship and fleet morale. In many cases a lack of agreement on how to handle mutinies (as well as a complete lack of awareness of the feelings of the lower decks) either provoked mutinies or allowed them to become much worse.

The reasons for mutiny over the centuries have varied a great deal. Some mutinies were the reaction of war-weary and homesick sailors, reacting to overextended deployments or being sent to theaters of war they felt they had no business going to, such as with two British mutinies, one against intervention in Russia in 1919 and another in 1944 on the over-crowed cargo ship _HMS Lothian_, its crew reacting to a deployment from the British Isles to the South Pacific. Other mutinies were done for patriotic reasons, such as the mutiny of the Greek destroyer _Velos_ in 1973, its officers working against the military junta that had overthrown King Constantine XIII in 1967 and that of the Soviet missile frigate _Storozhevoy_ in 1975, whose ringleader, a zampolit or political officer no less, wanted to protest Soviet hypocrisies and demand reform. Similarly, still other mutineers hoped to inspire revolutions; Brazil's sole two battleships, _Minas Geraes_ and Sao Paulo_, were led by rebellious officers who hoped to lead a revolution in 1924, while the crew of the famed Russian battleship _Potemkin_ hoped to spark a revolution in 1905. Racial tensions lead to mutiny of one sort or another in 1972 on the American carriers _Kitty Hawk_ and _Constellation_.

Most mutinies, mainly those in the age of sail at least, were due to poor working conditions, pay cuts (or lack of pay), and/or "tyrannical or neurotic officers." Well detailed in the book are the famous mutiny on the _HMS Bounty_, the mass Spithead and Nore mutinies of 1797, the bloody and violent 1797 mutiny on the frigate _HMS Hermione_ in the Caribbean, the mutiny on the American training brig-of-war _Somers_ in 1842, and the series of mutinies in the early 1930s in the Chilean, British, and Dutch navies.

[Mike Glaser · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have had this book for over thirty years and while I have read parts of this book over that time, this is the first chance that I have taken to read it cover to cover. Worth any professional naval officer’s time, it can at times drag but overall it is a fine read. I really enjoy the picture of the author that is found inside the back dust cover. I look at it and see a man who has enjoyed being an author.

[Bryan Whitehead · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you’re looking for a solid introduction to the history of naval mutiny, look no further. Author Leonard Guttridge’s organization is often a little odd. For example, he frequently starts new topics in the middle of chapters and then carries them over into the next chapter for no apparent reason. And sometimes his subjects get a little scrambled (for example, at one point he has German and Russian mutinies so strangely intertwined that it’s difficult to tell which country he’s writing about). Though this work doesn’t pretend to be a comprehensive coverage of its subject, Guttridge does do a good job of at least touching on the major social, psychological and political forces underpinning different types of mutinies.