^{Note 1 in page 428} See Mariner's Mirror, x, 94.

^{Note 2 in page 428} Chapters xxviii-xxxiv.

^{Note 3 in page 428} v, [313]–342.

^{Note 4 in page 428} 1st ed., iv, 600, 607–610.

^{Note 5 in page 428} The familiarity of historians with Smollett's various accounts of the expedition may be estimated from the testimony of J. W. Fortescue, who, in his authoritative History of the British Army, quotes Smollett's “Account” and, in his list of sources, adds, “The most familiar account of the expedition to Carthagena is of course that of Smollett, a great part of which is repeated in Roderick Random.” (See Fortescue, 2nd ed. [London, 1910], ii, 72–73, 79.) Some naval historians have lately attempted to exonerate Vernon; but their defences offer eloquent evidence of Smollett's enormous influence: Douglas Ford, announcing in the subtitle to his Admiral Vernon and the Navy (London, 1907), that his work contains “a critical reply to Smollett and other historians,” devotes nine pages to refutation of Smollett's charges against Vernon, together with four pages in which passages of Roderick Random are cited with approbation (see Ford, pp. 157–165, 271–277). In his exhaustive work, The Navy in the War of 1739–48 (Cambridge, 1920, 3 vols.), H. W. Richmond prefaces a defence of Vernon with a summary of the received opinion, obviously Smollett's: “It is the fashion to attribute the failures in the West Indies to Vernon, and to speak of him in a contemptuous and disparaging manner... . the failure at Cartagena is put down to his overbearing and arrogant attitude towards his colleague. He is summed up as a boasting creature of no solid qualities ... .” (Richmond, i, 133.)

David Hannay, also the author of A Short History of the Royal Navy, devotes a page of his Life of Smollett (London, 1887, pp. 38–39) to the great influence of Smollett's accounts of this expedition upon naval and military reform; while Geoffrey Callender, after listing Roderick Random and Smollett's Complete History of England in his “Bibliography of Naval History,” declares: “It would be difficult to exaggerate the influence which Smollett exercised over contemporary public opinion regarding naval affairs.” (See The Historical Association, Leaflet 61, p. 3.)

^{Note 6 in page 430} Roderick Random: I was wakened by a most horrible din, occasioned by the play of the gun carriageupon the deck above, the cracking of cabbins, the howling of the wind through the shrouds, the confused noise of the ship's crew, the pipes of the boatswain and his mates, the trumpets of the lieutenants, and the clanking of the chain pumps. ... I went above; but if my sense of hearing was startled before, how must my sight have been appalled in beholding the effects of the storm ! The sea was swelled into billows mountain-high, on the top of which our ship sometimes hung as if it was about to be precipitated to the abyss below! ... Of all our fleet, consisting of a hundred and fifty sail, scarce twelve appeared, and these driving under their bare holes, at the mercy of the tempest. At length the mast of one of them gave way, and tumbled over-board with a hideous crash ! Nor was the prospect in our own ship much more agreeable; a number of officers and sailors ran backward and forward with distraction in their looks, hollowing to one another, and undetermined what they should attend to first. Some clung to the yards, endeavouring to unbend the sails that were split into a thousand pieces flapping in the wind; others tried to furl those which were yet whole, while the masts, at every pitch bent and quivered like twigs, as if they would have shivered into innumerable splinters !—While I considered this scene with equal terror and astonishment, one of the main braces broke, by the shock whereof two sailors were flung from the yard's arm into the sea, w[h]ere they perished, and poor Jack Rattlin thrown down upon the deck, at the expence of a broken leg. (Works, i, 231–233.)

“Account”:

The author of this account, who was on board of one of the largest ships in the fleet, says he was waked early in the morning, by a dreadful concert produced from the clanking of chain-pumps, the creaking of gun-carriages, the cracking of cabins strained by the violent motion, the dashing of the sea, the howling of the wind, the rattling of the rigging, and the confused clamours of six hundred men running up and down the deck in confusion.

Nor was the eye more agreeably entertained than the ear: for, when he got up and mounted the accommodation-ladder, he found the prospect altogether dismal. Of all the fleet, seven sail only were to be seen, and of these, two had lost their masts, while the others scudded under reefed main-sails; the billows were incredibly vast and tremendous: there was nothing to be seen on board, but tumult, uproar, and dismay; the ship pitched with such violence, that the masts quivered like slender twigs; a cask of water broke from its lashings on deck, and maimed sixteen men before it could be staved; the main-sail was split into a thousand tatters, and the yard being manned to bend another in its room, one of the braces gave way with such a shock as threw four men overboard, two of whom were lost, while the knee of a fifth was crushed in a terrible manner between the beril and the mast. (Works, xii, 191–192.)

For other close similarities between the two accounts see Addenda.

For the convenience of the reader, page-references are made according to The Works of Tobias Smollett, with an introduction by W. E. Henley (Westminster and New York, 1899–1901), 12 vols.; but in order to preserve Smollett's text, all quotations from the “Account” are taken from the first edition of the Compendium (1756), and all quotations from Roderick Random are taken from the eighth edition (1770), the last during Smollett's lifetime. The “Account” is reprinted in Works, xii, 187–221.

^{Note 7 in page 431} The pamphlet has sometimes been ascribed to Smollett, but it is patently written by a member of the land forces who witnessed all the operations ashore.

^{Note 8 in page 431} See Original Papers, pp. 70–84, 104–113.—These letters were also available in a pamphlet entitled Authentic Papers Relating to the Expedition against Carthagena (London, 1744); but since the other pamphlet is larger and apparently official, I assume that Smollett may have used the best source.

^{Note 9 in page 431} See Addenda.

^{Note 10 in page 431} For examples, cf. Works, xii, 202–203; Journal, pp. 18–19; Works, xii, 214; Journal, pp. 36–40.

^{Note 11 in page 431} [Journal:] March the 12th, a Mortar Battery was begun, between the Forts St. Phillip and St. Jago... .

March the 13th, A Defence was made of Casks filled with Sand, to cover the Mortar Battery from the Enemy's Fire; this Evening ... it was finished, and began to play upon the Castle... .

The Bomb-Ketches likewise continued to throw their Shells, and it was observed that several of them did not take place in the Castle. The Ground was traced out for the great Gun-Battery.

... A Lieutenant Colonel's Guard was mounted to cover the Workmen to be employed on the great Gun-Battery.

The Enemy fired very smartly, both Yesterday and this Day, and killed several Men in the Camp.

March the 14th, the Works were carried on with all the Expedition our Circumstances would admit of; but were much retarded, not only from the Heat of the Climate, which renders Europeans almost unable to support the least Fatigue, but from the Negroes throwing down their Loads, and working Tools, whenever a Shot came near them. (Pp. 9–12.) [“Account”:] [The engineer] planned out a mortar battery, defended from the enemy's fire by casks filled with sand, which began to play upon the castle on the 13th, in conjunction with the bomb-ketches.

As for the great gun battery, it could not be finished with such expedition; for, the workmen were not only galled by the shot of the enemy, who fired with great vigour, but so relaxed by the heat of the climate, that they could not bear much fatigue; and the negroes, upon whose labour there was great dependance, were so intimidated by the fire from Boca Chica, that they threw down their burthens and fled at the report of every gun. (Works, xii, 199–200.)

^{Note 12 in page 432} [Journal:] The Battery (f) of two ten inch Mortars, which was raised by Captain Knowles on the Shore near to his Ship, began this Morning to Fire upon Fort St. Lazar, but was placed at so great a Distance as to have little or no Effect.

(f) It was raised 2600 Yards from the Fort, which is the utmost Distance those Mortars can throw a Shell, when their Chambers are quite filled with Powder; an Allowance only given for Proof, and never upon Service. Tho' appriz'd of this Circumstance by the Colonel of the Train, the Captain could not be prevailed upon to advance his Battery nearer, but (as it was expected) wasted above two hundred Shells, to little or no Purpose whatsoever. (P. 45.)

[“Account”:] Mean while captain Knowles began to throw shells at fort St. Lazaro from two small mortars, in a battery which he had judiciously raised on the shore under cover of his ship, at the distance of two thousand six hundred yards from the castle, notwithstanding the remonstrances of colonel Lewis of the train, who gave him to understand that this was the utmost distance a mortar can carry when the chamber is quite filled with powder; an expedient never practiced but upon proof. But the captain piqued himself upon being an able engineer, and in the confidence of his own capacity expended a good number of shells to the amusement of the enemy. (Works, xii, 218.)

Apart from the skill of this revision, the passage is noteworthy for its irony: this is the first evidence of the contempt which led to Smollett's notorious attack on Knowles in the Critical Review (v, 438–439, May, 1758), where, among other charges, Smollett denounces him as “an engineer without knowledge.”

^{Note 13 in page 432} Cf. Works, xii, 189, lines 12–22; Journal, pp. 54–55.

^{Note 14 in page 432} Cf. Works, xii, 219, lines 21–32; Journal, pp. 50–51.

^{Note 15 in page 432} Cf. Works, xii, 218, line 30–219, line 11; Journal, p. 46; Original Papers, pp. 107–108.

^{Note 16 in page 432} The extent of Smollett's industry may be fairly measured by consideration of the following passage from the “Account:”

On Friday the 27th, the Griffin and Orford were ordered to advance and post themselves across the mouth of the inner harbour called Surgidero;] while the Weymouth and Cruizer sloop were detached to the other side of the harbour, to demolish two small batteries on each side of the Passo-Cavallos or Horse-Ferry, a creek thro' which provisions were conveyed into the Laguna, and from thence to the city. This piece of service was performed without opposition, under the direction of captain Knowles, who at the same time took some hulks and small craft] that were serviceable in watering the fleet, at a very convenient wharf which they found by the side of an excellent spring. (Works, xii, 205–206.)

The first clause (down to the first bracket) is extracted from Original Papers (p. 79):

The next Day (the 27th) I gave Orders to Capt. Griffin, with Lord Augustus in the Orford under his Orders, to advance as fast as the Wind would let them, for posting themselves across the Harbour ....

Notice that Smollett has mistaken the captain's name for the name of a ship: it should read, “Captain Griffin in the Burford” (see Authentic Papers, p. 43). Such slips are rare in the “Account.”

The next portion (down to the second bracket) is chiefly derived from the Journal (pp. 22–23, text and footnote):

The Weymouth, and the Cruizer Sloop, were sent to demolish two small Batteries on the Passa-Cavallos, (r) which they performed without Opposition, and likewise seized or destroyed such small Craft, as they found upon the Lagoon.

(r) The Passa-Cavallos is the only Creek, thro' which Provisions can be conveyed into the Lagoon, and from thence to the City... .

The italicized portions of this section in the “Account” and the final portion are taken from Original Papers (pp. 79–80):

On the same Day the Worcester got up to me, and I sent her to anchor close to a Wharf where there is a good Crane and a Spring of Water, which I thought necessary to secure for the Service of the Fleet. The Weymouth, with my Engineer Capt. Knowles, getting in the same Afternoon, I sent him ... to destroy their batteries at Passo Cavallos, and to seize what Sinu Hulks were there; which he executed the 28th, having destroyed their two Batteries of eight Guns on each Side the Entrance into Passo Cavallos ... and has brought out four large Sinu Hulks, that may be very useful to us for our second Descent, and the watering of our Ships.

[For other passages derived from Original Papers see Addenda.]

^{Note 17 in page 434} Journal, pp. 35–36.

^{Note 18 in page 434} Works, xii, 212–213.

^{Note 19 in page 434} This introductory material, except for the few facts already noted (see above, note 13), has not been traced to any source; but Smollett may have taken some of the details, particularly the catalogue of ships, from some periodical or navy-list.

^{Note 20 in page 434} Works, xii, 193.

^{Note 21 in page 435} See Addenda, and above, note 6, below, notes 39, 48.

^{Note 22 in page 435} See above, note 6.

^{Note 23 in page 435} Idem.

^{Note 24 in page 435} See Works, i, 251: '“What you are pleased to call cyphers, are no other than the Greek ”characters, in which, for my amusement, I kept a diary of every thing remarkable that “has occurred to my observation since the beginning of the voyage, till the day on which ”I was put in irons ....

This suggestion has been advanced by Professor Lewis M. Knapp, “The Naval Scenes in Roderick Random,” PMLA, xlix, 595.

^{Note 25 in page 435} See Addenda.

^{Note 26 in page 435} See Works, xii, 211, lines 8–31; 213, line 13–214, line 9; 216, lines 10–217, line 27.

^{Note 27 in page 435} See below, p. 442, and cf. Works, i, 270, lines 1–16; xii, 219; Original Papers, p. 108; also Works, i, 270, lines 21–27; xii, 210, 213; Journal, pp. 30–31, 35–36.

^{Note 28 in page 436} The Miscellaneous Works of Tobias Smollett, M.D., 6th ed. (Edinburgh, 1820), 6 vols., i, 19.—I have italicized inserted.

^{Note 29 in page 436} Oliphant Smeaton, Tobias Smollett (Edinburgh and London, 1897), p. 42.

^{Note 30 in page 436} Robert Chambers, Smollett: His Life and a Selection from his Writings (London and Edinburgh, 1867), p. 40.

^{Note 31 in page 436} Geoffrey Callender, op. cit., p. 2.

^{Note 32 in page 437} See especially David Hannay, Life of Tobias George Smollett (London, 1887), pp. 35, 38.

^{Note 33 in page 437} Professor L. M. Knapp, op. cit., has aided in a solution by his discovery of the journals kept by Lieutenant Watkins of the Chichester during this expedition; but, although these provide useful data for a few parallels with the novel, they are in general too scanty to be of much assistance in evaluating Smollett's procedure. I shall note in passing a few points which Professor Knapp has anticipated by his use of Watkins' record.

^{Note 34 in page 437} The Works of Tobias Smollett, ed. by George Saintsbury (London, n.d.), 12 vols., i, xxviii–xxix.

^{Note 35 in page 437} See above, p. 428.

^{Note 36 in page 437} See Works, i, lxi.

^{Note 37 in page 437} See above, note 6.—The authenticity of these parallel passages is supported by the testimony of Lieutenant Watkins (see Knapp, op. cit., p. 597).

^{Note 38 in page 438} See above, note 6.

^{Note 39 in page 438} Cf. Works, i, 239–241; xii, 195.—The descriptions of the actual battle in both are essentially the same, except that the “Account” gives the number of French vessels as five, instead of four, and adds many more details. Since Smollett's version of this encounter does not appear in his printed sources, it seems likely that he learned of it from someone on board a participating ship whom he met during the long stay of the fleet at Jamaica, and that it was accordingly entered in his journal, where it served as a basis for the account of this event in both narratives. Professor Knapp has also noticed the fictitious nature of this incident in the novel (op. cit., p. 598).

^{Note 40 in page 438} Works, xii, 195.

^{Note 41 in page 439} Ibid., i, 240.

^{Note 42 in page 439} See above, p. 434.

^{Note 43 in page 439} See Works, i, 242–243.

^{Note 44 in page 439} Ibid., i, 256–258.

^{Note 45 in page 439} See below, p. 443.

^{Note 46 in page 439} See article by Seccombe in D.N.B.

^{Note 47 in page 439} See Works, i, 259–264; and cf. below, note 48.

^{Note 48 in page 440} Works, i, 260–261.—In the “Account,” however, Smollett relates this attack as he evidently saw it from the deck of the Chichester, in an original passage which seems to be based on his own journal:

“As the commodore sailed along the whole line of the fleet, all the ships were manned to do him honour, every vessel saluted him with three chears as he passed, and all the music played Britons strike Home. This squadron having run in as near the forts as possible, each ship clapped a spring on her cable, and a terrible cannonading ensued; as the reader may easily conceive when he is informed, that above five hundred great guns, besides a great number of bombs and cohorns, were incessantly plyed during the best part of the day.” (Works, xii, 201–202.)—Notice the verbal echoes (italicized) of the above quotation from the novel.

The details of the various Spanish guns (except those in the fascine batteries), as given in the novel, form part of a regular description of the harbor and fortifications which the “Account” brings in after the capture of Boca Chica (see Works, xii, 204–205). These figures do not appear in either of the pamphlets used by Smollett, nor do they agree with the official figures as given in the chart presented to the Admiralty by William Laws (see Richmond, op. cit., i, insert between pp. 112–113). The figures for the English battery in the novel do not agree with those in the “Account,” which gives them as “four and twenty great guns and forty small mortars and cohorns” (Works, xii, 201). The last figure is from the Journal (p. 16), but I am unable to find any source for the figure for the great guns, which Laws places at twenty. It seems that Smollett gathered most of these figures from hearsay on shipboard, entered them in his journal, and later used them in Roderick Random and the “Account.”

^{Note 49 in page 440} Works, i, 265–272.

^{Note 50 in page 441} E. A. Baker, The History of the English Novel (London, 1930), iv, 204.

^{Note 51 in page 441} Works, i, 267.

^{Note 52 in page 441} Ibid., i, 271.—Italics indicate close similarities with the subsequent quotation from the “Account.”

^{Note 53 in page 441} Works, i, 272.

^{Note 54 in page 441} Professor Knapp has suggested that Roderick's illness may represent an actual experience of Smollett's, for the bills of the Chichester charge him with high infirmary costs (op. cit., p. 594).

^{Note 55 in page 442} In the “Account” parts of the last two quotations, so rudely separated, are mixed with material from the printed Journal, in order to explain the desperate attempt to storm San Lazaro:

By this time the rainy season had begun with such violence that it was hardly practicable to keep the field, for it poured down in a deluge incessantly from the rising to the setting of the sun; and then the lightning began to play in stich continued flashing, that one might have read a small print all night long by the illumination. Such a change of the atmosphere is always attended with an epidemical distemper, in consequence of which the men dropped down so fast that there was scarce a sufficiency to relieve the proper guards of the camp, much less to cut down the wood and raise a battery so as to attack San Lazaro in form.

On these considerations it was resolved, in a council of war, to make an attempt for surprizing the fort... . (Works, xii, 212; cf. Journal, pp. 33–35.)

Then follow the descriptions of the hospital ships and the floating carcasses. Thus, in the “Account” the epidemic and its effects are related in an order proper for an understanding of the failure.

^{Note 56 in page 442} Works, i, 231–272.—For convenience I have defined “the section on the expedition” in the novel according to the limits of the “Account,” which after a brief introduction begins with the departure from St. Helen's, and ends with the departure from Carthagena; the novel, of course, has no such abrupt division, but includes many events on shipboard before and after the actual expedition.

^{Note 57 in page 443} Works, i, 268.

^{Note 58 in page 443} See above, pp. 433–434, and note 55.

^{Note 59 in page 443} See Works, xii, 213–215, 217; cf. Journal, pp. 34–40.

^{Note 60 in page 443} See Works, i, 256–258.

^{Note 61 in page 443} Cf. Works, xii, 196–199; Journal, pp. 1–9; Original Papers, pp. 71–73.

^{Note 62 in page 443} Similarly, in the midst of the bombardment of Boca Chica, Smollett makes the wounded Rattlin a mouthpiece for his usual condemnation of the wretched conduct of the expedition:

‘While I was employed in dressing the stump, I asked Jack's opinion of the battle, who shaking his head, frankly told me, he believed we should do no good; “For why, because in”stead of dropping anchor close under shore, where we should have had to deal with one cor“ner of Boca Chica only, we had opened the harbour, and exposed ourselves to the whole ”fire of the enemy from their shipping and Fort St. Joseph, as well as from the castle we in“tended to cannonade; that, besides, we lay at too great a distance to damage the walls and ”three parts in four of our shot did not take place; for there was scarce any body on board “who understood the pointing of a gun.—Ah! God help us! (continued he) if your kinsman ”lieutenant Bowling had been here, we should have had other guess-work.“‘ (Works, i, 262.)

In the “Account” all this criticism is removed, and Smollett, as an impartial, objective historian, simply records the facts as given in the printed Journal:

... their shot did very little execution among the enemy, and had no effect at all on the face of the western bastion, which was battered in breach from the land battery. (Works, iii, 202; cf. Journal, pp. 17–18.)

^{Note 63 in page 444} Works, i, 265–266.

^{Note 64 in page 444} Works, xii, 202–204; cf. Journal, pp. 18–21; Original Papers, p. 77.

^{Note 65 in page 445} Works, i, lxii.

^{Note 66 in page 445} Thackeray, “The English Humorists,” Works (Boston, 1891), viii, 220–221.