[caption id="ChannelSurfing_img1" align="aligncenter" width="156"]
ON 17TH JUNE 1944, a storm broke over the English Channel that nearly scuttled the Allies’ invasion plans. Rough seas pounded the “Mulberry” harbours upon which the invaders depended for a steady flow of ammunition, fuel, and other supplies. By the time the weather cleared three days later, one of the harbours was out of business and the other severely damaged. In the end, the Allies managed well enough, but it was a close call.
Other would-be cross-channel invaders have not been so lucky. Throughout history, the Channel has proven to be a formidable obstacle to conquest. More often than not, this has worked to Britain’s advantage.
Throughout history, the English Channel has proved to be a formidable obstacle to military conquest.
The earliest recorded assaults across the Channel set the pattern. In 55 BC, Julius Caesar sailed from Gaul with 80 ships carrying two Roman legions. Although greatly outnumbered by British warriors, Caesar routed the defenders and marched inland. He seemed unstoppable, until a sudden storm in the Channel dashed his transports against the shore, putting him on the defensive while he hastily repaired enough vessels to get his troops safely back to Gaul.
Caesar returned the following year. He brought along a bigger army and pressed the native Britons harder than he had the first time around, but the result was the same—rough seas, smashed boats, and a forced withdrawal.
You might think Caesar just wasn’t very lucky. Or was there more to it? The Spanish had to wonder after their own Armada suffered a similar fate in 1588. The Armada’s primary mission was to escort an invasion army across the Channel from the Netherlands. As every English schoolchild knows, it never happened. Sure, the British navy played it’s part, but the weather proved the more deadly foe of the Spanish. Commentators in that year attributed the wind and waves that drove off the Spaniards to more than just chance: “God breathed and [the Spanish ships] were scattered,” the English decided.
Twice since, the treacherous Channel has denied passage to potential conquerors. In these instances—in 1805 and 1940—it might fairly be argued that the forces of the Crown, rather than the forces of nature, played the vital role, but in truth, both Napoleon’s armies and Hitler’s outmatched the British and would almost surely have whooped them if they had been able to solve the problem of the Channel.
So you might almost say it was only fair that the British and their Allies, too, had to cope with a severe Channel storm at the height of the Normandy campaign. Unlike so many others before them, though, the British beat the odds. Nearly 900 years after the last successful cross-channel invasion, the feat was finally repeated by the royal and political descendants of William the Conqueror, the last man to do it. What could be more appropriate?
[caption id="ChannelSurfing_img2" align="aligncenter" width="151"]
Comments