Daily entries from the 17th century London diary
Footnotes in the Wheatley Edition point to a variant spelling of the name. They refer to him as Captain, afterwards Admiral Sir Thomas Teddiman.
L&M spell his name Teddeman. Per the Companion, he was quite a successful commander and a close ally of Lord Sandwich. He got caught in the general disgrace of the Second Dutch War, and was afterward retired as port admiral of Dover. Here are his significant career dates:To 1660: Served in Commonwealth navy1660-68: Seven commands1665-66: Promoted to rank of flag officer1665: Knighted, but also "led the inglorious attack on the Dutch fleet in Bergen harbor"1667: Retired to Dover1668: DiedHe also had a cousin, "Old Teddeman" (Henry Teddeman, Sr). He was also in the Commonwealth navy, but held only one later command, in 1664. Coventry had a low opinion of this cousin.
Teddeman's portrait by Lelyhttp://www.nmm.ac.uk/mag/pages/mnuExplore/Paint...
"...and this day for certain newes is come Teddiman hath brought in eighteen or twenty Dutcmen, merchants, their Bourdeaux fleet, and two men of warr to Portsmouth..."
Captain Sir Thomas Teddiman (or Tyddiman) had been appointed Rear-Admiral of Lord Sandwich's squadron of the English fleet. In a letter from Sir William Coventry to Secretary Bennet, dated November 13th, 1664, we read, "Rear Admiral Teddeman with four or five ships has gone to course in the Channel, and if he meet any refractory Dutchmen will teach them their duty"("Calendar of State Papers", Domestic, 1664-65,p.66).
"Flagmen of Lowestoft" --Teddeman Portrait:
"Apart from some service in the Mediterranean in 1660 little is known of him until, under Sandwich, he fought as Rear- Admiral of the Blue squadron off Lowestoft in 1665. He was knighted for this service. Shortly afterwards, still under Sandwich, he went to Bergen to attack Dutch Indiamen but was beaten off, since the Dutch were assisted by the Danish shore batteries. Despite this defeat he was successful the following year as a flag officer at the Four Days Fight and the St James's Day victory.
The portrait is inscribed 'Sir Thomas Tiddyman' and is one of the 'flagmen' portraits commissioned by Charles II's brother James, Duke of York after the Battle of Lowestoft. This was the first major action of the Second Dutch War, in which James commanded the fleet. It was seen in Lely's studio by Pepys and mentioned in his diary for 18 April 1666 as one of the portraits then either begun or finished."
Thomas Teddiman († 13 May 1668 Old Style)
TIDDIMAN, Sir Thomas,—was made commander of the Resolution in 1660; in 1661 of the Fairfax; in 1663 of the Kent; and in the following year of the Revenge; and afterwards of the Swiftsure. On his removal into this last ship, he was appointed rear-admiral of the squadron, sent into the Channel, under the command of the earl of Sandwich, on the probability and prospect of the Dutch war. These several appointments having taken place in the time of profound peace, nothing memorable occurs in the life of this very brave and deserving officer till the year 1665, when he hoisted his flag, as rear-admiral of the blue, on board the Royal Catherine. Having already given him, in concise terms, that character for gallantry he so truly merited, it becomes a species of tautology, useless, except for the purpose of connecting the Narrative, to say he eminently distinguished himself in the engagement with the Dutch fleet under Opdam. At the return of the fleet into port, as a proof that the gallantry of commanders ought never to pass unnoticed by the sovereign, Charles the Second made an excursion for the special purpose of honouring, and rewarding such, as had rendered themselves most conspicuous. Among the first of those selected on this occasion, was admiral Tiddiman, who, as a mark of his royal master's gratitude, received the honour of knighthood. On the duke of York's quitting the command of the fleet, and the appointment of the earl of Sandwich in his room, sir Thomas was promoted to be rear-admiral of the red. He was soon afterwards detached, by his commander-in-chief, with fourteen men of war and three fire-ships, to attack the Turkey and India fleet belonging to the Dutch, which, in consequence of Opdam's disaster, had taken refuge in Berghen. A kind of negociation, not very honourable, it must be candidly confessed, to either party, had been opened between the English and Danes; the result of which was, that in consequence of a proper douceur, the Danes, to whom the distressed Hollanders had flown for succour, should remain perfectly passive during the intended attack. Owing to some of those fatalities, or mistakes, to which a business of so complex and unfair a nature must be ever liable, the Danish governor had not received the necessary orders from his court, when the English squadron made its appearance. It was in vain he requested a delay, for three or four days, of the purposed mischiefs. Those who have behaved with duplicity, or treachery, on one occasion, can rarely act otherwise than to render themselves suspected in all. The admiral either doubted the sincerity of the Danish court, or wished to punish it for its want of punctuality, by attacking the Dutch before the promised orders arrived: as by that means the treaty became void; in consequence of which the king of Denmark was to be rewarded for his breach of hospitality, with half the plunder that should be acquired.
It was determined, in a council of war, to take, by force, that, which till then, it had only been hoped to obtain possession of, through connivance. Tiddiman began the attack with his usual gallantry; but that conduct which had so lately procured him, and his brave associates, such signal success, when engaged in fair contest with the enemies of his country, was insufficient to ensure a continuance of it, now the service, in which he was engaged, ceased to be perfectly void of political trick and chicane. The Danish governor not having, as yet, received orders to the contrary, held himself bound in honour, as well as compliance with what are called the laws of nations, to defend those who had placed themselves under his protection. The spirit with which the Dutch defended their ships, aided by the fire made from the castle, and a line, on which were mounted one-and-forty pieces of heavy cannon, became an enemy too formidable for the English squadron to cope with; so that, after a tremendous cannonade of several hours continuance, by which half the ships in the squadron were totally disabled: sir Thomas, blameless in every other respect, except that of having, unluckily, been the agent appointed to carry into execution an enterprise from which, even if successful, nothing could result but disgrace and dishonour, was glad to retreat, in the best manner the shattered condition of his ships would permit him. On the following day the long expected orders arrived; but, in consequence of the late event, the governor still refused to admit the English squadron, till he had received fresh instructions from his court; and sir Thomas smarting under his late disaster, returned to England sullen, and in disgust.---Biographia Navalis. J. Charnock, 1794.
In the month of May, 1666, he was, on prince Rupert's quitting the fleet with the white squadron, appointed to serve as a temporary rear-admiral of the white; and so much did he distinguish himself in the unfortunate action between the duke of Albemarle and the Dutch, that it was, for some time, currently reported, Van Trump's ship was sunk by the fire of the Royal Catherine. On the return of the fleet to refit, he was, on the 12th of June, promoted to be vice-admiral of the white: the squadron which, in the second engagement with the Dutch, in 1666, so much contributed to the complete victory obtained over them, by the very furious manner in which it attacked the van of De Ruyter's fleet. The Royal Catherine was so roughly treated, as to be obliged to quit the line to refit. No greater encomium can be passed on the behaviour of our admirals and commanders in this action, than to say they had the honour of totally defeating three such men as De Ruyter, Evertzen, and Van Tromp. No mention is made of sir Thomas, as having been concerned in any of the naval operations of the ensuing year; nor have we been able to obtain any further information concerning him, except that he commanded the Cambridge in 1668.---Biographia Navalis. J. Charnock, 1794.
Log in to post an annotation.
If you don't have an account, then register here.