Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests

National naval nomenclature?

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: National naval nomenclature?
Post by ThinksMarkedly   » Mon May 09, 2022 8:49 pm

ThinksMarkedly
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4105
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:39 am

Fox2! wrote:German capitalization rules don't require adjectives to be capitalized. English rules generally don't, either, but there are exceptions. Of which Royal and Imperial would be one.


Well, we're talking about the name of an institution, the Royal Navy, not just something that happens to have a royal attribute. For example, the Wikipedia article on royal prerogative starts as: "The royal prerogative is a body of customary authority, privilege and immunity..."

In German, it appears they keep the capitalisation of nouns in acronyms and the non-nouns not capitalised. Examples: eingetragener Verein (e.V. - "registered Association") and Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung (GmbH - "Company with limited Liability"). I don't speak German; I don't know if this is a rule or these two acronyms I am familiar with happen to be customarily abbreviated this way.
Top
Re: National naval nomenclature?
Post by Louis R   » Thu May 12, 2022 2:05 pm

Louis R
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1293
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 9:25 pm

To add to the fun, the Dominion of Canada was created in 1867, some 40 years before the RCN - and over 70 years before the formal creation of the Canadian Army - and I don't believe that Australia was ever a 'dominion': IIRC, those colonies were amalgamated as the Commonwealth of Australia. And in both cases, the countries remained colonies until the Statute of Westminster in 1932, albeit with essentially total home rule in domestic affairs [which is why Canada didn't declare war until Sept 3 1939. Mackenzie-King was making a political point].

So the existence of the RCN & RAN was not a matter of the political status of those countries.

(sorry, messed up the snipping. nothing below this point is mine. lr)
munroburton wrote:
Tricky question. We had colonies and what was termed an empire for a couple of centuries, but Queen Victoria did not become formal Empress until 1877 - and that was of Empress of India.

Then there is alos the subtelties of the first and second British empires :o :o

As far as I understand the Royal Navy was The navy for the empire. I suspect that the navies you mentioned came into being when those colonies became dominions [but not sure about that]


Yep, the British Empire basically didn't exist in an official sense. It was just a colloquial term for all the colonies, charter companies and such that formed the empire. When Victoria wanted to be an Empress, Disraeli neatly sidestepped all the challenges of turning the United Kingdom into an official Empire by adding the Empire of India as a separate title.

The Royal Navy's standing establishment also predates the United Kingdom by some 150 years. The RCN and RAN were essentially created when the naval arms race leading up to WW1 pulled RN ships back to concentrate in home waters. Both got their first HMCS and HMAS around 1910.

New Zealand's naval forces operated as a division of the RN up until 1941, when they formally separated and all their ships became HMNZS.

The East India Company began what would eventually become the Indian Navy in the early 1600s, again preceding the UK itself. Throughout the 1800s what it was called changed many times and they didn't start using the HMIS prefix until 1934.[/quote]
Top

Return to Honorverse