Ever wonder how the Navy goes about naming its vessels? Let the Naval History and Heritage Command, our parent command, bring you up to speed. Today we bring you part one of four of “Ship Naming in the United States Navy.”
“The Navy traces its ancestry to 13 October 1775, when an act of the Continental Congress authorized the first ship of a new navy for the United Colonies, as they were then known. The ships of the Continental Navy, and of the Navy later established under the Federal Constitution, were not named in any strictly categorical manner.
“Ship names in the Continental Navy and the early Federal navy came from a variety of sources. As if to emphasize the ties that many Americans still felt to Britain, the first ship of the new Continental Navy was named Alfred in honor of Alfred the Great, the king of Wessex who is credited with building the first English naval force. Another ship was named Raleigh to commemorate the seagoing exploits of Sir Walter Raleigh. Some ships honored early patriots and heroes (Hancock and General Greene). Others commemorated the young nation’s ideals and institutions (Constitution, Independence, Congress). A 74-gun ship-of-the-line, launched in 1782 and donated to the French Navy on completion, was named America. A Revolutionary War frigate named Bourbon saluted the King of France, whose alliance would further the cause of American independence. Other ship names honored American places (Boston, Virginia). Small warships—brigs and schooners—bore a variety of names. Some were named for positive character traits (Enterprise, Diligent). Others had classical names (Syren, Argus) or names of small creatures with a potent sting (Hornet, Wasp).
“On 3 March 1819 an act of Congress formally placed the responsibility for assigning names to the Navy’s ships in the hands of the Secretary of the Navy, a prerogative which he still exercises. This act stated that ‘all of the ships, of the Navy of the United States, now building, or hereafter to be built, shall be named by the Secretary of the Navy, under the direction of the President of the United States, according to the following rule, to wit: those of the first class shall be called after the States of this Union; those of the second class after the rivers; and those of the third class after the principal cities and towns; taking care that no two vessels of the navy shall bear the same name.’ The last-cited provision remains in the United States Code today.
“An act of 12 June 1858 specifically included the word ‘steamship’ in the ship type nomenclature, and officially defined the ‘classes’ of ships in terms of the number of their guns. Ships armed with 40 guns or more were of the ‘first class’; those carrying fewer than 40, but more than 20, guns were of the ‘second class.’ The name source for the second class was expanded to include the principal towns as well as rivers. The unprecedented expansion of the fleet during the Civil War was reflected—as far as ship naming was concerned—in an act of 5 August 1861, which authorized the Secretary of the Navy ‘to change the names of any vessels purchased for use of the Navy Department….’ This provision also remains in current law.
“Shortly before the turn of this century the legislation was changed to reflect the remarkable changes taking place in the Navy itself as wooden hulls, sails, and muzzleloading ordnance gave way to steel ships with breechloading rifles. An act of May 4, 1898, specified that ‘all first-class battleships and monitors [shallow-draft coast-defense ships completed between 1891 and 1903, armed with heavy guns] shall be named for the States, and shall not be named for any city, place, or person, until the names of the States have been exhausted, provided that nothing herein contained shall be construed as to interfere with the names of states already assigned to any such battleship or monitor.’
“As with many other things, the procedures and practices involved in Navy ship naming are as much, if not more, products of evolution and tradition than of legislation. As we have seen, the names for new ships are personally decided by the Secretary of the Navy. The Secretary can rely on many sources to help him reach his decisions. Each year, the Naval Historical Center compiles primary and alternate ship name recommendations and forwards these to the Chief of Naval Operations by way of the chain of command. These recommendations are the result of research into the history of the Navy and…suggestions submitted by service members, Navy veterans, and the public. Ship name source records at the Historical Center reflect the wide variety of name sources that have been used in the past, particularly since World War I. Ship name recommendations are conditioned by such factors as the name categories for ship types now being built, as approved by the Secretary of the Navy; the distribution of geographic names of ships of the Fleet; names borne by previous ships which distinguished themselves in service; names recommended by individuals and groups; and names of naval leaders, national figures, and deceased members of the Navy and Marine Corps who have been honored for heroism in war or for extraordinary achievement in peace.
“In its final form, after consideration at the various levels of command, the Chief of Naval Operations signs the memorandum recommending names for the current year’s building program and sends it to the Secretary of the Navy. The Secretary considers these nominations, along with others he receives as well as his own thoughts in this matter. At appropriate times, he selects names for specific ships and announces them.
“While there is no set time for assigning a name, it is customarily done before the ship is christened. The ship’s sponsor—the person who will christen the ship—is also selected and invited by the Secretary. In the case of ships named for individuals, an effort is made to identify the eldest living direct female descendant of that individual to perform the role of ship’s sponsor. For ships with other name sources, it is customary to honor the wives of senior naval officers or public officials.
“While the Navy has attempted to be systematic in naming its ships, like all institutions it has been subject to evolutionary change, and the name sources of the Navy’s ships have not been immune to this change. Thus, an historical accounting of this evolution, as it appeared in modern times, may help the reader understand the ship naming process as it exists today.
“The Civil War expanded the Navy to an extent undreamed of in prewar times. More than 200 new ships were built, and another 418 were purchased for naval use. Ironclads, including monitors, and shallow-draft river steamers fell into new classification categories, and their naming reflected the abrupt pace of growth. Names like Hartford and Brooklyn, Ticonderoga and Monongahela mingled with Trefoil, Stars and Stripes, Penguin, and Western World. Many ships, including gunboats and monitors, bore names of American Indian origin, such as Owasco, Sagamore, Saugus, and Onondaga. Four big monitors, laid down but never completed, were given such tongue-twisters as Shackamaxon and Quinsigamond. A large oceangoing ironclad was, fittingly enough, named New Ironsides. Ships acquired for Navy use were known by such strange names as Hunchback, Midnight, and Switzerland. In 1869 one Secretary of the Navy, who disliked the Indian names borne by so many Navy ships, renamed a large number of them, substituting names from classical antiquity such as Centaur, Medusa, Goliath, and Atlas. A few months later, his successor changed most of the names back again!”
