Unveiling the Naming Conventions of US Navy Battleships: A Historical Insight

Historically, the naming of US Navy battleships has followed a specific pattern that has evolved over time. Initially, all capital ships, including battleships, were named after states. However, as the maritime landscape changed, new naming conventions emerged for different types of vessels. This article explores the evolution of the naming conventions and provides insights into the historical context and reasons behind these practices.

The Origin and Early Naming Practices

The naming of US Navy battleships began with the recognition of the importance of large heavily armed warships. In the early days, these battleships were named after US states, a practice that continued until the advent of new types of vessels such as cruisers and destroyers. For instance, the Indianapolis, which was named after the state capital of Indiana, stands out as a notable exception. Tragically, the Indianapolis was sunk in 1945 during the Okinawa campaign due to an unfortunate sequence of events. Despite the ship's heroic efforts, its captain, concluding that the area was safe, ceased zigzagging, and a Japanese submarine spotted and hit the ship with torpedoes, leading to its swift sinking.

Evolution of Naming Conventions

With the introduction of new types of vessels, such as cruisers, destroyers, and submarines, the naming conventions began to diverge. While destroyers were named after admirals like Fletcher and Sumner, early submarines followed a numeric or letter-coded system (O-class, R-class, S-class). However, with the advent of the porpoise class, submarines started being named after fish, including Gato, Tambor, and Balao. This change marked a departure from the initial system of naming naval vessels after states, which led to the humorous observation that “fish don’t vote.”

World War I and Beyond

The use of names in commemoration of historical figures or significant events became a common practice. During World War I, the First Lady, Edith Wilson, honoring her ancestor Pocahontas, decided to name the battleships after Indian names. This decision reflected the cultural and historical significance of such names and added a layer of personal connection to the vessels. The Iowa-class battleships were another example, where the lead ship was given an appropriate name, and subsequent ships were named after states, thus providing a sense of pride to individual states.

Political Influence in Naming

Post-World War II, naming conventions became more politically influenced. Congress now has to approve the names of practically everything, leading to lobbying by various groups. States often lobby for capital ships and even attack submarines. This political landscape has added a new layer of complexity and bureaucracy to the process of naming naval vessels, ensuring that the naming system remains relevant and reflects the political and cultural dynamics of the time.

Conclusion

From the early days of naming battleships after states to the current system that incorporates a mix of historical, political, and cultural factors, the naming conventions of US Navy battleships have evolved significantly over time. Understanding the historical context and the reasoning behind these practices provides valuable insights into the naval heritage and the deep-seated pride that names evoke in the American people.