The Navy's 227th birthday - just don't ask for details
NAVAIR News Release
Release Date: 15-Oct-02
(Editor's note: The following is a commentary on the U.S. Navy's birthday.)
By BILL SWANSON NAS Patuxent River Public Affairs Department
PATUXENT RIVER NAVAL AIR STATION, MD- Many of us have in our extended family trees - how shall I put this delicately? - a lady of "a certain age" as they used to say, perhaps an aunt or a grandmother. When this lady had a birthday, you were permitted to wish her "Happy birthday"- and then you had darn well better zip your lip, buster, if you knew what was good for you.
What you couldn't do was ask a bunch of fool questions, such as how old she was, or the circumstances of her birth.
Alas, the birth of the U.S. Navy just celebrated on Sunday, Oct. 13, is pretty much like that. Don't ask, don't tell; it's one of those things people don't talk about in polite company. Here's why.
First, the 227th birthday of the Navy is only 30 years old.
Huh?
Furthermore (and you have to promise not to get into a fistfight over this at the local watering hole, fellahs), the Marine Corps is also 227 years old, though 28 days younger than the Navy, but its birthday is 51 years older than the Navy's birthday. Thus, the Marines take precedence over the Navy in seniority. In other words, the Marines are younger than the Navy, but older. Trust me on this.
It gets worse.
Oct. 13 is celebrated as the birthday of the Navy because it was on that date in 1775 that the Continental Congress passed two resolutions authorizing the outfitting of a pair of 10-gun ships intended to intercept a British ammunition convoy headed to Quebec. In other words, this is when the Continental Congress established the Navy, and they passed a resolution 28 days later (on Nov. 10) calling for the establishment of two battalions of Marines, as well.
It stands to reason, then, that one could ask, "Okay, if the Congress ordered two 10-gun ships, what were they? What are the names of the Navy's first two ships?"
The answer is, there is no good answer. And it gets even worse. You are never going to see the following question on Jeopardy or on a Trivial Pursuit Card:
Multiple Choice.
The Navy's first four ships:
a) Were named Black Prince, Defiance, Katy, and two ships were named Sally (yes, that's five names. You counted correctly)
b) Were named after a Saxon king and three Italians
c) Hannah, Speedwell (renamed Franklin), Eliza (renamed Hancock), Lee and Warren (yup, that's five, again)
d) Never had 10 guns
e) All of the above
Trick question? Oh, my, yes - and many of you who have no clue what this question means will still have guessed that the correct answer is E, all of the above, which is why Meredith Viera won't be tossing this softball to contestants on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire any time soon.
Let's try to sort some of it out.
Ever since 1921, the Marine Corps has proudly and officially declared its birthday was Nov. 10, 1775, that day the Continental Congress resolved to raise those first two battalions; thus it has been officially celebrating that birthday for 81 years.
When asked (in the 1920s) to supply an official date for its birthday, like the Marines had done, the Navy waffled for half a century. Often it chose dates in the 1790s, when the famous six frigates were authorized (March 27, 1794), or when the actual Department of the Navy was created (April 30, 1798). In 1922, the Navy League even decided the date would be Oct. 27 (any Oct. 27, no particular year attached), simply to honor Pres. Theodore Roosevelt's birthday. So without a firm date to put forth, the Navy had to take a back seat to the Marines in terms of declared seniority.
Finally, in 1972, Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, then CNO, said enough is enough. Acting with the advice of Vice Adm. Edwin B. Hooper, director of naval history, Zumwalt officially declared Oct. 13, 1775, as the birthday date. Thus, the Navy has had an official birthday for only the past 30 years, while the Marines have had one for 81 years.
Now, all those ships ... .
Even before the Continental Congress adopted those resolutions, the individual colonies of Rhode Island, Connecticut and Massachusetts had what were later called "state navies"; in other words, there were already armed ships out there doing battle with the British, only they were owned by the individual colonies, not by the Continental Congress.
Hannah, owned by Col. John Glover of the Marblehead (Mass.) Mariners (and who later became famous for ferrying Washington across the Delaware), was the first ship exchanging shots with the enemy, three days before the Oct. 13th resolutions. Soon, two other Marblehead schooners, Speedwell and Eliza (renamed Franklin and Hancock) were also brought into service. These three were ordered up by Washington as commander-in-chief, acting independently of the Continental Congress. He soon ordered up two more, Lee and Warren, bringing his total to five.
Thus, some people could consider Hannah as the American Navy's first ship.
Congress, learning that it already seemed to have at least three ships in its unofficial navy already (Hannah, Franklin and Hancock) started amending and augmenting its initial resolutions (the Oct. 13 "birthday" resolutions) and increased its official request from two ships to four.
That's why the first four American ships were actually five ships that weren't owned by America. I hope that's perfectly clear.
Implementing its amended resolution, the Continental Congress first acquired and armed a merchant ship called the Black Prince, and changed her name to Alfred, in honor of King Alfred, better known to history as Alfred the Great and considered by the British to be the "father of the Royal Navy."
Why a band of angry, contentious and rebellious colonists should name their very first "official" warship after the founder of their arch-enemy's navy would appear to be pretty strange, until it is understood that in late 1775 these men still considered themselves to be loyal subjects of the Crown; in their own minds they had not yet mentally divorced themselves from the mother country. So it was actually quite appropriate to name their first ship after the founder of "their" navy.
And thus, to some historians, Alfred is the Navy's first ship. It's pretty clear she's the first Congress bought and paid for, at least until George Washington turned in his expense vouchers.
No sooner had Alfred been purchased than three more merchant ships were acquired to fulfill that four-ship requisition; one was originally named Defiance, and the other two were a brig and a sloop, each named Sally. One of the Sallys was renamed Columbus, obviously in honor of Christopher Columbus; the other Sally was renamed Cabot, after the explorer John Cabot.
Cabot was born in Italy, mostly likely in Genoa, like Columbus, and his name at birth was Giovanni Cabato. He grew up in Venice then moved to Spain and then to England, in search of government support for his intended ocean voyages. This he got from King Henry VII, and in 1497, as John Cabot, he became the first European to "discover" the continental land mass of North America-essentially what is now Canada. Notwithstanding subsequent claims that Vikings, Icelanders, the Irish or even Phoenicians may have preceded him, the fact remains that Britain's claim to Canada and the American Colonies dates from Cabot's voyage.
The Defiance was renamed Andrew Doria, in honor of the third Italian of this Genoese trifecta, Andrea Doria (Andrea was anglicized to Andrew; it isn't clear why). Doria, a patriot and statesmen, was then and still is considered one of the greatest admirals of his era, having fought for several popes, the kings of France and Naples (then a city-state, like Genoa), and the Holy Roman Emperor, and against the Ottoman empire and Barbary pirates. In short, a pretty talented guy to name one of your warships after.
Come we now to the Rhode Island Navy's sloop Katy, (later renamed Providence) and given to a young lieutenant named John Paul Jones for his first command. Jones didn't skipper her for very long, though Providence went on to a distinguished career under several other captains. Be that as it may, during the same time the Continental Congress was acquiring Alfred, Cabot, Columbus, and Andrew Doria, it also acquired Providence (on Dec. 3) and then three additional ships, Hornet, Fly and Wasp. (Yes, three insect names; don't ask. We're just lucky our national bird isn't the turkey, like Benjamin Franklin wanted.)
At this point you need to know that in 1976, an organization called Seaport 76 began raising money as part of that year's Bicentennial enthusiasm in order to build a full-size replica of Providence (though out of fiberglass, unlike virtually every other replica ship). This was done, and even now the plastic Providence sails up and down the East Coast, much like the Pride of Baltimore and similar tall, albeit wooden, ships. And you also need to know that Seaport 76 and Providence's successor owner, the Providence Maritime Heritage Foundation, claim Providence as the Navy's first ship, based upon the date she was transferred from the Rhode Island Navy to the Continental Congress.
(Fair disclosure: in 1976, this writer sent Seaport 76 twenty-five bucks and became a "plankowner" of the Providence; in other words, somewhere down in the bowels of that ship there's $25 worth of polyester resin with my name on it.)
So which is the U.S. Navy's first ship?
The Hannah, first to fire a shot in anger (on Oct. 10) before fading into obscurity? Alfred, the first ship acquired under the Oct. 13 resolution as amended Oct. 30 (and also the first to hoist the flag of the Continental Congress, by the way)?
Or Providence, accepted into the Continental Navy (and already in commission, and with a combat record) on Dec. 3, the very same day Alfred was commissioned, though not before Alfred was purchased (Nov. 4) or renamed (Nov. 8)?
Paging Adm. Zumwalt, paging Adm. Zumwalt ...
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
