Kristensen Master 2 - UiO

British Identity and the Royal Navy

Tension between a Fear of Losing Naval Supremacy

and Pride in the Royal Navy

Ida Marie Kristensen

Master Thesis Lektorprogrammet

30 credits

Department of Education Faculty of Educational Sciences

UNIVERSITY OF OSLO

June 2017

III


Tension between a Fear of Losing Naval Supremacy and Pride in the Royal Navy

Photograph of the Union Jack.

IV

© Ida Marie Kristensen

2017



http://www.duo.uio.no/

Trykk: Reprosentralen, Universitetet i Oslo

V

Abstract

This thesis has studied the role of the Royal Navy played in creating and maintaining a common

British national identity from 1884 to 1914. During this time period the Anglo-German naval

arms race unfolded. Great Britain experienced a shift in threat from abroad, as France had been

the major threat for centuries preceding this period, suddenly Germany emerged and began to

challenge something uniquely British, namely the naval supremacy of the Royal navy.

Furthermore, the start of the time period was marked by the naval scare of 1884 and ended with

the Great War in 1914.

The thesis argues that there was a tension between a fear of losing naval supremacy and

a pride in the Royal Navy which resulted in increased public interest in naval affairs as the naval

position was being challenged for the first time since the Napoleonic Wars. Therefore, a feeling

of pride in the Royal Navy and its historical achievements had been allowed to grow.

A common British national identity was necessary for uniting the different groups living

within the British Isles. Both older ‘national’ and regional identities existed within Great Britain

at the time. A truly ‘British’ institution could therefore be used to unite these groups. The Royal

Navy can be seen as such an institution. The navy was also seen as the clearest symbol of the

British ‘island race’ which had come to define the British people.

The Navy League was founded as a response to the increasing challenge from Germany,

and attempted to raise support for the Royal Navy at a time when the navy would prove

particularly important for the British public. Public interest in the Royal Navy was used by The

Navy League and the Admiralty, by including the navy in public celebrations. The British

public were involved in naval affairs, especially during the Dreadnought Crisis of 1909 were

the British public influenced the outcome through the use of a slogan; “We want eight and we

won’t wait”.

VII

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the help and support of the following, who have contributed to this

thesis in numerous ways.

First, I would like to express my great appreciation to Dr Atle L. Wold, my supervisor,

for encouragement and belief in the project, as well as useful critique and feedback throughout

the process. He was also of great help in recommending the use of newspaper articles as primary

sources. Secondly, I would like to offer a special thanks to Dr Marianne Czisnik for

considerable help in recommending sources for the background study and thus offering appoint

of departure for this thesis.

A very special thanks to my boyfriend Ole Harald Moe for his support and

encouragement throughout this process, not to mention his help in proofreading the thesis and

giving constructive feedback. I also wish to acknowledge the help from my friend Annelise

Berentsen Kullmann, for help in proofreading this thesis. Finally, I wish to thank my family for

their support and encouragement throughout my study.


Oslo, May 2017.

IX

Table of Contents

British Identity and the Royal Navy ........................................................................... III

Abstract ................................................................................................................................. V

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ VII

1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................1

1.1 Motivation and Previous Work .................................................................................1

1.2 Method .....................................................................................................................3

1.3 Organisation of Thesis ..............................................................................................3

2 Historical Pride in the Royal Navy ..................................................................................5

2.1 Context of threat to British naval position .................................................................5

2.2 The Battle of Trafalgar and Lord Horatio Nelson .................................................... 10

3 Tension ......................................................................................................................... 14

3.1 Pride in the Royal Navy.......................................................................................... 16

The ‘Island Race’ .......................................................................................................... 16

‘Blue Water Strategy’ ................................................................................................... 17

3.2 A Fear of Losing Naval Supremacy ........................................................................ 19

How did the press and public view the Royal Navy in the time period? ......................... 19

Newspapers influence on the Dreadnought Crisis of 1909 ............................................. 22

3.3 Public Support of the Royal Navy .......................................................................... 24

4 Royal Navy and Identity ............................................................................................... 27

4.1 The Royal Navy as a Symbol of ‘Britishness’ ......................................................... 29

The naval theatre and public celebrations ...................................................................... 30

Losing naval supremacy and British identity ................................................................. 31

Ownership of the Royal Navy ....................................................................................... 32

4.2 Britain as an ‘Island Race’ ...................................................................................... 35

5 Influencing Public Interest ............................................................................................ 38

Timing .......................................................................................................................... 39

The Naval Theatre ........................................................................................................ 40

‘Cohesive society’ ........................................................................................................ 42

6 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 44

Bibliography......................................................................................................................... 47

X

List of figures Figure 1: «Articles dealing with British naval issues 1870-1890 in four major periodicals» ....6 Figure 2: Number of hits for the search word «Royal Navy» in the British Newspaper Archives accessed on May 22, 2017. .................................................................................... 15

1

1 Introduction

This thesis has studied the presence of a common British national identity where the Royal

Navy was a crucial element in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, more specifically

from 1884 to 1914.

By 1884, Great Britain was a great naval power with the world’s strongest navy and had

been for centuries. This was especially true of the period from the victory at the Battle of

Trafalgar in 1805. The period studied in this thesis marks the end of the British naval

supremacy. During Pax Britannica, which was a period of relative peace in Europe after the

Battle of Waterloo in 1815, Great Britain enjoyed a position as unchallenged naval power. The

period from 1884 to 1914 was also characterised by rapid technological development and social

changes, which threatened the position of the Royal Navy.

1.1 Motivation and Previous Work

The motivation for studying the Royal Navy and Great Britain in between 1884 and 1914 was

an increase in public interest related to the Royal Navy in the period from 1884 to 1914. This

was related to an increased threat towards the British naval position. Several nations, such as

Germany, the United States, France, and Russia, were building stronger navies. Therefore, the

British had to readjust in order to meet this naval threat.

This thesis will argue that Great Britain and the British Empire was proud of its highly

distinguished Royal Navy and dependent on being a strong naval power. There was an increased

public interest in the Royal Navy during the period. Therefore, the Royal Navy stands out as a

relevant object of study in relation to identity building in Great Britain in the period. The thesis

question that will be answered is as follows: Did the Royal Navy contribute to creating and

maintaining a common British national identity between 1884 and 1914?

Identity as a concept requires research, especially when studying Great Britain, as there

is so much diversity within the British Isles. Identity is defined as a “condition or character as

to who a person or what a thing is; the qualities, beliefs, etc., that distinguish or identify a person

2

or thing”.1 National identity is defined as “the depiction of a country as a whole, encompassing

its culture, traditions, language and politics”.2

The different regions within Great Britain are diverse and therefore a uniting identity

was necessary. If an identity that united the different regions had not existed there would be

more conflicts both within and between the British ‘nations’. This can be seen in the period up

until the Acts of Union in 1707. Which marked a shift from a period of small internal conflicts

to a period of outward focus, with the First and Second Empire as well as the conflict against

France. Therefore, a common threat from abroad might be necessary for uniting the British

people. What role did the Royal Navy play in creating this shared identity?

In recent years, the concept of identity has become more popular among scholars. One

of the most influential scholars is Linda Colley. According to Colley, British national identity

was forged by 1837, crucial elements were Protestantism, monarchy, and an opposition to

France as ‘the Other’.3 Even though her argument is solid, there had been a change by 1884.

The threat from France as ‘the Other’ was no longer the predominant European challenge. There

had been a shift in outside threat, and Germany was emerging as the main threat.

When the British Royal Navy was threatened by Germany, the British public began to

question their national identity. Therefore, some scholars began emphasising the role of the

Royal Navy in creating a British national identity. Duncan Redford argued that the Royal Navy

was a part of the British national identity, but that there were changes in national identity that

led to a gradual decrease in public and political interest in naval affairs after 1870.4 These

changes were caused by the public’s sense of security and the changes in Britain’s naval

position.

Jan Rüger, on the other hand, has argued that the Royal Navy functioned as the most

important symbol of national identity. He introduced the ‘naval theatre’, a stage where power

and identity could unfold. This was a stage where the navy could be celebrated and attract public

interest.5 John Mitcham, however, stressed the importance of the British Empire and the

1 "Identity," in Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon (Dictionary.com). 2 "National Identity," in Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon (Dictionary.com). 3 Linda Colley, Britons: Forging the Nation, 1707-1837 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2014). 4 Duncan Redford, "Introduction," in Maritime History and Identity - the Sea and Culture in the Modern World, ed. Duncan Redford (I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd, 2014). 5 Jan Rüger, The Great Naval Game - Britain and Germany in the Age of Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).

3

Dominions in creating a British identity, he argued that the British identity could apply to all

Britons, both in the British Isles and the Empire.6

To analyse the role of the Royal Navy in creating and maintaining a common British

national identity the thesis has examined the reaction of the British public when its naval

supremacy was challenged. In particular, this meant examining the tension between fear of

losing naval supremacy and pride in the Royal Navy due to its historical prowess.

1.2 Method

The presence of a British national identity where the Royal Navy was an important element in

the late nineteenth and early twentieth century has been studied. This was done through

studying newspaper articles, from the British Newspaper Archive, published in the period.

Newspaper articles are particularly good primary sources as they reflect the public debate that

went on at the time of publishing, and there was a lot of material to study. The British

Newspaper Archive has been used to find relevant sources. Keywords in different combinations

were searched for, such keywords were: ‘navy’, ‘nation(alism)’, ‘patriot(ism)’, ‘fear’, ‘scare’,

‘pride’. The time period was limited, focusing on the period from 1884 to 1914, and especially

on the period from 1898, as this was when the naval arms race became evident.

The primary sources were substantiated by secondary sources, such as the scholars

discussed above. These sources were written and published by different scholars researching

subjects related to the Royal Navy and/or identity.

1.3 Organisation of Thesis

This paper has been divided into chapters dealing with different subjects. Chapter 2 introduces

the historical background, from the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805 up until the naval scare in 1884.

This sets the social and political context of the Royal Navy in the period investigated in this

thesis, and explains the relevance of the thesis question in the specific time period from 1884

to 1914.

Chapter 3 deals with the tension between fear of losing naval supremacy and pride in

the Royal Navy felt by the British public in the period from 1884 to 1914. This emphasises that

6 John C. Mitcham, "Chapter 13: Navalism and Greater Britain, 1897-1914," in Maritime History and Identity - the Sea and Culture in the Modern World, ed. Duncan Redford (I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd, 2014).

4

the Royal Navy and naval supremacy was of great interest and importance to the British public.

The function is to show the effect of the Royal Navy on the British public.

This leads on to chapter 4 which explains the concept of identity and investigates if the

Royal Navy was paramount in creating a common British national identity. Chapter 5 discusses

the Navy League and the Admiralty, these emphasise how the Royal Navy was used for

propagandist effect and in public celebrations of the navy, which shows how important the

Royal Navy was for the British public. Finally, chapter 6 will present the conclusion of this

thesis.

5

2 Historical Pride in the Royal Navy

This chapter examines the historical background that might have contributed to a feeling of

pride in the Royal Navy. This has been done by studying the effects of the Battle of Trafalgar

on public national feeling. The effect of Pax Britannica which ensured almost a century of

relative peace in Europe will be emphasised. The historical background is relevant to this thesis

as it explains the situation in Great Britain from the 1880s and onwards, as well as emphasising

the historical importance of the Royal Navy. The Navy did not suddenly become very important

to Great Britain, British defence relied on the navy for centuries. However, the Royal Navy was

perhaps particularly important for the defence of the British Isles and British interests abroad

during the period from 1884 to 1914, due to advancements of rival navies.

2.1 Context of threat to British naval position

Understanding the social and political conditions in the period is important for understanding

the Royal Navy’s position among the public. As well as, the British people’s attitudes towards

the Royal Navy. Therefore, the years prior to 1884, as well as the early years of the naval threat

have been investigated. This explains why the Royal Navy was perhaps particularly important

to Great Britain and British defence policy during the period in question. The period in question

is interesting due to the technological advances and new challenges Britain were facing at the

time.

In 1884, there was a massive naval scare caused by a series of articles portrayed as

revealing the ‘truth about the navy’.7 “The fear was that the Royal Navy was unable to defend

Britain and its interests”.8 This naval scare resulted in the two-power standard with the Naval

Defence Act of 1889. This policy stated that the British navy should be bigger than, or at least

equal to, the second and third largest navies in the world combined. France had been the major

rival to Great Britain for centuries leading up till this period, and it was feared that they would

make an ally out of Russia, another strong world power, which was building up a strong navy.

Together these nations might be able to compete with the British Royal Navy.

7 Frans Coetzee, For Party or Country: Nationalism and the Dilemmas of Popular Conservatism in Edwardian England (New York: Oxford Univeristy Press, 1990), 11. 8 Redford, "Chapter 3: The Royal Navy, Sea Blindness and British National Identity," 61.

6

However, as it turned out, Germany would become the bigger threat. Germany was a

young nation that had been created by unifying Prussia with several smaller German kingdoms

and duchies in 1871. Germany was adept at utilizing the technological advances more

efficiently than Great Britain.9 Germans were thus able to build up a large navy in a short period

of time. The Naval Defence Act of 1889 and the two-power standard, which had been

obtainable for Britain in the past became more challenging to uphold due to the threat from

Germany. In 1898, Alfred von Tirpitz introduced the First German Naval Law, which lead to a

naval arms race between Germany and Britain, this would be the backdrop of the build-up

towards the First World War.

Great Britain met a major naval threat from abroad for the first time since the Battle of

Trafalgar in the late nineteenth century, this caused public interest in the Royal Navy to soar.

Duncan Redford argues that a prevailing view among scholars was that there was a period of

disinterest in the Royal Navy from 1870 to 1884.10 This implies that people did not care about

the development of the navy. Redford disagrees with this, and states that instead there was a

period of complacency concerning the Royal Navy, and therefore a sense of security about their

position. The effect of this was a low degree of media coverage.

However, the naval scare of 1884 caused uproar among the British public and therefore

a greater degree of media coverage in the following years, as this showed that the Royal Navy

was not as invincible as previously believed. As figure 1, from Duncan Redford’s Maritime

9 Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery (Penguin Books, 2004). 10 Redford, "Chapter 3: The Royal Navy, Sea Blindness and British National Identity."

Figure 1: «Articles dealing with British naval issues 1870-1890 in four major periodicals»

7

History and Identity shows,11 there were few articles dealing with naval issues between 1870

and 1884. From 1888 onwards however, the year before the Naval Defence Act of 1889, there

was a considerable increase in articles on naval issues. Therefore, it can be seen that public

interest in the Royal Navy soared due to the naval scare of 1884 the subsequent 1889 Naval

Defence Act, and the two-power standard. The British public might feel fear and surprise

regarding the up-and-coming threats, since the public was not used to seeing their navy

challenged.

The discussion of complacency in the Royal Navy shows that being a superior naval

force was something the British people took for granted prior to the naval scare of 1884. The

uproar that followed when this position was being threatened by other nations, can be seen as

evidence that the British position as the superior naval force is a part of British identity.

The period from 1884 to 1914 was characterised by simultaneous and gradual changes.

The early years of this period, from 1884 to 1898, marks a continuous shift in threat from

abroad. France had been the major European rival to Great Britain for centuries, but within a

few years this had changed. Suddenly Germany were threatening several of the common British

characteristics, most importantly was the threat towards the Royal Navy. Moreover, the United

States were building up their navy. Britain and the Royal Navy had controlled seas across the

world, but due to the increase in naval focus in the United States, there would be more

competition over the control of the areas surrounding South America. The Royal Navy therefore

withdrew from the area. If Germany had not posed a threat in home waters, this withdrawal

might not have been necessary. The Royal Navy was important in maintaining the balance of

power in the world, and this would be difficult to do from Europe alone.

According to Colley, a common British national identity had been forged by 1837, and

was based on Protestantism, monarchy, and everything that the French were not.12 When the

threat from abroad came from a nation more similar to Britain, how could the British define

themselves as a nation? This thesis has not questioned Colley’s argument, but instead focused

on how the Royal Navy influenced common British national identity. With France no longer

functioning as the main threat, some scholars argued that British naval superiority was

important for maintaining British national identity. Germany was more similar to Great Britain

than France had been, for example they had a monarchy and a protestant religion. One element

that distinguished these two nations was the presence of the British naval superiority. Germany

11 Ibid., 65. 12 Colley.

8

began to threaten the Royal Navy through the German Naval Laws, which marked a shift

towards navalism13 in Germany. This caused more friction between the nations, which led to a

naval arms race between Germany and Great Britain.

There are some events in the period from 1884 to 1914 that clearly show the British

public’s involvement, support, and pride in the Royal Navy. For example, the Trafalgar Day

celebrations which increased in size and scale in the years prior to the Great War, is one of

these. Similarly, the Naval Crisis or Dreadnought Crisis of 1909 also shows how involved the

British public were in the Royal Navy.

The period from 1884 to 1914 leads up to the Great War, which is usually seen as the

end of Pax Britannica. However, the Anglo-German naval arms race began challenging the

British naval position several years before 1914. Through Pax Britannica, the British public

had gotten used to a feeling of naval superiority. The Battle of Trafalgar was one of the last,

major threats to the Royal Navy before almost a century of peace. Therefore, a national feeling

of pride in the Royal Navy and its accomplishments had been allowed to develop in Great

Britain.

The period also experienced a remarkable and rapid development in battleships, the

“British were determined to stay in the lead of this development”.14 The Royal Navy had an

ambition of always being equipped with the newest and best technology. An example of this

can be seen in the launch of the French battleship, ‘La Glorie’, in 1859, this was the first

ironclad15 ship. The ship launch showed that the French were ahead in naval technology, and

Britain therefore had to attempt to regain the lead by building bigger and better ships.16

The British response was to prove more radical and decisive. Launched in 1860 as an immediate reply to the Glorie, the iron-hulled HMS Warrior was twice as big and fast as any other warship afloat, and armed with much heavier guns. This was essentially a case of Britain’s industrial might and techological advance being deployed into building a ship so powerful, it was thought that it could have sailed into any fleet in the world and sunk it singlehandedly. The Royal Navy had clearly regained the upper hand. Yet, for such a revolutionary ship, its pre-eminence was short-lived, as the rapid development of battleships which ensued, rendered Warrior itself obsolete within ten years of its launch.17

After this, battleship development continued at a rapid pace. In a response to the naval arms

race with Germany, the HMS Dreadnought was launched in 1906.

13 Navalism is defined as the policy of maintaining interest in naval affairs. 14 Atle Wold, "When Britain Ruled the Waves - or a Brief History of the Battleship," British Politics Review: Journal of the British Politics Society, Norway 8, no. 1 (2013): 14. 15 An ironclad ship is protected by iron or steel armour plates, this marked a shift from wooden ships. 16 Wold. 17 Ibid., 14.

9

Again, the British had built a ship which rendered all exiting battleships obsolete (to der Kaiser’s fury, though Dreadnought also rendered the largest fleet in the world, that of the Royal Navy, obsolete). Moreover, through the Dreadnought, the battleship had arguably, and finally, found its modern form.18

Technological advancements were so rapid and radical that previous battleships were rendered

obsolete, meaning that it was necessary to keep up with technology to stay in the naval arms

race.

Technological advances were central to the British public’s attitudes towards the Royal

Navy. Technological advances would influence the media coverage of naval affairs, which in

turn influenced the British public’s attitudes towards the Royal Navy. There was a fear of falling

behind in technological advancements, as well as an ambition of staying ahead in the

developments. A cause for concern was the industrial decline in Britain. As Paul Kennedy has

argued, “Britain’s industrial decline in this period is not simply to be described as an

unavoidable and natural process; it was also caused by complacency and inefficiency”.19 The

relative decline in Britain’s world position was hinted at through two closely-linked

developments:

1. Britain’s naval power, rooted in her economic strength, would no longer remain supreme, since other nations with greater resources and manpower were rapidly overhauling her previous industrial lead, and

2. sea power itself was waning in relation to land power.20

Kennedy argued that the British manufacturers were unwilling to keep up with technological

developments as they were still able to make profits through traditional methods. Similarly,

“[c]oal production and exports rose rapidly in this period, but only because of a vast increase

in labour and not because of new techniques and machinery.”21 Already in the 1880s, Germany

and the United States were developing technologically, at the same time Great Britain was not

improving efficiency, they were simply increasing the work force to increase output.22

Technological advancements and the number of new warships was seen as important

for the defence of Great Britain and its national identity, as argued by The Huddersfield Daily

Chronicle.

The Magnificent and the Majestic (…) are two of the most powerful vessels afloat, and their significance do not entirely rest with their production, but with the manner and method of that production. They are evidences not only of the power and wealth of Great Britain, but also her great productive capacity.23

18 Ibid., 15. 19 Kennedy, 187. 20 Ibid., 185-86. 21 Ibid., 188. 22 Ibid. 23 The Huddersfield Daily Chronicle, December 12, 1895.

10

These were two new warships in the Majestic-class, launched in the 1890s. Their names boast

of their great strength and capabilities. The newspaper moves on to focus on the importance of

new warships for British ‘national life’ and the identity of the British (or English) people. The

new warships “are defenders of the hearths and homes of England, and as such their addition

to our Royal navy should be welcomed by every Englishman”.24

Now that the context of the naval scare of 1884 and the Naval Defence Act of 1889, as

well as the shift in threat from abroad has been examined, it is time to move on to developments

that helped shape the navy. The increase in public interest related to the Royal Navy can be

examined through the commemorations and celebrations of the Battle of Trafalgar.

2.2 The Battle of Trafalgar and Lord Horatio Nelson

To understand the importance of the Royal Navy in the late nineteenth and early twentieth

century, it is necessary to study the historical roots and important events that helped shape the

navy and contribute to an understanding of the Royal Navy as a unifying factor in Great Britain.

Central to this, is the Battle of Trafalgar and Lord Horatio Nelson, and the influence of the Navy

League in the celebration of Trafalgar Day.25 There will be a brief discussion of one particularly

important event in British naval history that shaped the Royal Navy and influenced the way the

British people felt towards the navy for decades. The victory at the Battle of Trafalgar was an

event that shaped the Royal Navy and resulted in a strong connection between the navy and the

British people. The navy had an increasing impact on what it meant to be British during the

decades that followed. The Battle of Trafalgar was fought in 1805 between the British Royal

Navy and the combined force of the French and Spanish Navies. The British managed to beat

the Franco-Spanish fleet without losing a single British vessel. The victory at the battle of

Trafalgar showed clearly how superior the Royal Navy was in relation to the French and

Spanish navies, she was tested against two strong opponents and emerged victorious. The effect

of this was that the British experienced a feeling of naval superiority that could not be

24 Ibid. 25 For further discussion of Horatio Nelson and the Battle of Trafalgar see Marianne Czisnik, “Commemorating Trafalgar: Public Celebration and National Identity,” in Trafalgar in History – a Battle and Its Afterlife, ed. David Cannadine (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006) and Marianne Czisnik, Horatio Nelson: A Controversial Hero (London: Hodder Education, 2005) 25 Marianne Czisnik, "Commemorating Trafalgar: Public Celebration and National Identity," in Trafalgar in History - a Battle and Its Afterlife, ed. David Cannadine (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), 141.

11

threatened. Therefore, the Royal Navy became essential to British defence policy, both at home

and abroad.

In the years following the Battle of Trafalgar, the public interest in the navy and Lord

Nelson were not that high. The spirit of Lord Nelson, and the memory of Trafalgar was kept

alive mostly within the Royal Navy. However,

the battle started to become an important part of the identity of the Royal Navy. But as the last participants

of the battle began to pass away and members of the rising generation were wondering how to follow

Nelson, Trafalgar started to figure more prominently in the national consciousness.26

The Royal Navy therefore began to portray British greatness and became a more pronounced

symbol of British pride. As Marianne Czisnik has studied in detail, there was a pride in the

Royal Navy following the Battle of Trafalgar. Pax Britannica followed the defeat of Napoleon

in 1815 and was a century of relative peace in Europe in which the British naval strength was

not tested. This allowed the British public to grow accustomed to the feeling of naval

superiority, and grow complacent regarding the Royal Navy’s position.

Commemorations and celebrations of Trafalgar increased in the 1880s and 1890s.

Public interest in the battle and Lord Nelson was increasing markedly through the years leading

up to the centenary of the Battle of Trafalgar.27 Richard Harding stated that “Few personalities

have contributed more strongly to the myths of British supremacy on the seas”,28 than Lord

Nelson. Lord Horatio Nelson became a hero and was perceived as the saviour of the nation after

the Battle of Trafalgar.29 The 1880s and 1890s saw a revival of the hero status of Lord Horatio

Nelson.30 Correspondingly, the Royal Navy itself became very popular among the British

people. The upsurge in interest related to the Battle of Trafalgar and Lord Nelson, correlates

with the naval threat from Germany.

Political organizations began to exploit the interest in the navy to their advantage.

Marianne Czisnik argued that “[a]t the end of the nineteenth century, political organizations

went beyond exhibitions to exploit the significance of the battle of Trafalgar for the country’s

national identity”.31 Groups such as the Primrose League and Navy League were formed in

26 Ibid. 27 Ibid. 28 Richard Harding, "Sea-Mindedness and British Defence Policy," British Politics Review: Journal of the British Politics Society, Norway 8, no. 1 (2013): 4. 29 Ibid. 30 Czisnik. 31 Ibid., 142.

12

1883 and 1895 respectively. The Navy League was a pressure group promoting interests of the

navy. One of their actions was introducing the tradition of celebrating Trafalgar Day in 1896,

this was a celebration intended for the British public, not just the members of the Navy League.

Celebrations such as Trafalgar Day and the Royal Naval Exhibition in 1891 can be seen as

examples of the navy being used in propaganda.

Marianne Czisnik argued that organizations, such as the Navy League, began using the

Battle of Trafalgar and the publics’ interest in the Royal Navy in creating or defining a national

identity, because of its appeal to a wide audience. In her view, the British public were more

interested in the commemoration of Nelson and the Battle of Trafalgar than the Navy League

itself.32 Few attended Navy League meetings, as opposed to the celebrations of the navy, where

vast audiences were present. The Trafalgar Day celebrations, for example, were large, and

attracted large audiences. “Perhaps admiration for Nelson and a desire for national unity explain

why the Navy League’s celebrations attracted more people than did the Navy League’s political

ideas”.33 The British public was more interested in the symbolic value of the Royal Navy shown

in the victory of the Battle of Trafalgar, than in current naval affairs like the threat to naval

supremacy, this links back to the discussion of complacency in the Royal Navy’s position, in

the previous section.

The Navy League and other organizations used the Royal Navy for propagandist effect,

such as the public interest in the Trafalgar Day celebrations. The Battle of Trafalgar, the hero-

worship and status of Lord Nelson was used for propagandist effect when the Royal Navy was

beginning to face a threat from Germany in the late nineteenth century. Marianne Czisnik

argued that “[t]his combination of Trafalgar and Nelson was also used for propagandist effect

in ‘The Royal Naval Exhibition, 1891’, which attracted a wide public audience”.34 Czisnik also

argued that “[a]s the names of Trafalgar and Nelson were developing into a trademark of

national identity, they also started to attract commercial users”.35 This substantiates the

hypothesis that the Royal Navy played an important part in the forging of a national identity

that could unite the different identities living in the British Isles and the British Empire.

By way of conclusion, the period from 1884 to 1914 was characterized by a shift in

threat from abroad and the rapid technological developments. Developments in society would

influence the British position in the world, as well as the British people’s attitude towards

32 Ibid. 33 Ibid., 147. 34 Ibid., 142. 35 Ibid., 148.

13

British greatness and the Royal Navy. The historical background that has been studied in this

chapter is evidence for the increasing relevance of the Royal Navy on contemporary society.

The increase in hero status of Lord Horatio Nelson towards the end of the nineteenth century

as shown above can be taken as evidence of pride in the symbolic figure. Similarly, the effect

of the Battle of Trafalgar on the British national identity shows that the Royal Navy had an

increasing impact on what it meant to be British towards the end of the nineteenth century.

The Navy League and other organizations were founded in response to the relative

decline in the position of the Royal Navy, when they were being challenged from abroad, the

importance of the Royal Navy on British defence became more evident. The Royal Navy might

perhaps have become more important to defending the British Isles and British interests abroad

during the period from 1884 to 1914, as they were experiencing more competition from other

navies.

The historical pride in the Royal Navy has been introduced, this was a form of collective

pride felt by a vast audience within Great Britain, and not just a small group of people. The

historical pride in the Royal Navy supports the hypothesis that the navy was of great importance

to the British public. Likewise, the increasing public interest in the Royal Navy is evident

through the formation of leagues, the public celebrations of Trafalgar Day, as well as the hero

status of Lord Horatio Nelson. These substantiate the view that the Royal Navy was of

importance to the British public. The evidence for public interest in the Royal Navy can also be

seen to influence the British national identity.

Chapter 3 examines whether the public interest in the Royal Navy continued throughout

the period, also after the Anglo-German naval arms race began. This public interest can be said

to be twofold, there was a tension between a fear of losing naval supremacy and a pride in the

Royal Navy.

14

3 Tension

Between a Fear of Losing Naval Superiority and

Pride in the Royal Navy

A central feature of British attitudes towards the Royal Navy during the period from 1884 to

1914 was a tension or conflict between pride in the Royal Navy and fear of losing naval

supremacy. The basis for these attitudes can be found in the historical importance of the Royal

Navy, such as the victory in the Battle of Trafalgar and the increasing naval challenge from

Germany.

The historical prowess of the Navy resulted in a feeling of pride in the position of the

Royal Navy during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. At the same time, there was

an element of fear of losing naval supremacy. Prior to the naval threat from Germany, the

British public was used to feeling secure and superior due to their navy. However, the relative

decline in naval power meant that the British people began to feel threatened and more uncertain

of their position in the world.

This chapter explores the tension between fear of losing naval supremacy and pride in

the Royal Navy. The primary sources that have been used are newspaper articles written and

published in the period from 1884 to 1914 in Great Britain and the British Empire. Newspaper

articles are particularly good primary sources and have been studied as they reflect and give

insights into current and on-going public debates in the period.36

Newspaper articles present arguments in an on-going debate, they have been studied to

get an overview of what the British public was interested in. As newspapers tend to write about

what people were interested in at the time. The articles that have been studied have shown that

there was a high degree of public interest in the Royal Navy, meaning that there was a lot of

media coverage of naval affairs as well as public celebrations of the navy. As has been stated,

the period from 1884 to 1914 was characterised by increasing tension, both between Great

Britain and Germany, and within the British Isles.

The period was characterised by an increase in public involvement in naval affairs. The

naval scare of 1884, the Naval Defence Act of 1889, the German Naval Laws and the

36 The selection of newspapers has been formed by hits for keywords such as “the Royal Navy”, “pride”, “fear”, “patriot(ism)”, “nationalism”, and so on, in the British Newspaper Archives, and narrowed down by focusing on the period from 1884 to 1914.

15

Dreadnought Crisis of 1909 are some of the most evident examples of growing fear. The HMS

Dreadnought was launched in 1906 and quickly became the predominant type of battleships in

the early twentieth century. All battleships from then on were referred to as Dreadnoughts, as

opposed to the pre-dreadnought battleships that preceded them. The Dreadnought Crisis of 1909

came about due to the British demand for construction of more Dreadnoughts, and was at its

height during the spring of 1909. Public interest in the Royal Navy was especially high during

the crisis. In the year leading up to the Dreadnought Crisis of 1909, many newspapers were

writing about events linked to the crisis.

Figure 2: Number of hits for the search word «Royal Navy» in the British Newspaper Archives accessed on May 22, 2017.

Figure 2 shows the number of yearly hits for the search words ‘Royal Navy’ between

1880 and 1919, in the British Newspaper Archives. As can be seen, there was an increase in

newspaper articles regarding the Royal navy from 1880. It reaches a peak in 1885, the year after

the naval scare. There is another peak in 1900 after two German Naval Laws have been passed.

The year 1909 marks another year with many hits before a final peak in 1915 after the outbreak

of the Great War. Therefore, newspaper coverage correlates with some important events related

to the Royal Navy.

The public interest in the Royal Navy was a mixture of fear of losing naval superiority

and pride in the Royal Navy, this chapter will explore these in separate sections, although many

people properly experienced a mixture of these.

0

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000

1880 1885 1890 1895 1900 1905 1910 1915

Number of hits for "Royal Navy"

16

3.1 Pride in the Royal Navy

In this context pride in the Royal Navy means that the British people believed that the Royal

Navy was of great importance and value to Great Britain.37 The definition is close to the

definition of nationalism, meaning that a person is showing loyalty and devotion to the Royal

Navy.38 The word pride in this context is positively charged. The Royal Navy had been of great

importance and value to the British public for centuries, but was perhaps even more important

during the period from 1884 to 1914. The Royal Navy was part of what made people think that

Britain was a great and significant world power.

The ‘Island Race’

The existence of an ‘island race’ or ‘island nation’ meant that the British people were

characterised by the geographical position, being surrounded by the sea had come to define the

British and could also unite the diverse groups of people living in the British Isles.

Since Great Britain was an ‘island race’ or ‘island nation’ it was taken for granted that

Great Britain would need a powerful navy to protect them. The ‘island race’ concept is an old

one, which both John Mitcham and Jan Rüger uses in their arguments related to British identity.

The concept was also mentioned in a poem by Henry Newbolt published in 1889, called The

Island Race, as can be seen the poem was published during the period of study and emphasises

how relevant the concept was to the period.39 The meaning of the concept is nicely phrased in

the Great Naval Game by Jan Ruger.

One of the key ideas employed in this staging of unity was insularity. The ‘island nation’ was a powerful trope in Victorian and Edwardian Britain. Evoked in cultural as much as in political discourses, it served as an important Leitmotiv [dominant and recurring theme] in British identity politics.40

In other words, this meant that the effect of Britain being an ‘island nation’ could unite the

different groups within Great Britain against the world outside the British borders. The British

shoreline which marked the border against the world outside was used for national symbolism,

it was a border between ‘home’ and ‘foreign’. “Insularity was, as one reader put it, at the heart

of the ‘character of the British people’”.41

37 "Pride 4," in Oxford Students Dictionary - for learners using English to study other subjects, ed. Victoria Bull Alison Waters (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). 38 "Nationalism 1," in Merriam-Webster.com. 39 Jeremy Black, A History of the British Isles, 3rd ed. ed., Palgrave Essential Histories (Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, 2012). 40 Rüger, 170-71. 41 Ibid., 171.

17

The popular and highly read The Influence of Sea Power upon History 1660-1783 by

Alfred Thayer Mahan was published in 1890, and the timing meant that it was highly relevant

in contemporary Britain, even though it was studying an entirely different period of sea power.

The year of publishing meant that the book could influence the naval race between Germany

and Britain to a large extent. Mahan’s book

won international acclaim and ‘appeared to reveal immutable rules concerning the role of navies in international affairs that could be neglected only at a nations peril’. Written to stimulate American interest in a larger fleet, this widely-read and oft-quoted book became the bible for navalists everywhere, particularly in Britain, where its author was fêted and revered.42

The importance of this book in relation to the British ‘island race’ is the book’s extreme

popularity at the time, and its influence on Great Britain and the Royal Navy. As Paul Kennedy

argued, the age has been described as one of ‘the new navalism’, due to the influence of

Mahan’s book.43

The ‘island race’ describes how the geographical boundaries of the British Isles defined

the British people. This in turn influenced how they built up their military defence, a strategy

which came to be known as the ‘blue water strategy’.

‘Blue Water Strategy’

Compared to many continental powers, the prominent position of the Royal Navy relative to

the British Army is striking. In Great Britain, the navy was seen as crucial for British defence,

and therefore building a strong navy was essential. This contrasted with several of the other

European powers which historically had large standing armies. The inferiority of the British

army meant that attacking armies had to be stopped before reaching the shores of the British

Isles.

Duncan Redford argues that simultaneous to the period of complacency regarding the

Royal Navy from 1870 to 1884, there was also a period described as ‘the Dark Ages of the

Victorian Navy’ a term used by Oscar Parkes in 1966. Parkes described a period where there

was technological uncertainty and financial pressure on the Royal Navy.44

Great Britain was a world power, and kept the balance of power in Europe. Their

position had to be protected by the Royal Navy. Attacks on Great Britain and her interests would

have to come from the sea, as she was an island nation. The fact that Great Britain was used to

42 Kennedy, 184. 43 Ibid. 44 Redford, "Chapter 3: The Royal Navy, Sea Blindness and British National Identity," 63.

18

having a navy which was so much more powerful than those of other nations meant that no one

would attempt to threaten the British. But when there was a relative decline in the naval power

of Britain this was no longer the case.

Among the British people, the Royal Navy was seen as the ‘first and senior service’.

According to John Brewer, public attitudes towards the navy and army diverged, the “navy

commanded broad-based approval as an instrument of policy”.45 In contrast, the army was met

with ambivalence from the British public.46

The discrepancy between public attitudes towards the army and navy is in part attributable to this view, current in the late seventeenth century and after, that Britain’s strategic interests were best served by a ‘blue water’ policy in which the army played a subordinate role to the senior service.47

The British Army was not sufficiently large to protect Great Britain and its interests, and thus

it was not seen as important for British defence. The historical importance of the Royal Navy

contributed to the feeling of pride that did not apply to the army to the same extent. “For many

years, the Royal Navy was seen as Britain’s first, and indeed only, line of defence”.48

Because the Royal Navy was seen as the only real defence for Great Britain any

weakness would be heavily scrutinized by the media. In contrast, the army was met with

ambivalence both from the public and the press, which increased the pressure on naval

supremacy. The historical prowess and pride that it generated in the navy was challenged when

the Anglo-German naval arms race emerged. This lead to heavy scrutiny by the media and even

in some areas fear that the naval supremacy was waning.

45 John Brewer, The Sinews of Power: War, Money and the English State, 1688-1783 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990), 59. 46 Ibid. 47 Ibid., 59. 48 Redford, "Chapter 3: The Royal Navy, Sea Blindness and British National Identity," 61.

19

3.2 A Fear of Losing Naval Supremacy

A pronounced concern or even fear that Britain might lose her naval supremacy was a

prominent feature of the debates waged in the newspaper columns in the period. In this context

fear can mean anything between concern or anxiety to outright panic, there can therefore be

different degrees of fear experienced by the British public. How was this fear portrayed by the

press? Was there a change in the way the press and British public viewed the Royal Navy during

the period of interest, namely from 1884 to 1914?

The naval arms race and the subsequent Great War marked an end to the Pax Britannica.

It is interesting to study the effect this had on the British people at the time. The British peace

lasted for a century and through British control of the maritime trade routes and supremacy of

the sea, they made sure that there was no major warfare during this period. This meant that

people were used to peace and were probably quite unprepared for the scale of the Great War,

and uncertain of the threat towards naval supremacy which so characterised the British people.

How did the press and public view the Royal Navy in the time period?

It will be argued that there was a continuous change in the public’s attitudes towards the Royal

Navy in the period. As discussed previously there was a period of complacency from 1870 to

1884, a period of insecurity followed and led to a fear of losing naval superiority due to the

Anglo-German naval arms race.

People and the press were still secure in the strength of the Royal Navy, even after the

naval scare of 1884. This was an argument expressed by the newspapers during the period. The

Huddersfield Daily Chronicle published an article on December 12, 1895, which clearly

expresses complacency, meaning a sense of security and pride in the position of the Royal

Navy, “[A] thrill of patriotic pride runs through most Englishmen in the thought that upon the

ocean we are still supreme”. The author knew that the Royal Navy was important for keeping

the naval supremacy. However, there seems to be some subtle doubts and insecurities as to the

future developments, the necessity of staying ahead is therefore stressed. “We cannot afford to

fall behind in our first line of defence. In this we must be invincible if we mean to keep our

position, and this we do mean to do”.49 This links back to the discussion of the blue water

strategy and the first and second line of defence found in section 3.1, where the navy was clearly

the primary choice of defence, and the institution closest to the hearts of the British people.

49 The Huddersfield Daily Chronicle. [My emphasis]

20

The question of whether the Royal Navy was indeed strong enough to defend the British

people and its interests was raised by The Morning Post on January 20, 1900, it emphasised

that there was some uncertainty regarding the Navy and its strength.

The present war in South Africa has disclosed a weakness in our military system which has come as a most unpleasant surprise to those of the general public who are not in the know (…) This is already known and can be remedied, but it is to our Navy I would wish to direct attention, and ask the question: Is it ready, should its services be required.50

Here there is perhaps more insecurity about the defence of Great Britain and the naval

supremacy is no longer taken for granted. It is important to note that the First German Naval

Law had been passed between these two articles, and perhaps that has caused more uncertainty

in the Royal Navy and naval supremacy

Some people believed that the Royal Navy was not able to uphold its superiority and

that it was not working hard enough to maintain the upper hand. This can be seen in an article

in The Manchester Courier on June 10, 1908. “British Navy (…) allows itself to be overtaken

by the rapidity of naval development”.51 This article suggests a concern that the Royal Navy

was not doing its utmost to maintain naval supremacy, by allowing themselves to be overtaken.

This concern or fear was the result of naval supremacy being an important issue for most

Britons.

In the same newspaper, they argue that

[n]ow that the naval supremacy of Britain is no longer absolute, the naval ambitions of other nations are being openly asserted. America, in a few years has constructed a navy which is now the second in the world, but which will soon be surpassed by that of Germany.52

Even though the Royal Navy was still the largest and strongest navy at the time, there had been

a relative decline in Britain’s naval supremacy. “The gradual diminution of the British naval

supremacy, whichever way we look at it, is bound to diminish the chances of the maintenance

of peace”.53 Between January 1900 and June 1908 three more German Naval laws had been

passed, these were threatening the naval supremacy of Great Britain and posing a threat to the

British people.

By 1912, the British people seemed to have become more used to their navy being

threatened, even though they were still determined to put up a challenge and keep ahead in the

naval arms race. The newspapers might therefore be expressing less fear when discussing the

50 The Morning Post, January 20, 1900. 51 The Manchester Courier, June 10, 1908. [My emphasis] 52 Ibid. 53 Ibid.

21

Royal Navy and the threat from Germany. An example of this can be seen in The Courier from

February 1, 1912.

He can, of course, still economise by meeting German policy like a true and sensible statesman. Genuine naval economy does not lie in reducing the Naval Estimates at this juncture, but in increasing them. That would be a sign of strength. And signs of strength unimpaired are required to keep Germany from becoming too aggressive.54

As we can see from the article there are less signs of fear than in the previous articles. It is

possible that the British people now knew what they were facing, and the surprise of suddenly

having naval competition had worn off. The British might also see signs that they could win the

naval arms race. After the Dreadnought Crisis of 1909 the British saw the importance of

increasing efficiency to keep up with technological advancements, and saw that the navy had

the support of the British public.

Sometime between 1895 and 1912 a change occurred in the way the Royal Navy and

naval supremacy was seen and portrayed by the media, this might very well be a gradual change.

There had been a development in public attitudes towards naval supremacy from 1885 through

1900 up until 1908. The articles have shown that there was more insecurity about the naval

supremacy, the position of Great Britain in the world, and therefore also the identity of the

British people. As has been stated, the German Naval Laws were being passed during the period

from 1898 and 1912, these were continuously reminding the British people of the emerging

threat and forcing the British people to realize that they at least had to work hard to keep their

naval supremacy, and maybe even give up their dream of having a two-power standard.

The changes in the media’s portrayal of the naval strength that occurred in the period

also affected the way people thought and felt about the Royal Navy. Between 1895 and 1908

there seems to have been less certainty in the strength of the Royal Navy, this can be seen in

the articles discussed above. To begin with the press and the British people were quite secure

in the strength of the Royal Navy, the article from 1895 can be seen as Royal Navy propaganda

as it is emphasising the importance of Great Britain having the strongest navy in the world. The

author still sounds quite certain that they will be able to retain naval supremacy. Through the

1900 and 1908 articles, the press is sounding more uncertain and there is a larger element of

fear in the way the Royal Navy and Great Britain’s naval supremacy was discussed. The

continuous mention of uncertainty in the newspapers would have an impact on the readers and

the British public. The change from security to insecurity correlates with historical events like

54The Courier, February 1, 1912.

22

the German Naval Laws, which began in 1898, and the beginning of the Anglo-German naval

arms race.

As the British naval position was being challenged, this in turn led to more insecurity

about the British national identity. This can be exemplified by the Irish Home Rule bill being

passed in 1914 (even though its implementation was suspended due to the Great War), after

having dominated domestic British politics from 1885.55 This shows that insecurity about the

British position in the world led to more turmoil within the British Isles.

The press was interested in the Royal Navy, and the articles examined show increasing

uncertainty in the British naval position. As figure 2 illustrates, the number of articles related

to naval affairs and the Royal Navy soared in the period. How the newspapers’ coverage of the

navy influenced public opinion will now be investigated further by looking at the Dreadnought

crisis of 1909

Newspapers influence on the Dreadnought Crisis of 1909

One of the methods newspaper used to influence public opinion was through the choice of

words. This was paramount in the lead-up to the Dreadnought Crisis of 1909. How the

newspapers attempted to sway the public opinion will be examined by studying the choice of

words as well as looking at the effect repeated mentions and a lot of media coverage of the

Dreadnought Crisis would have on the British public.

It can be argued that there was a change in the way the Royal Navy was seen as a result

of the 1909 Dreadnought Crisis. The Admiralty56, Navy League and the press noticed the

public’s support of the Royal Navy and took advantage of the public interest. During the Naval

crisis of 1909 the newspapers were covering and following the events closely. The newspapers

were a good way of spreading hidden propaganda and information related to Royal Navy, both

inadvertently and intentionally. Since the media possesses the ability to influence the beliefs

of the British public through long periods of regular and repeated mentions of the fear and

uncertainty connected to the naval arms race. Early on in the Dreadnought Crisis of 1909, the

newspapers were publishing articles which seemed to intend to frighten and interest the British

people.

55 C.N. Trueman, "Home Rule and Ireland," History Learning Site (2015), http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ireland-1845-to-1922/home-rule-and-ireland/. 56 The Admiralty was the government department which was in charge of the command of the Royal Navy.

23

Even though the Royal Navy was still very powerful in 1908, the German and American

navies were challenging its superiority. Thus, some people feared that the British would not be

able to maintain a one-power standard, meaning that the Royal Navy would no longer be the

largest navy in the world. “We had reached a point in regard to Dreadnoughts, when the

question was not whether we retained a two-Power standard, but whether we had a one-Power

standard.”57 The Royal Navy defended the British interests and was used for maintaining peace.

“The gradual diminution of the British naval supremacy, whichever way we look at it, is bound

to diminish the chances of the maintenance of peace”.58

Words are particularly worthy of notice in this context, the choice of words in

newspapers will influence the reader and therefore the British public in the period. Thus, it is

interesting to study the effect of negative or positive words or sentences related to the Royal

Navy in contemporary articles. An example of the use of strong and negative words can be

found in The Daily Mail from March 17, 1909 and states, “BRITAIN’S NAVAL

SUPERIORITY PASSING” – “ENGLAND MUST WAKE TO DANGER”.59 Apart from the

use of capital letters to get the reader’s attention, there is also the use of the word “must” which

is an auxiliary verb expressing strong obligation. The effect would have been less striking if the

word “may” was used instead. Using the word “danger” also wakes the reader’s attention and

might result in fear in the reader.

The choice of words can influence the readers of these articles and therefore lead to

more uncertainty and fear among the British public. The media played an instrumental role in

reviving the interest in the Royal Navy by playing on the fear of losing naval supremacy.60 The

press did not just intend to spread fear, the more positive aspects portrayed in the media will be

examined in the following section. The involvement of the British public in naval affairs

showed that they were not just afraid of losing naval supremacy, they also supported the navy.

57 The Daily Mail, March 17, 1909. 58 The Manchester Courier. 59 The Daily Mail. [Original capitals] 60 Redford, "Chapter 3: The Royal Navy, Sea Blindness and British National Identity."

24

3.3 Public Support of the Royal Navy

The British public was not just proud of the Royal Navy or afraid of losing naval supremacy,

they were also supporting the navy and naval supremacy. The British public got involved in

naval affairs. The most striking evidence for this is the involvement in the Dreadnought Crisis

of 1909, this crisis has been examined extensively in this section. Therefore, a brief explanation

of this crisis will be included initially. The Dreadnought crisis can be seen as the peak of the

Anglo-German naval arms race, especially in regard to the involvement of the British public.

The Dreadnought was the most technologically advanced battleship at the time, and the

government had commissioned the building of 4 dreadnoughts, or 6 if necessary.61 However,

the British public would not settle for less than eight,62 thus the British public gave rise to the

naval arms race.

The naval crisis of 1909 showed more than British interest in the Royal Navy. The

slogan “We want eight and we won’t wait” coined by Unionist MP George Wyndham was taken

up by the British public and used for propagandist effect.63 The slogan and the public’s

involvement showed the support of the British public towards the Royal Navy. The British

people where not just interested in the Royal Navy they supported it and wanted the navy to

succeed in the naval arms race against Germany.

Indications that concern about naval strength was widespread, and can be seen in the

headline from The Western Morning News on April 5, 1909 which stated, “EIGHT

DREADNOUGHTS – GOVERNMENT YIELD TO NATIONS DEMAND”.64 This shows

how effective public support of the building of Dreadnought ships was to the outcome of the

crisis. The article also suggests that the entire British nation was behind the demand, even

though this was not the case, the wording is striking.

During the naval crisis in 1909, the feeling of insecurity and fear was attempted to be

calmed down, this was done by spreading a sense of security. Mr. Lambert, an M.P, made a

speech in April 1909, he stressed that there was “No ground whatever for alarm”.65 This can be

seen as an attempt by Mr. Lambert to calm down the public after the naval crisis of 1909, saying

61 National Museum of the Royal New Zealand Navy, "(1800-1913) the 1909 Naval Crisis and the Gift of Hms New Zealand," http://navymuseum.co.nz/1800-1913-the-1909-naval-crisis-and-the-gift-of-hms-new-zealand/. 62 John Lewis-Stempel, "Great War Centenary: Britannia Rules the Waves... But for How Long?," Express (2014), http://www.express.co.uk/news/world-war-1/462613/Great-War-Centenary-Britannia-rules-the-waves-but-for-how-long. 63 Ibid. 64 The Western Morning News, April 5, 1909. [Original capitals] 65 Ibid.

25

that there was no reason to be afraid, and that things were under control. This statement was

quoted in the Western Morning News, in an attempt to influence their readers, calm down the

British public, and spread a sense of security in the Royal Navy. Wordings such as ‘no ground

for alarm’ might have influenced the readers of newspaper. Another example of attempting to

calm down the public can be found in the same newspaper article. The Western Morning News

quote Mr. Rønciman66 from his speech, where he stated, “We are secure in the great strength

of the navy”.67 This is another example of the sense of security felt due to the Royal Navy and

the British naval position. The media coverage of naval events shows both public and press

interest in the Royal Navy. As these issues are constantly brought up in public debate, this

suggests that they are of importance and interest to the public.

The strength of the Royal Navy should have been above party politics, as argued by the

Daily Mail, meaning that all of British society could be interested in the Royal Navy regardless

of their party preferences. The navy was important to the whole of the British people, regardless

of which political party they belonged to and therefore appealed to a wide audience, in a way

that political parties could not. The newspapers were likely to write about events that people

were interested in. “The strength of the Navy is a question above party. It is a matter of life and

death to the British nation.”68 The strength of the Royal Navy regards all of the British nation,

similarly the use of the words “a matter of life and death” is very effective, it awakens the

reader’s attention and shows how important the matter was at the time. As this article was

published during the naval crisis of 1909 where many people were showing immense support

for the Royal Navy, newspapers would take advantage of the situation and cover the matter

extensively.

The German Navy was supposedly created so that they could provide themselves with

a naval force adequate to defend their political interests abroad, but Germany went further than

that.

As was officially declared a few years ago in the preamble of the Navy Law which has resulted in the enormous augmentation of her Fleet, Germany’s resolve is to create a Navy which will be able to tackle even the strongest Navy in the world – that is to say, our own – with some prospect of success. 69

The British were surprised at how fast Germany could build their navy. The Belfast Evening

Telegraph stated that “it had come upon them as a surprise that Germany now had a power of

66 Seems to the spelling in the article, however the name is a bit indistinct the digital archives. 67 The Western Morning News. 68 The Daily Mail. 69 The Aberdeen Journal, Februar 12, 1912.

26

shipbuilding not second even to this country and superior to every other country in the world”.70

This is another article published during the naval crisis of 1909, it shows discontent about how

the British government have handled the threat from Germany. The British public were

dissatisfied with government inactivity.

The importance of the Royal Navy was also visible in the naval budgets which were

already large before the naval arms race, but which increased dramatically during this period.

This was a matter that most political parties could agree on, the budgets had to be high in order

for Britain to maintain naval supremacy. In February 1912, the Courier stated that

[T]he only safe conclusion possible is that to-day the British Navy Estimates are really modest. They no more than maintain a satisfactory margin between the strength of our fleet and the strength of the next two strongest Powers.71

This means that some people believed that the Royal Navy barely had required funds if it was

to emerge with the upper hand in the ongoing naval arms race.

In conclusion, chapter 3 has studied the tension between pride in the Royal Navy and a

fear of losing naval supremacy. The importance of the support and involvement of the British

public in naval affairs has been emphasised. Findings suggest that the public interest in the

Royal Navy can be said to define the British public. As has been noted the ‘island race’, the

geographical position of Great Britain has come to define the British people and was at the

‘heart of the character of the British people in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

Since the Royal Navy was important for defending the ‘island nation’, the Royal Navy was

important for uniting the British people and creating and maintaining a British national identity.

Media coverage played a significant role in contributing to the public interest in the

Royal Navy. The press might have influenced the public, both by spreading fear and security.

The coverage changed continuously and gradually in how the strength of the navy was

portrayed between 1895 and 1912. This correlated with a gradual change in the British public’s

sense of security about their naval position. As the British naval position was being challenged,

this also led to more insecurity about the British national identity. The support and involvement

of the British public in the Royal Nay, especially during the 1909 Dreadnought Crisis

emphasises how important the Royal Navy was for the public. Public involvement in pressuring

the Government to increase the number of Dreadnoughts shows that the public was united in

its desire for continued naval supremacy. The Royal Navy united a large part of the British

public, some even argues that it played an important part in defining a British national identity.

70 Belfast Evening Telegraph, March 31, 1909. 71 The Courier.

27

4 Royal Navy and Identity

Could it be possible for an institution like the Royal Navy to unite the different regional

identities living within the British Isles and perhaps also include the identities from the British

Empire? Did the Royal Navy contribute to creating and maintaining a common national British

identity? A common national identity is important for uniting the inhabitants of a nation. It

would mean that the people could unite in order to work against a common goal, which reduces

internal conflicts and the risk of civil war. A common national identity can create a common

rallying point and nationalist propaganda. It is also something that unites people during wartime

and uncertainty.

In the introduction, identity was defined as the qualities, beliefs, etc. that distinguish or

identify who a person is. And national identity was defined as, the depiction of a country as a

whole, describing its culture, traditions, language and politics. According to Colley a common

national British identity had been forged by 1837, but it coexisted with the older identities of

England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. This identity was based on conflict with France as ‘the

Other’.72 It is therefore interesting to study the period from 1884 to 1914, where the external

threat changed from France to Germany, this change also posed a larger threat to something

that was very ‘British’ namely the Royal Navy.

Several researchers have stated that there was indeed an identity where the presence of

a strong Royal Navy was important for uniting the different groups within Great Britain in the

period in focus, among these were Duncan Redford, Dirk Bönker, Jan Rüger and John Mitcham.

Duncan Redford argued that “[i]n terms of national prestige and global status the Navy had an

important part to play within the construction of identity”.73

Dirk Bönker, however, argued that

the naval competition galvanized political parties and the broader public and attracted the attention of the fast-developing mass media. In each country, the pursuit of maritime force became a focal point of political mobilization, public debate, and nationalist identity politics. Political parties rallied around the case for national power, global empire, and maritime force, making the possession of a first-rate navy an attribute of a strong nation, well beyond the particulars of force ratios and maritime strategy.74

72 Colley. 73 Duncan Redford, "Does the Royal Navy Matter? Aspects of National Identity and the Navy’s Vulnerability to Future Budget Cuts," RUSI (2009), https://rusi.org/commentary/does-royal-navy-matter-aspects-national-identity-and-navy%E2%80%99s-vulnerability-future-budget. 74 Dirk Bönker, "Naval Race between Germany and Great Britain, 1898-1912," 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War (2015), http://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/naval_race_between_germany_and_great_britain_1898-1912. [My emphasis]

28

The naval competition of the period caused public interest from a wide audience, both from the

British public, the media, and political parties. This meant that different groups had a common

interest that could unite the different groups to work towards a common goal.

John Mitcham, on the other hand, stated that

The end of the nineteenth century witnessed a wave of intense public interest in the Navy, even outside the British Isles. This phenomenon – what contemporaries termed ‘navalism’ – transcended mere matters of propaganda and party politics to play a central part in the ongoing construction of ‘British’ identity.75

Whereas, Jan Rüger believed that the Royal Navy helped create a shared bond between the

British. “It was here, on the naval stage, that a shared bond between the four nations in the

British Isles and the wider empire could be imagined and experienced”.76

The British Isles consisted of a wide variety of identities, both local and regional, as

such the existence of a common British national identity was not given. When discussing British

identities, it is important to remember that several different identities coexisted within the

British Isles, there were old national identities connected to the old British nations, such as

English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish identities. Moreover, regional identities also existed with

Great Britain.77 Some people living in the north of England may identify more with their

Scottish neighbours than their neighbours in the south of England. There are large differences

within Scotland between the people in the Scottish Highlands and Lowlands, etc.. However,

there was something that united the different groups and identities at the end of the nineteenth

century and early twentieth century. One of the unifying factors was the Royal Navy, and as

such a ‘British’ identity where the Royal Navy played a crucial part can bring all these different

identities together.

Linda Colley phrased the existence of several identities nicely: “Identities are not like

hats. Human beings can and do put on several at a time”.78 This means that a British identity

would not have to replace already existing identities. Colley argued that “Britishness was

superimposed over an array of internal differences in response to contact with the Other, and

above all in response to conflict with the Other”.79 Due to the existence of the different regional

and older national identities, Great Britain presented the need for institutions that could unite

the divergent identities. Therefore, the next section will present the Royal Navy as a truly

75 Mitcham, 272. 76 Rüger, 182. 77 Christopher G. A. Bryant, The Nations of Britain (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006). 78 Colley, 6. 79 Ibid.

29

‘British’ institution which had the ability to unite different groups and identities during the

period in question.

4.1 The Royal Navy as a Symbol of ‘Britishness’

The Royal Navy appealed to a huge and diverse audience. This meant that a large group of

people could identify with it. The Royal Navy was important for the concept of ‘Britishness’

and therefore also the forging of a British identity. ‘Britishness’ is defined as “the quality of

being British or of having characteristics regarded as typically British”,80 here it is opposed to

identities such as ‘Englishness’ and ‘Scottishness’, etc.. Great Britain required a rallying point

which the different British identities could gather around, this rallying point could come in the

form of a British institution that could unite them. The Royal Navy was arguably the British

institution that united the different groups that existed within Great Britain, since it was a

symbol of ‘Britishness’.

Duncan Redford argued that the Royal Navy had been influential in nation building.

The cult of the navy in fact offers a powerful stage for the issues examined in this debate, a stage on which

notions of Britishness collided with English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish identities. The Royal Navy became

one of the most important metaphors of Britishness in the nineteenth century, just as the German fleet

was employed as a floating symbol of unity and national identification on the other side of the North Sea.

Both played essential roles or the shaping of ‘the nation’, for ideas of empire, ‘overseas’ and difference.81

The Royal Navy focused on and utilized their ‘British’ characteristics and uses propaganda to

spread a feeling of unity between the different identities in the British Isles. The Royal Navy

needs public interest and support. Therefore, it was necessary to focus on the things that brought

the British people together.

There are uniting aspects to the Royal Navy, as it applies to such a diverse audience.

John Mitcham argued that the Royal Navy, along with monarchy and Empire, were used to

create a British identity. The national identity is focusing on the uniting aspects of the

institution, namely the ‘British’ characteristics.

Within the context of the ‘four kingdoms’ of Great Britain, great efforts were made to stress the ‘Britishness’ of the Royal Navy, and its identification as an imperial symbol synonymous with the Monarchy, the Union and the Empire82.

80 "Britishness," in Oxford Dictionaries. 81 Redford, "Introduction," 3. [My emphasis] 82 Mitcham, 287.

30

The Royal Navy did not apply to only one group within Great Britain, it applied to English,

Scottish, Welsh, and Irish people alike. As a result, the navy could be seen as the binding glue

that several groups of people could relate to, it was common for all the British ‘nations’ and the

Empire. This was actively used by the Admiralty who promoted a sense of ‘Britishness’, instead

of focusing on the things that made the four kingdoms different. A collective, shared historical

past would bring them closer together.

The Navy also projected a uniquely British – as opposed to an English, Welsh, Scottish, regional, county or municipal – identity, thanks to Britain’s overarching island identity. In a period where localism and local and municipal pride were commonplace, as seen through the impressive civic buildings that sprung up in cities as expression of civic pride, identity and achievement the Navy rose above these more local identities as a strongly British institution.83

Redford argued that the Royal Navy was an institution that emphasised a uniquely British

identity, and that it was a strongly British institution. Even though many people rarely

distinguish between ‘England’ and ‘Britain’84, the Royal Navy was depicted as the British

Royal Navy, not an English or Scottish institution.

The naval theatre and public celebrations

Scholars dealing with national identity have not paid enough attention to the navy as a ‘cultural

symbol’, according to Rüger.85 Even though scholars have been interested in public

celebrations, Rüger argued that this interest did not extend to the navy. The Royal Navy was

used in celebrations such as fleet reviews and ship launches, and this pomp and circumstance

increased dramatically in the late nineteenth century.

From 1912, the Statement [of the First Lord of the Admiralty] featured an entire section called ‘Ceremonies and Visits’. This acknowledged the navy’s new public role: it was no longer only its function as an instrument of defence that mattered, but its cultural role as a symbol that celebrated the monarchy, empire and the nation with unprecedented pomp and professionalism.86

This substantiates the view that the role of the Royal Navy, as well as British attitudes towards

it, changed during the period leading up to the Great War. The Royal Navy became less a means

for defence and more a symbol of unity.

The naval theatre, as discussed in detail by Jan Rüger,87 was a public stage where the

navy could be celebrated through ship launches and fleet reviews. The naval theatre was thus

83 Redford, "Chapter 3: The Royal Navy, Sea Blindness and British National Identity," 68-69. [My emphasis] 84 Colley. 85 Rüger. 86 Ibid., 49. 87 For further information on ‘the naval theatre’ see Jan Rüger, The Great Naval Game – Britain and Germany in the Age of Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).

31

perfect for naval propaganda. The Admiralty used the navy in celebrations and exhibitions to

emphasise the ‘Britishness’ and the uniting aspects of the Royal Navy. Through an example of

the launch of the ship Hibernia in 1905, Jan Rüger shows how ship launches included Irish

characteristics, such as Irish whiskey instead of wine for christening the ship.

The naval theatre thus served as a key arena for symbolic uniting of the four nations of the United Kingdom. Conspicuously appealing to Scottish, Irish and Welsh sentiment in display and ceremonial, it was a powerful vehicle aimed at ‘reconciling the Celt’ when Anglo-Irish tensions were at an all-time high.88

This shows that the Admiralty intentionally used the Royal Navy and its uniting aspect for

propagandist effect. “The significance of this [naval] game became particularly clear after 1909

when the staging and celebrating of the navy continued despite the fact that the Royal Navy had

effectively won the naval race.”89 Furthermore, the escalation of the naval theatre in the period

leading up to the Great War shows how important the Royal Navy was to the British public and

how its role correlated with the increasing threat from abroad.

Losing naval supremacy and British identity

If the Royal Navy and its standing contributed to creating and maintaining a British national

identity, what happened when Britain’s naval position standing was threatened? It can be argued

that the problems with creating a common British identity, were related to the threat of losing

naval supremacy. Jan Rüger argued that “[t]hreats to the British command of the sea also

undermined senses of national identity, closely connected as they were to naval superiority in

this period”.90 In other words, as the British naval supremacy was threatened the British people

were becoming more diverse and therefore drifted apart. One example of this could be the

timing of the Irish Home Rule Bill being passed in 1914, the Irish question dominated domestic

British politics from 1885.91 This would imply that there is a correlation between turmoil

abroad and turmoil within the British Isles. Insecurity about the British naval position would

lead to more uncertainty about what defined the British people.

It would be more difficult to define what united the British people if they no longer had

naval supremacy. The naval supremacy is therefore immensely important to British national

identity, and as the Royal Navy was the defender of the naval supremacy this is a quite

interesting notion. Jan Rüger also considers the difficulties in uniting the different identities

88 Rüger. 89 Ibid., 10. 90 Ibid., 165-66. 91 Trueman.

32

within the British Isles and the British Empire. Scholars such as Linda Colley have focused on

religion, state formation and conflict as a uniting factor for the forging of a British national

identity. The naval theatre which Rüger has studied seems a more positive force to build a

nation upon, and it is something that several different groups could be proud of and support.

This is all the more surprising, given that the naval theatre was a particularly prolific arena for cultural nation-building. Indeed, the Royal Navy was one of the most important agents of national sentiment in the Victorian and Edwardian era. While the army was bound, by tradition as well as recruitment, to regional alliances, the navy offered itself ideally for a British, unionist and imperial emphasis.92

As Great Britain were losing their naval superiority during the naval arms race with Germany

their status as a world power also changed, at the same time their ability to control the balance

of power in Europe declined. Britain was so dependent upon their sea power status to be an

influential world power. “While Britain’s position as a world power began to decline, the Royal

Navy’s symbolic value increased remarkably.”93 The Royal Navy became a symbol of their

historic naval supremacy, and something the people could embrace to cling on to their world

power status.

Ownership of the Royal Navy

The Royal Navy was seen as a symbol of ‘Britishness’ and as such both the older British

‘nations’ and the British Empire and its Dominions might feel a connection to, and an ownership

of, the Royal Navy. In an attempt to see if there were any differences in identity between the

‘four kingdoms’ of the British Isles in relation to the Royal Navy, several newspaper articles

from the period of interest were studied.

As argued previously, the choice of words can influence how the reader interprets an

article. In the following article the use of the word ‘Englishman’ is interesting, notice that this

article is taken from an English newspaper. “Every now and then, as new and powerful

additions are made to our navy, a thrill of patriotic pride runs through most Englishmen the

thought that upon the ocean we are still supreme”.94 The author is expressing pride in the Royal

Navy, however he does not refer to the Royal Navy as a ‘British’ institution, but rather as an

‘English’ one. At the time, it was not uncommon, both within England and abroad to substitute

‘English’ for ‘British, as they did not always distinguish too clearly between the terms ‘English’

and ‘British’.95 It is also important to note the year of publishing of this article, as it is quite

92 Rüger, 166. 93 Ibid., 182. 94 The Huddersfield Daily Chronicle. 95 Colley.

33

early in the period being studied. Things might change after the Navy League and the Admiralty

used propaganda to focus on the Royal Navy and her ‘British’ characteristics.

In Scotland, however, newspapers were more consistent in distinguishing between

‘English’ and ‘British’. The Greenock Telegraph and Clyde Shipping Gazette shows how

concerned Scottish people were with this distinction. It is also important to notice that this

article was published in 1909, meaning that a few years had passed between this article and the

previous one.

Mr George Eyre-Todd occupied the chair, and in welcoming the delegates he referred to the progress the patriotic cause had been making during recent years, and affirmed that no orator now dared cross the Border and speak on a Scottish platform of the “English” Army, the English Navy, and so forth.96

Therefore, there might have been a change in the way the Royal Navy was portrayed in the

years between these two articles. On the other hand, this might just imply that the English

became more consistent in the distinction between ‘English’ and ‘British’ when accompanied

by Scottish people. It can also be seen that the Scottish people felt very strongly about the

mention of the ‘English’ Navy, as it was a ‘British’ institution where several of the British

‘nations’ were contributing, therefore the English could not take all the glory. The previous

articles show that both English and Scottish people felt ownership of and a connection to the

Royal Navy. Both English and Scottish newspapers were writing about “our naval position”97

and “our navy”.98

Similarly, politicians were focusing on national unity and the unifying factor of the

Royal Navy. In 1909, Mr. Balfour, former prime minister and contemporary leader of the

Conservative Party, stated that “the question was not whether we retained a two-Power

standard, but whether we had a one-Power standard”.99 All these examples stress the sense of

unity felt about the British naval supremacy and the Navy. This can be seen as a sign that the

Royal Navy and naval supremacy was best for all of the British nation.

The Royal Navy did not just unite people within the British Isles. John Mitcham argued

that some parts of the British Empire could identify with and were proud of the Royal Navy as

well. The naming of warships could create pride in the Royal Navy in the Dominions, as well

as the British Isles, this was a strategy which was actively applied to establish a stronger

connection and ownership towards the Royal Navy. In Mitcham’s view,

96 The Greenock Telegraph and Clyde Shipping Gazette, March 29, 1909. 97 Daily Record and Mail, January 14, 1914. 98 The Huddersfield Daily Chronicle. 99 The Daily Mail.

34

[b]y reserving these titles [f.ex.. HMS Canada] for the Navy’s most powerful battleships and cruisers, they ensured that colonials ‘would take much greater pride and interest in knowing that HMS “So and So” and HMS “Something-Else” were their Ships and a visible tangible object lesson of the Dominion’s part in the Empire’s defence’.100

An example of how the British Empire contributed to naval defence could be found in The Devon and Exeter Gazette from August 15, 1912.

The one bright spot on so dark a sky is found in the apparent intention of Canada to step into the field and help redress the maritime balance of the world. (…) The entry of Canada upon the scene has awakened a thrill of emotion in the mind of every man who believes in the Empire as a vital organism.101

The British Empire was also interested in the Royal Navy, several of the Dominions attempted

to aid the British in the naval arms race by contributing with funds or ships for the Royal Navy.

“The Golden and Diamond jubilees of Queen Victoria, in 1887 and 1897 respectively, showed

how much empire was part of British identity and ceremonial”.102

The British public and politicians disagreed about whether it was appropriate that the

British Empire should contribute to the Royal Navy. The British wanted support to be able to

win the naval arms race, but they also want to make sure that the British Dominions would not

get too much power, and free themselves from British control. An example of this can be found

in The Scotsman from Friday, January 14, 1910.

[T]here is much substance in the contention of those who hold that only by possessing a Navy and Naval Service of her own can the hearts and minds and hands of the children of the Dominion be thoroughly engaged in the task of defending it and the Empire at large.103

The importance of this article is that it shows how essential the British people considered the

navy. Therefore, it was believed that the navy would be equally important to the Dominions if

they could build their own navies. “The hearts and minds” was an important aspect in the Union

of the Crowns in 1603, when King James VI wanted to unite the two kingdoms and create a

common identity by the union of the hearts and minds of the people.

The Royal Navy was the most important symbol of ‘Britishness’, this meant that it was

a unifying factor and applied to many different groups of people. Both people within the British

Isles and the British Empire felt a connection with, as well as a degree of ownership towards

the Royal Navy. The naval theatre functioned as a meeting point between the navy, public and

press. It was a stage where the navy could be celebrated and praised. The public staging could

also be used for propagandist effect as it attracted a wide audience, this emphasises the great

public interest felt in the Royal Navy and naval supremacy. This was actively used for

100 Mitcham, 273. 101 The Devon and Exeter Gazette, August 15 1912. 102 Black. 103 The Scotsman, January 14, 1910.

35

propagandist effect by the Admiralty, what better way of attracting and maintaining public

interest than to utilize the ‘British’ traits of the navy? This in turn meant that the Royal Navy

could play an important part in constructing and maintaining a British national identity. In

contrast, it can be argued that when the British naval position was threatened, this also

threatened the British identity.

4.2 Britain as an ‘Island Race’

The Royal Navy was a truly ‘British’ institution which was imperative for protecting and

maintaining the ‘island race’. The geographical position of the British Isles can be said to define

the peoples of the British Isles and influence the way they saw themselves. The role of the

Royal Navy in maintaining the ‘island race’ will be explored. The ‘island race’ concept was a

geographical characteristic of the British Isles, which had distinguished the British from the

continent for centuries. Due to the British ‘natural borders’ the people were cut off from the

outside world. The national borders of the British Isles have been influential in the forming of

British identities. The British borders were fixed earlier on than borders between other of

European countries, on the continent the borders had fluctuated more, and for a longer time.

Therefore, the British identities could be older than some of their European counterparts.

The Royal Navy was seen as the defender of the British Isles and British interests

abroad, and was therefore a symbol and reminder of the fact that the British were an ‘island

race’. Several scholars have argued along the same lines, among them are: Duncan Redford,

John Mitcham, and Jan Rüger. The importance of the ‘island race’ concept is that the Royal

Navy was the most important symbol of the ‘island race’ and its existence, this was

substantiated by Jan Rüger. “Clearly, it was in the navy that the most visible symbol of the

‘island race’ existed. The Admiralty was therefore eager to project insularity as a source of the

nation’s freedom and identity”.104

Great Britain had been able to apply isolationist policies in the past due to their island

status. Now that the threat was so close to home it was no longer possible to stay isolated from

European affairs, they needed to control the threat from Germany. This could only be done

through winning the naval arms race. As in the past, Britain got involved in European affairs

when it was necessary to uphold and maintain the European balance of power. The ‘island race’

104 Rüger, 174.

36

was a concept that could apply to a vast audience, and as stated in chapter 3, this was at ‘the

heart of the character of British people’.

The ‘island nation’ or ‘island race’ was as geographically imprecise as ideas of ‘the nation’ were contested in the British Isles. In the naval theatre, this was a strength: precisely because it remained ambiguous, the idea of the ‘island nation’ could appeal to different senses of belonging and identification.105

Duncan Redford also explored British national identity in relation to its island status, he

believed that there was a relationship between the Royal Navy and British national identity

which was defined by its island status and global status.106 The Navy was therefore important

both in defending the British Isles and the rest of the British Empire.

John Mitcham, on the other hand, investigated the importance of the Royal Navy in

creating a sense of unity for subjects of the British Empire, as well as the people living in the

British Isles. In his view, the Royal Navy was something that all Britons could identify with

and be proud of.

This self-identification as an ‘Island Race’, possessing the world’s greatest navy and commercial fleet, influenced the development of a sense of global ‘Englishness’ and ‘Britishness’ during the ‘long eighteenth century’.107

The perception that the British people were an ‘island race’ was not only important for the

Royal Navy, it was also something that characterised the British people and was closely related

to the British identity.

There was a connection between the British national identity and the ‘island race’, the

common factor between these two was the role of the Royal Navy. The natural borders of the

British Isles had helped shape the British people and the way they defined themselves against

the ‘Others’ off their shores. The natural borders had meant that Great Britain could apply

isolationist policies and only get involved in European affairs when necessary. This

substantiates the hypothesis that the Royal Navy played an important role in creating and

maintaining British national identity, since the ‘island race’ so clearly characterised the British

people. This was due to the Royal Navy being the most important symbol for the existence of

the ‘island race’. As the Royal Navy symbolises the ‘island race’ it follows that it is of great

importance to its existence.

Great Britain was a nation consisting of several different types of identities, in which

the Royal Navy could be seen as a unifying factor. Many people felt a connection to, \ and

ownership of, the Royal Navy, this was true both within the British Isles and in the dominions.

105 Ibid., 173. 106 Redford, "Does the Royal Navy Matter? Aspects of National Identity and the Navy’s Vulnerability to Future Budget Cuts". 107 Mitcham, 272.

37

This emphasises the importance of the Royal Navy to the British public. The public interest in

the navy can be exemplified by the naval theatre and its public support and involvement. This

importance in turn shows that the Royal Navy played an important part in creating and

maintaining British national identity.

The Royal Navy can be seen as a uniquely British institution as it was created through

a cooperation between the different regions within the British Isles, as well as aid from the

British Dominions. As such, it was a predominant factor in the construction of a British national

identity. Furthermore, when Britain’s naval supremacy was threatened, the British national

identity was threatened too. This substantiates the hypothesis that the British national identity

was created and maintained with the aid of a strong Royal Navy and British naval supremacy.

Great Britain had been shaped through its geographical position, which in turn had come

to define the people living in the British Isles. The Royal Navy was seen as the most important

symbol for the existence of this ‘island race’. Therefore, the Royal Navy can be said to have

played an important part in creating and maintaining a common British national identity.

38

5 Influencing Public Interest

The Navy League and the Admiralty

The Navy League and the Admiralty attempted to maintain and increase public interest in the

Royal Navy during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. The high level of public

interest in the Royal Navy shows that the British public cared about, were interested in, and

supported the navy. This means that the Royal Navy in turn played an important role in creating

and maintaining a common British national identity.

The Royal Navy was used in public celebrations and for propagandist effect during the

period from 1884 tom 1914. This was done through including the Royal Navy in celebrations

such as Queen Victoria’s Golden and Diamond jubilees in 1887 and 1897, respectively. These

major celebrations included large scale fleet reviews.108 The fleet reviews and naval

celebrations attracted large audiences, this shows how important the Royal Navy was for the

British public. Both the Navy League and the Admiralty used the public interest in the Royal

Navy. The naval theatre has been introduced as a public stage where the Royal Navy could be

celebrated through events such as fleet reviews and ship launches. This theatre created a public

stage where the public could appreciate the navy. The intention behind using the Royal Navy

in propaganda was that it should increase the public interest in the navy even further, and

therefore create an even stronger connection between the public and the navy. In turn

underlining the existence of a British national identity where the Royal Navy played an

important part in defining the British people.

It can be argued that leagues such as the Primrose League and Navy League were created

in response to the naval threat from abroad. Correspondingly, the naval theatre increased in

popularity and scope during the period. This emphasises the public interest and support in the

Royal Navy at an instant when the naval supremacy was being threatened. The Navy League

believed that the British society was diverse and divided, and the Royal Navy could be seen as

a unifying factor in order to create a more ‘cohesive society’.109

The leagues formed towards the end of the nineteenth century have already been

mentioned in previous chapters. The formation of the leagues, and especially the Navy League,

108 Black. 109 Anne Summers, "4. The Character of Edwardian Nationalism: Three Popular Leagues," in Nationalist and Racialist Movements in Britain and Germany before 1914, ed. Paul; Nicholls Kennedy, Anthony (Hong Kong: The Macmillan Press Ltd. , 1981).

39

could be seen as a response to the naval threat and decline in British naval supremacy. Several

of the leagues, were formed in the late nineteenth century, these were interested in the Empire,

navy, and monarchy. These characteristics were important to the British people, furthermore

they offered a sense of unity and an element of pride to the British people. This can explain

why the organizations were so popular in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century and

contributed to a high number of members.

The high membership numbers of some of these leagues shows that many people were

interested in the events linked to empire, navy, and monarchy. Anne Summers argued that

“membership soared in the last few years before the war”.110 Similarly, the naval rivalry that

emerged and unfolded between Great Britain and Germany in the late nineteenth and early

twentieth century, may have aided and influenced the popularity of the organizations and hence

led to increased membership numbers of the Navy League.

Martin Pugh, however, argued that the founding of the organizations did not come due

to a turning point in 1880, but were the result of a continuous change both in policy and popular

attitudes.111

In 1900 Lord Salisbury expressed a typical late Victorian view when he claimed that the previous twenty years had witnessed a rejuvenation of popular interest in Empire, of which the Primrose League was only one of the more important manifestations.112

This meant that the British public was experiencing a revival of public interest in British

greatness such as the Empire and the Royal Navy. The leagues were formed in response to the

threat from abroad, especially from Germany.

Timing

The leagues that were formed in the late nineteenth century were important for the Royal Navy

and identity due to the naval threat Great Britain were facing at the time. Some scholars

believed that the leagues were formed in the late nineteenth century precisely because this was

when Britain were facing a major naval threat for the first time since the Battle of Trafalgar.

Therefore, the timing of the formation of these leagues is of importance to the Royal Navy and

the building of a national identity. Martin Pugh, for example, has emphasised the effect of the

timing of the phenomenon, he argued that “[i]mperialism may well have become a more

110 Ibid., 80. 111 Martin Pugh, The Tories and the People : 1880-1935 (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1985). 112 Ibid.

40

excitable and militaristic phenomenon owing to a perceived decline in Britain’s military and

strategic position and her vulnerability to invasion”.113

Anne Summers also agrees with the aspect of timing in the founding of these leagues.

She argued that the Navy League

was formed in a mood of black despair precisely because Britain no longer ruled the waves. The League was not so much a movement of aggressive expansion as a last attempt to keep alive the strategic ‘splendid isolation’ which the turn of the century would break down. Into Ententes with Russia and France.114

The leagues were interested in maintaining the old British characteristics that had distinguished

the British from the rest of Europe for centuries. Hence the Royal Navy was of the utmost

importance, as this was the major factor that truly distinguished Britain from other European

nations like France and Germany. As the British had managed to maintain naval supremacy for

centuries prior to the naval threat.

The Navy League was thus formed because the Royal Navy was experiencing a threat

from Germany. This was a threat that challenged the British naval position and the British naval

supremacy. The threat from Germany was imperative for the British national identity since such

a defining factor was being threatened. Britain was so dependent on, and characterised, by their

position in the world to be able to define their national identity without including the Royal

Navy. Great Britain had an identity that was defined and dependent on being a stronger naval

power than the rest of the world, and they needed to maintain this position to continue staying

‘British’.

The Naval Theatre

The naval theatre, as discussed by Rüger, was all about creating spectacle. As well as creating,

and maintaining public interest in the Royal Navy. The naval theatre was thus perfect for naval

propaganda. The Admiralty wanted to keep the public interest in the Royal Navy high, they

considered “how the press and public opinion were best influenced”,115 trying to influence and

manipulate it in the right direction.

As early as 1887, during the preparations for the Queen’s jubilee review, the strong interest shown by the press in naval pageants led the Admiralty to make these rituals more accessible to the media.116

113Ibid. 87. 114 Summers, 73-74. [My emphasis] 115 Rüger, 75. 116 Ibid., 74.

41

The Admiralty came to the conclusion that it was best not to force the media to cover naval

events, it would be easier to continue to enjoy the publicity if the press were not constrained.117

The Admiralty was not the only active party in using the naval theatre to influence public

interest to their advantage, the Navy League “boosted the publicity for the naval theatre by

organizing trips to fleet reviews and ship launches”.118 The Admiralty and the Navy League

were both promoters and participants in the celebration of the navy. The main objects of the

Navy League were to raise support for the navy and make the British public aware of the naval

threat from abroad, and make sure that British politicians increased the naval budget and

prepared for war.

Its [the Navy League’s] stated objects were to bring home to the British public the navy’s unreadiness for war, and the crucial importance of maintaining global naval supremacy for the Empire at a time of increasing international competition for markets and colonies119.

Pugh argued that one cannot talk about the navy without mentioning the Empire, as these two

were inextricably linked. The Royal Navy was seen as the defender of the British Isles and the

Empire.

The Navy League emphasised the importance of the Royal Navy in defending Britain,

this was a role that could not be filled by the British Army. This links back to the ‘blue water

strategy’ which saw the Royal Navy as the first, and only line of defence, whilst a strong

standing army was feared by the British.120 The Royal Navy also had a symbolic value, relating

to the historical importance and influence of the Battle of Trafalgar. The Navy League wanted

a heavy naval budget and a brisk programme of battleship construction.121 They believed that

the British had no other option for defending themselves against Germany. This was also linked

to the belief in monarchy, Empire, and navy as the core characteristics of the British people,

these characterised the British people and were part of what distinguished Great Britain from

the rest of Europe. The isolationist policy Britain had followed in the past, as well as their role

in the balance of power in Europe during the preceding century, was something that many

people wanted to maintain. According to the Navy League, Great Britain needed the Royal

Navy to maintain this position which was why the Navy League made it their objective to

increase, or at least maintain, the size and power of the British Navy in relation to other navies.

117 Ibid. 118 Ibid., 96-97. 119 Summers, 68. 120 Brewer. 121 Summers.

42

Leagues such as the Primrose League and Navy League embraced ideologies such as

nationalism, monarchism, Christian idealism, and militarism, which could be seen as British

characteristics. The Empire, monarchy and navy were institutions which the British people

could be proud of and emphasised the contemporary position of Great Britain as a world power.

The Navy was linked to patriotism and hero-worship.122

The naval theatre was the perfect stage for spreading naval propaganda, this was used

both by the Admiralty and the Navy League. The naval theatre was utilized to draw more

attention to the Royal Navy through the increase in public interest and its position in the world

at the time. The threat from abroad meant that the Navy League and the Admiralty wanted to

spread the importance of the Royal Navy for defending the British position in the world. The

Navy League also attempted to use the Royal Navy to unite the different groups within Great

Britain to create a more ‘cohesive society’.123

‘Cohesive society’

The Navy League doubted whether Great Britain was a ‘cohesive’ and stable society with a

clear definition of who they were, as argued by Summers.124 This is connected to the discussion

in chapter 4.1 of different identities within Great Britain. A ‘cohesive society’ is a society that

is well-integrated and united. The Navy League therefore questioned whether the different

identities in the British Isles were united or divided. Summers argued that,

[t]he early propaganda of the Navy League betrayed fundamental doubts as to the cohesiveness and stability of British society in the era of legalised trade unionism and franchise reform. The working classes were loyal neither to the Empire nor the existing social order, if ‘social revolution’ was the inevitable ‘Meaning of Defeat’; it might even be the case that the working classes would contribute as heavily to that defeat as Britain’s external enemies.125

The leagues might perhaps attempt to use the uniting aspect of the Royal Navy to create a more

cohesive and united society. The British public was showing great interest in the navy and naval

affairs, this interest substantiates the hypothesis that the existence of a powerful navy played a

role in defining the British people. This was something the Navy League and the Admiralty

wanted to use to create a more stable foundation upon which to build a nation and a common

identity.

122 Pugh. 123 Summers. 124 Ibid. 125 Ibid., 75.

43

The Navy League was the league most interested in the Royal Navy and the importance

of the navy for unifying the British people. It is therefore yet again, important to understand

that the Royal Navy and its historical achievements lead to an understanding that Great Britain

had no choice but to maintain naval supremacy. The Navy League split into fractions in 1908

when the Imperial Maritime League was formed.126 “It was the older League [the Navy League]

which capitalised most successfully on the naval scare of 1909 and the vociferous national

agitation for a large fleet of Dreadnoughts”.127 That an organization, such as the Navy League,

could profit from an event like the naval crisis of 1909, clearly shows how important the Royal

Navy had become to the rest of the British public. The Navy League might therefore notice an

increase in members or an increased interest in their main cause. As stated previously, Anne

Summers studied the membership numbers, and argued that “membership soared in the last few

years before the war”.128

All things considered, the naval theatre and public celebrations of the navy attracted a

large audience which underlines how important the Royal Navy was for the British public. The

public interest was used by the Navy League and the Admiralty, for propagandist effect. The

Royal Navy was included in many celebrations in order to continue to profit from public

support, and maintain the public interest in the navy. The high level of public interest in the

Royal Navy shows that the British public cared about, were interested in, and supported the

navy. It also demonstrates that the Royal Navy played an important role in creating and

maintaining a British national identity.

It has been argued that the leagues were created in response to the naval threat from

abroad. Simultaneously, the naval theatre increased in popularity and scope. This emphasises

the public interest and support in the Royal Navy at an instant when the naval supremacy was

being threatened. As has been noted, the Navy League might have presented the Royal Navy

as a uniting factor to unite the British identities in order to create a more ‘cohesive society’.

126 Ibid. 127 Ibid., 80. 128 Ibid.

44

6 Conclusion

Did the Royal Navy contribute to creating and maintaining a common British national identity

between 1884 and 1914? This thesis has concluded that there was indeed a British national

identity where the Royal Navy was an important defining factor during the period from 1884

to 1914. Whether this was the case before 1884 or after 1914 has not been studied. Similarly, it

has not been argued that the Royal Navy played an important part in defining British national

identity at one specific time in the period between 1884 and 1914, but that the Royal Navy was

especially important for British national identity in the period in question. At some time

between the naval scare of 1884 and the outbreak of the Great War in 1914, a British national

identity was defined by the Royal Navy. This is evident through the involvement of the British

public in matters relating to the Royal Navy and naval supremacy.

The Royal Navy might not have played an important part in defining British national

identity as early as 1884, but this national identity emerged or was constructed through a period

of naval threat from abroad. Events such as the Anglo-German naval arms race and the

Dreadnought Crisis of 1909 contributed to the strengthening and/or forging of a common

British national identity, due to factors such as media coverage and public interest in these naval

affairs. The Royal Navy had been important to the British public for centuries, and as such, the

British public where inclined to be defined by this truly ‘British’ institution during a time where

the naval supremacy was being threatened.

It has been argued that there was a tension between a fear of losing naval supremacy

and pride in the Royal Navy. This can be seen in the insecurity that followed the First German

Naval Law in 1898. The British were used to being the superior naval power. When this position

was threatened it also threatened the British identity. The British people was proud of the Royal

Navy, both before and during the period in question, due to its historical prowess and the

security that followed its unchallenged strength. As a result, it was commonplace to be involved

in naval affairs, like the Dreadnought Crisis, and attending naval celebrations, such as the

Trafalgar Day celebrations and fleet reviews.

The ‘island race’ was a concept that defined and united the British public. The British

people were used to isolating themselves from European affairs and only intervene when

necessary. The Royal Navy was important for defending this position, if other nations could

compete with the Royal Navy’s strength this would threaten a British characteristic that united

45

its diverse population. Linda Colley argued that “[i]dentities are not like hats. Human beings

can and do put on several at a time”.129 This means that the British people could continue to

identify with older national and regional identities, as well as identifying with the British

national identity where the Royal Navy was one of the main elements that defined the British

people.

Correspondingly, this could mean that a common British national identity could be

defined by other factors along with the Royal Navy. Another interesting element to consider

during this period might be the British Empire. This thesis has not focused especially on the

British Empire but it can be argued that the Empire and navy form two sides of the same coin.

As Pugh argued, the two were inextricably linked, as defending the British Empire was one of

the Royal Navy’s main tasks. Therefore, the Royal Navy and the British Empire are linked and

symbolize a few of the same British characteristics. It has been argued that the British national

identity, where the on the Royal Navy played an important role, could apply to all Britons,

including the people of the British Empire and its Dominions to some extent. The British

Empire might also be seen as a unifying factor for the British people, it would therefore be

interesting to see whether this was something that defined the British national identity.

129 Colley, 6.

47

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Belfast Evening Telegraph, March 31, 1909. Daily Record and Mail, January 14, 1914. The Aberdeen Journal, Februar 12, 1912. The Courier, February 1, 1912. The Daily Mail, March 17, 1909. The Devon and Exeter Gazette, August 15 1912. The Greenock Telegraph and Clyde Shipping Gazette, March 29, 1909. The Huddersfield Daily Chronicle, December 12, 1895. The Manchester Courier, June 10, 1908. The Morning Post, January 20, 1900. The Scotsman, January 14, 1910. The Western Morning News, April 5, 1909.

Books

Black, Jeremy. A History of the British Isles. Palgrave Essential Histories. 3rd ed. ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, 2012.

Brewer, John. The Sinews of Power: War, Money and the English State, 1688-1783. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990.

Bryant, Christopher G. A. . The Nations of Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Coetzee, Frans. For Party or Country: Nationalism and the Dilemmas of Popular

Conservatism in Edwardian England. New York: Oxford Univeristy Press, 1990. Colley, Linda. Britons: Forging the Nation, 1707-1837. New Haven and London: Yale

University Press, 2014. Czisnik, Marianne. "Commemorating Trafalgar: Public Celebration and National Identity." In

Trafalgar in History - a Battle and Its Afterlife, edited by David Cannadine, 139-54. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.

Kennedy, Paul. The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery. Penguin Books, 2004. Mitcham, John C. "Chapter 13: Navalism and Greater Britain, 1897-1914." In Maritime

History and Identity - the Sea and Culture in the Modern World, edited by Duncan Redford, 271-93: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd, 2014.

Pugh, Martin. The Tories and the People : 1880-1935. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1985. Redford, Duncan. "Chapter 3: The Royal Navy, Sea Blindness and British National Identity."

In Maritime History and Identity - the Sea and Culture in the Modern World, edited by Duncan Redford, 61-78: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd, 2014.

———. "Introduction." In Maritime History and Identity - the Sea and Culture in the Modern World, edited by Duncan Redford, 1-10: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd, 2014.

Rüger, Jan. The Great Naval Game - Britain and Germany in the Age of Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Summers, Anne. "4. The Character of Edwardian Nationalism: Three Popular Leagues." In Nationalist and Racialist Movements in Britain and Germany before 1914, edited by Paul; Nicholls Kennedy, Anthony, 68-87. Hong Kong: The Macmillan Press Ltd. , 1981.

48

Uncategorized References

"Britishness," in Oxford Dictionaries. Bönker, Dirk. "Naval Race between Germany and Great Britain, 1898-1912." 1914-1918-

online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War (2015). http://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/naval_race_between_germany_and_great_britain_1898-1912.

Harding, Richard. "Sea-Mindedness and British Defence Policy." British Politics Review: Journal of the British Politics Society, Norway 8, no. 1 (Winter 2013): 3-5.

“Identity” in Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon. Dictionary.com. Lewis-Stempel, John. "Great War Centenary: Britannia Rules the Waves... But for How

Long?" Express (2014). http://www.express.co.uk/news/world-war-1/462613/Great-War-Centenary-Britannia-rules-the-waves-but-for-how-long.

“National identity” in Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon. Dictionary.com. National Museum of the Royal New Zealand Navy. "(1800-1913) the 1909 Naval Crisis and

the Gift of Hms New Zealand." http://navymuseum.co.nz/1800-1913-the-1909-naval-crisis-and-the-gift-of-hms-new-zealand/.

"Nationalism 1," in Merriam-Webster.com. "Pride 4," in Oxford Students Dictionary - for learners using English to study other subjects.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Redford, Duncan. "Does the Royal Navy Matter? Aspects of National Identity and the Navy’s

Vulnerability to Future Budget Cuts." RUSI (2009). https://rusi.org/commentary/does-royal-navy-matter-aspects-national-identity-and-navy%E2%80%99s-vulnerability-future-budget.

Trueman, C.N. "Home Rule and Ireland." History Learning Site (2015). http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ireland-1845-to-1922/home-rule-and-ireland/.

Wold, Atle. "When Britain Ruled the Waves - or a Brief History of the Battleship." British Politics Review: Journal of the British Politics Society, Norway 8, no. 1 (Winter 2013): 14-15.

Kristensen Master 2 - UiO

Documents

Transcript of Kristensen Master 2 - UiO