Talk:Post-captain

Universality

It says:

(from 1794; before that it was possible to become post as a Lieutenant and commander was an informal rank)

If laws changed in 1794, they did not change throughout the whole universe, but rather in one country. Which one? Michael Hardy 22:39, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

This is strictly Royal Navy. I was considering merging this material into Captain actually, since it's a single-country variant on the basic concept. Stan 22:59, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I removed the sentence in question. Sorry, I checked the history, to see who added it. And I saw that it was a contributor identified only by an IP address. Normally I would write the author of something I regarded as incorrect rather than merely change it. It is possible that what that original contributor meant was that it was possible for a lieutenant to be promoted directly to Post-Captain, without ever having served as a Commander. But if this was what they meant, they were incorrect. Lieutenants were promoted directly to Post-Captain in exceptional circumstances both before and after 1794. I am skeptical that commander was an informal rank in 1794.

There are other aspects of this article that I think are questionable. Using nautical fiction as an authoritative source of information is a mistake.

This article, and many other wikipedia articles that deal with the Royal Navy, make the mistake of refering to all Post-ships, that were not Ships-of-the-line as frigates. This is a mistake. Frigates were ships which nominally, had a single gun deck, but had a raised forecastle and quarterdeck. Some junior Post-Captains commanded flush-decked, ship-rigged sloops. -- Geo Swan 02:13, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Becoming a post-captain might have had something to do with being listed as such in the Naval Gazette

Or at least that was implied in the Horatio Hornblower novels. BTW: Hornblower's first command as a post-captain was a sloop. Will (Talk - contribs) 04:18, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

• Becoming a post captain was down to a mixture of notority, good luck, success and nepotism, not necessarily in that order. Being listed in the Naval Gazette was just one of the ways to gain the first of these requirements, but was far from the only method of reaching the rank of Post Captain. Once an officer was "posted" his promotion would be mentioned in the Naval Gazette, but appearing in that journal was far from an essential part of becoming a captain. As said above, basing real facts on (admittedly very well researched) historical fiction will inevitably result in mistakes or misunderstandings.--Jackyd101 02:07, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I was talking about where the term "Post-Captain" came from. You get "posted" when you get promoted. Will (Talk - contribs) 12:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Yellow Admiral?

what does it mean by "(even if only a yellow admiral)"? Yeah and weres the Insignia ? --Climax-Void ^{Chat or My Contributions}

Originally the Royal Navy had three squadrons, Red, White and Blue. In theory an Admiral would start as a "Rear Admiral of the Red Squadron", then of the White, then of the Blue, before being appointed a Vice Admiral, of the White, the Red, then Blue, and Admiral of the same, before being "Admiral of the Fleet".

An officer whose seniority entitled them to promotion to Admiral, who was never appointed to command an actual squadron, was informally called a "Yellow Admiral". Geo Swan (talk) 19:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Explanation

I made this change, because I believe the original text was based on a misunderstanding. In general the more senior officers on a station would command the larger vessels, but an admiral on a remote station was fully entitled to appoint even the most junior captain to command a Ship of the Line, if he was the most senior captain available to him. Geo Swan (talk) 19:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Popular Kulture is all very well BUT...

...shouldn't the repeated references throughout this article to our well-beloved but fictitious Hornblower and Aubrey be limited, and relegated to a separate paragraph? Both of them notionally served in all other commissioned ranks, too Jezza (talk) 18:31, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Post-Captain → Post captain –The guideline at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Military_terms & Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) are clear that this does not require a capital for "captain". The hyphen is unnecessary in by Wikipedia standards - see WP:HYPHEN. I can't see that this has been moved before, and I don't believe it to be controversial. Shem (talk) 21:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

• Support since the O'Brian novel is called "Post Captain", and is named after the naval rank, it would seem to be the correct spelling. 65.94.44.141 (talk) 05:06, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose. First, the hyphen was usual at this time, whatever a modern author may have called his novel. Second, convention on Wikipedia is to fully capitalise articles on military ranks. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Necrothesp - could you please tell me where this convention is laid down? The conventions I've listed above show exactly the opposite. Shem (talk) 16:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Just look at pretty much every article about a rank on this encyclopaedia. Category:Military ranks. Propose them all for change if you must (and I suspect you'll be opposed, as I'm pretty sure it's been attempted several times before), but don't do it piecemeal. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't looked in any meaningful way at the titles of the other articles, but I see what you mean. Thanks. Shem (talk) 23:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

US Post Captain?

The article Board of Navy Commissioners seems to inply the USN had post captains too. True? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 12:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

What is a post-captain?

I know nothing about the subject, and that may be what allows me to notice that this article never actually says what a post-captain is. In fact, the word "distinguish" in "The term served to distinguish those who were captains by rank from" led me to believe the term identifies captains who are not described by either of the following two bullet points –- for example, not in command of a vessel -- but the rest of the article makes me think it's the opposite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dprovan (talk • contribs) 18:38, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

• Dprovan, anyone who commands a ship is called "captain". In the Royal Navy smaller vessels, with smaller crews, were commanded by more junior officers. Like the masters of merchant vessels, they would be addressed as "captain", but they did not hold the rank of Captain.
• Normally, a Post Captain, a commanding officer who holds the rank of Captain, commands a vessel of a certain size.
• When a Commodore, or Admiral, on a remote station, has to replace an officer of the rank of Captain, they don't just tell a junior officer to take over. They had the authority to give the junior officer an acting appointment, as Captain. Geo Swan (talk) 00:21, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

That doesn't really address my point: the article never says what a post-captain is, so even with your explanation, I'm not sure. How about a lead more like, "Post-captain is an obsolete term for someone with the rank of captain in the Royal Navy, used to distinguish them from someone called 'captain' for reasons other than having that rank."? That's a definition (if I understand it). The two bullet points then become examples of such non-ranked captains instead of part of the definition. The list intro could say, "There are two reasons officers are called captain when they don't have the rank of captain:", thus avoiding the confusing use of "distinguishing" in that sentence.

I'm also getting two different impressions: the lead indicates that all officers with the rank of captain could be referred to as post-captains, but the 3rd paragraph's description of "post" coming from being posted to a ship makes me wonder if only captains by rank who are currently in command of a vessel would be called post-captains. But it doesn't say what captains by rank on the beach would be called. Dprovan (talk) 21:54, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Direct appointments to Captain...

I am trying to figure out the rank held by Christopher Middleton (navigator). I can see contributors looking at the sources, and assuming he was directly commissioned as a Captain. I don't thinks that is clear.

On his first expedition James Cook, Captain Cook, was merely a Lieutenant. He had been a famous navigator, but only held the rank of sailing master, a warrant rank, before being commissioned for his Pacific expedition.

According to our favourite authors, in the 18th and 19th century, there was a general rule that anyone who received a commission had to serve for six years in the RN first. According to our favourite authors, Captains would carry the sons of friends on their rolls, to falsely establish they were serving those six years, so they could receive their first commission early.

Well, Christopher Middleton (navigator), who had served in the (civilian) fleet of the Hudson's Bay Company for 20 years, was directly commissioned. I find the RS unclear as to the rank he held.

RS say his half pay was 4 shillings a day == 74 pounds per year. That may clarify his rank. Geo Swan (talk) 00:40, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Given his first RN command was a bomb ketch I would suspect he was commissioned as a lieutenant, which I believe was the usual rank in command of such vessels. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:26, 10 February 2020 (UTC)