If the new ship, "Queen Elizabeth," as christened by the incumbent monarch, then it indeed is "The Queen Elizabeth:" named for The Queen. No problem. It stands alone in that right.

The previous Queen Elizabeth was named for the previous Queen by that name, was she not?

But if it is the third Cunarder in a series, and is named for the ship which preceeded it, should it not be "(the) Queen Elizabeth 3?"

How speaketh Cunard on this?

And, by the way, "QE2" is now shorthand for a complex bit of current unpopular financial jiggery pokerey standing for "Quantitative Easement." I do not have the slightest knowledge what it means, but headlines denouncing "QE2"are all about these days give one a bit of a start!

[ 11-20-2010: Message edited by: Cambodge ]

When QE2 was under construction, it was originally planned to have her in service along with QE.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lasuvidaboy:
As for QE2 being simply named QE, would'nt that have confused passengers in the late 1960s as there was already a QE in service?

When QE2 was under construction, it was originally planned to have her in service along with QE.

In 1965-'66 when the new Cunarder was under construction, Cunard planned to have the older ship in service until as late as 1975! Selling space on the aging QE may have been a challenge with the new QE2 in service.

---

Nope, by mid-1967 the decision had already been made that by the time the new liner entered service in late 1968 (as originally planned) she was to replace both of the Queens. Of course the MARY went in late 1967 and the ELIZABETH in late 1968.

That is when Cunard decided to name the new ship after the older ELIZABETH.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fairsky:
So why not just Queen Mary instead of Queen Mary 2?

---

Because the original QUEEN MARY is still extant under that name, although not under the British flag. Cunard wanted to pay homage but also clarify a difference with the name. I think also having QE2 still in service may have been influential.

Although Cunard has said that the new QE has a generic name, Peter Shanks more or less contradicted this at the naming ceremony by dedicating the ship in no uncertain terms to HM. So again the generic name seems to have been turned over in favour of naming her in honour of Elizabeth II - this time by an over enthusiatic President and MD as opposed to the monarch!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by KenC:
It was only in more recent years that Cunard created this myth about her being the second ship named QE

---

This is incorrect. It is not a myth created in recent years. That is nothing more than revisionist history and faulty memory.

The explanation about QE2 being the second ship to bear the name Queen Elizabeth (hence the use of the arabic numeral 2 to indicate just that) was given by a Cunard spokesman the day after the launch in September 1967. Try searching the archives of such newspapers as The Times, The Guardian and the New York Times for issues published in September 1967. This is also documented not only in Potter and Frost's 1969 book about QE2, but in other books published in that era.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian_O:

This is incorrect. It is not a myth created in recent years. That is nothing more than revisionist history and faulty memory.

This is also documented not only in Potter and Frost's 1969 book about QE2, but in other books published in that era.

Brian

---

Yes, Potter & Frost have an extensive discussion about the name in their book, published right after the ship entered service. Cunard Chairman Sir Basil Smallpeice also writes about this in his autobiography "Of Comets & Queens" (1980), and he is the man who decided on the original name and why.

Finally Ronald Warwick writes about the original naming intention in his book "QE2", 1985.

As things turned out, everyone involved was pleased that the revised name could also be a reflection of the royal monarch, but this event was definitely not something recently dredged up, and is only news to those who are not familiar with QE2's history.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian_O:

This is incorrect. It is not a myth created in recent years. That is nothing more than revisionist history and faulty memory.

The explanation about QE2 being the second ship to bear the name Queen Elizabeth (hence the use of the arabic numeral 2 to indicate just that) was given by a Cunard spokesman the day after the launch in September 1967. Try searching the archives of such newspapers as The Times, The Guardian and the New York Times for issues published in September 1967. This is also documented not only in Potter and Frost's 1969 book about QE2, but in other books published in that era.

Brian

---

Sorry - not so, my memory is perfectly fine!! It was generally accepted in 1967 that the Queen had named the ship after herself. Maybe it was Cunard's intention to name the ship 'Queen Elizabeth' - but remember this was a secret and, as suffixing of ships was unheard of at the time, what else would people assume when the Queen add 'the Second' except that she intended to name the ship after herself?

I clearly remember newscasts with Sir Basil Smallpiece saying that they were honoured that the Queen had named the ship after herself and that they would use the arabic '2' to differentiate the ship from the monarch. Cunard in later years changed this story to claim the '2' was to differentiate the second QE from the first, but if they never intended to call her QE'2' how can this be true? I have a souvenir book printed by Southampton City Council in May 1968 which states 'Her Majesty the Queen performed the launching ceremony giving the liner her own name'. I was an avid ship fanantic back then too so you can be sure that I read everything available about the launch of QE2 at the time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Linerrich:
.....As things turned out, everyone involved was pleased that the revised name could also be a reflection of the royal monarch, but this event was definitely not something recently dredged up, and is only news to those who are not familiar with QE2's history.

Rich

---

Exactly, I am not disputing the intended name of QE2 but I am saying that she was named 'Queen Elizabeth the Second' by Queen Elizabeth the Second and the general public accepted the link as did a probably reluctant Cunard. It was only later abbreviated to QE2 and from that came the awful misnoma Queen Elizabeth Two.

"Launch
As was Cunard practice at the time, the name of the liner was not to be publicly revealed until the launch. Dignitaries were invited to the "Launch of Cunard Liner No. 736", as no name had yet been painted on the bow.

The Queen launched the ship with the words "I name this ship Queen Elizabeth the Second," the normal short form of address of the monarch, Elizabeth II herself. The following day, the New York Times and British Times printed the name as "Queen Elizabeth II", the short form of written style of the monarch. However, when the liner left the shipyard in 1968 she bore the name Queen Elizabeth 2 on her bow, and has continued to do so ever since.

1969 authorised biography
In an authorised biography of the QE2 published in 1969, various explanations of events occur.

These state that, as at the launch ceremony, an envelope and card were also held in New York in case of transmission failure, and when opened the card was found to read the name Queen Elizabeth, and that the decision to add "The Second" to the name was an alteration by the Queen. The book quotes the Cunard chairman Sir Basil Smallpeice as saying "The Queen Mary [named] after her Grandmother, the Queen Elizabeth after her mother, and now this magnificent ship after herself."

Following the unexpected addition of the Second by the Queen, the book attributes the use of lower case lettering and an numeric 2 – rather than a Roman II – to the decision by Cunard to use a more modern typeface to suit the style of the 1960s. The book also surmises that the naming of the liner after the reigning monarch, in the form Queen Elizabeth II, was potentially offensive to some Scots, as the title of Queen Elizabeth II (of the United Kingdom) relates to the lineage of the throne of England (the Tudor monarch Elizabeth I having reigned only in England).

Ron Warwick, former Captain
A later account by Ronald Warwick, who was Master of both the QE2 and later the QM2, and who also is the son of William Warwick, the ship's first master, also states that the Queen initiated the surprise move of naming the liner after herself rather than simply Queen Elizabeth as originally planned (the name being made vacant by the retirement of the current liner before the new one was commissioned). This name had been given to the Queen in a sealed envelope which she didn't open. The book, referencing his autobiography, states that the Cunard chairman Sir Basil Smallpeice was delighted with this development, it being in keeping with the previous Queen liners, and the 2 was added by Cunard for differentiation of the ship while still denoting it was named after the Queen.

Cunard website
From at least 2002 the official Cunard website stated that "The new ship is not named after the Queen but is simply the second ship to bear the name – hence the use of the Arabic 2 in her name, rather than the Roman II used by the Queen", however, in a change in 2007 this information had been removed.

Other accounts
Other later accounts repeat the position that Cunard originally intended to name the ship the Queen Elizabeth and the addition of a 2 by the Queen was a surprise to Cunard, in 1990 and 2008, although two books by William H. Miller state that Queen Elizabeth 2 was the name agreed on before the launch between Cunard officials and the Queen.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cambodge:
OK. Everyone is marching back and forth over history. That is fine. But is the vessel in question named for the previous ship, or the current monarch? I still do not have a straigh answer! Or do I? Is this Cunard's position?

---

Well according to Cunard, the vessel is named after the ship, not the lady. Following British custom, only Naval vessels are named after Royalty. But, as in the case of QE2, if people want to believe the ship is named for HRH, then Cunard is happy to let them think so.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Linerrich:

Well according to Cunard, the vessel is named after the ship, not the lady. Following British custom, only Naval vessels are named after Royalty. But, as in the case of QE2, if people want to believe the ship is named for HRH, then Cunard is happy to let them think so.

Rich

---

Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth .... could have sworn they were royal names and not in the navy??? Oh well must be another British tradition gone to the dogs!!!

Why don't you believe Cunard Chairman Sir Basil Smallpiece - who was there at the time and responsible for the original name - when he wrote ...

"The Queen Mary [named] after her Grandmother, the Queen Elizabeth after her mother, and now this magnificent ship after herself."

- or perhaps you have something against the ship being named after HER MAJESTY???

(taken on board the then new Queen Vic.)

[ 11-21-2010: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dougnewman:
I haven't a clue who or what the current one is named after -- .

---

I gathered Cunard were originally using the name of the ship .... but, at the naming ceremony Peter Shanks definitely said ' ... Many claim the souls of ships as their own. But the essence of this ship belongs to one person. This, your Majesty as we approach your Diamond Jubilee year celebrations is without doubt, your ship ... ' To me this says that Cunard, having now dedicated the ship to the Queen and with the original QE2 bust plus a newly commissioned portrait onboard, want an assumption that the ship is named after HM.

quote:

---

Originally posted by dougnewman:
I think Cunard would probably rather keep it ambiguous -- but the official line from Buckingham Palace is that the Queen named QE2 after herself. The letter saying so is probably still in the Captain's Day Room in Dubai.

---

That's interesting. Which letter is that? I have not heard of it before - can you cast any light on the contents?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
Well figure this one out:

(taken on board the then new Queen Vic.)

[ 11-21-2010: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

---

I saw that too ... perhaps it was an over zealous Carnival purchase department buying a job lot for Cunard .... QE2 then QM2 so naturally assumed it must be QV2??? When I saw them, the '2' was a lot blacker, it must have washed out some!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by KenC:
When I saw them, the '2' was a lot blacker, it must have washed out some!!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by KenC:
That's interesting. Which letter is that? I have not heard of it before - can you cast any light on the contents?

---

This is the text of the letter:

BUCKINGHAM PALACE
27th July, 1988.

Dear (illegible),

Thank you for your letter of 17th July. The Queen Elizabeth II was indeed named after Queen Elizabeth II, and the ship's proper name is Queen Elizabeth II.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Linerrich:

Nope, by mid-1967 the decision had already been made that by the time the new liner entered service in late 1968 (as originally planned) she was to replace both of the Queens.

That is when Cunard decided to name the new ship after the older ELIZABETH.

Rich

---

I wonder what the original name for QE2 was suppose to be? Construction started in 1965 and there certainly had to be talk about a name-I recall 'Winston Churchill' was one name. Since the newly re-fitted QE was intended to be in service with the 'New Cunarder' at that time, maybe the new ship would have ended up being named Queen Mary 2?

I still don't know why there is a bust of HM QEII and not the Queen Mother on the QE2. The Queen Mother Christened the QE and it was named after her and the 'New Cunarder' was apparently a successor to that ship. QM2 of course has a bust of HM QM which makes perfect sense. To me at least, that means QE2 was actually named after HM QEII.

[ 11-21-2010: Message edited by: lasuvidaboy ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dougnewman:
It was/is hanging on the wall of the Captain's Day Room along with other ephemera.

This is the text of the letter:

BUCKINGHAM PALACE
27th July, 1988.

Dear (illegible),

Thank you for your letter of 17th July. The Queen Elizabeth II was indeed named after Queen Elizabeth II, and the ship's proper name is Queen Elizabeth II.

Yours sincerely,
Robert Fellowes

---

Well, if this is authentic then it really settles the matter. I'm surprised that it has not been mentioned or published anywhere before and that Cunard continued to maintain the story about QE2 being named after the ship not the monarch long after this date???