Gigantic

[PITAI]

Documentation supporting GIGANTIC name

GIGANTIC: WHAT'S IN A NAME by Jonathan Smith (TRMA)

I did use the search function and was unable to find this document being referenced on this site.

Just came across this, or rather someone pointed me towards it. Seems authentic. What are your thoughts on it?

EDIT: I must confess the watermark is annoying as all hell.

 

[Mark Baber]

I did use the search function and was unable to find this document being referenced on this site.

See above.

 

[:Ted-jon: Charlton. NZ]

In regard to this comment of yours Dave, June 19 2007 (apologies for been nearly 12 years late in this amazing discussion), I have read all of this thread from the start, and just like to plonk in a thought.... If the "Gigantic" so called poster is only a packing slip what company used it? If such a common item wouldn't there be numerous copies of it? Why hasn't someone so far proved it? For example, if a pre WW1 "Acme & Son" made or sold sheets and had standard, queen, king, and Gigantic (now called Super King) sizes, it would be well documented.Or if "Gigantic" was a companies brand name. Does the copy with 64 x 80 refer to dimensions? If so, would be for a cot, been approx 1600 x 800mm
Those dimensions would make more sense as a large poster.

I have loved all the debate, and still sitting on the fence with my thoughts on Gigantic / Britannic naming issue

 

[:Ted-jon: Charlton. NZ]

The various references to Gigantic and Britannic are very confusing. I've turned up a reference to Britannic from as early as May 1911, yet later references either call the third ship Gigantic or say she's un-named.

Hi Dave, re your comment above (Jun 19, 2007), would there be a possibility two different vessels were being referred to? What if the earlier references to "Britannic" were in regard to a 4th possible ship? And during that time any reference to "Gigantic" was actually to the 3rd ship, later renamed to Britannic. Due to huge repair bills, sinking of Titanic, public perception, the 4th ship idea was scrapped and the name used for the 3rd (and with WW1 also had the patriotic ring to it)

Has there been serious research through all the WS material to see if producing 4 ships was on their agenda?

 

[Christian Pierce]

Just idle speculation, but maybe there's more counterfeit material out there than genuine. It could be someone producing posters and such much later on saying one name or another because they couldn't find anything or maybe just wanted to fulfill a personal fantasy. Not necessarily malicious, but more along the lines of the artist's impression of Britannic in her WSL livery.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/RMS_Britannic_(crop).jpg

As for what I think, I think Gigantic was going to be the 3rd ship's name but was changed because Aquitania and Imperator would beat it to the punch and then the Titanic disaster happened, so they picked a stately, respected name that had previously been used.