It's not at all clear that this is correct, and it's pretty clear that Titanic's sinking being the reason for the change of name (if there was one) is not correct. Look at https://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/forums/construction-history/3353-gigantic.html.I should add that her name was originally meant to be "Gigantic" but this was changed in the wake of the Titanic disaster and her wartime activities.
Hi Adam,Hi Ioannis,
Then do we think the ship would have been called Britannic all along then, even if - hypothetically - World War I had never broken out and she would have carried on as a regular passenger vessel?
In April 1912 Titanic was the biggest ship of the UK (let us put the difference with Irland etc. aside.) Let us say hull No. 433 would have been named Gigantic, she would have been the biggest one and the name fit well. But looking to other country, May 1912, launch of the Imperator, much bigger then Titanic and became the worlds biggest ship. So Gigantic would not fit very well...I don't think you can read much into how the Germans named their ships. Different country, different shipping company, different methods and all chasing the Blue Riband.
No, Adam, Gigantic was in fact being used as a name, not an adjective, in press accounts of the day. Just as a sampling, look at the newspaper articles in the following threads:surely the press would have used the word "gigantic" as a describing word rather than claiming that it was the ships actual name?
Sorry Adam, but I disagree! Other ships were also mentioned to be called "Gigantic" like the 2nd Oceanic from 1899. No one called her so and also she did not became known or got that nickname.Hi Ioannis and Mark,
Thanks for that. I'm surprised, but we should bear in mind the power of the press - that alone may have been enough for the Britannic to have been called Gigantic, or at least for it to become some sort of nickname, like the Olympic became known as "Old Reliable".