Beeing Promoted in the Forums

[Trejiuvanat]

We could do some money if we sold him to Jawas.

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

Good to see you back Elvis!

 

Well, that said, I want to move a little off topic... or is it back on topic? I've noticed that we haven't really had hot topics of late, so I'm hoping to stir the ashes a little .

 

Back during the heated debate it was decided that the Imperial rank system was based upon that of the American Navy, save for ranks such as High Admiral, Grand Admiral, Moff and Grand Moff. I would now like to propose that this is not the case, but that it is rather based upon the British Navy.

 

In recent months I have taken a great interest in the British navy of the 19th century, reading all literature I can get my hands on with a voratious appetite, and I have noticed some striking similarities between the 19th Century/Modern British Navy and the Imperial Navy

 

First, the existence of both Commodore and Rear-Admiral. In the American Navy the rank of Commodore has been replaced with that of Rear-Admiral so that, in a very confusing manner, there is an upper and a lower Rear-Admiral. In the British Navy Commodore is used in two ways. One, as a rank, the lowest Flag position available to an officer. The second is not so much a rank as a position. A Captain can be temorarily appointed a Commodore to take command of a task-force that is to perform a mission that an Admiral's fleet would not be needed for. So, a Captain commands a small group of Captains during an operation.

 

The existance of Commodore leades me to believe that the rank of Line Captain is redundant and, indeed, only presented to justify the rank insignia of a single character, Captain Khurgee.

 

In addition to Commodore, there are also three ranks, listed as Midshipman/Ensign, Acting Sub-Lieutenant, Sub-Lieutenant, and Lieutenant. These too reflect the British rather than the American Navy. In the American Navy there is only Ensign, Junior Grade Lieutenant and Lieutenant. In the modern British Navy the rank structure is pretty much the same. Going back to the early 19th century or earlier, however, one finds that it is not at all uncommon for there to be a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Lieutenant serving aboard a ship, and that the rank of Officer/Cadet would be Ensign/Midshipman, officers that do not yet have their commission.

 

I would also like to pose that the rank of High Admiral is pointless, even on a scale as large as the Star Wars universe is concerned. A Fleet Admiral would be the highest needed rank since there are Moffs and Grand Moffs to cover planetary and sector control.

 

The ranks of Moff and Grand Moff also lend themselves to the British Navy. It was not uncommon for a Naval Officer to be given a sort of Governorship for Naval ports where they would be known as a Commandent with only the regional governors above them, and of course the King/Queen.

 

The rank of Grand Admiral fits in with the British Sea Lords. To my knowledge there are only two Sea Lords in the British Navy, but with the size of the Star Wars Galaxy, eight Grand Admirals might make sense. The rank of Grand Admiral doesn't really seem to fit into the standard power structure, so I'm inclined to believe it is simply related to tactical abilities and exists out side of the Naval power structure.

[Mad78]

I believe that Grand Admiral is more a honorific title given to very very good commanders.

[SOCL]

The rank of Grand Admiral fits in with the British Sea Lords. To my knowledge there are only two Sea Lords in the British Navy, but with the size of the Star Wars Galaxy, eight Grand Admirals might make sense. The rank of Grand Admiral doesn't really seem to fit into the standard power structure, so I'm inclined to believe it is simply related to tactical abilities and exists out side of the Naval power structure.

Actually, the rank of Grand Admiral comes to use from the Third Reich's Navy of WWII where the highest rank was, in fact, grand admiral (esp. in the case of Doitz, leader of the Third Reich after Hitler).

 

The rest of what you said is addressed by Dr. Saxton at his website. You might want to read through that, _Thrawn...he cites his sources.

 

EDIT: Also, I thought I should address the fact that High Admirals are pretty much necessary. You see, Grand Admirals aren't an official rank...if you're an officer in the Empire, you aren't guaranteed to have a Grand Admiral at the top of your chain-of-command, but you are guaranteed to have Admirals, Fleet Admirals, and at least one High Admiral. It's the same thing as the Five-Star officers in the USA's Armed Forces, the rank exists, but that doesn't mean there are any persons of the rank in active duty (or alive) and, therefore, it doesn't mean any given person will fall under the eventual command of a Five-Star. I hope that made sense.

[SOCL]

I know this basically seems like a bump/spam post, but I believe it is important that way new readers will be able to reference.

 

If anyone is still looking for Imperial ranks, check this thread or read back a quite a few pages.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BEAK

[SOCL]

I haven't used my BEAK powers in a while, and I thought of this recently. I have yet to formally submit it to Dr. Saxton for consideration, but I suppose I'll post it here first to see if any challenges it and, therefore, make it full-prove (if not at all).

 

Basically, in A New Hope we are treated to a certian style of Imperial rank insignia that is commonly known as the "Grand Moff Tarkin scheme" (at Dr. Saxton's site, it's referred to as Aesthetic 3), which Dr. Saxton attempts to explain by saying "the aesthetics of the combination of the parts depended on the regulations of the various regional or central units." This is an interesting theory, but it seems a little strange to believe that a government as systematic and organized in bureaucracy as the Galactic Empire would establish two or three styles of insignia for its military forces. These different styles of insignia, as a matter of fact, would emphasize individuality more so than unity and loyalty to the Emperor, something certainly unwanted by a government that originally began its military forces with clones soldiers engineered to be one hundred percent loyal to their commanders, who are in turn loyal to then-Supreme Chancellor Palpatine.

 

Run-on sentences aside, we observe that in The Empire Strikes Back, the forces assigned to Darth Vader's Death Squadron use a different style of insignia, known at Dr. Saxton's site as "Aesthetic 1" which is easily explained as the most standard pattern throughout the Empire (numerous sources, including many of the novels, comics, and other EU sources)--quite a change. Some might argue that this is simply an intermediate step in the evolution of the Imperial insignia as it once again changed in Return of the Jedi to where everyone had the same basic insignia, some diverting from the 3 red over 3 blue squares with 1 cylinder to 3 red over 3 blue squares with 2 cylinders, but this is moot since the Jedi insignia are a known mistake. This idea of evolutionary insignia, though, is quite interesting and got me thinking...what if the insignia in A New Hope is actually just a predated version of those in The Empire Strikes Back? What I mean is, remember in the Death Star conference room scene when Tarkin walks in and mentions that the Imperial Senate no longer exists? Most people don't realize the significance of that scene, but that was the true ending of the Republic, the final form of representative goverment had been disbanded, and now the government was one hundred percent under the dictatorship of Palpatine (granted, the government had probably already been functioning as a dictatorship for some time already, it is the removal of the Senate that establishes the end of any hope for political change from dictatorship to democracy). What's strange, though, is that this change in figural government (figural because the Senate by this time was probably nothing more than a puppet used by Palpatine to keep the citizens relatively pleased) didn't truly show any evident change between A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back...or did it?

 

We stand as witness that the insignia in A New Hope is no longer in use in The Empire Strikes Back, which leads one to theorize that with the change of the Senate (and, therefore, the total annihilation of the Republic), the Emperor would probably want to rid everything in the Empire of any sign of the democratic Republic. This leads me to believe that the insignia witnessed in ANH is actually the final inclings of the Republican military (notice the less-than-organized insignia style, characteristic of a less-than-organized pre-Palpatine government). With the end of the Senate so comes the end of the late Republic insignia style, which leads to the systematic, non-individual, un-unique style seen in The Empire Strikes Back and hinted at in Return of the Jedi.

 

How can I say this? Well, other than the theory I have presented, we also note other changes that coincide with the end of the Senate. For instance, Lord Darth Vader's position and importance seems to have heightened; no longer can officers arrogant officers shout insults or question him. Officers as high in rank as Fleet Admiral Ozzel, Fleet Admiral Piett, and Moff Jerjerrod shy away at the presence of the Dark Lord, a stark change from Commodore Motti's arrogant shouts concerning the stolen Death Star plans, Sub-Lieutenant Daine Jir's questioning concerning Lord Vader's judgement on holding Princess Leia prisoner, and Grand Moff Tarkin's apparent ability at "holding Vader's leash" (some much so that he ordered Vader to stop choking Motti and Vader complied!). It seems that Vader himself was simply some sort of high-ranking government aide to Emperor Palpatine working liaison within the forces than he was a military commander. This may be an indication of Palpatine's restrainment of Vader in the years following the Jedi purge, probably a political stunt to keep the weakened Senate and, therefore, the Imperial citizens from rising-up, most likely an attempt at keeping the Rebellion from expanding more than it already had.

This is not an unknown practice; the early emperors of the Roman Empire--most especially Augustus (Imperator Caesar)--made small attempts at preserving the image of republic by having "elections" (which were rigged and were, therefore, basically appointments) for the different magistrate positions (i.e. consul, praetor, etc.), yet they were the effective the leaders of the Imperium Romanum. Palpatine is actually very much like Augustus, who during his time before emperor/Imperator status was awarded different positions and powers by the Senate (for instance, he was given control of the provinces, the treasury, the military, and effectively the empire, yet technically the Senate and magistrates still had control (of course, Augustus had control over them). Similarly, Palpatine was elected Supreme Chancellor (an election that was quite probably rigged through the use of force and intimidation) and then, through a staged/rigged crisis (i.e. the Seperatists Movement and the Clone War), was elected "emergency executive powers" to act as a dictator until a time came when he no longer needed the powers...of course, the crisis would probably never end and, therefore, neither would the dictorial powers. What we see, then, is a politician who pretends to be very honest and humble scheming and using his influence to get his way and will.

 

Other changes include the change in tactics in both The Empire Strikes Back and other sources of the time, as officers like General Tagge (the proponent of the fleet over superweapons in the Death Star's conference room) and the Grand Admirals become the leaders in an Imperial military based on the tactic of hunting through the effective employment of the Fleet and attached surface forces over the use of superweapons (of course, another superweapon would eventually be developed, but by that time it is quite obvious the Imperial Fleet commands the might and power of the Empire and its military forces, as evidenced by the fleet at the Battle of Endor and campaigns that followed, most especially allusions made in EU literature such as by Pellaeon in the Thrawn saga characters throughout the Stackpole/Allston X-Wing series). This can also be attributed to the change from the Rpeublic idea of a single, over-all factor to change everything (i.e. the idea of using the Jedi, then swtiching to a Grand Army of the Republic in the Clone War) to the Empire's post-Yavin strategy of fighting a counter-insurgency war on all fronts with a deployed Fleet.

 

I suppose my theory is a little weak and the facts are a little scattered (I have been working on typing this up for the better part of an hour or so, having been distracted and pulled away from the computer, so my thoughts may be a little jagged and scattered, not all of them clear or connected), but the basis of a decent, well-founded theory are there. If anyone would like to contribute or challenge this theory, please feel free to do so, I would actually appreciate it, but please be aware of Dr. Saxton's site.

 

[/bEAK]

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

Actually, this theory makes perfect sence, and now that you have pointed it out, it's attractive in many ways. Because of the way in which the Republic was organized, Vader couldn't hold a position such as that which we see him in in ESP and RotJ. The liquidations of the senate left a power gap to be filled by Moffs, Grand Moffs, Grand Admirals and Vader. They had diract controle over their forces, but answered directly to the Emperor.

 

Your theory could also be furhter supported by Tarkin's appearance. We don't see him until the secene in the Death Star's conference room, and he is the only officer in all of ANH to be wearing what I shal refer to as a post-Republic rank insignia, perhaps a show of support for the new structure to be found in the Empire.

 

Your mention of the chaotic rank insignias for the ANH Imperial officers can be seen in the Rebel rank insignias, which I don't think any one can make sence of simply by watching the movies.

 

Your observations on the change on the Imperial strategem chance is something I hadn't noticed before. In ANH we see only two Star Destroyers protecting Tatooine, a planet suspected to have the plans for the "Ultimate Weapon" on it. In ESB we see a massive fleet deployed to take in one Jedi, who isn't even trained, something Vader in a single ship could probably have done. Again in RotJ we see a sligh reversion to the "bigger is better" theorum, but it is backed up by this new taste for large fleets with emense fire-power.

 

I think this is an excellent explaination for the discrepancies in the rank insignias, and we may get a definitive answer with RotS.

 

Just a little side note, I think Motti was an Admiral, not a Commodore (since Commodore isn't realy a rank, and according to most of the CCGs).

[SOCL]

Your mention of the chaotic rank insignias for the ANH Imperial officers can be seen in the Rebel rank insignias, which I don't think any one can make sence of simply by watching the movies.

Very true.

 

I think this is an excellent explaination for the discrepancies in the rank insignias, and we may get a definitive answer with RotS.

Agreed. I hope there is either evidence to back my theory or no evidence to contradict it.

 

Just a little side note, I think Motti was an Admiral, not a Commodore (since Commodore isn't realy a rank, and according to most of the CCGs).

Many sources refer to Motti as an admiral, but his insignia is of the lowest ranking admiral possible, which in the USA's Navy is called a 'Rear Admiral, Lower Half'. This is, of course, a USA-unique rank created when the USA's Army made the rank of Brigadier a general-status rank by calling it Brigadier General...you can imagine that all the USA's Navy Commodores begin to whine about how their ground force counter parts were generals and they weren't admirals, so the rank went through a series of changes that started with a crazy rank called 'Commodore Admiral', then changed to 'Captain Admiral' (which was 100% incorrectly used), which finally became 'Rear Admiral, Lower Half'. With that said, many sources in Star Wars became confused (since most of the authors had little to no knowledge concerning the military and traditional military ranks) and started to contradict themselves to the point that the Imperial Sourcebook claims a Commodore is higher in rank than an Admiral! This is, of course, preposterous!

 

Additionally, Motti's rank insignia is that of a Commodore since there already existed a rank of a Rear Admiral (which would be just above Commodore and just below Vice Admiral). Because of different positions a commodore-ranked officer might have (i.e. a position that does not involve being a 'commodore'...I'll get into the meaning of rank names in a minute....), it's quite a possible a Commodore would be called a Rear Admiral. Motti is a great example, a Commodore who is in a position of either staff or operations aboard a space station and not commanding a squadron of vessels, therefore, calling him a commodore would seem rather funny, but then again, calling him anything less would be inproper, so settling for calling him an admiral would do just fine. You can read more about Motti and the rank of Commodore, Brigadier, and Rear Admiral on this webpage and a summary of officer insignia on this other webpage.

 

 

This is, of course, suggesting that Star Wars does not follow one specific nation's armed forces' ranks, but what would be considered 'standard English ranks'. By that, I mean that the ranks are given their names and put at their level in accordance with what standard English uses (some people say we can't do that since English isn't from the Star Wars universe, but until someone hands me a military sourcebook written in Aurebesh that is actually from 'A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away', this is the best that can be done). So we find that ranks like 'Lieutenant, Junior Grade', 'Rear Admiral, Lower Half', 'Brigaider General', 'General' (i.e. for air forces), and other such ranks to be rather unusable. Why? Quite simply, these are ranks created because of the specific conditions their respective military's used them. For instance, general being the highest rank in an Air Force exists because of the fact that that specific air force at one time was a part of the that nation's army or is derived from the USA example. So in Star Wars, we revert to using more arhaic names that have meanings which that are branch/mission-specific than they are nation-specific. This gives us the ranks commodore and brigadier, which quite simply mean 'an officer who commands more than one warship of fire-power greater than a line of warships, esp. a squadron' and 'an officer who commands a brigade of soldiers', respectively. Each rank has it's own meaning and purpose (I could list them all, but until someone asks, I'll spare the community).

Of course, we can't revert to such archaic terms that the meaning begins to take on an Earth-specific meaning (after all, we only have limited space in which to work); by that, I mean we can't replace the Army rank of captain with the more archaic 'centurion' because that would then give the rank a Roman-style named...and last time I checked, the Romans were never a part of the Corellian, Slius Van, or any other human-based sector (unless they're a species of humans in the Unknown Regions.... ). Additionally, terms like 'hoplite' should also be avoided, though we have seen the use of 'legion', 'phalanx', and 'legionaire' in Star Wars continuity.

 

Again, though, this is all based on standard English for the sole sake that we have nothing else to work with than what we have here on Earth (additionally, this is all based on the idea of 'rationaliz[ing] a fantasy'). By eliminating names that ring of Earth or national specifics, we are able to avoid many of the flaws other people have contributed to the Star Wars universe. Quite simply, here's a quote from Dr. Saxton's site: "The motivation of this project is to synthesise and explore a self-consistent reality for that universe.... ...the project intends to rationalise a fantasy. This hobby simply uses the methods and language of science to consider the question: "If the STAR WARS universe were real, how would its phenomena be understood?"

 

 

 

EDIT: Oh yeah, I forgot to the turn-off/close the code!

 

[/bEAK]

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

I quite agree with you, and I was aware of the evolution of the rank of Commodore and the American Rear-Admiral, lower half, but I would suggest another possibility.

 

In the early 19th century, and indeed right up until the British Navy did a little restructureing, Commodore was a title given to Captains in command of a small squadron (usually four or five ships, but on the scale of the Star Wars Universe, this would clearly need to be increased). These commands were usually temporary, lasting on a short while (which back then could concievably be a year and a half). If we look to Rebellion (the game that is), we see that, although his rank insignia matches all of the other Commander ranked characters, Zuggs is listed as a Commodore in his encyclopedia text.

 

What I suggest is this: Star Wars had a great deal of British influence in the production of the first movie, and as I'm sure every one here could agree on, your best "Imperial Officer" impression is nothing but a shoddy British accent (unless, of course, you are British ). Perhaps there is some of this influence in the structure of the Imperial Navy (and perhaps the Army as well). To this day there is only four "Flag" ranks in the British navy, with Rear Admiral being the lowest and Fleet Admiral the highest (though there are the ranks of First and Second Sea Lord, but I would equate those with the Star Wars positions of High Admiral and Grand Admiral). Perhaps what we see is a mergring of North American and Brittanic ranking systems?

 

As I think I stated in an earlier post, the existance of Moffs and Grand Moffs is remeniscant of military leaders being given Governorships over naval ports or forts and the surrounding areas.

 

I suggest this also because of this picture in which we see Motti with two rows of rank insignia (which also gives credence to the theory of the change in insignia due to the senate being disolved), which would suggest (I believe) that he is an admiral, though do to a slight glare we can't see what the colour of the lower row is, though the top appears to be red.

 

I must also admit that the inclusion of the rank of Commodore would make sence because of the scale of the universe. With such a large fleet an expansion of the command structure would make perfect sence, hence the inclusion of ranks such as High Admiral and Grand Admiral.

[Paul]

SOCL, while I agree with most of your thoughts I must point out that the best source for Motti's rank is the Star Wars site which states that he is an Admiral. -Grand Moff Conway

PS:Fixed

Edited March 14, 2005 by Paul

[Mad78]

The Star Wars sight?

[SOCL]

If we look to Rebellion (the game that is), we see that, although his rank insignia matches all of the other Commander ranked characters, Zuggs is listed as a Commodore in his encyclopedia text.

Yes, but then again--if I remember correctly--Rebellion shows all the officers wearing the same insignia, making it inconsistent and, therefore, unreliable

 

What I suggest is this: Star Wars had a great deal of British influence in the production of the first movie, and as I'm sure every one here could agree on, your best "Imperial Officer" impression is nothing but a shoddy British accent (unless, of course, you are British ). Perhaps there is some of this influence in the structure of the Imperial Navy (and perhaps the Army as well). To this day there is only four "Flag" ranks in the British navy, with Rear Admiral being the lowest and Fleet Admiral the highest (though there are the ranks of First and Second Sea Lord, but I would equate those with the Star Wars positions of High Admiral and Grand Admiral). Perhaps what we see is a mergring of North American and Brittanic ranking systems?

I agree the movies had quite a bit of British influence, but the rank of Grand Admiral is in no way associated with the British Admiralty or Sea Lords or the UK at all, for that matter. It was taken from the German Third Reich's Navy where the highest rank in the admiralty was that of Grand Admiral. Additionally, the rank of High Admiral, though it can be equated to the British Sea Lords, is more a rank created out of necessity and, if anything, comes closer to matching the rank of Grand Admiral in the Third Reich or Admiral of the Fleet in the UK because it is the highest achievable rank on merit alone for an officer since Grand Admiral in the Imperial Navy required a personal appointment by the Emperor himself. In fact, Grand Admiral can be viewed as a version of the Moff ranks that is 100% military, a way of allowing the Emperor to excerise executive control over things he had governors controlling (a tactic Palpatine used to keep everyone within the Empire pitted against one another in competion so as to avoid people from banning together to attempt coups, something that only failed once: i.e. Zaarin).

 

Quite simply:

-High Admiral is the highest regular military rank that does not require personal appointment by the Emperor. Created out of necessity due to the enormous scope of a Galaxy-wide Naval force (which is also the arms and legs of a galaxy-wide military).
-Grand Admiral is the military's answer to the civilian and military Moff ranks; can even command Moffs and Grand Moffs as needed/per mission proxy/orders. The name is derived from the Third Reich.
-Surface Marshal (the highest rank in the Imperial Army) is derived from the Third Reich's field marshal and is of the same status as a High Admiral.
-Grand General is apparently mentioned once (Force Commander), but may have not existed since a general rank of such high position is not needed in a military force that is primary based around a galaxy-wide Fleet.

 

As I think I stated in an earlier post, the existance of Moffs and Grand Moffs is remeniscant of military leaders being given Governorships over naval ports or forts and the surrounding areas.

I agree on that particular point, especially since Moffs and Grand Moffs could be either military officers or civilian officials appointed to what is known commonly as 'governor-general'.

 

-Moff is Commander in Chief and Chief Political Magistrate/Exectutive of a Sector.
-Grand Moff is a Commander in Chief and Chief Political Magistrate/Executive of an Oversector (a temporary area of space that can overlap two or more sectors; usually created for times of crisis, esp. like those of the Outer Rim as seen in A New Hope).
-Supreme Moff is a strange position that was known as a possible rank (Imperial Sourcebook), but no one is known to have ever possessed the rank. It is of about equal status to an Imperial Grand Admiral (think of it as the civilian side's answer to the military's Grand Admirals who had grown more powerful and influential than Moffs and Grand Moffs) with the ability to command a independant military forces (like a Grand Admiral) or be a sort of 'supreme governor-general' (like a really high-ranking grand moff). Actually, think of this rank as Grand Admiral, only a civilian official can be appointed to this position without prior military service.

 

I suggest this also because of this picture in which we see Motti with two rows of rank insignia (which also gives credence to the theory of the change in insignia due to the senate being disolved), which would suggest (I believe) that he is an admiral, though do to a slight glare we can't see what the colour of the lower row is, though the top appears to be red.

For the first time in a long time, someone has surprised me with a rank insignia. I have never seen that, but by the looks of the picture, it was taken during a rehearsal, so the question remains whether or not it should be considered canon. IF it is, then I agree with the assessment, it could very possibly be the changed from the late Republic-style insignia to the New Order-style. Additionally, this may be some sort of rank promotion (I'll address that below).

 

SOCL, while I agree with most of your thoughts I must point out that the best source for Motti's rank is the Star Wars site which states that he is an Admiral.

This is explained one of two ways: 1) People sometimes call Commodores 'Admiral' when that officer is not assigned to Commodore duties (as discussed above), OR 2) This may represent a promotion for Motti post-'Death Star Conference Room Scene'.

 

Quite simply, we can assume that many people probably doubted or were no impressed with Motti's "technological terror" (I'm thinking of one particular Dark Lord of the Sith), but after it 'proved' itself to truly be "the ultimate power in the universe" (or so the Imperial officials came to believe) by destroying Alderaan, he was more than likely promoted one, two, maybe even three. As a matter of fact--given he was at commodore--I would be surprised that someone who thought up or helped think up something with that much punch and then defend it in an argument with Palpatine right-hand man (i.e. Lord Vader) would not be promoted to at least to full admiral (two full rank promotions)! It would be strange if they didn't get promoted! Now, that's not to say he was promoted to Admiral, but I do not doubt he was promoted to the admiralty after the demonstration at Alderaan reached Imperial Center (Coruscant), and I'm sure Tarkin was given permission to hand Motti a battlefield promotion until the official files were worked up (similiar as to how Piett was battlefield promoted to Fleet Admiral after Ozzel's death until the promotion became official later on). Of course, if Motti was promoted so soon after Alderaan's destruction, he was probably demoted soon after the Death Star's destruction postmortem. This could lead to him having been demoted as low as Ensign, or the records of a promotion to admiral being "mysteriously lost" before they reached the official review board and remaining a Commodore, or he may have retained the rank...regardless, the amount of chaos that undoubtably ensued after the Death Star's destruction and then the collapse of Imperial organization soon after (after the Death Star II's destruction and Palpatine's death) probably accounts for the confusion concerning Motti's rank.

 

Motti is, actually, not the only person whose rank, postmortem, is in confusion. For instance, Piett's promotion to Fleet Admiral in The Empire Strikes Back is known to be a battlefield promotion (their obviously wasn't an official review right there and though Lord Vader pocessed much power and influence, it's doubtful he was allowed to simply hand out promotions...though he could, undoubtably, for review boards to promote certain officers) and that sometime before the end of the movie the promotion was made official, but what about after the movie? It has been speculated that after a loss such as the Millenium Falcon, Piett should have been demoted (since he was not, apparently, executed like Ozzel). Return of the Jedi would be great as a source of what rank Piett had after that last scene aboard the Executor in Empire, but, though the insignia is different, we find that all the Imperial officers have the same rank plaque, some officers varying only by the number of code cylinders they carry, so Jedi turns out to be a bad source concerning Imperial insignia. Additionally, it has also been speculated that Piett was of the rank of High Admiral at the Battle of Endor since he had been made acting fleet commander for the Fleet amassed over the Forest Moon in protection of the Death Star II. This would have, undoubtably, been a 'battlefield promotion', but the question remains of whether or not he would have kept it or would have returned to being a Fleet Admiral(?). So you see, the Motti problems are not unique to Star Wars and, as a matter of fact, tend to plague this particular universe (i.e. the Star Wars universe), which is understandable, though, when one takes into account that everything is based around a galaxy-wide empire.

 

 

 

SOCL = BEAK-y: I've still got that touch!

[/bEAK]

[Paul]

MOTTI was already an admiral before he was appointed to the Death Star . He was at admiral status when he rescued Tarkin and Bevel Lemelisk on the way to Despayre during construction of the Death Star. Also the Death Star destroyed Despayre after it was completed thus showing its' capability before destroying Alderaan. All of this is from the official Star Wars Encyclopedia and is considered canon by lucas as it was licensed by him.-Grand Moff Conway

SOCL, just so you know- in general I agree with you.

[SOCL]

MOTTI was already an admiral before he was appointed to the Death Star . He was at admiral status when he rescued Tarkin and Bevel Lemelisk on the way to Despayre during construction of the Death Star. Also the Death Star destroyed Despayre after it was completed thus showing its' capability before destroying Alderaan. All of this is from the official Star Wars Encyclopedia and is considered canon by lucas as it was licensed by him.-Grand Moff Conway

SOCL, just so you know- in general I agree with you.

Don't worry, I'm not taking it as insult, just a challenge...

 

rereads quote

 

...but it seems...

 

looks for anything to cling to

 

...my friend...

 

eyes dart from word to word

 

...that you...

 

tears begin to well

 

...have...

 

tears streaming, action-figures mutinying, Zoot laughing in my face

 

...beaten me.

 

You have won this round, my friend, but I will be back...you'll see...with more BEAKyness. You'll see! You have not see the last of the Grand Imperator of BEAK!

[Jahled]

I bow to such BEAKNESS, and also such humility and grace in the face of defeat! Grand Moffs are appointed by his most devilishness presance himself the Emperor, so jostle with one at your peril!

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

I'm confused as to why we need to assume Piett was promoted to the ran of high admiral for the engagement at Endor. Although the Imperial Fleet that was massed there was huge (perhaps an understatement), he was already the commanding officer of the flagship (with a captain below him, therefore making the placement of some one above him impossible), and so the logical choice for fleet commander. I say this because it is generall accepted that there were Grand Admirals aboard the Death Star, meaning that even were Piett promoted to High Admiral, there were officers (presumably more capable officers) who could have commanded the fleet, and who were of a rank higher than Piett. His command was a byproduct of his posting.

 

Now, my linkage between the rank of Grand Admiral and Sea Lord was only for example. I know where the rank of Grand Admiral came from (I have an odd fascination with Dönitz) but have now found another reason my connection makes little sence: the Admiralty rank of First Sea Lord is the equivalent to Grand Admiral (IRL that is). Churchill was First Sea Lord in the First World War, placing him in command of the whole of the British Navy. Dönitz was in the same position in the Second World War (of the German navy though ). Because the two ranks are one and the same, it makes no sence that they should equate one another in the SW universe. That, and the rank of Grand Admiral clearly holds a different status in the Imperial Navy than it did in the Kriegsmarine.

[SOCL]

I bow to such BEAKNESS, and also such humility and grace in the face of defeat!

As you should!

 

Grand Moffs are appointed by his most devilishness presance himself the Emperor, so jostle with one at your peril!

Right, right, I forgot to mention that, but yes, all Moff positions are appointed by the Emperor himself, yet their powers are still rivaled by that of the military's Grand Admirals.

 

I'm confused as to why we need to assume Piett was promoted to the ran of high admiral for the engagement at Endor. Although the Imperial Fleet that was massed there was huge (perhaps an understatement), he was already the commanding officer of the flagship (with a captain below him, therefore making the placement of some one above him impossible), and so the logical choice for fleet commander. I say this because it is generall accepted that there were Grand Admirals aboard the Death Star, meaning that even were Piett promoted to High Admiral, there were officers (presumably more capable officers) who could have commanded the fleet, and who were of a rank higher than Piett. His command was a byproduct of his posting.

It actually is pretty valid speculation considering the size of the fleet at the Battle of Endor. Addtionally, just because he is aboard the commandship does not mean he his necessarily the fleet's flag officer. Another, equal or higher-ranking officer could have easily been called to the battle and decided to remain aboard a regular Star Destroyer (this seems likely since people like Pellaeon and other officers in the post-Endor Empire despised huge superweapons and huge superships, and preferred the idea of many small warships). If another Fleet Admiral came to the engagment, for instance, Piett could either be told he is the fleet's flag or he could be made a High Admiral. If a High Admiral came to the participate in the engagement, Piett--if the Emperor wanted him to remain in command--would have had to have been made High Admiral and designated flag at least for the duration of the battle.

 

Again, though, it was merely speculation about Piett possibly being a High Admiral at Endor...speculation made before Star Wars Insider Magazine decided that Grand Admirals should have been present at the battle (and aboard the Death Star II of all places!). Actually, I don't like thinking of that particular point since it really makes the Grand Admirals look bad, being unable to control a the Imperial fleet against a band of Rebels and all (but then again, The Good Guys Must Win law applies to Endor...this has alos been discussed NUMEROUS times and it even had a thread dedicated to it some time back...no need to start that up again). But then again, the particular Grand Admiral I'm thinking of was more loyal to the Emperor (because of his Force-sensitivity) than to the Fleet, so it seems to make sense for him to not help the fleet fighting while his master is being chucked down a canyon.

 

Now, my linkage between the rank of Grand Admiral and Sea Lord was only for example. I know where the rank of Grand Admiral came from (I have an odd fascination with Dönitz) but have now found another reason my connection makes little sence: the Admiralty rank of First Sea Lord is the equivalent to Grand Admiral (IRL that is). Churchill was First Sea Lord in the First World War, placing him in command of the whole of the British Navy. Dönitz was in the same position in the Second World War (of the German navy though )

Wait, wha'? Could you say it again, only slower(?), you confused me.

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

I had come to the realization that Sea Lord and Grand Admiral in the British and German sence are essentialy the same rank, so any linkage between them would be poinless ( it would be like comparing highway and autobahn (sp?), which pretty much results in the answer "duh!"). When relating to the Star Wars Grand Admiral and High Admiral, Grand Admiral has no equivalent in the real world, where High Admiral is basically the German Grand Admiral and the British First Sea Lord.

 

Something I think we should consider is the possibility of the Imperial Navy using a tierd Flag Rank system. I'm not sure if it is still in use, but at one time there was a system in the British (I know, get off the Brits already! ) navy where there was a Rear, Vice and regular Admiral of the Blue, Red and White, making nine possible flag ranks rather than three or four (excluding Admiralty command positions). So, a Rear-Admiral of the Blue was lower than a RA of the Red who was lower than an RA of the White, and so on. As Mr. Saxton pointed out, there are too many possible combinations to make the Imperial rank structure as strait-forward as he presents.

[Mad78]

I think what he means is that in the real navy the Sea Lord is the equal of a Grand Admiral.

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

Now why didn't I think of saying it that way?

[Mad78]

Because you are a historical expert GAT

[SOCL]

I had come to the realization that Sea Lord and Grand Admiral in the British and German sence are essentialy the same rank, so any linkage between them would be poinless ( it would be like comparing highway and autobahn (sp?), which pretty much results in the answer "duh!"). When relating to the Star Wars Grand Admiral and High Admiral, Grand Admiral has no equivalent in the real world, where High Admiral is basically the German Grand Admiral and the British First Sea Lord.

I see; adding to that, it should also be made clear that many of the ranks may not have an Earth equal as the ranks for the Galactic Empire are for a galaxy-wide military and, therefore, one is required to have many different levels of command and bureaucracy (sp?) to keep control (hence Tarkin's talk about regional governors keeping control of the galaxy without the Senate).

 

Something I think we should consider is the possibility of the Imperial Navy using a tierd Flag Rank system. I'm not sure if it is still in use, but at one time there was a system in the British (I know, get off the Brits already! ) navy where there was a Rear, Vice and regular Admiral of the Blue, Red and White, making nine possible flag ranks rather than three or four (excluding Admiralty command positions). So, a Rear-Admiral of the Blue was lower than a RA of the Red who was lower than an RA of the White, and so on.

I'm not too well aquainted with this particular system, but I can see how it would be useful in the Galactic Empire. Also, given the fact that the Imperial rank insignia presented in Aesthetic 1 are not all used, yet this is the most standardized system, it's quite possible some ranks have tiers. It doesn't seem it would be as organized as the British system, but similar in idea (similar in idea, different in function).

 

Consider the Aesthetics Table (specifically Aesthetic 1) and the Rank Table (as well as the paragraph above it). Now please note (using coordinates for the Rank Table), rank [2,3] and [2,4] are lower levels of Sub-Lieutenant, [3,4] is a lower level of Lieutenant Commander, [4,3] is a lower level of Commodore, [5,4] is a lower level of Vice Admiral, [5,2] is a lower level of Admiral, [6,4] is a lower level of Fleet Admiral, and [6,2] is a lower level of High Admiral. I have chosen to exclude the ranks of branches other than the Imperial Navy for this dicussion's purposes (though the basics of this discussion apply to those ranks of Army and Fighter), as well as excluded [1,4] and [1,3], dismissing those as cadet/training ranks, and [7,3], dismissing that as too high a rank for practical military purposes (since its amdist ranks that the Emperor must appoint and not achievable simply based on record and merits like those ranks from Ensign to High Admiral).

 

Given the above information (and I'll refer back to it), notice that ranks with "extra levels" are very commonly used ranks in the military, officers who could function in a variety of different positions and jobs. The situation is that not all these ranks are used at once, hence why this page only shows certain insignia. Using _Thrawn's idea of the tier system, one can explain why there exists intermediate ranks (not used in Earth forces) such as Line Captain. Odds are that as the military expanded, so did the demand for intermediate-ranking officers for intermediate positions. Again, I fall back on the rank of Line Captain, a rank that was probably spawned as it became evident that a specific ranking officer was needed in order to fill the position of a commanding officer for a line of warships. They probably had problems where Captains were commanding (hold the flag of) lines, but the captains aboard the warships within the line might have started to protest the idea of being commanded by a person of the same rank. A Commodore, though, would not be the solution since it would have been a type of insult to make a Commodore the commanding officer of a position lower than the rank diserves. Therefore, a lower tier of Commodore [4,4] was filled with the rank of Line Captain.

 

Make sense?

 

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that there was a basic ranking structure to start with (probably similiar to Earth's militaries), but as the military grew and grew to become a galaxy-wide force, the need for more officers became apparent. Therefore ranks are created to fill these rolls that begin to arise, giving rise to a tier system similiar to that of the British Navy (only that all the tiers are not at all times filled, nor do they need to be, and, if and when they are filled by a rank, the tier/level is assigned a new rank (i.e. Line Captain), with insignia ready to be thrown in. To explain why the levels exist, imagine that each level is a successive major military position for a given rank. For instance, [4,4] was the level for an officer commanding a line [4,3] is a higher position, and [4,2] is the position of a squadron commander (i.e. a Commodore). It's also quite possible that the rank of Commodore didn't exist until it became apparent that there was a need for a rank between Rear Admiral and Captain (which may explain some of the confusion behind whether to call someone a "commodore" or an "admiral"; the same for calling a Line Captain "line captain" or simply "captain").

 

Does that make sense? My thoughts might be a little scattered, but I very much like _Thrawn's proposal about a tiered system, I just felt it needed a little modifying to fit in with Star Wars.

 

Hey, _Thrawn, maybe we should write an SWR.Com version of the Technical Commentaries? The BEAK Commentaries, perhaps?

 

By the way, pending approval by Founder and CEO of the BEAK Imperium (i.e. Scathane), I today induct Grand_Admiral_Thrawn into the ranks of the BEAK Imperium.

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

With the introduction of the tierd concept, Dr. Saxtons work makes far more sence to me. Ranks such as Line Captain would have had to be created for officers who are to command fleets (or suadrons) that are considered too small for a flag rank, but too large for a standard Captain to command. Situations like this would be far more common in a military as spread out as the Imperial Navy.

 

They may also be used depending on the size of the ship being commanded. For example, an officer holding the rank of Commander might be given command of a smaller ship, perhaps a Lancer Frigate or a Carrier style ship, one that requires some one higher than a Lieutenant to command, but would be too low in prestige for some one holding the rank of Captain to command.

 

I still find the number of sub-ranks for Lieutenant excessive, but without knowing all of the positions to be filled by an officer, it's difficult to discount any of them.

 

In the real military the title with which you address an officer may be confusing if their position is not the same as their rank (for example a Commander might command a Destroyer in the Navy, but you would call him Captain out of respect). I'm not sure if there would be any trouble with what you call a Commodore. I believe there was a Commodore reprimanded recently in the Canadian Navy, and he is simply refered to as Commodore. I think you would simply pay the courtesy of refering to an officer by the name of their position rather than their base rank in such situations (Captain could refer to a Lieutenant, Commander, or Captain in command of a ship, Commodore for a Commodore, and Admiral for those in Flag positions).

 

I'm not sure if people could handle a BEAK Commentary, what with all the references linking to other pages and all .

[SOCL]

I still find the number of sub-ranks for Lieutenant excessive, but without knowing all of the positions to be filled by an officer, it's difficult to discount any of them.

Positions for Lieutenants and Lieutenants, Junior Grade in the USA's Navy alone are far too many to account for! I'm not kidding! I can assure you, if there aren't enough Lieutenants and Lieutenants, Junior Grade in an Earth-based Navy, there can never be enough Lieutenants and Sub-Lieutenants in the Imperial Navy! Trust me, I know this (the USA Navy point) for a fact!

 

In the real military the title with which you address an officer may be confusing if their position is not the same as their rank (for example a Commander might command a Destroyer in the Navy, but you would call him Captain out of respect). I'm not sure if there would be any trouble with what you call a Commodore. I believe there was a Commodore reprimanded recently in the Canadian Navy, and he is simply refered to as Commodore. I think you would simply pay the courtesy of refering to an officer by the name of their position rather than their base rank in such situations (Captain could refer to a Lieutenant, Commander, or Captain in command of a ship, Commodore for a Commodore, and Admiral for those in Flag positions).

Yes, this is generally accepted. Of course, though, when in the presence officers of higher rank of other ships captains (of higher rank), this does not apply. For instance, if a Lieutenant Commander commanding a vessel has an officer of higher rank on board, that particular Lieutenant Commander would not be addressed as "captain" but as "commander". If a Lieutenant Commander and a Commander are together, they are referred to by their exact rank (this happens all the time during Changes of Command in both the Army and the Navy of the USA's Armed Forces...you'll have a Lieutenant Colonel taking command of a battalion from another Lieutenant Colonel with the brigade commander, a Colonel, watching over-watching: the Lieutenant Colonels are addressed by "lieutenant colonel" and the Colonel is addressed by "colonel"); this also happens all the time. Additionally, when officers of the admiralty (I hesitate to use the term 'flag officer' even if it is correct simply because a 'flag officer' can be either a person of admiral/general status or an officer in command of a group of warships...hence, a Line Captain is the 'flag officer' of a line of warships and commands from his 'flagship' despite not being an officer of admiralty) are together and are of varying levels, all are referred to and addressed by their exact rank ("vice admiral", "fleet admiral", "rear admiral", etc.).

 

I'm not sure if people could handle a BEAK Commentary, what with all the references linking to other pages and all .

Actually, as soon as I get Scathane back here, I'm going to try and team with him to see if this site will host a Technical Commentary page similiar to Dr. Saxton's (hosted like how Antilliles has his '60 Standard Minutes').

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

Naval etiquet must be very different between the British and American navies. If a Captain were taking command of a ship once commanded by a Commander (doesn't happen often), th Captain would still refer to the Commander as Captain. The same would be true if a Captain were in a room with a Rear-Admiral and a Fleet Admiral. They would both be refered to as Admiral. Maybe in the past American officers were more touchy about their ranks than the Brits?

 

I suppose if a Commentary were done like 60 Standard Minutes it would be quite successful (and useful to boot).