Jump to content

Recommended Posts

In the files of Marilibia there is mention of a ship named Dalmazia of 3800 GRT which is reported leaving Tripoli for Catania in a list of "Unità del commercio". Was there a merchant ship named Dalmazia of such tonnage in the Italian merchant ship or is this perhaps the naval water tanker Dalmazia? Any suggestion?

 

Many thanks,

 

Platon

Edited by Corto Maltese
Aggiunti Tags
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A quick web search about your query, Platon, has given the civil (military enroled) merchant vessel "Dalmatia", sunk january 26, 1942. I do not realized if she is the same you are talking, anyway more info could be found at link down.

The website "Trentoincina" reports as follow:

 

Dalmatia L. (Passeggeri)
 

Tonnellate: 3252

Dettagli: Colpita tra Taranto e Catania

Sorte: Rimorchiato ma esplose verso Messina

Causa della perdita: Sommergibile

Quando: 25/01/1942

Dove: Capo dell'Armi

Avversario che causò la perdita: sm Ultimatum

 

Search continue for further. Cheers

Tiberio

 

http://cronologia.leonardo.it/battaglie/batta60.htm

 

http://www.naviearmatori.net/ita/armatore-8-1.html

Edited by Corto Maltese
Editato post
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Tiberio,

 

Many thanks for a very quick answer. I am aware of the possibility it may have been DALMATIA L. although the spelling in two different sources is DALMAZIA and not DALMATIA. However errors in documents are always possible! The two web sites you listed are very interesting, particularly the one by Franco Prevato, and I will have a closer look. Right now it is a toss up between DALMAZIA and DALMATIA L. The British submarine PARTHIAN attacked MARTE and "DALMAZIA" was following her. The submarine commander gave only a description of "two steamers" but he was focused on MARTE and may not have paid much attention to "DALMAZIA" which he should have described as a tanker. Perhaps at a certain angle it was difficult to discern if this was an ordinary merchant vessel or a tanker. The mystery is still on!

 

Cordiali saluti,

 

Platon

Edited by Corto Maltese
Editato post
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Francesco,

 

Many thanks for your help. I believe that the MARTE involved was a freighter (5290 GRT, 1917) rather than the tanker (2502 GRT, 1892). I am attaching a page showing DALMAZIA and MARTE, the latter' s tonnage looks to me closer to that of the freighter. However I am open to suggestions.

 

Best wishes,

 

Platon

post-96-0-11697500-1443793567_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Platon,

DALMATIA was built by the Arsenale del Lloyd at Trieste in 1903 (launched 24.2.1903) for the then Austro-Hungarian Lloyd Triestino. The Lloyd came under Italian flag in 1919, and the ship in 1925 changed her name in part to DALMATIA L., to avoid confusion with another DALMAZIA ex WAR PICTURE, a British Standard Ship Type N1 built in 1920 by Furness Shipbuilding Co. at Haverton Hill on Tees for the Shipping Controller, completed in Sept. 1920 for La Veloce Compagnia di Navigazione, Genova, later sold to Parodi & Corrado then to the SA Emanuele Parodi, broken up in April 1934 at La Spezia [a sister-ship the well-known TROUBADOR ex CONFIDENZA ex WAR PROJECT, a rare survivor of PQ17, by the way]..

Francesco

 

P.S. The dwt or tpl (tonnellate di portata lorda) measurement refers to the cargo capacity of a ship, so the Marilibia document evidently is based on that, instead of the more used grt or tsl (tonnellate di stazza lorda).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Francesco,

 

Your arguments on the deadweight tonnage are most convincing! Many thanks.  It is a bit odd though that a couple of different Italian sources refers to her as DALMAZIA instead of DALMATIA L.

I assume we can attribute this to human error.

 

All the best,

 

Platon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evidently the Lloyd Triestino (in itself a very non-Italian name) people decided to keep the Latin/English original name, only adding as an afterthought the suffix L as in Lloyd, probably a tribute paid to their cross-national tradition.
Obviously, in a country where thanks to autarchia all foreign names were frowned upon if not banned outright ("mescita" instead of "bar" was a famous instance), the price to be paid was the (wrong) commonplace use of the Italicized version of the word. Even if Dalmatia could be interpreted as a Roman word...


 

Dear Francesco,
 
Your arguments on the deadweight tonnage are most convincing! Many thanks.  It is a bit odd though that a couple of different Italian sources refers to her as DALMAZIA instead of DALMATIA L.
I assume we can attribute this to human error.
 
All the best,
 
Platon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...