ABSTRACT
These are evidently difficult and dangerous waters, but it is worth briefly looking at the criteria such scholars use for their classification systems. These include the following.
Size and nature of the fleet
Classification should not be based on mere ‘bean-counting exercises’ which disregard such issues as technical quality, professional skill, and maintenance efficiency. But to some extent the possession of given numbers of large surface combatants is often regarded as a rough indication of relative strength and purpose. In Corbett’s day the fleet was commonly split between assets devoted first to winning battles, second to securing control of maritime communications and last to patrolling and controlling coastal waters, and these distinctions still make sense so how a navy allocates its resources between these categories may help us classify it.3 It is certainly true that maintaining large ships is especially demanding in terms of money and manpower for smaller navies. While there is a rough correlation between the ambitions of a navy, and the size and individual fighting capacity of its main units, it is difficult to push the observation much further than this.
