_Ceremonial and other Usages_
The student who has wandered along the by-paths of early military and
naval history may perhaps have been struck by the fact that although he
met not infrequently with instances of the devotion and respect with
which the soldier regarded his military ensigns he met with no similar
examples in naval affairs. He might at first be disposed to attribute
this to the fact that the histories he had read were not the work of
professed seamen, but upon reflexion he would more probably be disposed
to infer that, except in the ship of the Commander-in-Chief, there was
at sea nothing to correspond to the military insignia. The examination
into the early history of the flag which we have endeavoured to carry
out in the first chapter of this book leads us to the conclusion that
until the thirteenth century there was no equivalent of the military
ensign in use at sea, and the early history of the salute at sea tends
to confirm this view.
The Ordinance[395] drawn up by King John in 1201, which required all
ships and vessels to strike and lower their sails at the command
of the King's ships, makes no mention of a flag, and although the
striking of the sails was perhaps primarily intended not so much as
a mark of respect as a practical means of ensuring that the ships in
question should render an effective submission to the will of the
king's officers, the omission is at any rate of some significance. An
instructive commentary upon the relative significance of the acts of
striking sails or flags is afforded by the account of the taking of two
Spanish ships by the 'Amity' of London in 1592[396]. These merchantmen
had fallen in with each other off the south-west coast of Spain, and
apparently each side had determined to make prize of the other. The
Spaniards were displaying a flag with the arms of the King of Spain,
which caused the English to "judge them rather ships of warre then
laden with marchandise." After a long fight the English ship gained the
advantage,
willing them to yeeld, or els we should sinke them: wherupon the
one would have yeelded, which was shot betweene winde and water;
but the other called him traiter. Unto whom we made answere, that
if he would not yeeld presently also, we would sinke him first. And
thereupon he understanding our determination, presently put out
a white flag, and yeelded, and yet refused to strike their own
sailes, for that they were sworne never to strike to any Englishmen.
Evidently the striking of the sails was an act of greater submission
than the display of the flag of truce, and its persistent survival
until the year 1806 as part of the ceremony required when the salute
was exacted by H.M. ships is a clear indication that it must have been
originally the most essential part of that ceremony. When Pennington
was given his instructions as Admiral of the Narrow Seas in May, 1631,
he was told:
If in this yo^r imployment you shall chance to meete in the Narrowe
Seas anie ffleete belonging to anie forraine Prince or State you
are to expect that the Admirall and cheefe of them in acknowledgmt
of his Ma^{ts} Soveraignty there shall strike their Top-sayle
in passing by, or if they refuse to do it you are to force them
thereunto[397],
but no instruction was given him in regard to their flag, and the
Treaty made between Cromwell and the Dutch at the close of the First
Dutch War in 1654 required the latter not only to haul down their flag
when rendering the salute, but also to lower the topsail (_vexillum
suum e mali vertice detrahent et supremum velum demittent_).
After Trafalgar the British Naval Power stood at such a height that it
was felt that no loss of prestige could then arise from the abandonment
of the claim so tenaciously insisted on for many centuries, and the
instructions to naval officers to exact the salute were quietly dropped
out of the _King's Regulations_ where they had, for many years,
appeared in the following terms:
When any of His Majesty's Ships shall meet with any Ship or Ships
belonging to any Foreign Prince or State, within His Majesty's
Seas, (which extend to Cape _Finisterre_) it is expected that the
said Foreign Ships do strike their Topsail, and take in their Flag,
in Acknowledgement of His Majesty's Sovereignty in those Seas;
and if any shall refuse or offer to resist, it is enjoined to all
Flag Officers and Commanders to use their utmost Endeavours to
compel them thereto, and not suffer any Dishonour to be done to His
Majesty. And if any of His Majesty's Subjects shall so much forget
their Duty, as to omit striking their Topsail in passing by His
Majesty's Ships, the Name of the Ship and Master, and from whence,
and whither bound, together with Affidavits of the Fact, are to be
sent up to the Secretary of the Admiralty, in order to their being
proceeded against in the Admiralty Court. And it is to be observed,
That in His Majesty's Seas, His Majesty's Ships are in no wise to
strike to any; and that in other Parts, no Ship of His Majesty's is
to strike her Flag or Topsail to any Foreigner, unless such Foreign
Ship shall have first struck, or at the same time strike her Flag
or Top-sail to His Majesty's Ship.
An adequate presentment of the history of the salute at sea would claim
a volume to itself, and is indeed rather outside the scope of the
present work, but it may be remarked that in the sixteenth century
(and probably at an earlier date, though evidence of this is lacking)
the requirement of the salute--in itself a mere passing ceremony--was
expanded into a demand that no foreign ship or English merchantman
should fly any flag at all when in the presence of any of H.M. ships
of war. This point of view, as understood by the seamen of the late
Elizabethan and early Stuart period, is set forth in the _Observations_
of Sir Richard Hawkins published just after his death in 1622:
One thing the French suffered (upon what occasion or ground I know
not) that the English always carried their flag displayed: which
in other partes and Kingdomes is not permitted; at least in our
seas, if a Stranger Fleete meete with any of his Majesties ships,
the forraigners are bound to take in their flags, or his Majesties
ships to force them to it though thereof follow the breach of
peace, or whatsoever discommodity. And whosoever should not be
jealous in this point, hee is not worthy to have the commaund of
a Cock-boat committed unto him: yea no stranger ought to open his
flag in any Port of England, where there is any Shipp or Fort of
his Majesties; upon penaltie to loose his flagg and to pay for the
powder and shott spend upon him. Yea, such is the respect to his
Majesties Shippes in all places of his Dominions, that no English
ship displayeth the Flagge in their presence, but runneth the like
danger, except they be in his Majesties service: and then they are
in predicament of the Kings Ships.
* * * * *
In Queene Maries Raigne, King Philip of Spaine comming to marry
with the Queene, and meeting with the Royall Navie of England, the
Lord William Howard, High Admirall of England, would not consent
that the King in the Narrow Seas should carrie his Flagge displayed
until he came into the Harbour of Plimouth.
I being of tender yeares, there came a Fleete of Spaniards of above
fiftie sayle of Shippes bound for Flaunders to fetch the Queene
Dona Anna de Austria, last wife to Philip the second of Spaine,
which entered betwixt the Iland and the Maine, without vayling
their Top-sayles or taking in of their Flags, which my father, Sir
John Hawkins (Admirall of a Fleete of her Majesties Shippes then
ryding in Catt-water) perceiving, commanded his Gunner to shoot at
the flagge of the Admirall, that they might thereby see their error.
The instances in which this point of view was impressed upon foreign
ships and English merchant ships are numerous.
The following example of the ceremonious manner in which the salute was
sometimes voluntarily rendered outside the "Narrow Seas" is of special
interest. It occurred during the expedition to Algiers in 1620, under
Sir Robert Mansell:
The one and thirtieth of October, in the morning wee turned into
the Road of Gibraltar, where were riding at anchor two of the King
of Spaines ships of warre, the Vice Admirall of a Squadron with
the Kings Armes in his fore-top and another, who so soone as they
perceived us weighed their Anchors, set sayle, and comming Lee-ward
of our Admirall, strooke his flag, saluting him with their small
shot and great Ordnance, after haled him with voyces; our Admirall
striking his flag, answered them with voyces, gave them his
Ordnance and small shot, all the Fleet following in order.
Before the legislative union of the two kingdoms, the salute was
exacted by English men-of-war of ships of the Scottish navy. In June,
1706, the 'Royal William,' one of the three small ships that then
comprised the Scots navy, put into Tynemouth, whereupon the commanding
officer of H.M.S. 'Dunwich' fired "a sharp great shot" at her and
complained that her commanding officer was displaying a broad pendant
in English waters. In his letter reporting the incident to the Lord
High Admiral of Scotland, Commodore Gordon adds that the commander of
H.M.S. 'Bonaventure' had told him "that he should be sorry of meeting
me without the Island of May, since he had orders from the Board of
England to make our frigates strike and salute[398]."
Closely connected in idea with the lowering of the flag in salute and
as a mark of respect to a stronger power is the lowering of it as a
sign of submission and surrender in action. Its application to this
purpose seems comparatively modern and to have been really an extension
of the salute. In naval warfare among the ancients and during the
middle ages submission was often of little use; the only safe thing to
be done by those who saw that they would be beaten and cared to save
their lives was to take to flight. Prisoners, except a few likely to be
of value for ransom, were usually disposed of summarily by being thrown
overboard, for there was little room for them in the early ships and
none at all in the galleys. It will be remembered that Chaucer says of
his "Schipman": "If that he foughte and hadde the heigher hand By water
he sente hem hoom to everyland." When Hubert de Burgh's men in 1217
agreed that so soon as they had boarded Eustace the Monk's ship one of
their number should climb the mast and cut down the flag, they did not
imagine that this would indicate surrender; the object they had in view
was to confuse the remaining enemy ships by depriving them of the mark
by which they could recognise their leader's ship.
Until the use of great ordnance had been sufficiently developed at
sea to enable an enemy ship to be overcome at a distance, it is
obvious that the dispute for the mastery could only be settled by
hand-to-hand encounter. In these circumstances there would be no
need of any method of indicating surrender other than by a personal
appeal for quarter on the part of the vanquished crew, and indeed, the
vanquished would hardly have the time or opportunity of removing the
various flags placed along the bulwarks or flown from the masthead as
a preliminary to such an appeal. But when it became possible for the
ship to be destroyed from a distance, some method of indicating a wish
to surrender on terms became necessary. This appears to have first
been provided by displaying a flag of truce, a practice that was no
doubt adopted about the beginning of the sixteenth century from the
usages of land warfare where it had been current for many centuries.
The following instance of its employment at sea occurred during Sir
Richard Hawkins' voyage into the South Sea in 1593-4. In April, 1594,
Hawkins' ship was caught at a disadvantage in the Bay of San Mateo.
The crew were not over-anxious to fight, and talked of surrendering.
Hawkins harangued them: "Came we into the South Sea," he asked, "to
put out flagges of truce? And left we our pleasant England, with all
her contentments with intention and purpose to avayle ourselves of
white ragges?" After some fighting, which their neglect of proper
preparations rendered useless, the captain of the ship "presently
caused a flagge of truce to be put in place of our Ensigne, and began
to parley of our surrendering[399]." It will be noted that the colours
were hauled down and the white flag then hoisted on the ensign staff.
This method of indicating a wish to surrender was evidently the general
practice at this period, for in the same year, during an attack upon a
carrack by the Earl of Cumberland at Terceira, some of the crew of the
carrack who had had enough fighting waved a flag of truce and called
out to the English to save their lives, but the captain ordered them
to take in the flag of truce, for he had determined never to yield
while he lived. In the time of the First Dutch War the striking of the
colours formed part of the outward symbolism of surrender, but not the
whole. According to Captain Joseph Cubitt's account of the Battle off
the Texel on 31st August, 1653, some of the Dutch ships "that had lost
all their masts struck their colours and put out a white handkerchief
on a staff, and hauled in all their guns[400]." It may be concluded
from this that the mere hauling down of the colours was not in itself
considered sufficient to indicate that the ship desired to take no
further part in the fight, nevertheless it is clear that as great
importance was attached to the capture of the flags as to the capture
of a regiment's colours on land, for the States General published a
list of rewards[401] offered to their "soldiers at sea" which included
an offer of 1000 guilders to him who should "fetch off and deliver up"
the flag of the chief admiral, 500 guilders for a subordinate admiral's
flag, 250 guilders for a jack, 150 guilders for a flag from the mizen,
and 50 guilders for a stern ensign.
The process of surrender is illustrated by Captain John Smith in his
_Accidence for Young Seamen_[402] in the following words:
They hang out a flag of truce ... hale him amaine, abase or take in
his flag, strike their sailes and come aboard with their Captaine,
Purser and Gunner, with their commission, coket, or bils of lading.
By the time of the Second Dutch War (1666) the mediation of a flag of
truce appears to have become unnecessary, for Van de Velde's picture of
the surrender of the 'Royal Prince,' Admiral Ayscue's flagship which
ran aground on the Galloper during the Four Days' Fight, clearly shows
the lowered ensign and a man at the main masthead in act of lowering
the admiral's flag. Van de Velde was present at the action, so that
there can be little doubt but that the details are correct. From this
date the lowering of the colours appears to have been sufficient.
But perhaps the principal reason for the disuse of the white flag at
sea lay in its ambiguity. On the occasion above referred to, Ayscue was
Admiral of the White Squadron, and the 'Royal Prince' was displaying
a large white flag at the masthead and an ensign which was almost
entirely white save for a small St George's cross in its upper corner.
In such circumstances the display of another white flag would have been
liable to misunderstanding. A like ambiguity would have arisen in the
French navy, where from 1661 until the Revolution the ensign was plain
white, and it may be noted that in 1794 during the attack on Martinique
the French fired on a flag of truce sent by the English, and explained
their action later as being due to a mistaken supposition that it was
intended for the colours of their late rulers the Bourbons; whereupon
it was agreed that in future ships bearing flags of truce should have
the enemy's flag at the bow and their own national colours at the stern.
The plainest and most unmistakable method of indicating surrender is
to hoist the enemy colours above one's own, and this was the course
adopted by some of the Spanish ships which surrendered at Trafalgar,
although others appear to have hoisted the white flag after hauling
down their own colours[403]. Modern practice, however, recognises the
hauling down of the colours accompanied by the cessation of fire as
sufficient; the victors on taking possession then hoist their own flag
above the enemy flag as a sign of capture.
It is evident from an incident that occurred during the capture of
the Island of Goree by Commodore Keppel in 1758 that the precise
significance of hauling down the flag was in doubt even at that
comparatively late date. The fire of the British Squadron was so
overpowering that the enemy's flag was hauled down and the fire
thereupon ceased.
A lieutenant being ordered ashore, attended by the Commodore's
Secretary ... was surprised on being asked before they quitted the
boat on what terms the surrender was "expected." The lieutenant
astonished at this question asked if they had not struck their
flag, intimating an unconditional submission resting merely on the
clemency of the victor? He was answered "No: lowering of the flag
was intended only as a signal for a parley."
The action was thereupon renewed and finally the Governor ordered
the regimental colours to be dropped over the walls as a signal of
surrender at discretion[404].
The captor's flag is not hoisted above the colours of a neutral vessel
seized for breach of blockade or similar reasons; in such a case the
captor's flag (if hoisted) should be hoisted in another part of the
ship.
The custom of "half-masting" the flag, that is, of lowering it to a
position halfway or more down the flagstaff as a sign of mourning,
does not seem to be very ancient, but it is probably older than the
seventeenth century. The earliest instance in which I have met it
occurred in July, 1612, on the occasion of the murder of James Hall by
the Esquimoes during the first expedition in search of the North-West
Passage in which Baffin took part, when the 'Heart's Ease' rejoined
the 'Patience' with "her flag hanging down and her ancient hanging
over the poop, which was a sign of death." On entering the Thames two
months later the 'Heart's Ease' again lowered her flag and ensign "in
token and sign of the death of Mr Hall," so that it was at that date
well understood to signify the death of the commanding officer of a
ship. It was the custom in the navy after the Restoration to observe
the anniversary of the execution of Charles I in a similar manner, for
Teonge twice records the fact in his Diary:
30 Jan. 1675. This day being the day of our King's marterdome wee
shew all the signs of morning as possible wee can, viz. our jacks
and flaggs only halfe staff high;
and again:
30 Jan. 1678. A solemn day, and wee keep it accordingly with jacks
and pendents loared halfeway.
Evidently the practice of half-masting the flags was well understood
both in the English navy and in the merchant service, but it is
doubtful if it became a universal custom until comparatively modern
times. The 'Black Pinnace,' which brought the body of Sir Philip
Sydney from Holland in 1586, had black sails, but the illustration in
the contemporary account of his funeral[405] shows the flags at the
masthead, and the Danish ship which brought over the Duke of Richmond's
body in 1673 had a "black Flagg at his Main Top Masthead and black
colours[406]." Black as a sign of mourning is of great antiquity, and
a black sail was used for this purpose among the ancient Greeks, but a
black flag was used by Drake at Cartagena in 1585 as a sign of war to
the death, and was commonly adopted by pirates with a like meaning. It
was never used in the navy in the sinister connection in which it is
used ashore; an execution in one of H.M. ships was signalised by the
display of a yellow flag at the masthead.
We may conjecture that the original signification of the lowered flag
was the passing away of the authority which that flag connoted.
After the battle of Lepanto in 1571 the fleet of Don John entered
Messina "the galleys gay with all their flags and streamers and
towing their prizes with lowered colours."
There were several ways of treating the flag of a captured ship during
the seventeenth century. It might be hung below the ensign of the
captor on his ensign staff, hung over his stern spread upon a spar or
trailing in the water, hung over the stern of the captured ship in like
manner[407], or kept to "dress ship" with. When Captain Heaton was in
command of H.M.S. 'Sapphire' during the First Dutch War,
he took so many prizes that on a festival day the Yards, Stays,
backstays and shrouds being hung with Dutch, French, Spanish and
Burgundian colours and pendants variously intermixed, made a
beautiful show, and raised the courage of all belonged to her[408].
The practice of hoisting numerous flags in token of rejoicing is so
ancient and so widespread that it may be regarded rather as the result
of a primitive instinct than the outcome of any formal symbolism, but
it may be noted that, although the display of numerous flags by ships
in harbour on holy days and days of national rejoicing was allowed,
and in some cases even enjoined by authority, the display at sea of
"ostentatious bravery" was usually interpreted to indicate some
warlike or provocative action on the part of the ship indulging in it.
This was certainly the case until the end of the seventeenth century,
but with the dawn of the eighteenth a more law-abiding, or perhaps we
should say more civilised, spirit began to prevail upon the sea, and
these primitive methods of displaying the red rag to the bull began
to go into disuse. The practice of displaying flags upon occasions of
rejoicing, however, gave rise from time to time to unpleasant incidents
between ships of different nations from the indiscriminate use of all
the flags in a ship, including national flags of other nations, in the
desire to make a fair show; for until the nineteenth century was well
advanced both men-of-war and merchantmen carried very few signal flags,
which are the only flags over whose relative precedence when hoisted in
"dressing ship" no offence can be given.
Prior to 1889 it was usual in the Royal navy for one of the junior
officers to draw up a scheme for "dressing ship" on ceremonial
occasions for the approval of the captain, but since that date the
order of the signal flags, some 60 in number, has been laid down in the
Signal Manual so that uniformity is secured, the national ensign (or
ensign of a foreign power if the occasion warrants the use of this)
being exhibited only at a masthead.
The modern practice, for all ordinary occasions, is to hoist the
national colours in the morning and to keep them up until sunset,
but innumerable references to hoisting or "heaving out" the colours
indicate that in earlier days this was not the custom, and that they
were only hoisted at sea when there was some special reason for so
doing. There was a routine for hoisting the flag in harbour in the
time of Elizabeth, for the orders for Drake's fleet in 1589 and the
"Brief Noates" of John Young _circa_ 1596 both contain an article to
this effect, those absent without leave at the time being deprived of
their "aftermeal," but the hour at which the ceremony took place is not
stated. The practice at the end of the eighteenth century, as related
by Wm Spavens[409], Pensioner on the Naval Chest at Chatham, was as
follows:
At sunrise every ship in the fleet hoists her colours viz the
ensign and jack, unless it blows hard and the yards and top masts
are struck, in which case the colours are not hoisted but when some
vessel is coming in or passing; and at sunset they are again struck
or hauled down; at half past 7 o'clock the drums begin to beat and
continue till 8, when the ship on board of which the Commander in
Chief hoists his flag, fires a gun.
We do not know when this practice of hoisting the colours at sunrise
was first instituted, but it is not older than the seventeenth
century. In 1844 the time was altered to 8 A.M. from 25th March to
20th September and 9 A.M. from 21st September to 24th March. If there
is sufficient light for the ensign to be seen, it is hoisted earlier
or later than these hours, if the ship is coming to an anchor, getting
under way, passing or meeting another ship, approaching a fort or town,
etc.
The use of false flags as a means to deceive or entrap an enemy is
probably as old as the flag itself. We have already had an example
of the application of a similar ruse in the case of the Greek and
barbarian standards in the year 480 B.C., but perhaps the earliest
instance upon record of the use of flags at sea for this purpose
occurred about the end of the twelfth century when Frederick of Sicily
was a little boy (_dum ... Fredericus Sicilae Rex esset puerulus_).
The Pisans had fitted out twelve ships and galleys and set out to
attack Messina, which they tried to blockade. One night the citizens
discovered that four of the galleys were off the Pharos, or lighthouse.
They fitted out two galleys under Walter of Ferrara with picked crews,
and hoisting Pisan flags (which presumably would be visible near the
lighthouse) they fell upon the Pisans and took two of the galleys.
Many instances of the use of false flags, either to avoid scaring an
unsuspecting prey or to escape the notice of a stronger enemy, might
be culled from the sea literature of the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, one of the most interesting being the following, taken from
Captain Wyatt's account of Dudley's voyage in 1594-5:
But this before mentioned Spaniarde perceavinge the imminent
dainger ensewinge and seinge noe way to avoyde it ... made triall
of a thirde, which was to worke theire safetie by desaitefull
pollecie, a fitt subject for base objects to worke strainge
strategems, yett the usuall occupation of Spanish practises. Being
in this dilemma, and driven withall to this forced conclusion by
necessite, they bore up with us puttinge forth an English flagg,
keeping his men soe close that they might not soe much as seeme
to bee Spaniards. But wee seinge her to be a flibote standinge
with us, bearinge in her top the English collers, supposed them
at the least to be some Irishmen bounde for Lisborne.... But
beinge noe soener past us, and perceavinge that if wee should
cast aboute after them, wee might hasarde the bouldginge of our
selves, beinge a shipp of soe great a burden, and withall soe neare
the Rock, they then begin to disclose themselves, abusinge that
most contemptuouslie which before they had most safelie, although
craftelie, used for their safegarde, by takinge their English
flagg, by whom they had theire safe pass, from their top and
hanging it at theire sterne most disdainefullie[410].
Among more modern instances, one that is almost classic occurred in
January, 1797, when five large East Indiamen under the orders of
Lennox, master of the 'Woodford,' met a French squadron of six frigates
off Java. Lennox immediately hoisted the flag of a British admiral and
made imaginary signals, and by this means deceived the French into
thinking that they were in presence of a number of British men-of-war;
with the result that they withdrew and the East Indiamen escaped
capture.
There is no clear pronouncement of International Law as to what is and
what is not lawful in the use of false colours, and publicists are by
no means unanimous upon the subject, but the following instance is
given by Halleck[411] as an example of what should not be allowable:
In that year (1783) the 'Sybille,' a French frigate of thirty-eight
guns, Captain le Comte de Krergaron de Soemaria, enticed the
British ship 'Hussar,' twenty guns, Captain J. M. Russell, by
displaying an English ensign reversed in the main shrouds, and
English colours over French at the ensign staff. She was also under
jury-masts, had some shot holes, and in every way intimated herself
to be a distressed prize to some of the British ships. Captain
Russell at once approached to succour her, but she immediately,
by a preconcerted and rapid movement, aimed at carrying away the
bowsprit of the 'Hussar,' raking and then boarding her. This _ruse
de guerre_, of so black a tint, was only prevented taking full
effect by the promptitude of Captain Russell, who managed to turn
his ship in such a way as only to receive half the raking fire. He
then engaged with the 'Sybille,' and, on eventually capturing her,
publicly broke the sword of the French captain, who he considered
had sullied his reputation by descending to fight the 'Hussar'
for above thirty minutes under false colours, and with signals of
distress flying. "She" (the 'Hussar'), said Captain Russell, "had
not had fair play, but Almighty God had saved her from the most
foul snare of the most perfidious enemy." He confined the captain
of the 'Sybille' as a State prisoner. It appears that the latter
was subsequently brought to trial by his own Government, but was
acquitted.
It is, however, now generally agreed that ships of war may hoist false
colours for the purpose of deceiving the enemy, provided that their
proper national colours are substituted for them before any hostile
act is committed. As regards the use of neutral colours by merchantmen
seeking to escape capture, it will be remembered that during the late
war the Germans claimed this as a violation of the law, but the British
Government contended that it was a legitimate _ruse de guerre_, and had
been recognised in the past as not entailing a breach of international
law.
A few remarks may be offered upon the various methods of fastening
the flag to its support. In the earliest times it seems to have been
nailed to its staff, and while it was small and easily portable this
entailed no inconvenience. Afterwards it became customary to form a
socket of canvas, buckram, or other stout material to which the hoist
was sewn, and which was slipped over the staff from the top. This
method was only convenient for the smaller flags, and with larger ones
it appears to have been usual to sew a band of canvas down the hoist
and attach a number of ribands to this by which the flag was tied to
the staff. Finally, the flag was sewn to a piece of rope which could be
made fast at the ends to halliards running through a block or sheave
in the cap at the top of the staff, but at first these halliards were,
in the case of masthead flags, taken only down to the top, not to the
deck, so that a sailor had to ascend the mast whenever the flag was
taken down or put up, or when any signal had to be made aloft. Thus,
during the battle with the Dutch off Lowestoft on 3rd June, 1665, the
Duke of York
ordered the signal to be given for the whole fleet to tack, but the
sailor who had got up the mast to give the signal was so long about
it that before he could let the flag fly Opdam had with his van
bore up round.... This little accident lost above six hours.
No doubt it was "accidents" of this nature that led, at a later date,
to the introduction of longer halliards reaching down to the deck[412].
After the introduction of the driver or spanker boom about 1790 the
ensign staff on the poop had to be removed in three-masted ships when
the ship was under sail, and the ensign was then hoisted at the "peak"
or outer end of the gaff by which this spanker sail was supported, the
halliards passing from the poop through a small block made fast at
the extremity of this spar. This continued to be the position for the
ensign when the ship was at sea until the abolition of sails brought it
again to its original position.
It remains to say a few words about the sizes of flags. The "baucan"
streamer of _circa_ 1293 was 30 yards long and 2 yards wide at the
head. In 1337 the streamers range from 14 to 32 yards in length and
were from 3 to 5 "cloths" wide. It is not known what the width of a
"cloth" was, but it was certainly not the full width in which the
cloth was made in the loom, which would have been 54 inches or more.
Probably it was about one yard, for the banners were 1¾ yards long
and 2 "cloths" wide, and we know that these were rectangular and
rather deeper in the hoist than they were long in the fly. In the time
of Elizabeth the streamers were from 12 to 28 yards long and 2 to 3
yards broad at the head, rather less in size than those of 1337, but
the banners had increased in size and some were 5 yards long and 4½
yards deep. In 1623 ensigns were of 9 to 18 "breadths," flags 5 to 24
"breadths" and pendants 8 to 24 yards long. This "breadth" was probably
11 inches, for in 1664 the material was being woven in widths of 23
inches and then cut in half. Pepys, at a somewhat later date, tells us
that
it is in general to be noted that the Bewper of which Colors are
made being 22 inches in breadth, and the half of that breadth or
11 inches going in ordinary discourse by the name of a Breadth
when wrought into Colours, every such breadth is allowed about
half-a-yard for its Fly.
By this rule the largest ensigns in 1623 were 27 feet long and 16 feet
6 inches deep, and the largest "flags" (i.e. masthead flags) 36 feet
long and 22 feet deep. In Pepys' time the ensign or flag of a first
rate was 26 breadths and 14 yards in the fly, while the jack was of
14 breadths and 7 yards fly, and the pendant 3 breadths at the head
and 32 yards fly. The "distinction" pendant as used in the Downs was
broader and shorter, being of 5 breadths and 21 yards fly. The Lord
High Admiral's flag was 24 or 22 breadths and 12 or 11 yards fly. In
1708 the ensigns had slightly increased in size and varied from 10 to
30 breadths, but the "breadth" was then nearer 10 inches than 11. An
ensign of 26 breadths in 1709 was 14 yards long and the Union canton
was 189 inches by 117 inches. In 1742 ensigns were from 16 to 34
breadths and 9 to 17 yards long, and jacks were from 6 to 16 breadths
and 3 to 8 yards long.
These were truly enormous flags, and towards the end of the eighteenth
century the sizes seem to have suffered a gradual reduction. In modern
times the "breadth" has been reduced to 9 inches, and the largest
ensigns are not more than 22 breadths, but the relative length of the
flag has been slightly increased. Thus the largest ensign of 1742 was
51 feet long and 28 feet deep; the largest modern ensign is 33 feet
long and 16½ feet deep. The largest Union flag is now 18 breadths,
i.e. 27 feet by 13 feet 6 inches, while pendants vary from 3 to 20
yards in length. The proportions of the crosses in a modern Union flag
are as follows:
{ red 1/5 of width of flag
St George's Cross {
{ white border 1/15 " "
St Andrew's Cross { white 1/10 " "
{ red 1/15 " "
St Patrick's Cross {
{ white border 1/30 " "
It may be observed that the white "fimbriation" of the St Patrick's
cross, required by the rules of heraldry to prevent the colour red from
touching the colour blue (white being a "metal": silver) is now taken
from the width of the red, reducing that from 1/10 to 1/15. The two
crosses, St Andrew's and St Patrick's ought, however, to be of equal
width, and the fimbriation of the latter should therefore be taken from
the blue ground.
In the white ensign the St George's cross in the fly is 2/15 of the
width of the flag. In the red and blue ensigns the Union canton now
occupies one-fourth of the flag; in the white it is, of course,
slightly smaller owing to the space occupied by the large St George's
cross.
The pendant at the masthead of one of H.M. ships is a sign that the
ship is in "commission"; that is, in active service under the command
of an officer of the Royal Navy holding a commission from the Crown or
the Lord High Admiral or the Commissioners for executing that office.
It is not flown in ships in reserve. In ships flying the flag of an
Admiral, or a Commodore's broad pendant, the Admiral's or Commodore's
flag is in itself sufficient indication that the ship is in commission,
and the pendant is not flown in those ships. It is, however, not struck
when a captain hoists a Senior Officer's pendant.
It is difficult to say when the custom of hoisting a pendant on
commissioning the ship became established. Mainwaring, writing about
1623, speaks of the pendants as serving solely "for a show to beautify
the ship," and Boteler, ten years later, knew them only as used for
this purpose or as a means of distinguishing the squadrons of a
fleet[413]; but from 1661 onwards there was, in addition to the three
squadronal pendants with red, white or blue fly, a fourth with the fly
striped red, white and blue. This was the distinctive pendant of all
H.M. ships in commission which did not form part of a fleet divided
into squadrons by the red, white and blue squadronal colours.
The first step towards the recognition of the pendant as the
distinctive sign of a man-of-war was taken by the Proclamation of 1661,
which assigned the Union pendant to H.M. ships only, and the next by
the Proclamation of 1674, which forbade merchantmen to fly any pendant
whatsoever; but although the use of a pendant was thereby confined to
men-of-war, it does not seem to have been the custom at that time to
fly it continuously. It is clear from the Diary which Teonge, the naval
chaplain, kept during his service in the Navy from 1675 to 1679, that
the pendant was only hoisted--with the jack and ensign--when the ship
wished to make her nationality known; or was preparing to fight; or on
days of rejoicing, when pendants were hung from every yardarm; but the
significance of the pendant seems to have been generally recognised
at that date, for in the account which he gives of the launching in
1676 of a brigantine by the Knights of Malta, he says that after the
religious ceremony, "they hoysted a pendent to signify shee was a man
of warre, and then at once thrust her into the water."
Although it was not until 1824 that the King's Regulations for the
Navy contained any instruction that ships in commission were to fly
a pendant, it is probable that the practice of flying a pendant
continuously in H.M. ships in commission was established about the end
of the seventeenth century, for the first edition of the Regulations
(1731) contained a direction to Captains "to husband the Ship's
Colours, and not to keep them abroad in windy weather, the Pendant
being a sufficient mark of distinction," from which it is clear that
the latter was then flown continuously. The practice in the Navy at the
beginning of the nineteenth century is given by Captain Basil Hall[414]
in the following words:
In the mean time I must proceed to put my ship in commission. The
first thing to do is to get hold of one of the warrant-officers to
"hoist the pendant," which is a long slender streamer, having a St
George's cross on a white field in the upper part next the mast,
with a fly, or tail, either Red, White, and Blue, or entirely of
the colour of the particular ensign worn by the ship; which, again,
is determined by the colour of the Admiral's flag under whose
orders she is placed. The pendant being hoisted shows that the ship
is in commission, and this part of the colours is never hauled down
day or night. At sunset, when the ensign is hauled down, a smaller
pendant three or four yards in length, is substituted for the long
one, which, in dandified ships, waves far over the stern. Ships in
ordinary[415] hoist merely an ensign.
According to modern practice the pendant is hoisted at 9 a.m. on the
day on which the ship is "commissioned" and is kept flying night and
day (unless an Admiral's flag is hoisted in her) until she is "paid
off." At the present day the regulation size is strictly adhered to,
even in "dandified ships"; but it is a common practice for ships
abroad, when ordered to return home to pay off, to hoist a very long
narrow pendant, apparently as a sign of rejoicing. This pendant, which
is of course not officially recognised, is made by the signal staff
out of white bunting which they have "acquired" in the course of the
commission, and is usually of such length (150-250 feet) as to reach
from the masthead to the water, even when inclined at a considerable
angle from the perpendicular, but in some instances it is much longer
and it has been known to reach 1400 feet. A bladder filled with air is
fastened at the end to keep it buoyant when trailing on the water.
It was at one time the custom to fly the Union flag at the masthead
of any of H.M. ships in which a foreign personage of importance was
embarked. The two following examples are typical of this usage, which
is now obsolete. When William Prince of Orange came to England in 1677
to marry the Princess Mary, the royal yacht which brought him over
carried this flag at the masthead while he was on board; and in 1689
Admiral Russell, who had embarked the Queen of Spain in his ship at
Flushing and conveyed her to the Downs and thence to Corunna, flew the
Union flag at the main topmast-head during the time the Queen was on
board his ship. In modern times the personal standard of the Prince
or the Queen would have been flown, but it is clear from these and
similar examples that the wearing of a foreign flag at the masthead of
one of H.M. ships would at an earlier period have been regarded as an
intolerable act of humiliation.
Analogous to this usage was the flying of the Union flag at the
main when the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Governors of Colonies, or
Ambassadors were embarked, but this mark of honour was not permitted in
the waters of the English Channel or in the presence of an Admiral's
flag. In 1821 the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland was granted the use of a
special form of the Union flag bearing in the centre a harp on a blue
escutcheon, and in modern times the Governors General or Governors of
Colonies or Dominions may, when afloat, fly a Union flag bearing the
badge of the Colony in the centre.
* * * * *
In this account of the history of British flags I have not dwelt
upon the immaterial or emotional aspects of these important national
emblems; partly because this seemed somewhat foreign to the aim I had
in view; partly because this side has been sufficiently illustrated
in other works. There is, however, one aspect which may receive an
illustration here. Among the privileges and duties of which a British
flag has for so many centuries been an outward emblem, not the least
in value has been that of freedom. Towards the end of 1769 Lord St
Vincent, then plain Captain Jervis, was in the Port of Genoa in
H.M.S. 'Alarm.' Two Turkish galley slaves temporarily released from
their chains were walking on the mole near their galley when they
caught sight of one of the 'Alarm's' boats. They jumped into her and
wrapped themselves in the British colours, claiming their freedom. The
Genoese guard removed them by force, part of the boat's pendant being
torn away in the struggle. Jervis demanded of the Doge and Senate of
Genoa that the officer of the guard should bring the slaves with the
fragment of the colours and make a formal apology on the quarter deck
of the 'Alarm.' When this had been done, Jervis "asked the slave who
had wrapped the pendent round his body what were his sensations when
the guard tore him from the pendent staff. His reply was that he felt
no dread for he knew that the touch of the royal colours gave him
freedom." And upon this note I must make an end.
FOOTNOTES:
[395] Twiss, _Black Book of the Admiralty_, I, 129.
[396] Hakluyt, _Voyages_, VII, 103.
[397] _S. P. D. Chas I_, CXCII, 3.
[398] Grant, _The Old Scots Navy_ (N.R.S.), p. 337.
[399] _The Observations of Sir Richard Hawkins, Knight, in his Voiage
into the South Sea_, p. 155.
[400] _S. P. D. Inter._, XXIX, 11.
[401] _First Dutch War_ (N. R. S.), V, 319.
[402] 1626, reprinted with additions as _A Sea Grammar_ in 1627 and
1653.
[403] The 'Bahama' (Sp.), the 'Argonauta' (Sp.) and the 'Achille' (Fr.)
indicated their surrender by displaying Union jacks from the deck.
[404] Charnock, _Biographia Navalis_, V, 318.
[405] Reproduced in Corbett, _Drake and the Tudor Navy_, I, 363.
[406] _Pepys MSS._ Narborough's Journal, 9th September, 1673. This ship
was actually fired at for not striking the flag on coming near the
fleet!
[407] The practice of towing captured galleys stern foremost with their
flags trailing in the water was in vogue as early as the end of the
thirteenth century.
[408] Gardiner, _First Dutch War_ (N. R. S.), I, 23.
[409] _The Seaman's Narrative_, 1796, p. 127.
[410] _The Voyage of Robert Dudley to the West Indies_ (Hakluyt Soc.),
II, 3.
[411] _International Law_, I, 568.
[412] The date is not known, but it was after 1672. Cf. Narborough's
Journal, 29th May, 1672: "A seaman set at the Foretopmasthead with the
Flagg of Defiance loose in his arms ready to hoist."
[413] See p. 117.
[414] _Fragments of Voyages and Travels_, 3rd Series, vol. III, p. 6.
[415] I.e. in reserve.
INDEX
Admiral, flags of, 63-5, 85;
in boats, 100;
rank distinguished by balls, 101
---- Lord High, use of standard 77, 80, 87, 88, 91;
anchor flag, 80-4, 201;
of Scotland, 84, 192
Admiralty flag, 81
Æthelstan, 32
Agrippa, blue flag, 11
Alexander the Great, 7
Amadeo of Savoy, 112, 143
Anchor, as badge of Lord High Admiral, 82
Anne, Queen, 84
Anthony, A., 45
Antioch, 22
Aradus, 7
Artemisia, 8
Athens, 7
Audley, Thomas, 87, 155
Australia, flags of, 85, 121, 135, 136
Baldwin, 19
banner, early, 2;
of Richard I, 4, 21;
of Edward I, 34;
Tudor, 45
baucan, 42, 161
Bauçan, 21
Bayeux Tapestry, 13
Bayonne, 42
Bohemond, 18
Boteler, Sir Nathaniel, 61, 86, 117, 158
Bristol, 46
Bruges, 42
Brutus, 11
Buckingham, Duke of, 78, 82, 89, 91, 157
Bytharne, Jehan, 154
Cabot, John, 77
Cadiz, expeditions to, 88, 89, 114, 157
Calais, 45
Canada, flags of, 121, 135
carroccio, 27
Charlemagne, flag of, 12, 17, 32
Charles II, flag flown at homecoming, 66
Childers, H. C. E., 85
Cinque Ports, flag of, 42, 43, 128
Clarence, Duke of (William IV), 85
colonial flags, 128, 135
colours of distinction, 110;
_see also_ Ensign
comitus, 25
commodore, pendant of, 102, 105;
of Bombay Marine, 122
Conflans, Antoine de, 150
Constantine, 12
Constantinople, 26
council, banner of, 77, 142, 143, 145, 149, 155, 157
crescent, in early standards, 7
Cromwell, Oliver, 65
cross, as standard, 7;
in flags, 19;
coloured for, at Crusades, 33, 37;
of St George, 37
crusades, 17
Danes, 30, 50
Dartmouth, Lord, 107
Dover, 43
dragon standard, form of, 10;
in Bayeux Tapestry, 16;
in England, 32;
of Richard I, 33;
at Westminster, 33;
in army, 34;
in Scotland, 49
Drake, Sir Francis, 45, 60, 113
East India Co., flag of, 130;
signals, 183
Edward I, 37;
cross of St George, 39;
convention with Count of Flanders, 42
Edward III, founds chapel of St George, 40;
adopts arms of France, 74;
at Sluys, 77;
flag at sea, 86
Egypt, 6
ensign, called 'colours,' 6;
commonwealth, 62;
red for merchant ships, 68;
union replaces St George's cross, 71, 118;
of three colours, 92;
change in white, 99;
striped, 115;
introduction of red, 115;
of white and blue, 117;
squadronal colours, 117, 119
Essex, Earl of, 88
Eustace the monk, 86
Faversham, 42
flag, definition of, 1;
origin and development, 1;
unknown to the Greeks, 9;
early Chinese, 9;
early Athenian, 9;
laterally-attached, 12;
protection, 12, 19;
Arab, 13;
unusual form in Bayeux Tapestry, 15;
triangular, 16;
Crusaders', 18;
introduction of heraldic devices, 21;
consecrated, 14, 21, 23;
authority conveyed by, 22, 27;
of Pisa, 23;
of Genoa, 24;
of Venice, 25;
division of fleet by, 25, 91;
origin of national, 27, 28;
early English, 30;
Saxon, 30;
Danish, raven, 30;
of St George (_vide s.v._);
baucan, 42;
early English ships, 42-6;
Union (_vide s.v._);
alterations under the Commonwealth, 62;
of command, 74;
squadronal colours, 111, 117;
privateers, 124;
public offices, 126;
for signals (_vide s.v._);
ceremonials, 189; striking, 189;
salute, 190;
lowered as sign of surrender, 192-5;
white flag of truce, 193;
half-masted, 195;
black for mourning, 196;
black indicating no quarter, 196;
yellow at executions, 196;
of captured ship, 195-6;
as indication of rejoicing, 196;
dressing ship, 197;
time for hoisting at sea, 197;
false colours, 198;
methods of attachment, 199;
sizes of, 200.
(_See also_ Banner, Ensign, Gonfanon, Standard.)
flagstaff, naked, use of, 95
flammula, 11
Flanders, 42
Florence, 27, 28
Garter, Order of, 44
Gaston de Bearn, 18
Genoa, rise of, 23;
flag of St George, 24
geton, 6, 44
Godfrey of Bouillon, 18
gonfanon, early form, 2, 5, 13;
in Bayeux Tapestry, 14;
_chansons de geste_, 20;
Genoese, 24;
of St Mark, 26;
of council, 44
Greece, 7, 9
Greenwood, Jonathan, 163
guidon, 6
Hamburg, 29
Harold, standard of, 16, 32
Hastings, 42, 46
Hawke, Sir Edward, 164
Hawkins, Sir John, 45, 114, 156, 191
---- Sir Richard, 191, 193
Henry II, 37, 38
---- IV, 74
---- V, ordinances of war, 41
---- VIII, flags on ships, 45, 113;
adopts harp for Ireland, 52
Histiaea, 8
Holy Trinity, 44
Hood, Lord, 174
Hospitallers, flag of knights, 21
Howard of Effingham, 78, 82, 88
Howe, Earl, 120, 167, 168, 171
Indian Marine (Royal), flags of, 121
Innocent III, 22
insignia, 2;
mentioned by Vegetius, 10
Ireland, early flags, 50;
red saltire, 51;
great standard of, 52;
arms of, 52, 75;
harp, 52, 64, 65, 75
Jack, definition of, 6;
introduction of, 60;
during Commonwealth, 64, 94;
on merchant ships, 68;
on yachts, 69;
budgee jack, 69, 124;
special form for use in America, 70, 127;
disuse of, at sea, 71;
misuse of term, 73
Jaffa, 19
James I, 54, 75
---- II (Duke of York), 67, 81, 83, 162
Jerusalem, 18
John (Don) of Austria, 112
Kempenfelt, Richard, 167, 169, 170
Knowles, Sir Charles, 166
La Bourdonnais, Mahé de, 167
Lateran, mosaic, 12
Leo, Emperor, tactical signals, 141
Lloyds, flag, 128
Lubeck, 29
Lyme Regis, 41, 46
McArthur, John, 174
Marryat, Frederick, 183
Mary, Queen, impales arms of Spain in Standard, 74
Milan, early national ensign of, 27
Millan, John, 163
Mocenigo, Piero, 146
Nelson, Lord, 121, 172, 174, 175, 178
New Zealand, flags of, 135
Northumberland, Earl of, 83
Octavian, 11
Padua, 27
Papal flags, 19, 21, 22, 23
Parma, 27
Pembroke, Earl of, 80, 84, 99
pendant, 6, 114;
Union, 73;
to distinguish squadrons, 90;
of command, 102;
of distinction, 98, 102;
budgee, 105;
of Commodore, 102, 105;
of senior officer, 107;
of ships of war, 110;
of Bombay Marine, 122;
sizes of, 201, 203;
hoisted on commissioning, 202
Pennington, Sir John, 61, 158
pennon, 6
pennoncel, 6, 38, 43
Pepys, Samuel, 57, 66, 95, 102, 104, 108, 126, 130
Pergamum, 8
Philip Augustus, 21
Philip of Flanders, 21
---- of Spain, 191
phoinikis, 9, 10, 141
pinnae, 11
Pisa, flags of, 22
Polyaenus, 8
Pompey, 11
Popham, Sir Home, 176, 180, 183
private ship, definition of, 90
privateer, flags of, 124;
red jack, 70, 125
protentinus, 25
Raymond of Toulouse, 18
Richard I, banner and standard, 4, 21, 33, 74
---- II, orders army to bear St George's cross, 40;
impales arms of Edward the Confessor in Standard, 74
Riga, 29
Robert of Normandy, 19
Rooke, Sir George, 98, 163
royal arms, flags of, 42, 43, 44, 74;
of Scotland, 48
Rupen, 22
Rupert, Prince, 79
Russell, Edward, 163
Rye, 46
St Andrew, becomes patron saint of Scotland, 47;
cross placed upon clothing of Scots army, 41, 47;
flag, 55, 59, 64, 65, 92, 131
St Columba, 47
St Cuthbert, 34
St Edmund, 34, 39, 40, 43
St Edward, 34, 39, 40, 43, 44
St George, cross of, 20;
flag of, 24, 34, 36, 42, 44, 51, 55, 57, 59, 91, 113;
cult of 35;
early representations in England, 36;
origin of cross of, 37;
introduction into England, 38;
becomes patron saint, 40;
cross placed on clothing of army, 40;
flag on early ships, 42-6;
in use during Commonwealth, 62;
jack, 68;
as admiral's flag, 87, 99;
introduced into white ensign, 101, 118;
replaced by Union in ensign, 118
St John, 33, 34, 43;
flag of Knights of, 21
St Katherine, 44
St Margaret, 50
St Mark, 25, 26, 149
St Mary, flag of, 23, 27, 43, 44
St Maurice, 12, 32
St Nicholas, 44
St Patrick, 50, 52
St Peter, 22, 33, 47
St Wilfred, 33
Sandwich, 42
Saracens, 18
Scotland, early flags of, 46;
discontent with the Union Flag, 56;
flag during Commonwealth, 63, 64;
Northern lighthouses, 128;
salute to English men-of-war, 192
semeion, 2, 8, 9, 140
ships, early flags of English, 41-6, 76;
Scottish, 48, 63;
Irish, 52;
distinction between royal and merchant, 59;
flags during Commonwealth, 63;
public ships of war, 110;
private men-of-war, 124;
public ships, 126;
method of signalling, 188
---- merchant, flags of, 46, 129;
abuse of Union flag, 66;
to fly St George's jack, 68, 70, 132;
forbidden to fly Union flag, 130;
red ensign, 130;
East India Co., 130;
irregular colours, 133;
Levant Co., 134;
Guinea Co., 135;
Scottish East India Co., 135;
of British Dominions, 135;
blue ensign, 136
Sidon, 7
signals, vexillum, 10;
early flag signals, 140;
of 14th cent., 142;
of 15th cent., 146;
of 16th cent., 150;
of 17th cent., 157;
special flags first proposed, 160;
red flag, 160;
first English codes, 161;
Commonwealth, 162;
late Stuart, 162;
of Russell, 163;
of Rooke, 163;
of Hawke, 164;
numerary codes, 166;
of Sir Chas. Knowles, 166;
of la Bourdonnais, 167;
tabular system, 167;
of Howe, 169, 171;
of McArthur, 174;
vocabulary, 175;
of Popham, 176, 180;
at Trafalgar, 178;
modern codes, 181;
commercial codes, 183;
of Marryat, 183;
International Code, 184
signum, 2, 9, 10, 141
standard, early forms, 3;
at crusades, 4, 21;
Egyptian, 6;
Phoenician, 7;
Greek, 7;
Roman, 9;
of Brutus, 11;
position of, 11;
lowered, 11, 12;
of Harold, 16;
Battle of the, 33, 34, 49;
of the Generals at Sea, 64;
of Charles II, 66;
Royal, history of, 74;
of Commonwealth and Protectorate, 75, 79;
early use at sea, 76;
flown by Lord High Admiral, 77, 80;
by commanders of fleets, 78;
of William III, 80
streamers, 6;
lengths of, 45, 200
Strickland, Sir Roger, 95
Tancred, 18
Templars, flag of, 21
Tenterden, 46
Trafalgar, 178
Trinity House, 67, 103, 128
tufa, 11
Union Flag, origin of, 54;
proclamation of 1606, 55;
objection of Scots, 56;
quarterly form, 57;
first called 'Britain or British flag,' 58;
confined to ships of the R.N., 59;
introduction of the jack, 60;
form during Commonwealth, 63-5, 93;
at Restoration, 66;
usurped by merchant shipping, 66;
imitations of, 68;
proclamations against use by merchant ships, 67, 68;
union of 1707, 71;
of 1801, 71; modern patterns, 72;
flown by admirals, 89, 100;
use by captains in command, 98;
flown by privateers, 124;
white bordered, 127;
as signal, 158;
proportions of crosses in, 201;
for persons of distinction, 203
Venice, flag of, 25, 26, 149
Verona, 27
vexillum, 2, 9, 10, 30
William the Conqueror, gonfanon of, 12, 14
William III, 80
Wynter, William, 88, 155
Xerxes, 8
Yachts, flying union flag, 69;
flags of, 136
Yarmouth, 46
Young, Captain John, 60, 114, 197
PRINTED IN ENGLAND
AT THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
BY J. B. PEACE, M.A.
TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE
Italic text is denoted by _underscores_.
Bold text is denoted by =equal signs=.
Superscripts are denoted by ^ and have not been expanded;
for example 'I am informed y^t the Ma^{rs} of'.
Obvious typographical and punctuation errors have been corrected
after careful comparison with other occurrences within the text and
consultation of external sources.
Except for those changes noted below, inconsistent or archaic spelling
of a word or word-pair within the text has been retained. For example:
anchor-flag, anchor flag; city-states, city states; footsoldiers,
foot-soldiers, foot soldiers; engrafting; warre; yeeld.
p 28. 'Ghibbellines' changed to 'Ghibellines'.
Chap I Footnote [54]. 'coiore' changed to 'colore'.
Chap II Footnote [99]. xx above xj has been changed to xx*xj;
this represents 20x11 (220).
Chap II Footnote [99] and [118]. Italicized letters in the Latin
quotation have been made plaintext for clarity.
p 59. 'his Mats Shippes' changed to 'his Ma^{ts} Shippes'.
p 68. 'His Matys' changed to 'His Ma^{tys}'.
p 89. xx above iiij has been changed to xx*iiij; this
represents 20x4 (80).
p 89. [85] changed to (85) to avoid confusion with Footnote numbering.
p 100. Reference to Footnote [277] is made twice in the original text.
p 135. 'British Dominons' changed to 'British Dominions'.
p 138. A mid-line blank space has been replaced by '_________'.
p 162. 'coloumns' changed to 'columns'.
p 183. 'fifthteenth' changed to 'fifteenth'.
p 200. 'robands' changed to 'ribands'.