Persons not familiar with international signaling at sea will probably not appreciate the work and detail involved in the preparation of the new code which became effective January 1, 1934. Aside from expanding and making available for easy signaling a multitude of words, phrases, and expressions, in all the ramifications which may be desired, facilitating transmission of ideas by means of signal flags, arranging the various language codes so that the signals and their meanings can be looked up alphabetically in any of the accepted languages, and improving the old code in other ways, there have been added to the 27 flags already available, 10 numeral pennants and 3 repeaters. Under the old code, A and B were burgees, C, D, E, F, and G were pennants, and the rest were square flags. The present code has substituted new square flags for the pennants, has used the pennants as numerals 1-5, inclusive, and has added 5 more pennants to complete the 10 numerals, so that now all alphabet letters are square flags (A and B being burgees), and all numerals are pennants.
Signal flags are necessarily simple in design. Reference to the international code flags shows that their design, if not a solid color, is a grouping of two (in a few instances 3 and 4) contrasting colors in simple figures and divisions of the field. The subject is closely allied to heraldry, and with the same motive, since early heraldic bearings were really signals which designated their owners; shields and signal flags alike are “parted” and “charged.” The flag designs of the international code may be summarized as follows:
Solid (no divisions or devices)
BQ
Horizontal division (party per fess)
E
Vertical division (party per pale)
A H K
Three horizontal stripes (a fess)
J D (practically)
Three vertical stripes (a pale)
T
Many horizontal stripes (Barry)
C
Many vertical stripes (Paley)
G
Many diagonal stripes (Bend)
Y
Quartered
L U
Quartered diagonally
Z
Checkered (Checky)
N
A cross
R X
A saltier
M V
A diamond
F
A square (or ball)
P S I
Concentric squares
W
A ball
1 2
A cross
4 8
Horizontal division
6 7
Vertical division
5
Three vertical stripes
3 0
Quartered
9
It will be seen that the international code flag designs are all simple and unmistakable, and further, that in dividing the fields of the flags, practically every simple method of partition has been utilized.
Now, as to color, it is well known that the most striking, and generally the most beautiful flags, whether they are signal flags, national flags, or any other kind, are those which have contrasting colors adjacent. White and yellow are the distinctly “light” colors, in contrast to the other relatively darker colors, and it is noteworthy that there are very few well- known flags which do not embody either white or yellow. Our own flag uses red and white stripes, and blue, with white stars; Holland, Belgium, Sweden, Japan, Turkey —all have either yellow or white next to the other color or colors which compose their flags; Great Britain’s red crosses, in her Union Jack, are not directly on the blue background, but are outlined with white; and Norway’s flag observes a similar rule of good taste. The parallel with the practice of heraldry is at once apparent: heraldry permitted a color (blue, red, black, green) to be laid on or adjacent to a metal (silver, gold, i.e., white, yellow), and vice versa, but color on color, or metal on metal, was prohibited.
In some national flags, various tints and shades of the simple colors are used, such as the Latvian deep red, the Persian pink, and the Esthonian light blue, but these colors are not contemplated by the primary rules of heraldry. There are also flags which for historic or traditional reasons fail to conform to these rules, such as the yellow and white of the Vatican, and the blue and red of Haiti. For signal flags, however, I think it will be agreed that the colors should be simple and contrasted, and that the rules of heraldry find excellent application here.
Looking over the international signal flags, it is noticeable that they are nearly all heraldic in design, and that all except two conform to the heraldic color rules. These two are E and Z. The latter is quartered diagonally, but only one of these quarters is a metal, the other three being colors. It could easily be improved, while keeping the same design and four differently tinctured fields, by making the right and left quarters colors, say red and blue, and the upper and lower quarters the metals, white and yellow. E, horizontally divided into blue and red, is a worse offender, since not only is there no metal to contrast with a color, but the flag itself is a replica of the Haitian national flag. No nation relishes seeing its flag used as a signal flag, when it must often be displayed below another flag, an indication of defeat or dishonor in war and certainly a discourtesy in peace. Nor would interchanging those two colors do any good; it would then become the Haitian flag upside down, a signal of distress. E should certainly be changed.
It is noted that where two signal flags have the same design, the part which is a metal in the one becomes a color in the other, and vice versa. Thus, R has a yellow (metal) cross on red (color), while X has a blue (color) cross on white (metal). The other cases in point are: D (disregarding the fact that D’s middle stripe is twice as wide as the edge stripes) and J, L and U, M and V, P and S, 1 and 2, 3 and 0, 4 and 8, 6 and 7. In the case of I and 5 (the ball design is practically equivalent to the square), and A, H, and K, colors or metals are merely changed, not reversed. Flags such as C, E, F, G, N, 0, T, Y, are each the only ones of that particular design, and one of these designs should be selected, with changed colors and metals, to replace the present objectionable E. Since green is not used with any of the signal flags, and black may be used instead of blue, the combinations possible are: red or blue (black), with yellow or white, in one of the designs available.
Taking the same design, i.e., horizontal division, the proposed E flag might be blue and white, blue and yellow, or red and yellow. (Red and white should not be selected, as these colors with this design are used in the national flags of Poland and Monaco.) Taking the 0 design, diagonal division, the proposed E flag might be blue and white; with the T design, it might be yellow, red, yellow; the G design makes available six stripes, vertical, red and white; Y, diagonally blue and white; etc. The principal factor in making up a new flag from these is to guard against its being readily mistaken for some other signal flag when there is not enough wind to blow the flags out fully.
Another of the new flags, C, approaches dangerously close to a national flag, that of Costa Rica, whose only difference is that the center red stripe is wider than the others, while in C the stripes are all the same width. It would seem advisable to change this, particularly as it is a new flag and has not yet acquired the prestige of long use. J is rather similar to the flags of Argentina, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Salvador, except that these national flags either have a device on the white stripe, or the blue is a distinctly light blue, which makes them sufficiently different from J. The similarity of T with the French flag is only apparent; a second glance shows that in the former the hoist is red and the fly blue, while in the latter this is reversed.
Three changes, then, are suggested: Z, one of the old flags, to be changed as to colors only, retaining the design; and C and E, both new flags, the designs of which have not yet become so indelibly impressed upon the minds of seafaring men as to necessitate holding to them. New designs and colors should not be fancifully thrown together, but should be selected from those available as outlined above, to insure obtaining useful and proper flags. It is interesting to note that the alphabet flags, generally, have been designed, perhaps unwittingly, in accordance with those ancient rules of heraldry, and, up to the time of the latest additions to the code, have not encroached on any national flags. If the above suggested changes are made, the present signal flags would be brought into line again, a step making for increased usefulness and international courtesy.
Marlborough was always resourceful, always ready for the unexpected, quick to perceive and to utilize his enemy’s errors, careful of his men, but prepared to demand necessary sacrifices from them. He had readiness, alertness, and an originality which rose superior to the conventional strategy of the day; while at the same time his soundness of judgment and great common sense saved him from recklessness or from rash attempts at the impossible. An adroit and accomplished tactician, it was perhaps in the domain of strategy that his pre-eminence was most marked. Here his broad grasp of the general situation, combined with his great capacity for dealing with the details of administration, enabled him to frame great enterprises and to carry them to a successful conclusion. And, almost alone among great Generals, he showed a singular insight into naval affairs, inspiring the strategy by which the Allies obtained and utilized the control of the Mediterranean. In this, as in other respects, he may have learnt from William: but his use of his lessons was all his own.—Cambridge Modern History.