![[Flag of the United Kingdom]](../images/g/gb.gif)
1:2 | 
image by Clay Moss, 16 December 2006Flag adopted 1 January 1801.
Last modified: 2014-03-08 by rob raeside
Keywords: united kingdom | union jack | kings colours | great union |
Links: FOTW homepage |
search |
disclaimer and copyright |
write us |
mirrors
1:2 |
image by Clay Moss, 16 December 2006
Flag adopted 1 January 1801.
See also:
It was noted that Edward VII tried to make the British Royal Standard more personal by restricting its use. How did he try to restrict it?
Nathan Lamm, 28 March 2003
During the reign of Queen Victoria, the Royal Standard was considered to be the
Standard of the United Kingdom, and not the Standard of the Sovereign. It was
used by members of the Royal Family; flown at certain military parades;
displayed on fortresses and official buildings in the United Kingdom, and at
Government House in the colonies, on the Sovereign's Birthday and on the days of
Coronation and Accession; and flown on government buildings when the sovereign
was passing in State. It was also flown by private individuals and organisations
who thought that it was an appropriate way of displaying their loyalty to the
crown.
When the Prince of Wales became King Edward VII he tried to introduce a Royal
Standard differenced with an oval shield in the centre carrying his cypher and
crown on a purple ground. It was to have been for his exclusive and personal use
alone, with misuse guarded against by the Trade Mark Act of 1883. However the
Board of Trade, who were responsible for trade marks, wrote that changes to the
Royal Standard were not within their competence. The Law Officers thought that
since the Arms and Standard had been created by the Act of Union with Ireland,
any alteration to the Royal Standard would probably require an Act of
Parliament. This was thought to be unfeasible, and the proposal was abandoned.
As an alternative, measures were taken to restrict the use of the Royal
Standard. The Home Office noted that the King was aware that legally no one
could be prevented from flying the Royal Standard, but he wanted it to be
discouraged.
In 1906 the Admiralty and War Office issued Circulars that the Royal Standard
was not to be displayed on fortresses and official buildings on King's Birthday,
etc., but only when the sovereign, was present in person. To avoid contentious
legislation, restrictions on the use of the Royal Standard by private
individuals were promulgated by Circulars to Police Forces.
In the course of 1907 instructions were issued by various government departments
canceling existing orders, and directing that the Royal Standard was to be flown
on government buildings only when HM was within the building.
Home Office and Scottish Office Circulars stated that the Royal Standard could
not properly be used without HM permission, and that persons should be asked to
discontinue its use, and the Secretary of State informed of any refusal. It was
acknowledged that the instructions could not be enforced, but it was hoped that
the restrictions on its use could be achieved by appealing to the people's sense
of good taste.
In 1908 it was reported that action (unspecified) was taken against persons or
bodies reported for flying the Royal Standard. In a letter to 'The Times', the
Earl of Crewe wrote that the belief that the Royal Standard could be flown
anywhere, by anybody, was incorrect.
By the time that George V succeeded Edward VII in 1910, it had become generally
accepted that the Royal Standard of the United Kingdom was the sovereign's
personal banner.
Public Record Office : ADM 1/8765/311; HO 45/10287/109071;
HO 45/10316/126525; HO 144/602/B22911; HO 144/7048;
MEPO 2/1070; WO 32/16192; WO 32/14,700; WORK 21/6/9.
David Prothero, 30 March 2003
Was the restriction on use of the Royal Standard what prompted the
widespread use of the Union Jack, or was that a result of Jubilee celebrations a
few years earlier?
Nathan Lamm, 30 March 2003
It is hard to judge what
impact the restriction had. The Union Jack replaced the Royal Standard in
the relatively few places/occasions where the latter was no longer permitted.
The publicity, if there was much, may have raised the profile of flags, and
encouraged the idea that the Union Jack could be used by the general population,
as well as being an emblem of the state.
David Prothero, 6 April 2003
Why would an act of Parliament be required to alter it, when it had been
altered in Victoria's time (removing Hanover, etc.) and before (elector to king,
etc.), but after the Act of Union?
Nathan Lamm, 30 March 2003
To the best of my knowledge an alteration to the Royal Standard would not
need an Act of Parliament.
Christopher Southworth, 30 March 2003
Such things are done through the Earl Marshal, I believe.
Anton Sherwood, 31 March 2003
It was only a legal opinion,
not definitely established, that an Act of Parliament would be required.
Before 1801, I assume, the royal arms and standard were the concern of no-one
but the Monarch, the Court, and the College of Arms. This changed when the
alterations to the flag and arms in 1801 were instituted by an Article in the
Act of Parliament that created the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
The changes that modified, and then removed the Hanoverian escutcheon, were,
following the advice of HM's Privy Council, declared by Royal Proclamation.
The perceived problem with Edward VII's proposal was, not that it would have
changed the standard, but that it would have created a new standard, along side,
and derived from, the existing standard.
David Prothero, 6 April 2003
I wrote when this first came
up "that it was one for the lawyers amongst us" and let say at once that I am
not qualified to offer a legal opinion. But does the possible requirement for an
Act of Parliament not depend upon whether the 1801 Act of Union was formally
repealed upon the creation of the Irish Free State in 1921? If it was not,
then the power (to select the symbols of the Union) granted to the Monarch under
Article One of that Act is surely still operative?
Christopher Southworth, 6 April 2003
I wonder if the legal basis
for this advice might have been that, as Hanover was itself not subject to the
authority of the British Parliament, the removal of its arms from the British
royal arms and standard could not be regulated by an act of the British
Parliament. This theory would be weakened if the 1801 act specifically mentioned
the Hanoverian escutcheon, of course, but even so it would not be British law
that would govern to whom the Hanoverian arms legitimately descended upon the
death of William IV. On the other hand, British law would govern the
disposition of the basic British (English, Scottish, Irish) quarterings.
Joe McMillan, 7 April 2003
Hanover was included in the
1800 Act of Union; (effective 1 January 1801):
"... the arms or ensigns armorial of the said United Kingdom shall be quarterly,
first and fourth, England; second, Scotland; third, Ireland: and it is our will
and pleasure, that there shall be borne within, on an escocheon of pretence, the
arms of our Dominions in Germany ensigned with the Electoral Bonnet. And it is
our will and pleasure that the standard of the said United Kingdom shall be the
same quarterings as are hereinbefore declared to be the arms or ensigns armorial
of the said United Kingdom, with the escocheon of pretence thereon herein before
described."
That particular article in the Act was a package that encompassed the Royal
Stile and Titles, the Ensigns Armorial, Flags and Banners, and the impressions
on Coins, Dies, Stamps, and Marks; but different parts were treated in different
ways. The changes to the arms/standard were by proclamation; "We have thought
fit, by and with the advice of Our Privy Council, to declare that henceforth the
shield or escocheon of pretence representing His late Majesty's dominions in
Germany, and ensigned with the Hanoverian royal crown, shall be omitted, and the
shield left to contain the arms or ensigns armorial of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland only;".
However in 1902 a Parliamentary Councilor wrote:
"It is a well known constitutional rule that where a power is granted by
Parliament to the Crown, that power is exhausted by its first exercise. In
accordance with this constitutional rule the various alterations or additions
which have been made to the Royal style and title have always been authorised by
special legislation ( eg. 39 & 40 Vict. c.10, and 1 Edw.7. c.15 ). It appears to
me that any alteration of the Royal standard, on which the Royal Arms are
blazoned, would require similar legislation."
I think this refers to Victoria taking the title 'Empress of India', and Edward
VII adding 'and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, King,'
There was reluctance to undertake legislation that might be opposed in
parliament, but concern that adding the King's personal cypher to the standard
without any legislation might be successfully challenged in the future. Instead
the standard became, by persuasion, the sovereign's personal standard, even
though the Act creating it describes it as, "the standard of the said United
Kingdom", not "the standard of His Majesty, King of the United Kingdom".
David Prothero, 9 April 2003
What artistic changes have been made to the harp over the years?
Nathan Lamm, 30 March 2003
There have been two versions
of the harp in recent times; the winged female, and the Gaelic.
Heraldically, either is acceptable, since the blazon calls for a harp, and
anything which looks like a harp is correct, as long as it is gold, with silver
strings. In 1954 the Queen approved a design of the Royal Standard with a
Gaelic harp. At the time, it was thought by some, that this had then
become the definitive pattern. However in 1957, when the Ministry of Works
asked Garter King of Arms for the design that should be used for the standards
that they supplied to the Royal Households, a drawing of a standard with a
winged female harp was sent. During this period a question arose
about the Standards of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, and Princess Margaret.
If the Royal Standard had a Gaelic harp, did these two other standards have to
have the same harp ? Garter ruled that it was entirely the choice of the
owner of the standard. In general the Gaelic harp tends to be used on
shields, as the shape is a better fit, but the winged female harp always(?)
appears on the Royal Standards.
David Prothero, 6 April 2003
If a banner is defined as being "Quarterly X and Y," if X or Y change on
their own and thus the banner changes, is there an appropriate act? For example,
say Scotland decided, on its own (assuming it had that power) to remove the
border of its banner. Would the UK's banner change, and if so, how?
Nathan Lamm, 30 March 2003
The Royal Standard is no more nor less than a banner of arms, and would (I
assume) normally change automatically when the arms change. Past changes in the
Royal Standard have generally (but not exclusively) signaled either, a change in
the personal circumstances of the monarch (such as the various Hanoverian
alterations and change to the present design), or of the monarch's aspirations
(such as when the fleur-de-lis were dropped).
Christopher Southworth, 30 March 2003
According to Whitney Smith's book on flags, merchant ships from 1606-1634 flew the Union Jack (minus the cross of St Patrick of course) on the foremast and the flag of England (Cross of St George) on the jack staff. He gives four possible positions for flags, going from fore to aft on the ship they are: jack staff, foremast, mainmast, ensign staff.
Nathan Augustine, 23 August 1995
Perrin (1922), p.132, quoted the 1808
edition of the 'Regulations and Instructions relating to His Majesty's Service
at Sea' which confirmed the continuing use of the St George's Cross as a jack by
the merchant marine. It is speculation as to whether they actually did so at
this late date, however, :
Wilson (1986), p.34, said that 'This flag (a
Union Jack with a white border) was introduced in 1823 as a signal for a pilot
in Marryat's Code of Signals for the Merchant Service and later came to be worn
as a jack'. He went on to say 'that it is still a legally permitted jack for
merchant ships' - which, of course, it is.
Christopher Southworth, 15 March 2003
Based on
http://fraser.cc/FlagsCan/Appendicies/Chronology.html, which is an online
version of The Flags of Canada, by Alistair B. Fraser, I've condensed a much
longer treatment, mostly focusing (as one would expect) on Canada, to cover only
cantons/unions in British and related flags. There's also information on French
and Viking flags.
1165 - First reference to the use by Scotland of the
Cross of St. Andrew. The reference claims that its use goes back to King
Hungus in the eighth century. The choice of blue for the field evolved only
later.
1277 - First reference to the English use of the Cross of
St. George as a flag.
1557 - In his voyage to (what is now) Frobisher Bay, Sir Martin Frobisher
carried St. George's cross with a quartered shield of arms in the centre. First
and fourth quarter were French modern, while the second and third quarters each
contained two English lions. [Click here
for an illustration ( from "The world atlas of exploration", Eric Newby,
Colporteur Press, Sydney, 1975). The original illustration seems to be from the
British Museum. - James Dignan, 8 September 2003]
1574 - Ensigns, to be flown at the stern of a ship, were introduced at sea about
this time so individual ships could be recognized. In the early ensigns, the
field was often multi-coloured strips with St. George's or St. Andrew's cross in
the canton depending on whether used by English or Scottish vessels.
1606 Apr 12 - The first, two-crossed, Union Flag is introduced.
1621 - The first red ensign was made and it began to be used by both the King's
ships and merchantmen. By 1633 the striped ensigns had been abandoned and Red,
Blue and White ensigns were used by the English fleet to denote the three
different squadrons.
1649 - Union flag gives way to Cromwell's Commonwealth Ensign.
1674 Sep 18 - The red ensign is specified as the proper flag for a merchant
ship. It continued to be used by a Naval Squadron until 1864. The canton
contains either the Cross of St. George or St. Andrew, but not the Union Flag.
1694 Jul 12 - Vessels in the non-military branches of the King's service were to
use a red ensign with a badge of the department on the fly. Before this time no
distinction in flags was made between the navy's ships of war and vessels in the
civil departments of the navy or other branches of the king's service. The
colour of these state ensigns was changed to blue in 1864. (Wilson)
1707 Jul 28 - The red ensign alone is proclaimed the National Ensign, and all
merchant ships were expressly ordered to wear it. The White and Blue Ensigns
were looked upon as mere variants for the purposes of naval tactics.
Joe McMillan, 16 September 2003
1621 and 1633 accord with Perrin, however, regarding the Blue and White
Ensigns. Definite use of the White and Blue Ensigns to distinguish the private
ships of van and rear squadrons may be dated from an Order of the Navy
Commissioners of March 1653. Such Ensigns were made in small numbers prior to
this date, but private ships had almost certainly flown a Red Ensign and had
been distinguished by an appropriately coloured pendant (see Nathanial
Botelier's "Dialogues about Sea Services" written c1634, Perrin and Wilson).
Christopher Southworth, 16 September 2003
From BBC NEWS Scotland:
Trafalgar union jack up for sale
The only surviving union jack from
the Battle of Trafalgar could fetch £15,000 at auction after it was found in a
drawer, auctioneers say. The flag was flown from one of Nelson's warships, HMS
Spartiate, in the naval battle off the Spanish coast in 1805. It was presented
by the 540-strong crew to Fife-born Lieutenant James Clephan after the conflict,
a high honour bestowed upon an officer by his men. The flag is being sold by one
of his descendants living in Australia. Clephan, who later went on to command
his own ship, was one of the few men to have risen through the ranks and was
greatly admired by his crew.
The flag, measuring 7ft 4in x 11ft 7in, is made of 31 panels sewn together by
the crew on board the ship. It bears a number of "battle scars" - holes caused
by shot and shell splinter damage sustained during the conflict. It was
treasured by his family, who kept it in a drawer to preserve it. Auctioneers
expect the flag to fetch £10,000 to £15,000. Charles Miller, through his own
auction house, is selling the piece in London on 21 October, Trafalgar Day. He
said the flag was the only known surviving union jack from the battle. "I think
it's hard to under-state the historical importance of this flag," he said. "This
was the greatest naval action ever fought. The great thing about the flag is
it's one of the most emblematic items you can get from Trafalgar. This is a bit
of naval hardware that has actually served in the action."
Clephan, from
Scoonie in Fife, spent his early years as an apprentice weaver and went on to
join the Merchant Navy. He retired in 1840 with the rank of captain and lived in
Edinburgh for 11 years until his death at the age of 83.
Published:
2009/10/08 23:42:19 GMT.
Christopher Southworth, 9 October 2009
This flag appears to be a specimen of a type that we've seen drawn and
painted a number of times: The four corners have small fields that each in
themselves are traversed diagonally by red stripes bordered white. Those
paintings, it would appear, are not mistaken representations, but are faithful
representations of the actual flags of the time, even if they don't correspond
with the symbolism behind the design.
Peter Hans van den Muijzenberg,
9 October 2009
According to
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6884574.ece the flag sold
for nearly £320,000.
Chrystian Kretowicz, 22 October 2009
