Last modified: 2006-07-08 by rob raeside
Keywords: united kingdom | union jack | kings colours | great union |
Links: FOTW homepage | search | disclaimer and copyright | write us | mirrors
by Graham Bartram
Flag adopted 1 January 1801.
by Edward Mooney
When King James VI of Scotland ascended to the English throne, thereby becoming James I of England, the national flags of England and Scotland on land continued to be, respectively, the red St George's cross and the white St Andrew's cross. Confusion arose, however, as to what flag would be appropriate at sea. On 12 April 1606 a proclamation was issued:
"All our subjects in this our isle and kingdom of Great Britain and the members thereof, shall bear in their main top the red cross commonly called St George's Cross and the white cross commonly called St. Andrew's Cross joined together according to a form made by our heralds and sent to our Admiral to be published to our said subjects."This is the first known reference to the Union Flag. Although the original design referred to has been lost, it is presumed that it was the flag which, with the addition of the St Patrick's cross, forms the basic design of the British Union Flag today. It is also interesting to note that the new flag was not universally popular nor accepted. The English were not overly pleased at the obscuring of the white field of the St George's flag. The Scots, with more justification, were upset at the fact that the red cross was laid over the white. The Scots proposed a number of alternative designs. These included:
None of these are very convincing designs and none were ever used. The Scots did, however, use an ingenious design in which the white cross of the St Andrew's flag was brought forward to overlay the red cross. This flag even seems to have achieved some limited official sanction. When the king visited Dumfries in 1618 he was hailed as the king under whose banner "the whyte and reid croces are so proportionablie interlaced." The word interlaced is held to be significant as it implies the use of the 'Scottish' version of the Union Flag:
by Stuart A. Notholt
As late as 1693, Slezer, Captain of Artillery and Surveyor-General of Stores and Magazines in Scotland, produced an engraving on Edinburgh Castle in which the 'Scottish' version is shown: again, an implication of actual use. Source: Paul Harris (ed.), Story of Scotland's Flag, Lang Syne Publishers Ltd, 1992. Available from the Flag Research Center.
Stuart A. Notholt, 4 May 1996
The design of the Union Flag that preceded the current version was established by a royal proclamation of 12 April 1606. However it was for use only at sea in civil and military ships of both Scotland and England. In 1634 its use was restricted to the king's ships. The flag went out of use in 1649 when England became a commonwealth but was restored for use in the king's ships after the restoration in 1660. The flag became 'the ensign armorial of the United Kingdom of Great Britain' as one of the provisions of the Act of Union in 1707, when the kingdoms of England and Scotland were united.
David Prothero, 2 July 1998
|by Ivan Sache|
The June edition of "BBC History" magazine has a short piece marking the four hundredth anniversary of the Union of the Crowns in 1603 when James VI of Scotland became James I of England. This included a photograph of a series of designs for a Union Flag, here redrawn by Ivan Sache. The caption to the article said: "Cross countries: designs for a Union flag, kept in the National Library of Scotland, c 1604 by an unknown artist; the Note of Preference is signed by the Earl of Nottingham" [this note was attached to the fifth design, per pale Cross of St. George, Cross of St. Andrew.]
André Coutanche, 25 May 2003
As a matter of interest, the 'impaled' design was actually used (from c1643) as a jack by Royalist ships in the English Civil War. Another design not shown had a quarterly arrangement - Cross of St George first and fourth, Cross of St Andrew second and third - and this is known to have been used as a jack on at least one occasion (1623).
Christopher Southworth, 25 May 2003
by David Prothero
A drawing of the Union Flag that was sent to the Office of Stores for the
Navy Board, on 15 November 1800 was marked, 'Union Flag from 1st January 1801
(c)', but the fimbriation had been made by reducing the width of the red
diagonal. The drawing, as reproduced in the Mariner's Mirror (Journal of the
Society for Nautical Research), is shown here.
It was found among a collection of drawings and letters from the office that organised flags for the Navy. The collection of correspondence was closed in 1837 and apparently retained in the Secretary of the Admiralty's Office until 1949, when it was handed to the Admiralty Library. It is unlikely that it was ever seen by William G. Perrin. Commander Hilary P. Mead R.N. described it in two articles in the Mariner's Mirror, April 1951 and February 1952. He commented that the drawing, "differed somewhat from that in Perrin's plate IV." I wonder if the change was made by accident or design?
"Admiralty Office, 15 November 1800.
A Report from the Lords of the Committee of the whole Council, dated 4th instant etc., etc. [details of decision to issue a Royal Proclamation]
That the Committee were further of opinion that the Union Flag should be altered according to the Draught thereof marked (C) in which the Cross of St George is conjoined with the Crosses of St Andrew and St Patrick:
And that the Standard be the Arms of the United Kingdom according to the Draught
And that on and after the First Day of January next ensuing the said Flags and Banners should be hoisted and displayed on all His Majesty's Forts and Castles within the United Kingdom, and the Islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, Sark, and Man, and also on board all His Majesty's Ships of War, then lying in any of the Ports or Harbours of the said United Kingdom, or of the Islands aforesaid, and on board His Majesty's Ships employed on Foreign Service, as soon after the said First Day of January next as His Majesty's Proclamation or Order in Council shall be received by the Commanders of His Majesty's Ships employed on Foreign Service; We herewith transmit to you a Printed Copy of His Majesty's Order in Council of the 5th instant approving the Report of the Lords of the Committee afore-mentioned, and do hereby desire and direct you to cause such Flags and Standards as may be necessary to be prepared conformably to the said Draughts for the use of His Majesty's Ships of War at Home and on Foreign Stations, and to be supplied with them accordingly, with all the dispatch that may be.
You are also to cause the Colours described in the said Order in Council to be hoisted in all the Dock Yards of the Kingdom upon the 1st Day of January next, and to supply the necessary Colours for the use of the Naval Hospitals at Home, and the Naval Yards and Hospitals abroad, in the manner directed by the said Order in Council;
We are Your affectionate Friends,
Arden, J.Gambier, W.Young. Navy Board."
Note by John David Rolt, chief clerk in the Office for Stores, the Navy Board. Memorandum ( to C ). "The Ensign is Red, White and Blue according to the Colours of the Admiral's Flag, who bears it, with this Union Jack in a Canton in the Upper or Chief Dexter corner, and next the staff." Mead notes; "The Union Flag is from 24 to 18 breadths and is allowed to Flag Ships only. The Jack is the same in all respects except in sizes, which are from 10 breadths downwards.
David Prothero, 2 February 2003
The Admiralty version of the Union Flag, shown above, is, in fact, a
corruption of the herald's original intention. In the Admiralty version (still
of course in use today) fimbriation to the saltire of St Patrick is created by
taking it from the saltire itself instead of from the field, whereas, according
to the original design the saltires of St Andrew and St Patrick should be of
equal width with a fimbriation added. The colour illustration (preserved in the
Privy Council papers) and blazon supplied by Sir Isaac Heard (Garter
King-at-Arms) was - in accordance with Article One of the Act of Union between
Great Britain and Ireland - approved by the King in an Order in Council of 5
November 1800. The Act of Union was then proclaimed in London Gazette No. 15324
dated 1 January 1801, with the blazon (accompanied by a monochrome drawing)
reading as follows: "...that the Union Flag shall be azure, the Crosses Saltires
of St Andrew and St Patrick Quarterly per Saltire, counterchanged Argent and
Gules; the latter fimbriated of the Second surmounted by the Cross of St George
of the Third, fimbriated as the Saltire".
Which brings me to the Great Union of 1900. In preparing a design for the War Office the College of Heralds returned to the original blazon and correctly made the saltires of even width with a fimbriation added, however, whilst it is obvious from the 18th Century illustration that the phrase "fimbriated as the saltire" was intended to mean 'fimbriated in the same colour as the saltire', the late-Victorian heralds wrongly interpreted this as meaning of 'the same *width and* colour'.
Christopher Southworth, 28 May 2006
I checked some documents that might have had information about the
introduction of the new Union Jack in 1801.
The Captains Logs from ten RN ships in commission on 1 January 1801, selected at random, produced three references to the occasion. Blanche in Portsmouth "hoisted the (something, possibly 'union') colour", Phoebe in Cork "fired salute of 21 guns to celebrate union between Great Britain and Ireland" and Agincourt at Spithead did the same, though a day later on 2nd of January.
The notice that announced the Red Ensign was headed;
"Caution to Masters of Merchant Vessels Against Wearing Unlawful Colours. By the King a Proclamation, First Day of January 1801."
It included a small drawing of the Red Ensign in black and white with the colours indicated by words. The width of the diagonal stripes was in proportions 1-2-3, arranged with the wider white stripe uppermost not only in the first and third quarters, but also in the second and fourth quarters.
David Prothero, 6 February 2003
The introduction of the present Union Jack appears to have been more
complicated than the usual accounts suggest. It obviously depended upon the
Union actually taking place, and this required the assent of both British and
Irish parliaments, but in December 1799 the Bill was rejected by the Irish
parliament. It was re-introduced in the New Year and finally passed its Third
Reading on 7 June 1800. I do not know if the corresponding Bill had already been
passed by the British parliament, or whether it was done shortly afterwards. It
received the Royal Assent on 2 July 1800, (40 Geo. III c. 67).
The article in the Act relating to the flag stated; "That it be the first Article of the Union of the Kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland, .... that the ensigns, armorial flags and banners thereof shall be such as His Majesty, by his royal Proclamation under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom, shall be pleased to appoint."
However it appears that the flag had already been designed, and some examples made. On the following day, 3 July, the Duke of Portland, Home Secretary, wrote to Viscount Castlereagh, Chief Irish Secretary ending, "... and, as to the new Union Flag, that, though ready, was not hoisted, because we found out that we have no right to use it until the first of next year, when the Union takes place." http://www.actofunion.ac.uk/castlereaghindex.php?volume=3 Documents 352/353.
Perhaps it had been intended that the Union should take place on the first day of the new century ? The Order in Council of 5th November 1800 seems to have been a formality.
Whether the Union Jack is an "official national flag" depends upon ones interpretation of the phrase. It is the official royal flag of a monarchy, and thus the kingdom's national flag, but its use by private individuals or bodies has been sanctioned by parliamentary statements, not by legislation.
22 October 1902. Mr Balfour, First Lord of the Treasury. The questions which have been raised as to the proper use of flags have received careful consideration by the Government, but they are unable to adopt the course of action suggested. Nor does it appear desirable to undertake the legislation that would be necessary in order to regulate the general use by civilians, or any class of civilians, of any particular flag on land. It is a matter which is best left, as hitherto, to the guidance of custom and good taste.
[By way of further explanation, the First Lord of the Treasury is one of the other offices of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom - and in fact is written on his letterbox at his office at 10 Downing Street, London. This would indicate the high level at which this matter was being deliberated at that time.
Source: Web site of the British Prime Minister, http://www.10downingstreet.gov.uk, consulted 12 June 2006.
Colin Dobson, 12 June 2006]
9 May 1912. Colonel M'Calmont. To ask Prime Minister whether the Union Jack is the emblem of the nation rather than the sovereign, and if this is so, in the event of the Government of Ireland Bill becoming law, will it be competent for the Irish Parliament to eliminate the cross of St Patrick from the national flag. Mr. Asquith. The Union Jack was established by Royal Proclamation under the Act of Union and is as much a matter of prerogative as the Royal Standard.
David Prothero, 13 June 2005
What is the correct Flag to be flown on land by Civilians?
This answer was based upon a Minute by Garter, King of Arms:
"There is no Flag in existence answering to this general description. Civilians generally are not authorised to fly or display any Flag. Peers and gentlemen entitled to bear Arms have a right to fly from their Castles or residences a banner of their Arms. The Royal Standard appertains to the Sovereign alone. The Union Flag of the United Kingdom is used by authority throughout the Army and Navy, and the State Departments, usually with some modification or addition by way of distinction. The Union Flag, being the National Flag, appertains to the Nation as a whole, and cannot be considered as specially distinctive of individuals, or groups of individuals. The common practice on occasions of national rejoicing of displaying the Royal Standard and the Union Flag indiscriminately with other Flags must be regarded as an attempt to express loyalty by means of decoration. As to Public Buildings, Schools, etc - State Buildings should fly the Union Flag. Schools etc., should fly the Flag displaying their proper Arms. Municipal Buildings should fly a banner of the Arms of the particular Corporate body. The issue of a Royal Warrant touching this matter would, in my opinion, be inexpedient.
Sir Arthur W. Woods."
David Prothero, 12 June 2006
A 1902 Home Office Minute on the question:
There appears to be no such thing as a "correct" flag for use by civilians on land. It seems that any one who has a coat of arms may display them on a flag, and the Union Flag has been used without restraint. A warrant under the Act of Union can be and has been issued fixing the ensigns, ceremonial flags and banners of the United Kingdom, but this warrant does not relate to such flags as private people may fly. The Union flag has been used indiscriminately for a very long period. There is no power by law to interfere with the use on land of any flag even the King's Standard. Any such warrant as proposed would therefore be accompanied by no means of enforcing it. There seems no reason why the state should intervene as to flying flags on land, (except as regards the King's Standard). To attempt to enforce any rule would bring the state into conflict with Trades Unions, the Royal Order of Ancient Buffaloes, the Foresters, and for all we know the processions of the Roman Catholics and Ritualists (etc). In fact it is impossible to say where it would end. To lay it down that all schools should use, say the Union Jack, would at once provoke a number of schools in Ireland to display a green flag with a harp, or a sunburst, the Socialists to display red banners. Is the state then to interfere and compel them all to use the Union Jack only ? Such an attempt would I think raise a veritable hornet's nest. The true answer is I think, that "there is no 'correct flag' for use on land except the Royal Standard by the King, and possibly coats of arms by those who possess them. There is no power at law to enforce the use of any flag. The use of flags on land has been regulated only by custom and good taste."
David Prothero, 12 June 2006
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
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
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