Nelson & His World

I have realised how ignorant I am about signalling. Can anybody point me to a good source of information, or answer any of these questions:

Were all signals flown from the mizzen mast? (daytime flag signals at sea)

If directed at an individual ship, where were that ship’s identifying pendants flown?

Was it possible to make a signal to several specified ships simultaneously?

Was it possible to make more than one signal simultaneously? Presumably not(?), but if so, how would you know which had been answered?

If making a telegraph signal, was an answer expected for each hoist?

If making several signals in rapid succession, how could you be sure which had been answered?

Tony

You and me both. There are some issues I have tried to understand about signalling in the past that I have never fully got to the bottom of.

Obviously one important thing to clarify is that there were 2 sytems running alongside each other.

The "legacy" system - going way back into history.

And Popham's Telegraphic Code which was initially used unofficially and was finally accepted by the Admiralty some time around Trafalgar.

Obviously answers to your questions might differ between the two systems.

Having said that - in answer to your first question I believe that signals using the Popham Code were invariably raised on the mizzen mast. The flag lockers were generally just to the rear of the mizzen mast - so very neat and convenient for the lieutenant or midshipman to run his signalling team in that small area. You can imagine the chaos if men and flags were being sent all over the deck - not to mention the risk of errors in the signals being raised.

Hope that helps as a starter.

MB

Tony,

Like you, and seemingly Mark, I am also not that proficient in this area, but would agree that the mizzen mast was the mast normally used, although I would imagine circumstances dictated if other masts and yards were used on occasion.

As Mark said, the poop is where the signal lockers and the signalling personnel were situated. This would seem logical since the flagship would usually be signalling to the ships astern of her. There were also of course the 'repeating' frigates, stationed on the beam of the fleet, whose duty it was to relay the signals from the flagship, in case the latter should be obscured either by other ships, distance, or smoke! Thus it was this ship which the signal officer would keep an eye on rather than the admiral.

Well that would seem to be question one out of the way, but it might be difficult to find the in depth answers to your others!

Cannot fill in all the answers, but would offer the following:

- most signal codes of the 18th century often specify different meanings to single flags flown on different masts.

- With the introduction of the Telegraphic Code, I always presumed that the signals were made as a whole i.e. "England expects..." etc. would have have been made as a single hoist. With the length of signal the Telegraphic Code allowed, than I would doubt that the mizzen was exclusive for signal hoists. Although the flag lockers would be sited aft, I agree most would have employed the mizzen.

Looking at the signal log of the Euryalus at Trafalgar, she seems to have sent very long signals (for example "notwithstanding little wind many of the enemy persevere to get out the rest except one line ready yards hoisted"), which, presuming the hoists were made at the same time, would have used every hoist available...

- It was certainly possible to make a signal to more than one ship. Looking at the signal logs (for example those reproduced in "Logs of the Great Sea Fights 1794-1805") then it is clear that this happened. There were also clearly 'collective callsigns' - identifying pennants covering a group of ships, for example "general" - "all frigates" - "ships ahead of the admiral" etc, apart from individual pennant numbers.

- I believe that each signal had to be acknowledged by the recipient(s) - this was done by use of the Answering pennant; it would be hoisted 'at the dip' (half way up the hoist) to show signal seen, but not yet understood - when understood the pennant would be hoisted 'close up' (ie the top of the hoist). Until all recipients had acknowledged receipt, another signal would not (normally) be made

Gentlemen,

I am no expert, but here are a few thoughts to get the ball rolling.

1.There were in fact 3 signaling systems operated during the 18th century.

A. Up to the 1790s, admirals could only convey a limited number of orders by signal; and these were predetermined by the printed 'Fighting Instructions'. The Instructions of 1779, for example, contain only 44 messages/signals that could be to sent by day. The different signals were differentiated by variously coloured flags hoisted in different positions (and occasionally supplemented by the firing of a gun). As a example, article XVIII says
"When the commander in chief would have the ship or ships that chase bring down to him, he will hoist a blue flag pierced with white half way up the fore top gallant mast."
Article XLII says
"When the commander in chief would have the squadron prepare for anchor he will fire a gun and hoist a flag striped red white and blue at the mizzen peak."

B. To overcome the obvious limitations of this system, in the 1780s a number of senior officers, the most notable of whom was Lord Howe, worked out an improved method. When Howe was c-in-c of the Channel Fleet in the 1790s, he introduced his specially printed new signal book (which was, of course, successful and instrumental in bringing about the battle of the Glorious First of June after 4 days of manouevring in mid-Atlantic). Howe's system was numerical and was based on 10 basic (and 6 other) flags of different colours and designs which enabled 160 separate (but still) predetermined numerical orders to be sent. Number 1, for example, meant ‘Enemy in sight’ and number 16 was the famous ‘Engage the Enemy More Closely’.

C. Popham then introduced his (at first, supplementary) telegraph system which used the same flag designs but enabled more (predetermined) numerical messages to be sent and also converted the numbers to alphabetical letters so that individual words could be spelt out if needed.

2.’Private’ ships (ie non-flagships) only normally carried 2 flags - a national ensign at the stern and a commissioning pennant at the highest masthead. Ships carrying admirals additionally had his flag flying from the appropriate mast – fore for vice admirals, mizzen for rear admirals etc. Ships did not fly flags identifying them routinely, nor raise them unless asked to do so

3. There were no fixed positions for hoisting signals, and this did not change over time. The point is that signal flags had to be visible when the ship was carrying a (variable, according to the wind) pyramid of sails. The idea they were flown only on the mizzen mast (even if the flags were stored in the quarter deck lockers) cannot be the case since, if a vessel were sailing with the wind in any position on the stern quarters, any signal flown in that position would have been invisible to ships ahead. In fact, every masthead and yard arm tip was used, which one(s) depending on the wind and the position of the vessel in relation to those being signaled to. According to Brian Lavery, the Royal George in 1794 had 30 separate signal hoisting locations on yards and mast on both starboard and larboard sides and carried 973 fathoms of rope for signal flags! To make doubly sure of course, flag-ships used smaller vessels at different positions to repeat signals and ensure they were seen.

4. Ships could be signaled collectively as part of a fleet by showing the preparatory ‘general’ flag; or individually, by prefacing the message with their number.

5. Night time and fog signaling obviously also involved lights and guns.

Brian

Here are a few other observations on my part, some of which I surmise rather than have hard evidence for:

I was just about to answer the point which PN made, concerning the answering pennant at the 'dip.' I would think this procedure made the whole process quicker, especially if there were a succession of hoists to be answered, rather than having to hoist the flag all the way from the deck each time.

In the case of the repeating frigate, although I don't know for certain, I would imagine that if the flagship was expecting a reply from all the ships in the fleet, the frigate would wait until all the ships had hoisted their answering pennants and then she would signal the same to the flagship. So conversely, the signal officer in the flagship would have his telescope trained on the repeating frigate.

I don't know if anyone can confirm this, but I have an idea that signal flags and command flags were broken out at the masthead, or wherever, rather than being hoisted loose: a) because so doing would make more of an impact on the observer; b) the flags were kept tidily rolled in the flag locker in any case (and I can remember rolling the union flag like this when in the scouts, when a sharp tug would loosen the turn of the tack rope around it); c) hoisting flags rolled would prevent them getting less easily fouled by some part of the rigging, on their passage up the mast. I think, however, ensigns were hoisted loose.

It might be worth bearing in mind that the trucks on the top of the masts were usually fitted with two sets of halliards, one each side of the mast and so making successions of hoists on the same mast easier.

Incidentally, I think you'll find that the Trafalgar signal was made in a succession of 12 hoists, and I think from the mizzen mast. The way the signal is hoisted on the Victory today is, of course, historically incorrect.

Visiability of course was important when sails were set, and I would imagine that upper ones, such as royals, might have been temporarily taken in to enable flags to be seen more easily.

All of which doesn't really help Tony with his specific questions

Thanks all, for so much great information - even if some of it is conflicting!

I should have been more specific. I am interested in the signals used by Nelson as commander in chief - i.e. Howe's numerical system plus Popham's telegraph code. As I understand it, with Howe's system, a signal's meaning no longer varied according to where it was flown. Is that correct?

When an admiral made a general signal to the fleet, did anyone really check that every ship had answered it?

For example, at Trafalgar, Nelson's first signal after daybreak was number 72, 'Form the order of sailing in two columns', made at 6.10 according to the private log of Thomas Atkinson, master. It is recorded as answered at 6.11 - just one minute later. Two minutes after that, at 6.13 signal number 76 was made with compass flags ENE - 'Bear up and sail large on course ENE'. At that time, the fleet was scattered over several miles, with some ships up to four or five miles from the Victory, and a few detached even further away. How would it be possible for anyone to verify that all 26 line of battle ships had answered within one minute - or even within a space of three minutes before making the next signal? I believe the first signal (72) was only recorded in the logs of 9 ships. This is not necessarily significant, as many signals went unrecorded, but it is quite surprising for the first signal of the day. It is not recorded in any of the frigate's logs, but soon after, signal 13, 'Prepare for battle', made at 6.22 (after signal 76 had been answered at 6.20), was repeated by the Euralyus. As each of these signals was made a couple of minutes after the previous one was answered, I am assuming that one was hauled down before the next was hoisted?

On the question of the 'England expects' telegraph signal, I have come across both versions of how it was flown - 12 sequential hoists or all 12 simultaneously. That signal definitely was repeated, but I still can't imagine how it could be read if made as a single hoist in 12 different positions and the ship making the signal was in full sail. It's inconceivable that the Victory took in any sails to make that signal!

Tony,

Out of interest where did you come across that statement.

You could knock me down with a feather if that was correct.

Surely there were not enough signal flags in the lockers to make a 9 word/12 hoist signal simultaneously.

For now I am speaking exclusively of the "Popham" signals. But the mental picture I have had for years is the signal team working exclusively on the poop deck and mizzen mast - with a "runner" carrying messages between the captain on the quarterdeck and the lieutenant or midshipman who headed up the signalling team.

But of course I don't have it written in black and white so could still be wrong.

Kester - interesting to see your comment about flags being rolled up as they were raised. I can take that even one step further. In 2 instances - both fiction books admittedly - but very early stuff like Marryat etc. - I have seen an insinuation that the flags were actually hauled up in a bag, which was pulled away when the flag was in the required position. Akin to what you said about a tack rope being pulled away but even one step beyond that!!

Crikey - seemingly such a straightforward subject - but fraught with permutations, differences of opinion etc. etc. I am feeling a sense of deja vu coming on here - but happy to keep debating these points in the hope that we might reach a consensus.

MB

Mark,

England Expects... - flown simultaneously: Gregory Fremont-Barnes, 'The Royal Navy 1793-1815', 2007, p 52 - including instructions on which order the various locations were read. See here: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=uKPv ... q=&f=false (See also the painting of Nelson on the poop deck (!) as the signal was prepared.)

Peter Goodwin says the signal was made in eleven (?) separate hoists at the mizzen.

William James (1826) said 'up went to the Victory's mizen topgallantmast-head, the first flag of the celebrated telegraphic message, "ENGLAND EXPECTS...'

Of course, talking of things written in black & white, I have also read a version which said: 'Lord Nelson caused a signal flag to be exhibited from the Victory's mizen-top-gallant-mast-head, on which were written in large conspicuous characters England Expects...' - from 'A history of France from the earliest times to the present day‎', 1882

Tony, I hope I'm not digging a big hole for myself here - if so I will put my hands up and apologise!

But I find the idea of the signals going up simultaneously laughable.

I think I am right that Nelson placed so much importance on signalling that he put his most senior lieutenant in charge of the signalling team. (Hence the kerfuffle after Trafalgar when Pasco didn't get the promotion which should have been due to him)

I can't see him sending off illiterate seamen with sets of flags to be raised on the different masts. Imagine the chaos if the flags were accidentally attached to the halliard in the wrong order.

But again this is only a combination of what I have read/inferred over the years.

But I do believe that signals under the Howe and earlier systems WERE raised on the different masts - but they weren't trying to convey whole sentences etc. as under "Popham".

Sorry I don't have time to really do your initial query justice - but I do have here a facsimile of Howe's first signal book when he introduced it privately on the North American station as early as 1776.

If I can find time later or over the weekend I will see what that says about the use of different masts.

My gut feel is that Mr Fremont-Barnes is incorrectly mixing up the 2 codes of Howe & Popham.

Now just in case I am already in a hole I am going to stop digging!!!

MB

P.S. I always wished that somebody had published a facsimile of one of the Popham code books but I don't think that has ever happened. Likewise nothing on Google Books etc. etc.

England Expects... - flown simultaneously: Gregory Fremont-Barnes

I would have to say that I doubt Mr Fremont-Barnes - I think he is actually describing how the signal is flown today on the Victory on 21 October, not how it would have been in 1805.

There was some correspondence on this matter many years ago in the Mariners Mirror . Commander Hilary Meads, an expert on the history of signalling, very much doubted that it was flown simultaneously, but was done as a series of hoists.

He cites as his reasons -

Signal flags need dedicated halliards - it was normal to have signal halliards only rigged to the mastheads and the peak; there were not normally yardarm signal halliards. He could not believe that signalmen would have spent a long time rigging signal halliards to the yardarms, so only the usual masthead/ peak lines would have been available.

Also he states that Popham's 'Telegraphic Signal' book make no mention of using yardarm hoists.

[source: Mariners Mirror vol.22 (1936) p.358]

PN

Thanks for mention of Hilary Meads who I believe is/was the acknowledged expert on signalling of the Nelson age.

I think I have copies of some of his stuff here - probably close by my "Howe code book".

At the back of my mind is the notion that under the Howe and previous codes there WAS an order/prioritisation of masts and yardarms.

Will definitely have to satisfy my curiosity later.

MB

PhiloN, I had read Hilary Meads' answer in Mariner's Mirror, and found it confusing and contradictory - hence a couple of my original questions! I was surprised to find nothing more conclusive in the Mariner's Mirror.

In the piece in the Mariner's Mirror, Hilary Meads cites specific evidence for signal halyards at the Victory's yard arms before going on to say he did not believe they were there! The evidence was a pendant board issued by Lord Nelson on October 10th, 1805, showing that the single pendant of a ship has to be hoisted at the starboard or larboard, main, fore or mizen topsail yardarm, or at the crossjack yardarm for some ships. For example if signalling the Africa, her pendant had to be hoisted at the starboard main topsail yardarm. The same pendant hoisted at the main top-mast-head would indicate the Royal Sovereign. Having come up with this fairly conclusive evidence, he then goes on to propose an alternative theory that single identifying pendants were not used at Trafalgar, but that instead the double pendant scheme was used where each ship was uniquely identified by a two pendants which could be hoisted anywhere.

He was defending his position where he had used his theory that the Victory’s signal halyards were confined to the three mastheads and the peak to argue against Nelson’s Historic Signal having been the simultaneous showing of all, or a large number of, its thirty-one flags.

N.B. note Brian's previous comment:
But I still concur with both you and Mark and don't believe it could have been flown simultaneously.

PS Having stoked up this mild controversy, I am actually more interested in my question about the answering of signals to the entire fleet. Any guesses on that one?

W G Perrin in his book ‘British Flags’ (1922), in the chapter on signalling, gives a sequence of sending a flag signal by code. He actually refers to the practice used with the International Code of Signals, introduced in 1901, but I suspect that the principle is not so different as that employed with the Popham Telegraphic Code of 100 years earlier.

In making a signal using international code, the ships ensign would be hoisted with the ‘code’ flag - I would suggest that with the Popham system this would have been the appropriate pennant to identify the addressee with the Telegraph flag. This indicates that a signal follows. This hoist would appear to be kept hoisted.

On seeing this the receiving ship hoists the Answering Pennant “at the dip”. The sending ship then starts to send her signal by a series of hoists …. “when the first hoist is noted down and translated in the ship receiving the signal, this ship hauls the answering pennant “close up” to show that it is understood and keeps it there until the signalling ship has hauled that hoist down.” The answering pennant is then lowered to the dip position, until the next hoist is disposed of, and this process continues until the ship signalling has completed, which she indicates by hauling down the ensign and ‘code’ ( = pennant and telegraph) .

This would suggest that no more than two signal halliards need be used.

How does this work when signalling to a fleet of ships? Strict answer - I don't know, but perhaps the Repeater or Repeating ship may be the solution ? Falconer defines this as 'a vessel, generally a frigate, appointed to attend each admiral in a fleet and to repeat every signal he makes, with which she immediately sails the whole length of the fleet or squadron, if the signal is general, or to the ship for which it is intended, and then returns to her station..."

Euryalus was, I think, the Victory's repeater ...."At 11.56 repeated Lord Nelson's telegraph message 'England expects......" (log of E)

Gentlemen!

I doubt if a definitive answer will emerge to Tony’s specific question. Having gone through as many Captains Orders and Admiralty Instructions as I can find, none actually says ‘Signal officers will promptly acknowledge signals from the flagship’ nor ‘flagship signals officers will ensure that all private ships acknowledge signals sent’. Presumably promptitude on both counts was expected and assumed. There are plenty of Orders stressing that signals officers should be alert and present during the hours of daylight, that flags should be kept rolled up in bags and be ready at all times, and that lookouts should be regularly relieved – presumably to prevent fatigue.

The nearest I got was in the Orders of Captain Riou when in command of ‘Amazon’ in 1799 where he gives an example of how the Signal Book is to be laid out and how entries should be made (with examples). It, of course, stretches across the page, but converting it vertically it reads like this:

DAY - Tuesday
DAY OF THE MONTH - 17th
(Signals Made)
TIME - 1.50
FROM - Royal George
NO - 75
PURPORT - Form in order of sailing in three columns
(Signals Answered)
TIME - 1.52
BY WHAT SHIP - By the squadron except the ‘Dragon’who answered by 374 (Unable to comply)
NO
PURPORT - Answering pendant

(Signals Made)
TIME - 2.0
By what ship - Dragon
NO - 338
PURPORT - Mainmast sprung
(Signals Answered)
TIME - 2.5
BY WHAT SHIP - Royal George
NO - 338
PURPORT - Affirmative flag

Riou obviously assumed that the immediate acknowledgement of signals was par for the course. There is no mention of the position of signals (which I think indicates that there was no set place and that they varied with weather and wind). One cannot generalise from Trafalgar. The flying of signals from 'Victory's mizzen was approporiate to those circumstances since she was in the van, the wind was astern and her mizzen could be widely seen. However this was exceptional - the normal position of a flagship was in the centre.

On two adjacent themes
- telegraph messages were indicated by being proceeded by a white and red ‘telegraph’ flag.
- a disadvantage of telegraph communications as opposed to normal ones may have been the time they took to send. At the Basque Roads court martial, Cochrane (admittedly not the most reliable of witnesses) excused himself for having sent the misleading 477 (Enemy superior to the chasing ship and am in distress) by saying that he ‘had than no time to express by a tedious telegraphic communication what I meant to convey.’

Brian