Flags at half mast

Last modified: 2003-08-16 by phil nelson
Keywords: half-mast | new zealand | usa | fort mchenry | germany |
Links: FOTW homepage | search | disclaimer and copyright | write us | mirrors

• FOTW Vexillological Reference

Origin of the Term "Half Mast" or "Half Staff"

When, where and why did the origin of placing the flag at half-mast come from?

When: First(?) recorded instance July 1612.
Where: In what is now Canada.
Why: Not definitely known.

If you consider the phrase used, and the practicalities of hoisting flags, it is likely to be of naval origin and probably not earlier than the 14th Century.

Although flag pole is a common phrase no one flies a flag at half-pole. In British English it is, I think without exception, half-mast, and in American English, although Webster lists half-staff, half-mast is the main entry. So, since a mast is on a ship it's of nautical origin.

Also, you can't easily half-mast a flag unless you have a fairly tall 'pole', and a halyard. I think that it's not unreasonable to assume that most land flags of the Middle Ages were carried around on hand-held staffs, and that most flags flown from the tops of buildings were probably the same staffs inserted into sockets. Flags on staffs are usually tied on, tacked on, or have a sleeve at the hoist into which the staff is inserted. Not easy to half-mast.

It's probable that at this time, tall poles with a suitable hoisting mechanism were found only on ships, and that ships with masts of this size did not become common until around the 1300's.

Some earlier accounts of half-masting, refer not only to the flags but also to the sails. In a book entitled "Naval Customs" written by Lt. Cdr. Leland P. Lovette USN and published by USN Institute in 1934:

"The half-masting of colors is in reality a survival of the days when a slovenly appearance (untidy, careless) characterized mourning. Even in the British Merchant Service today there are recent cases of trailing rope ends, 'slacking off' of rigging, and scandalizing yards as a sign of mourning."

He goes on to describe the last occassion on which Royal Navy ships 'cock-billed' their yards whilst lying off Lisbon after the murder of Don Carlos King of Portugal in 1908. When possible, it seems that the sails were deliberately set badly, not fully hoisted, yards scandalized or askew, "cock-billed as a sign of mourning". The idea was that an untidy, slovenly, careless appearance where one would normally expect to see everything 'ship-shape', indicated mourning. This concept goes back a long way. I seem to remember passages in the Bible that refer to people tearing their clothes and rubbing ashes into their hair when in mourning.

It has just occurred to me that a ship that had been in battle would have an disheveled appearance, so perhaps there was also the idea of simulating the aftermath of a battle with its consequent deaths.

Half-masting a flag is probably the last symbolic gesture of what was once in some cultures a common way of showing grief.

Some suggest that the part lowering of a flag indicates the passing of the authority represented by the flag, or that it is to leave space for 'the invisible flag of death' to be flown above the lowered flag, but these are modern attempts to explain a practice which has much older origins.

The reference to 1612? "on the occasion of the murder of James Hall by 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 ensign 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 in 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." from "British Flags" by W.G.Perrin.

The idea that a slovenly appearance at sea is a sign of mourning is in "Naval Customs, Tradition and Usage" by L.P.Lovette.
David Prothero, 28 February 1998, 25 May 1998

In his book 'Signal', Captain Barrie Kent writes that in 1952, Buckingham Palace asked the Board of Admiralty for information on the origin of the custom of half-masting colours to signify a death. The Archivist Peter Kemp replied:

The earliest record we have of the lowering of a flag to signify a death was an occasion in 1612, when the Master of the 'Hearts Ease', William Hall, was murdered by Eskimos while taking part in an expedition in search of the North West Passage. On rejoining her consort, the vessel's flag was flown trailing over the stern as a mark of mourning. On her return to London, the 'Hearts Ease' again flew her flag over the stern and it was recognised as an appropriate gesture of mourning.

It was the habit, after the restoration of the Monarchy in 1660, for ships of the Royal Navy to fly their flags at half-mast on the anniversary of the execution of King Charles I on 30th January 1649, and it is from this custom that, so far as we can trace, the present practice of announcing a death by the flying of a flag at half-mast has evolved. The earlier pracice at sea was to fly a black flag or to set a black sail.

We know that the hoisting of black sails was a sign of mourning from the very earliest times. The black sail was superseded by the black flag, probably because it was a nuisance to have to carry black sails for use only on rare occasions. It was probably the position,rather than the colour, that caught the attention, particularly at a distance.

According to US Navy custom, there is/was only one flag that could be flown above the US national flag . . . this was the church flag (white pennant, blue cross lengthwise), flown during religious services. This might have been amended since to include the UN flag, but it was not permitted then. Having some familiarity with USN tradition, I doubt it.

The national flag was two blocked (raised to the top of the halyard) and flown there. When flown at half mast, it was first two blocked and then lowered to the proper position half way down the length of the halyard (rope). The reverse was done when lowering the flag at sunset.

Only the national flag was flown from a single halyard, but that might have been done otherwise by other services or when used by civilians. There were only two sites where the flag could be flown at night: Fort McHenry and the battleship Arizona memorial. This custom has been amended since so that the flag can be flown at night if illuminated. Naturally, the flag can be flown anytime during battle.

It is only natural that customs differ elsewhere, particularly in those countries having a history much older then here. I'd be most interested in hearing about them. Alvan Fisher

When are Flags Flown at Half Mast?

In the United States the flag is flown at half-staff, by order of the President, to honor the memory of high ranking government officials upon their death. Duane Streufert

James Dignan, Nathan Augustine, T.W. Hall and Anton Sherwood all mention that flags are flown at half mast in memorial of the dead by schools, corporations, fire stations, government institutions and individuals.

My understanding is that the flag is theoretically not flown at "half" mast, but one flag's depth down from the masthead (in practice, it's often more than that) to allow for the "invisible flag of death" to be flown at the top of the mast. The idea goes back to mediaeval times, I think.

The same protocol applies in New Zealand for deaths of the head of state and other Royal Family members, the Governor General, the Prime Minister and other Ministers of the Crown. The days on which the flag is half masted (day of death, day of funeral, days in between) vary according to the status of the deceased. ANZAC Day (our Memorial Day equivalent) is another half-mast day (usually morning only). Of course, many official and private organizations also half mast the flag in respect of deaths of other people of special significance to them. Stuart Park

In Denmark flying half-mast is *the* appropriate thing to do at funerals and on some holidays (Good Friday comes to mind).
Ole Andersen, 13 December 1997

How Far Down the Flagpole is "Half Mast"

This is originally a naval term, referring to the pole or area on the mast of a ship where the flag is flown under way. This area is about three flag widths tall above the ship's main structure to allow for the occasional two-flag display (the US flag always on top) and room for lowering the flag to half mast. Because the mast area and the pole at a ship's stern are short, half mast is one flag width below the top. A flag pole is not a mast, so the flag should not be flown half-way up a tall pole. It is properly raised briskly to the block (top) and lowered slowly one flag width to the "half-mast" position. This makes it clearly not "two-blocked" and signals respect, but still keeps the flag high enough to prevent fouling and the sloppy appearance of a "half-pole" position, especially if the flag is very large. The flag, even at half mast, should be fully visible and flying freely and proudly in the wind.
Richard Olsen

I'm sure I'm not any kind of authority on proper flag etiquette but I would like to respond to the letter from Richard Olson.

It seems to me that even though the "half-mast" is a naval term, it has become a common and proper term in American English (and British English?). Also, flags flying at the actual half-pole position, seems to me to be 'proper' since that is what I've seen all my life.

Trying to imagine what a flag would look like at one flag width below the top, seems like it would appear that someone made a mistake about the position of the flag. A flag at the half-mark of a pole is clearly intended to be there and has always made me query as to who died.

Also, Mr. Olson says that the flag is only one flag width below the top because it is short. But the fact is, is that it IS at half-mast. Were the mast on the ship to be taller, would it still have been at half-mast? Or is the rule in the Navy, one flag-width below the top no matter what the height of the mast?

Nonetheless, whether the origin of the flag being at half-pole is from the Navy or elsewhere, it certainly has become proper to lower it to half-mast (mast is also defined as a vertical or near vertical pole: Webster) in our culture and society today and I see no reason to change it.

The act of raising it to the top of the block, then to half-mast when raising the flag and then raising it again to the block before lowering it seems logical to me. The placement of the flag at half-mast is not the 'norm' for the placement of the flag. Its symbolic representation of the nation (branch of military, etc.) should be at a high point for all to see and respect. The 'lack of respect' of placing the flag at half-mast seems, to me, to place the nation second to the death of an important figure. Raising the flag to the block before and after raising it seems symbolic that this is where the flag should be but because of a great loss due to death, we will forgo that place of honor so as to honor the dead more. Returning the flag again to the block returns the flag to its honored position saying (maybe) that the nation goes on despite the death.
Michael Menninger

Duane Streufert posted an article concerning the etiquette of flying the flag at half mast from the Nov.-Dec. 1994 National Flag Foundations "Standard Bearer" Magazine. This article remains the copyrighted material of the National Flag Foundation and is presented here by permission.
Nathan Augustine posted a reply.

In Spain, the most frequent alternative to flying a flag half mast to indicate mourning is to stitch a small piece of black material (a short cravatte, a square piece of material, occasionally even a black Handkerchief) to the centre of the flag. This is done almost only with flags not intended for hoisting, such as flags displayed on balconies etc. Flags not intended for hoisting but which would be inappropriately defaced by such an addition (namely military colours) tend to use a black cravatte attached to the finial.
Santiago Dotor, 27 April 2001

The US Department of Defense Directive 1005.6 (27 May 2000) now mandates that "The term "half-staff" means the position of the flag when it is one-half the distance between the top and bottom of the staff." This is (all too typically) a case of standardization that fails to take into account empirical realities that were more than adequately covered already by individual service regulations--things like flagpoles with crosstrees, guy cables, and those standing too close to buildings for the flag to fly free if positioned exactly half-way up the pole.
Joe McMillan, 12 September 2002

Half-mast or Half-staff

Some websites I found on the CBC web page, of a vexi-nature (CBC is the government-sponsored broadcaster in Canada) http://cbc.ca/news/indepth/words/flagflap.html
David Kendall, 9 November 2000

It is clear that although "half-mast" is more common in usage in the United States, the correct term is in fact "half-staff". This is somewhat intuitive, since "masts" are on ships and a "flagstaff" is on land. (What's more than one? "Flagstaffs"? "Flagstaves"? The Merriam-Webster Dictionary gives both plurals as correct for the word "staff"...) Of course, "flagpole" is also a common term, and "half-pole" is clearly incorrect.
Stever Kramer, 13 November 2000

My impression is the same as Steve's, that people here in the U.S. tend to say "half-mast" even though the legal term is "half-staff."

Naval usage, whether referring to a ship or a shore installation, is "half-mast." That includes the US Marine Corps and Coast Guard.
Joe McMillan, 19 November 2000

In Britain we say "half-mast". It's even a colloquial term used for anything that isn't quite as high as it should be, such as the mother telling her son that his trousers are at half-mast.
Graham Bartram, 13 November 2000

In France, we usually do not use the direct translation, which would be 'mi-hampe' (staff) or 'mi-mât' (mast), but 'EN BERNE' ('mettre un drapeau en berne' = half-staff or -mast a flag).

In his 'Dictionnaire de la langue francaise' (1872, suppl. 1877), P.E. Littré wrote:

"BERNE Mar. Pavillon en berne : Pavillon hissé mais roulé sur lui-même." (Mar. Ensign hoisted, but furled on itself.)

In his 'Dictionnaire alphabétique et analogique de la langue francaise'(6 vol., 1955), P. Robert wrote :

"BERNE n.f. (1672; origine obscure) Mar. Pavillon en berne : hissé á mi-mât en signe de deuil ou de de'tresse. Par ext. Drapeau en berne : non deployé, roul*eacute;." (Mar. Ensign 'en berne': hoisted at half-mast as a sign of mourning or distress.) By extension. Flag 'en berne': not unfurled, furled.)

'Petit Larousse Illustre' (1991) says:

"BERNE n.f. (du néerl. berm, repli ?) [from Dutch berm, withdrawal?] Pavillon, drapeau en berne : Hissé á mi-drisse en signe de deuil" (Ensign, flag 'en berne': hoisted at half-halyard as a sign of mourning.)

There was therefore an evolution in the concept of BERNE: