Great show!! Now, if I get my way, I'm convinced I could/should have an Easton Flag flying out here in Tucson. I lived in Easton(Wilson) 'til I was 8 and "grew up" in Nazareth. I knew OF the flag, but now I'm surprised it wasn't mentioned even once in my H.S. Frosh. Northampton Co. history class. Here in Tucson, people often stop to ask about our old house or my "strange plants" collection. Answering flag questions might as well join the list... and luckily I'm just 2 miles from a local Map & Flag store.
I grew up in York and Lancaster, PA, and was unaware of this version of the flag, so this is all very interesting to me. However, I think I might have a bit of insight into some adjacent, yet relevant, information. Flag design falls under a set of rules generally known as "heraldry." Heraldry is the system that governs the creation of symbols to represent people, places, or institutions. These rules cover two major areas. The first part of heraldry deals with graphic design. There are guidelines about what colors can be used, in what combinations, and in what order. These rules are designed to ensure that a symbol is easily recognizable, even from a distance. The second part of heraldry involves the description of symbols using words. This description is known as a "blazon." The purpose of a blazon is to ensure that if you give two different vendors, like flag makers, the same blazon, what they produce will look similar enough to be recognized as the same symbol. A blazon follows a specific hierarchy in describing elements: generally from largest to smallest, top to bottom, and left to right. When you look at the Flag Act of 1777, you'll see it's a written description (or blazon) of the flag’s design. The blazon reads: “thirteen stripes, alternate red and white; that the union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field.” Following the hierarchy, the first part is “thirteen stripes, alternate red and white,” which means the main part of the flag is the striped section. The next part says “the union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field.” This refers to the blue section with white stars. What’s interesting here is that Congress didn’t strictly follow the heraldic hierarchy, as the blue field is a larger element than the stars. A more accurate blazon, for the sticklers out there, would have been “in a blue field, the union be thirteen white stars.” Normally, if something isn't specified in the blazon, the designer has some freedom to make stylistic choices. Congress didn't specify how many points the stars should have or how they should be arranged within the blue field. This means that the Easton, Betsy Ross, and Fort McHenry star layouts are all valid interpretations. Considering that Congress itself wasn’t strictly adhering to the hierarchy in the Flag Act, it’s easy to imagine how a 14-year-old girl might not have fully grasped the importance of those rules. Or, if the blazon had been passed along by word of mouth-and perhaps translated back and forth along the way-the order could easily have become jumbled.
I agree; I had the same thought about the description in the act, and the way the Easton Flag is put together. The field would be the stripes, and the "union" would be understood generally as the upper left canton. I say this because we were British, and British flags, particularly regimental flags and naval ensigns, followed that design. The upper left canton in such flags contained the "Grand Union" or what we refer to as the "Union Jack". So the body should be the stripes, and the "union" would comprise the blue field and the stars. Whoever made the Easton Flag understood the description in reverse.
+dmadenford *The Easton flag wasn't specification for the Representatives of the United States of America in General Congress Assembled.* Francis Hopkinson designed two ensigns: A navy-blue canton with 3+2+3+2+3 Mullets white for Government functions, one navy-blue canton with an annulus of 13 Mullets white as the Battle Colors of the Continental Army.
Very interesting.
Thank you Sheldon. I like "fun with flags" 😉
Great show!! Now, if I get my way, I'm convinced I could/should have an Easton Flag flying out here in Tucson. I lived in Easton(Wilson) 'til I was 8 and "grew up" in Nazareth. I knew OF the flag, but now I'm surprised it wasn't mentioned even once in my H.S. Frosh. Northampton Co. history class. Here in Tucson, people often stop to ask about our old house or my "strange plants" collection. Answering flag questions might as well join the list... and luckily I'm just 2 miles from a local Map & Flag store.
That does sound like a good idea for a new tattoo and I was thinking of getting a new one
I grew up in York and Lancaster, PA, and was unaware of this version of the flag, so this is all very interesting to me. However, I think I might have a bit of insight into some adjacent, yet relevant, information.
Flag design falls under a set of rules generally known as "heraldry." Heraldry is the system that governs the creation of symbols to represent people, places, or institutions. These rules cover two major areas.
The first part of heraldry deals with graphic design. There are guidelines about what colors can be used, in what combinations, and in what order. These rules are designed to ensure that a symbol is easily recognizable, even from a distance.
The second part of heraldry involves the description of symbols using words. This description is known as a "blazon." The purpose of a blazon is to ensure that if you give two different vendors, like flag makers, the same blazon, what they produce will look similar enough to be recognized as the same symbol. A blazon follows a specific hierarchy in describing elements: generally from largest to smallest, top to bottom, and left to right.
When you look at the Flag Act of 1777, you'll see it's a written description (or blazon) of the flag’s design. The blazon reads: “thirteen stripes, alternate red and white; that the union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field.”
Following the hierarchy, the first part is “thirteen stripes, alternate red and white,” which means the main part of the flag is the striped section.
The next part says “the union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field.” This refers to the blue section with white stars. What’s interesting here is that Congress didn’t strictly follow the heraldic hierarchy, as the blue field is a larger element than the stars. A more accurate blazon, for the sticklers out there, would have been “in a blue field, the union be thirteen white stars.”
Normally, if something isn't specified in the blazon, the designer has some freedom to make stylistic choices. Congress didn't specify how many points the stars should have or how they should be arranged within the blue field. This means that the Easton, Betsy Ross, and Fort McHenry star layouts are all valid interpretations.
Considering that Congress itself wasn’t strictly adhering to the hierarchy in the Flag Act, it’s easy to imagine how a 14-year-old girl might not have fully grasped the importance of those rules. Or, if the blazon had been passed along by word of mouth-and perhaps translated back and forth along the way-the order could easily have become jumbled.
I agree; I had the same thought about the description in the act, and the way the Easton Flag is put together. The field would be the stripes, and the "union" would be understood generally as the upper left canton. I say this because we were British, and British flags, particularly regimental flags and naval ensigns, followed that design. The upper left canton in such flags contained the "Grand Union" or what we refer to as the "Union Jack". So the body should be the stripes, and the "union" would comprise the blue field and the stars. Whoever made the Easton Flag understood the description in reverse.
+dmadenford *The Easton flag wasn't specification for the Representatives of the United States of America in General Congress Assembled.* Francis Hopkinson designed two ensigns: A navy-blue canton with 3+2+3+2+3 Mullets white for Government functions, one navy-blue canton with an annulus of 13 Mullets white as the Battle Colors of the Continental Army.