A guide to researching Australian WWI medals

Every year, on 25 April, Australians and New Zealanders commemorate Anzac Day – a national day that honours those who have served and died in all wars and conflicts and acknowledges the contribution and suffering of all those who have served their country. The day is marked by commemorative activities such as a traditional dawn service and parades in which serving members, veterans, their families and descendants march in recognition of military service and sacrifice. Many family members and relatives choose to wear the military medals and decorations awarded to their ancestors.

Although “Anzac” is a familiar word to Aussies and Kiwis, its origins are traced back more than a century to the First World War, when the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (A.N.Z.A.C) was formed. As colonial subjects of the British Empire, the ANZACs volunteered to fight for their King and Mother Country against the Central Powers, comprised of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire. The ANZACs won fame during the ill-fated Gallipoli campaign, where they fought against the Ottomans, as well as in the Middle-East and on the Western Front in Europe.

Approximately 417,000 Australians volunteered to fight in WWI, from a total population of fewer than 5 million people. Consequently, millions of Australians today have ancestors who fought in the Great War. As a result of the Centenary of the First World War (2014-2018) there has been renewed interest in family history related to military service, especially with regard to researching service records and military medals.

What medals were awarded during WWI?

As part of the British Empire, Australians were awarded Imperial medals and decorations for campaign service, gallantry and bravery. The most commonly awarded campaign medals for WWI were:

1914-1915 Star

1914-1915 Star

The 1914-1915 Star was awarded for campaign service in an operational theatre between 5 August 1914 and 31 December 1915. Those ANZACs who took part in the Gallipoli campaign between 25 April 1915 and 9 January 1916 were awarded the Star. It was never awarded alone. A recipient of the 1914-1915 Star would also be eligible to receive the British War Medal and Victory Medal.

British War Medal

The British War Medal was awarded for 28 days’ mobilised service in an active theatre of war between between 5 August 1914 and 11 November 1918. It is the most awarded medal of WWI.

Victory Medal

The Victory Medal was instituted to commemorate the Allied victory. It was awarded to personnel who entered any theatre of war between 5 August 1914 and 11 November 1918 (no minimum service duration applies). This medal was never awarded by itself, but always in conjunction with (at least) the British War medal and (if eligible) the 1914-15 Star.

These three medals are found mainly in two configurations, namely the ‘WWI Pair’ (British War Medal, Victory Medal) or the ‘WWI Trio’ (14/15 Star, British War Medal, Victory Medal). As a rule of thumb; if a person enlisted in 1914 or 1915 and served at Gallipoli, he/she would most likely have received the Trio. Alternatively, if he/she enlisted after 1915, the Pair is most likely to have been awarded.

It is important to note that these three medals are the most common because they were awarded for campaign service. In other words, all who took part in the War between specific dates and for a specific duration were awarded campaign medals. On the other hand, individual acts of gallantry or bravery were recognised with another group of medals, called decorations. Many fewer decorations were awarded compared to campaign medals, and as a result they are much rarer. Such decorations include the Military Medal (MM), Distinguished Conduct Medal (DCM) and Military Cross (MC). The most prestigious British decoration for gallantry is the Victoria Cross (VC).

How do I know which medals my ancestor received?

The best place to start your search for medal entitlements (i.e., which medals your ancestor received) is to track down his/her service record. Fortunately, most Australian WWI service records have been scanned and digitised. They are available (and searchable!) through the National Archives of Australia’s website.

Once on the National Archives homepage, look for the search bar and enter your ancestor’s details. Useful search terms include full names, surname and service number. Once you have entered a search term and clicked the search button, the search results will be displayed. There will likely be more than one result, so scroll through them until you find your relative. For WWI service records, look for the date range “1914-1920” and an icon resembling a sheaf of papers (highlighted below). This icon indicates that records have been digitised and are available for you to view.

An example of search results from the NAA website

After clicking on the digital records icon, a new window will open with several scanned and photographed pages of records. The records typically include enlistment papers, embarkation records for troopships, disciplinary records, correspondence and medical records. This is a wonderful way to discover the history of your ancestor and it is well worth poring over each page to piece together the timeline of their wartime experience. Surprising details can often be found, although they can be difficult to decipher due to the handwriting of some military clerks.

The medal entitlements page will normally be towards the end of the collection, and is easily recognised by a series of three stamps, like the ones pictured below:

Note the three stamps in the shapes of the various campaign medals

The three stamps represent the 1914-15 Star, British War Medal and the Victory Medal. If a stamp has a number inscribed in it, it means that the particular medal was awarded. If a medal has the letters “N/E” inscribed, it means the person was Not Eligible to receive that particular award. In the example pictured above, it can be seen that the person in question was awarded the British War Medal and the Victory Medal, but was not eligible to receive the 1914-15 Star.

Not all WWI service records contain these medal entitlement stamps. In such a case reading through the service records and piecing together dates and duration of service can provide hints about which medals a person would have received. For example, if service records indicate enlistment after 1915, the person in question would most likely have been awarded the WWI pair (i.e. without the 1914-1915 star). Other sources of information include the Australian War Memorial and the Department of Defence.

Once you have determined which medals were awarded to your ancestor, you can purchase replica medals to wear on appropriate occasions, such as Anzac Day and Remembrance Day. The cost of a set of mounted replica medals can range between A$80 – A$200. Note that when wearing a relative’s medals, they should be worn on your right chest (since the medals were not awarded to you, they may not be worn on the left chest).

Feel free to leave any comments or questions below.

Book Review: Civilization

Civilization by Niall Ferguson

Penguin, 2012. 401 Pages.

The phenomenon upon which Niall Ferguson ponders in Civilization is so profound that for centuries it has been taken for granted; so pervasive that it has become ubiquitous. For millions of people across generations it is what could most universally be described as ‘normal’. Indeed it is perhaps the closest approximation of a universal normative framework that humanity has thus far created. What is this phenomenon? Western Civilization.

The pinnacle of success for any value system, or indeed product or idea, has been attained when reflective pondering stumbles upon the question: “How could people ever have lived without this”. I have heard this question asked (more emphatically than ponderous) by the millennial generation about the most pervasive consumer goods of our time – mobile technology, the internet, Facebook, etc. In the same way, preceding generations will have exclaimed the essential virtues of life-altering inventions such as railroads, electricity, and the automobile. However, take a step back from these everyday minutiae that make our lives more interesting and sometimes easier, and you may be able to see the woods, instead of just the trees. The grand framework within which we (and our predecessors for the past five centuries) have lived our lives and which has brought us so much progress, prosperity and proliferation has its roots in an unlikely time and place – the chaotic and tempestuous Europe of the middle-ages.

Ferguson’s approach to his subject is twofold. The first, and most comprehensive part concerns an exposition of the development of Western civilization and the reasons for its dominance. Like any popular historian worth his or her salt, Ferguson tackles these questions by highlighting a set of clearly defined and easily understood causative factors (or “killer applications”, as he describes them as a means of ingratiating them with contemporary jargon) of which he identifies six in total. In (very) brief terms, they are:

• Competition. Because Europe was fragmented as it emerged from the middle-ages, economic, diplomatic and military competition between states rose to fever pitch. This competition stimulated thriving economies and international exploration.
• Science. The Enlightenment and subsequent scientific revolution propelled Europe to the cutting edge of innovation, surpassing China and the Arab world. This accelerated the development industrial and military technology.
• Property rights. The explosion in commerce and trade was underpinned by the surety that you owned the fruits of your labour. Despotic predations upon property was minimised, thereby incentivising risk taking and profitability. Ferguson cites property rights as a key factor in the ascendancy of the United States.
• Medicine. Scientific prowess coupled with imperial expansion provided Western scientists with the opportunity to revolutionise modern medicine. This has universally led to prolonged life expectancy and improved quality of life.
• Consumerism. The enduring legacy of the Industrial Revolution is not the creation of cheap and plentiful goods and products, but rather the market of mass-consumption which it spawned.
• Work. Christianity, and specifically Protestantism, provided the West with a design for life that emphasised self-direction, hard work, thrift and saving. The Western work ethic that developed as a result promoted productivity but also bolstered social stability.

The importance and influence of these factors are skillfully demonstrated by the author through comparisons with other powerful yet transient civilizations such as those of Arabia, China, Japan and pre-Columbian south America.

The second strand to Ferguson’s approach asks whether we are witnessing the demise of Western dominance and prognosticates regarding the nature of a post-Western future. Of course, the somewhat droll spectre of Chinese ascendancy features centrally in these discussions, given its self-evident plausibility. Whilst China’s growing power should come as no revelation to all but the most uninformed of readers, the author manages to nevertheless approach the topic in a stimulating manner. Given that the book was published in 2010 and written in the immediate aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, Ferguson engages in much hand-wringing about the accelerated demise of Western dominance as a result of this episode. Writing at the time, and given the premise of the book, it is entirely understandable that this event should feature prominently in any analysis of the West’s (and specifically the USA’s) economic durability. However, reading (as I did) this book some eight years later, it is my impression that while the financial crisis highlights the unsustainable nature of certain sections of the modern global economy, the way in which the West has managed to weather the storm in its aftermath appears rather to challenge the assumption that it is on a path of linear and accelerating decline. The West, after all, invented the economic game the entire world is now playing on a globalised and interconnected scale. As a result, it is both player and referee, with all the benefits and advantages that accrues from such a position.

I was particularly interested to read how Ferguson would approach the “elephant in the room” when writing on the global success of the West, namely colonialism and its legacy. Having lived in Africa myself for the majority of my life and worked in academia, I am acutely aware of the trend of historical revisionism as it relates to colonialism. This school of thought has reinvented historical colonialism in two major ways. First, it posits that colonialism had exclusively negative consequences for the colonised and second, that all post-colonial headwinds and failures in such societies can be related back to colonialism. What began as an ideological and rhetorical tool of political justification has also contaminated to scholarship, where it enjoys not only popularity, but also a virulent self-righteous character that is entirely at odds with scientific objectivity. Ferguson, on the other hand, approaches the topic circumspectly and with fairness and common sense.

That colonialism was the direct cause of great suffering is not to be disputed. Of this the brutality of Belgian and German regimes in Africa provides ample testimony. Although somewhat less callous in their nature, the transgressions of French, British and Portuguese colonial dominion are also well-catalogued and not to be controverted. To deny such malfeasance would be to indulge in another, particularly abhorrent strain of historical revisionism. However, I have yet to encounter anyone who propagates this position as an historical truth or legitimate point of view. An objective appraisal will reveal that colonialism was morally wrong by contemporary standards, but that it also bestowed real and measurable benefits upon the societies where it was imposed. Does this justify colonialism? Absolutely not. To move the conversation towards the burden of justification is to throw out a red herring and entirely disingenuous. Yet, as explicit as colonialism’s injustices are, its progressive nature is equally incontrovertible. From this perspective, colonialism essentially kick-started modernisation in previously primitive societies. The products of modernity are there for all to see; infrastructure, transport, medicine, technology, trade, etc. Would any post-colonial citizen wish to live without these goods? As the author explains, the aforementioned building blocks of modernity are some of the enlightened products of Western civilisation that were left after the demise of colonialism.

Niall Ferguson is rightly regarded as being one of the foremost historians of our time. Having read and enjoyed another work of his (The Ascent of Money), I am particularly enthralled with his ability to clarify and render complex and esoteric issues to a popular level without sacrificing historical truth, accuracy, and analytical rigour.  What is even more engrossing about his work is that he brings his scholarly faculties to bear on subjects of acute contemporary relevance and interest. This is particularly true of his tour de force of Civilization and its prospects – a book that comes highly recommended.

 

An Incomplete History of Henry Patrick Moresby Sealy

One of the great pleasures in collecting historic artifacts is the very direct link they provide to the past. Items of military history are particularly evocative, since they are frequently traceable to specific individuals. Thus, history is made tangible, for instance when appreciating a medal, but also personal, because a name could be inscribed on the object. This is one of the reasons why I enjoy collecting medals and decorations.

Making such a personal connection with the past enables one to really empathise with historical circumstances. When looking back at twentieth century history and its two global conflicts, or World Wars, one may come to view history quantitatively in terms of numbers and statistics. True, these two conflicts were fought on a scale unrivalled in human existence – WWII involved some 690,000,000 combatants. However, each number, whether casualty or survivor, was a life lived or cut short. All these lives were like yours or mine; ordinary, except that they lived through exceptional and terrible episodes of all-encompassing war.  Yet, a group of medals awarded to an ordinary person may extend the memory of his or her contribution far beyond their social status or own lifetimes, if properly preserved.

This is the case with mr. Henry Moresby Patrick Sealy, one of the 334,000 South Africans who fought as part of the British Commonwealth forces during World War II. I was fortunate to have procured his group of medals along with some original documentation that shed some light on his service during WWII.

Identification photo of Henry Sealy in his middle age, which accompanied his medals and military records

The earliest dated document in the collection is a registration card for the Union of South Africa’s Active Citizen Force (ACF). The ACF was created in 1912 and served as a reserve to the Permanent Force (PF) of the Union Defence Force. By law, all able-bodied males between the ages of 16 and 60 were obliged to undergo military training after 1912. However, this was not strictly enforced by government, partly because there was a steady stream of volunteers to serve in the PF and ACF, even during peacetime. Henry Sealy’s ACF registration card indicates that he enrolled for training in January 1934. It also shows that at the time he resided at 197 Florida Road, Durban. Coincidentally this is not far from where I grew up as a child.

Citizen’s Identification Card in terms of the South Africa Defence Act of 1912.

Another document in the collection concerns Sealy’s demobilisation from military service some 11 years later, in October 1945. The “Ex-Volunteer’s Identity Book” provides interesting biographical insights. The obverse of the Identity Book is a shade of dark blue, which does not contrast well with the black ink handwriting that appears on it. Nevertheless, I have added a scanned image of the document below:

Henry Sealy’s Ex-Volunteer’s Identity Book issued to him upon demobilisation in October 1945

From this document it transpires that Sealy, No. 4465-V (‘V’ indicating ‘Volunteer’) assumed full-time volunteer service on 18 June 1940. The war in Africa had commenced eight days earlier on 10 June 1940 with the East African (involving Italy) and North African (involving Germany and Italy) campaigns. South African forces played significant parts in both these campaigns. The document also shows that upon his demobilisation in 1945, Sealy was a married man, 27 years of age. That would have made him 22 years old when he volunteered in 1940. His address is now listed in Pietermartizburg, where he worked as a civil servant in the Natal Provincial Administration before enlisting (see scanned reverse of Identification Book, below). The Provincial Administration was (and remains) headquartered in Pietermartizburg, which is about 80km inland of Durban. The renowned Comrades ultramarathon has been run between these cities annually since 1921. Thousands of volunteers from Natal, including Sealy, were demobilised at Kings Park in Durban, which now houses a 52,000 seater rugby stadium.

The reverse of Henry Sealy’s blue Ex-Volunteer’s Identity Book

Another document provides us with information about his service. The Quartermaster Clearance Certificate was issued to account for kit and equipment of soldiers returning to South Africa. From Henry Sealy’s clearance certificate one can see that he held the rank of Lieutenant in the 1st Battalion, Cape Corps (CC). The Cape Corps was raised in May 1940 to provide additional manpower for the South African war effort and incorporated so-called ‘coloured’ troops. In South African society, the term ‘coloured’ refers to individuals of varied ethnic origin which includes African, European, Asian (Malay) and indigenous Khoisan ancestry. Demographically South Africa’s coloured population has traditionally been centred in the Cape Colony and later Cape provinces. The origins of the Cape Corps as military unit can be traced back to the 18th century, when an indigenous unit was raised by the Dutch government in the Cape. It saw action in WWI, and some of those veterans were involved in the unit’s reconstitution in 1940. The Cape Corps consisted of coloured men and NCO’s led by European (white) officers.

It is noteworthy that Henry Sealy served with the Cape Corps. The documents I have discussed clearly show that he was resided in the Natal Province, prior to and after WWII. Many units were raised and reactivated in Natal during the early stages of the war, and it is curious that he should not have enlisted with one of his ‘local’ units. One can only assume that he had an affinity to the Cape (perhaps by birth) or that he possessed specific skills that were requisitioned by the Cape Corps during its reactivation for service in North Africa. Alternatively, since the Cape Corps was designated a non-combatant service unit, it is possible that Sealy was attached to a combatant unit from Natal, but as a member of the Cape Corps support through service troops such as drivers, POW guards, stretcher bearers, medical orderlies, etc.

The cap badge of the Cape Corps features the figure of Hope with her right arm resting on Table Mountain and her left hand holding an anchor. It references the historical name, Cape of Good Hope.

Notwithstanding the particularly interesting nature of the aforementioned documents, the most evocative testament to Henry Sealy’s military service are the medals that he was awarded. These are the Africa Service Medal, the War Medal 1939-1945, the Africa Star, and the 1939-1945 Star, pictured below:

L-R: Africa Service Medal, War Medal 1939-1945, Africa Star, and 1939-1945 Star. Note the patination on the Africa Service Medal, which is struck in silver, as opposed to the cheaper Cupro-Nickel of the War Medal next to it

The Africa Service Medal was awarded to members of the Union Defence Forces and the South African Police who volunteered for war service outside South African borders between 6 September 1939 and 2 September 1945. It was therefore a medal that was largely restricted to South Africans, and was issued in addition to the War Medal 1939-1945, which was awarded to all subjects of the British Commonwealth who had served full-time in the Armed Forces  for at least 28 days between during the war. The Africa Star was a campaign medal awarded to Commonwealth subjects who served in North Africa between 10 June 1940 and 12 May 1943, and the 1939-1945 Star was awarded for 180 days service between 3 September 1939 and either 8 May 1945 in Europe or 2 September 1945 in the Far East theatre.  This group of medals is typical of what many South African servicemen were awarded at the conclusion of the war.

The letter above was issued to Henry Sealy as confirmation of his awards. A ribbon for the 1939-1945 Star is attached, which partially obscures the date of 10 June 1946. Separate ribbon samples were issued for servicemen to make ‘ribbon bars’, which were worn on uniforms or civilian dress in circumstances where it is inappropriate or impractical to wear full-size medals. It is interesting to note that this letter lists his work address as “Provincial Audit … Pietermaritzburg”, which suggests that he may have been an accountant or auditor by profession.

Henry Sealy’s blue Identity Book notes that he is “to resume his civil occupation with Natal Pro. Admin., P.M. Burg” (sic).  One can therefore deduce that he returned to the relatively prosaic life of a provincial bureaucrat, after a five-year intermission of adventure and, no doubt, peril. One wonders how he must have sat at his office desk and reflected upon the things he did and saw during the war, his mind reliving unforgettable memories both terrible and remarkable, only to be startled back to the mundanity of the present by the ringing of a telephone or the knock of a colleague at the door. Henry, and so many like him were, after all, ordinary people thrust into extraordinary circumstances.

 

The Honoris Crux – Part II

This is the second of a two-part post on the Honoris Crux Decoration of South Africa. Part 1 recounted the institution of the Honoris Crux in the 1950s. This post focuses on the re-creation of the Honoris Crux in the 1970s.

By the early 1970s an escalating armed conflict was taking place in the region known as South-West Africa (SWA), now Namibia. Prior to WWI the territory had been a German colony, known as German South-West Africa. After the conclusion of WWI, the region was ceded to South Africa under the terms of a mandate from the  League of Nations (the predecessor to the UN).  Thus, SWA effectively became part of South Africa, being governed as a “fifth province” of the Union and later Republic. The system of apartheid that had developed in South Africa had also been legally and bureaucratically extended to SWA.  Since the mid-1960s the South-West Africa Peoples’ Liberation Movement (SWAPO) had spearheaded an insurgency in the North as part of a struggle for independence. This threat was initially countered by the South Africa Police (specifically the highly effective counter insurgency unit called koevoet, or “crowbar”) and later by the South African Defence Force as the magnitude of the conflict escalated.

By 1973/74 it became evident that the large-scale involvement of the SADF in the so-called ‘Border War’ was poised to escalate drastically. The conflict had a profound effect on South African society as manpower, resources and, perhaps most importantly, sentiment was mobilised to counter the Cold War threat of communist expansion in Southern Africa. As with all instances of modern conflict, numerous sectors of society were organised in support of the war effort, including the media, religious and educational establishments, and civil society. As far as the armed forces were concerned, it was essential that an adequate range of awards were developed to acknowledge the service and sacrifice that would be required from the thousands of servicemen who would be conscripted into the conflict.

Thus, as part of an overhaul of the South African system of honours and awards, the HC was also reformed. The HC was reconstituted with a revised design and in four distinct classes, namely diamond, gold, silver and the ordinary class.

Sketches of the 1975 Honoris Crux award in its four classes, from the book Honoris Crux II, Ons Dapperes

As can be seen from the sketches above, the three senior classes of the award retained the green enameled Maltese cross of the original HC, with the junior class cross in white enamel. The eagles separating the arms of the original design were replaced with a wreath of Protea flowers (South Africa’s national plant) and a pair of crossed swords. The central roundel retains the South African national colours. The two most senior classes were produced in gold, with the highest class sporting eight diamonds embedded in the roundel border. The ribbon suspender is in the form of a bundle of rods, or fasces, which is a heraldic symbol of unity and authority. The four classes of award were also distinguishable by their ribbons of orange, either solid or with vertical white stripes.

The Honoris Crux Diamond depicted on a Republic of South Africa postage stamp from 1984

As anticipated, the expansion of the Honoris Crux decoration was matched by a marked increase in the number of awards, commensurate with the escalation of military operations by the SADF in South-West Africa and later Angola. Bearing in mind that only six of HC’s first incarnation were awarded between 1952 and 1975, a total of 201 HC (junior class), 27 HC silver, and 6 HC Gold were awarded between 1975 and 2003. The vast majority of these decorations were awarded between 1975 and 1988. Only two men were twice awarded an Honoris Crux; Captain Arthur Walker of the South African Air Force (the Gold class on both occasions) and Colonel André Diedericks of 1 Reconnaiscance Commando (HC in 1975 and HCS in 1985). The Diamond class was never awarded.

Capt. Arthur Walker, HCG (with bar)

All four classes of the Honoris Crux, along with all the apartheid era honours and awards were finally abolished in 2003, and replaced with a new set of post-apartheid decorations in line with the political transformation of South African state and military after 1994. Thus, the institution, revision and eventual abolition of the Honoris Crux decoration in South Africa serves as particularly relevant example of the manner in which medals  (as symbols of nation and state) are barometers of the particular national and political climate  prevalent during particular periods of history in different countries. The Honoris Crux reflected South African ambitions of sovereignty and independence from Empire and the establishment of an own nationalist identity, the political consequences of this nationalism in the militarisation of the apartheid state during the second half of the twentieth century, and the dissolution of the award as a symbol of an unacceptable past in post-apartheid South Africa. This, as I have noted in previous posts, is why artifacts of military history are so much more than mere objects. They are virtual time capsules left over from earlier times that, to a lesser or greater extent shaped, symbolised, or recalled periods of which such artifacts may be our sole link to the past.

The Honoris Crux – Part I

The Honoris Crux was a decoration of the South African Defence Force (SADF) between 1952 and 2003. The history of this prestigious decoration for bravery serves as an example of how symbols such as medals reflect the changing political and military circumstances of a country, as discussed in this two part blog.

In 1910 the Union of South Africa was formed as a dominion of the British Empire, amalgamating the four British colonies of the Cape, Natal, Orange River and Transvaal. Only eight years prior, the latter of these two colonies were the independent Boer republics of the Oranje-Vrijstaat (Orange Free State) and Zuid-Afrikaanse Republiek (South African Republic). Throughout the 1920s there was a growing aspirations of greater autonomy in many British dominions such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. The dominions were distinguished from colonies by the fact that they were settled by British subjects. These dominions had attained levels of political development and autonomy that were sufficient for self-government. During the Imperial Conference of 1926 in London, the various dominions and Britain were tasked with the “consideration of fundamental principles affecting the relations of the various parts of the British Empire”. In a subsequent declaration (known as the Balfour Declaration), the Imperial Conference recognised that the dominions:

“are autonomous Communities within the British Empire, equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs, though united by a common allegiance to the Crown, and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations”

The representatives at the 1926 Imperial Conference. The Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa, Gen. J.B.M. Hertzog is second from left.

The Balfour Declaration was followed in 1931 by the Statute of Westminster, which formally renounced the British parliament’s legislative authority over the dominions and established authentic self-government in those places.

In South Africa of the 1930s the the emergence of Afrikaner nationalism as a political force had important consequences in the context of the Statute of Westminster. First, the Afrikaner nationalist government would be able to more effectively pursue domestic policies dealing with the coexistence of various races and second, the achievement of total independence from the British Empire and national sovereignty now appeared to be an attainable goal. In time, both these issues would come to dominate South African politics – first, in 1948 after the National Party won the general election based on the policy of racial segregation (apartheid) and in 1961 when South Africa was proclaimed as in independent and sovereign republic, no longer constitutionally part of the Empire.

The Honoris Crux (HC) was first instituted in 1952. Barely four years had passed since the watershed election of 1948 in which Afrikaner nationalism had triumphed, placing South Africa on a new political trajectory. Buoyed by a new political spirit and self-confidence, Afrikaner culture experienced a renaissance, with the creation of new symbols, the cultivation of a new historical-cultural narrative and national consciousness, and the development and institutionalisation of the Afrikaans language and Afrikaner ethos in all spheres of South African society. As an important component of national symbolism a unique system of South African honours, awards and decorations were also required as part of this renewal. Such awards are, after all, important emblems and representations of national identity and achievement. Up to that time South Africans (as subjects of the Empire) were eligible for British honours and military decorations, and an indigenous system of national awards and honours (both civil and military) would be an important symbolic step to indicate growing separation from Britain and the Empire. Indeed, it would be incongruent to acknowledge acts of bravery by South African soldiers, carried out in the interests of South Africa, with ‘foreign’ awards and decorations. In this regard, the authoritative and excellent book titled South African Orders, Decorations and Medals, relates that:

“In 1948 the Minister of Defence, Mr. F.C. Erasmus, issued instructions through the then Chief of the Air Force, Brigadier Durrant, to Major George van Rhyn, the Military Heraldic artist of the SADF, to design an ‘own’ set of awards based on the nomenclatures given by the Minister. Major van Rhyn proceeded with the designs for awards (and new uniforms) … The post-nominal titles were specifically designed to be the same in English and Afrikaans”

The result was a comprehensive and truly indigenous set of honours and awards for the Union Defence Force (UDF, later known as the SADF) reflecting the South Africa’s growing political autonomy and unique national identity. These awards replaced those of Britain, for which South Africans had hitherto been eligible. One of the military awards that emerged as part of this new system of honours was the Honoris Crux, the name being Latin for Cross of Honour. The Latin naming was no-doubt chosen in order to maintain the parity of language between English and Afrikaans, as noted in the extract above.

The 1952 Honoris Crux (HC)

The HC was awarded to members of the armed forces who without thought of own safety and through personal courage and determination performed a gallant act or deed in action against an enemy in the field. The HC could be awarded to all ranks. After the Louw Wepener Decoration, which was now the South African equivalent of the Victoria Cross and never bestowed, the HC was South Africa’s second highest award for gallantry. Recipients of the Honoris Crux were eligible to use the letters “HC” after their names.

When comparing the Honoris Crux to the British awards and decorations of the time, it would have ranked lower than the Victoria Cross and roughly equivalent to the Distinguished Service Order (DSO, awarded to officers) and the Distinguished Conduct Medal (DCM, awarded to other ranks). The South African Honoris Crux, however, did not discriminate between officers and other ranks, and all deserving members of the armed forces were eligible to receive it for acts of bravery.

The Distinguished Service Cross awarded to officers for gallantry and the Distinguished Conduct Medal for other ranks reflected the divisions in status and class prevalent in the British Armed forces and society of the 19th century.

The Honoris Crux medal itself is takes the form of a silver gilt maltese cross of which the green enameled arms are separated by four eagles. This design is similar to that of the famous Pour le Merite order of Prussia, which was commonly known as the “Blue Max”. The medal is attached to the ribbon by a laurel wreath, which is traditionally a symbol of achievement and success. The words “Honoris Crux” appears in the central roundel of the cross, along with the orange, white and blue bars of the former South African flag (1928-1994).

The design of the award is somewhat perplexing, since aside from the national colours in the central roundel, no uniquely national South African symbols are incorporated into the design. Similarly, the predominant red and green colours of the medal and ribbon are not traditionally associated with South Africa. A likely reason for this is that the design of the Honoris Crux was, in fact, almost sixty years old at the time of its adoption in 1952. It is recorded that in the late 1890s the president of the Zuid-Afrikaanse Republiek (mentioned previously), Paul Kruger, proposed the establishment a system of honours for the Boer Republic. His suggestion was widely opposed by the egalitarian-minded boer citizens, who felt that such a system was reminiscent of imperialist grandeur and monarchy, particularly that of the British Empire, which they regarded with scorn. Prototype design drawings of the proposed awards were completed at Kruger’s request, but subsequently abandoned after the proposal met with opposition. Thus, when Major van Rhyn was tasked with commencing work on designing new awards and decorations in 1948, one the design drawings of the rejected ZAR orders was used for the Honoris Crux decoration. Given that the national colours of the erstwhile ZAR featured green, red, white and blue, the oriigns of unusual palette of the 1952 HC is better accounted for.

The coat of arms of the Zuid-Afrikaanse Republiek. Compare the colours and the prominent golden eagle to the design of the Honoris Crux

President Paul Kruger of the ZAR. His presidential sash of green trimmed with red and white is virtually identical to the ribbon of the Honoris Crux.

Even though the Honoris Crux was instated in 1952, the post-WWII years represented a quiet period for the South African armed forces. More than twenty years would pass before the HC was first awarded in 1973. However, within a year, five more crosses would be bestowed – all to members of the South African Air Force for their actions during the South African Border War in which the armed forces fought insurgents in South-West Africa. Behind this initial dormancy and subsequent rapid bestowal of the HC lies a chapter of South African history marked by incisive political change and the rapid expansion of the military operations as part of an escalating conflict. The mid-1970s also saw the reform of the existing system of South African honours, medals and decorations.  The Honoris Crux decoration was also reconceived as part of this process and its important role in the military consciousness, which is discussed in the second part of this blog.

The aircraft of the Imperial War Museum Duxford

The Imperial War Museum (IWM) organisation is dedicated to preserving and exhibiting the history of Great Britain’s military history. There are five different IWM branches throughout the United Kingdom – the IWM London, which is the main branch; the HMS Belfast, which is a WWII-era cruiser permanently moored on the Thames as a floating museum; the Churchill War Rooms; the IWM North, located in Manchester; and the IWM Duxford in Cambridgeshire, which is dedicated to the history of civil and military aviation.

The main exhibition hangar at IWM Duxford, housing an assortment of military and civil aircraft from throughout the 20th century.

There are approximately 200 different vehicles on display at IWM Duxford, the majority of which are aircraft. There are also some exhibits dedicated to land warfare, displaying tanks and other armoured vehicles.  However the historical significance of Duxford extends far beyond the impressive displays it houses.  The museum is located on a functioning airfield, which saw active service as an RAF base at the end of WWI and throughout WWII.  The base played an important role during the Battle of Britain. Since Duxford was located close to Britain’s east coast, it proved a crucial point from which to intercept Luftwaffe aircraft which were bound for London on bombing raids. Even though most of the fighter aircraft stationed at Duxford during WWII were Hawker Hurricanes (the RAF’s mainstay during the Battle of Britain), the No.19 Squadron stationed at Duxford was the first to operate the state of the art Supermarine Spitfire before the war in August 1938.

An RAF pilot in his Hawker Hurricane – these two (and many other pairings like them) would be instrumental in thwarting Germany’s invasion of Britain.

Aside from the iconic Hurricane and Spitfire, the museum houses other rare and interesting aircraft that would otherwise be inaccessible to the public. Indeed, one of the great virtues of museums is that they provide the opportunity to get ‘up close and personal’ with artefacts which, either due to the passing of time or because of their specialised use, one would never normally encounter in everyday life. One such example from Duxford includes a pre-production model of the Concorde, of which twenty aircraft would eventually be built. The Concorde on display at Duxford (G-AXDN 101) once concluded a trans-Atlantic flight in 2hr56mins – the fastest ever recorded for any Concorde.

The Concorde is the longest aircraft in the main hangar. Daily tours are available of the cockpit and cabin. Also visible in the foreground is an Avro Lancaster Bomber.

Having written a previous post focusing on aircraft roundels and insignia, I found it interesting to wander through the exhibition hangars at Duxford and found some noteworthy examples.

After the defeat of Poland in 1939 following the invasion by German and Soviet forces many Polish aviators were evacuated. Most of these pilots found their way to France where units of the Polish Air Force were reconstituted, flying French hardware (mainly the poorly rated Caudron C.714 fighter plane). After the surrender of France in 1940 around 150 Polish pilots once again relocated, this time to the United Kingdom. Like the French Air Force, the RAF was initially sceptical about the ability of the Polish airmen. However, given the losses the RAF was suffering at the hands of the Luftwaffe at that time, there existed a desperate need for fighter pilots. Polish fighter and bomber squadrons were created within the RAF and soon proved their worth. At that stage, the Polish pilots were probably the most experienced Allied airmen of the war, having flown against the Luftwaffe in Poland and France. This experience, combined with the potent Hurricane and Spitfire fighters, made a crucial difference in the air war above Britain in 1940. Of all the British and Commonwealth squadrons stationed in Britain at that time, the Polish squadrons were the most effective. IWM Duxford as an example of one of these Polish RAF Spitfires that flew with the No.317 Polish Fighter Squadron.

A Supermarine Spitfire from No.317 squadron. The squadron insignia is displayed behind the cockpit, above the letter ‘C’. Note the RAF and Polish Air Force roundels

 

Detail of the Polish Air Force roundel on the fuselage beneath the engine exhaust outlets.

Since the Polish airmen integrated completely with the RAF, all the Polish squadrons operated aircraft in RAF livery. However, the Polish Air Force roundel, which is actually square, was also displayed on the fuselage. Polish pilots also wore RAF uniforms and rank insignia, but retained their distinctive Polish Air Force pilot wings.

Also on display is another Spitfire with ties to the RAF and the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF). As with their Polish counterparts, many Dutch pilots flew in the RAF after the invasion of the Netherlands and the low countries in May 1940. These pilots also flew RAF aircraft throughout the war. After WWII, many of the Dutch RAF squadrons were used to rebuild a post-war RNLAF. As a result, the Dutch continued to fly British fighters such as Spitfires during the colonial wars of independence that emerged after WWII.

RNLAF Spitfire of No.322 Squadron. Note the green colour scheme and the distinctive Dutch roundel.

Spitfire H-53 served with No.322 Squadron RAF during WWII. This squadron was in particular tasked with intercepting V-1 flying rocket bombs that were launched at London from sites in France. After the war the squadron was continued in the RNLAF, also as No.322 Squadron, in honour of its wartime service.

In an interesting coincidence, a neighbouring hangar at the museum houses a Luftwaffe Messerschmitt Bf-109 fighter that was shot down over England during the Battle of Britain. The display shows the downed aircraft being guarded by a British tommy, somewhere in the English countryside.

A downed Messerschmitt. Note the curved propeller blades caused by impact with the ground.

On closer inspection it becomes apparent that this Messerschmitt was involved in the invasion of the France and the Netherlands in 1940. As is customary with most aircraft, the air to air victories of the pilot are indicated somewhere on the fuselage. In this case they are painted on the tail rudder. It can be seen that the pilot of this Bf-109 shot down five enemy aircraft in one month, including two Dutch, one French and two British planes. The two Dutch kills occurred on the same day (13 May 1940). The Dutch officially surrendered on the following day, the 14th of May.

The rudder sporting the victories of the downed Bf-109. Compare the first two roundels with that of the RNLAF Spitfire, discussed above.

The British/Dutch Spitfire and the German Messerschmitt on display at Duxford are typical of the fighter aircraft that took part in the Battle of Britain and aerial conflict in general during WWII. They could conceivably have ecnountered one another in actual combat, and it’s a privilege to see these two warriors of the sky in the flesh.

Fast forward some six decades and the face of aerial combat has changed drastically. An example of 21st century airpower is the Eurofighter typhoon, which was developed through the collaboration of various European aircraft manufacturers. Since its introduction in 2003, eight countries have adopted the Eurofighter. The main users are Italy, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom.

The Eurofighter Typhoon on display at IWM Duxford.

Despite being a contemporary aircraft, Duxford has a Eurofighter Typhoon on display. This particular aircraft is one of the early developmental models manufactured in the UK and used for testing purposes in the late 1990s. As a developmental model, it has some unusual insignia. It sports two roundels. The one to the rear of the cockpit is the standard RAF low visibility roundel used on grey paint schemes. Towards the middle of the cockpit appears another roundel. This emblem is a composite of the German, UK, Spanish and Italian roundels. This unique emblem is a fitting representation of the cooperation between these countries in developing and manufacturing the Eurofighter.

The Imperial War Museum at Duxford, like the other branches of the IWM, is a highlight for any enthusiast of military history. There are only a handful places in the world where such a diverse assortment of aircraft are concentrated in one place.  This makes Duxford a valuable resource for popular history.  And as history recedes further into the past, the value of museums such as Duxford will continue to grow. Here’s hoping that with this passage of time, the task of preserving history in this manner will receive the recognition and support it deserves.

Stars in Flags: Symbolism and Examples

Stars are a ubiquitous feature among contemporary world flags. Currently, according to my own count, 59 states feature at least one star on their national flags.  This post explores some of these examples, along with the symbolic meaning of the stars used on each flag.

Today, the star as a symbol is generally associated with excellence or some other superlative quality – from children being awarded gold stars for scholastic effort, to football teams gaining stars for cup victories.  Celebrities are also often referred to as stars, as in film stars or sport stars.  In this sense, the symbolic meaning of a star is often intuitively linked to the luminous cosmic bodies we also refer to as stars.  The latter’s characteristics of brightness, elevation and consistency are germane to the qualities of excellence and merit for which we award stars to winners and achievers.

Gold star stickers of the type often awarded to children

The emblem of the Spanish football team, surmounted by a star denoting the team’s 2010 World Cup victory

Despite the commonly accepted association between the star as symbol and celestial body, the star in heraldry has a different and altogether more interesting origin.  A clue to the symbolic roots of the star as it is used on coats of arms, flags and rank insignia may be found in the Old French word mullet.  Whereas in English mullet refers to a tasty fish and a less-tasteful hairstyle, the Old French word is used in heraldic and flag-speak in reference to five-pointed stars with straight edges (like the ones depicted in the examples above).  In modern French, the word is spelt  molette, and refers to a rowel, as found on riding spurs.

Boots with spurs attached. Note the eight pointed rowels that resemble stars.

Therefore, in the world of heraldry and subsequently in flags, stars recall the time of mounted combat where knights and noblemen would fight on horseback wearing spurs.  Accordingly, for a gentleman to have a star on his coat of arms could evoke his status as a mounted warrior (perhaps a nobleman) or his prowess in combat during which spurring his horse into action would be required regularly.  In this sense symbolic status of the rowel or mullet is contrasted with the lowly infantry footman or man-at-arms who, in lacking a wealth and social standing, would never owned a horse, much less worn spurs.  In this sense, the star originally symbolised military and social distinction, from which connotations of merit and excellence were subsequently derived.  Stars are still commonly associated with military status and rank.

The 1914 star. A British campaign medal from WWI

The tree stars of a Lieutenant General on George S. Patton’s helmet

Given the close relationship between war and national identity on the one hand, and the connotation between stars and merit on the other,  it is therefore unsurprising that stars became popular features on national flags.

United States of America

The flag of the USA, also known as the “Stars and Stripes” and the “Star Spangled Banner” is probably the best-known star bearing flag in the world.  Currently, the flag features 50 five-pointed stars, each representing a state of the Union. The firs US flag featured 13 stars (one each for the original thirteen colonies) and as subsequent states were admitted to the union, further stars were added to the flag.  The flag was last adjusted in 1960 after Hawaii was admitted as the 50th state of the Union.

European Union

The flag of the EU, known officially as the “Flag of Europe” bears a circular arrangement of 12 gold stars, also of the five-pointed variety.  The twelve stars do not, in fact, represent member states of the EU.  Instead, twelve stars were chosen as a neutral symbol representing the “ideals of unity, solidarity and harmony among the people of Europe”.  In this sense, the number twelve evokes aspects of Western religion, such as the twelve Tribes of Israel, the Twelve Disciples or the Twelve Olympian gods of ancient Greece.  The number also features in European culture in the form of the Duodecim Tabulae (Twelve Tables) which were the  basic laws underpinning the system of Roman Law and the Knights of the Round Table, of which there were also twelve.

North Korea

The flag of North Korea, along with those of Vietnam and China, feature the Communist Star.  The Communist Star was also a prominent symbol of the Soviet Union, even though a hammer and sickle was depicted on the USSR flag itself.  There are numerous symbolic interpretations of this five-pointed star, including that it represents the five fingers of a worker’s hand, the five continents to which Communism was to be spread, and the five groups that would lead a society to Communism (the military, youth, workers, peasants and intelligentsia).

New Zealand

The flag of New Zealand sports 4 five-pointed stars in red, with white borders.  This is a good example of heraldic use of stars where the symbols are intended to represent actual celestial stars, in this case the Southern Cross constellation. The flag of Australia, which is similar, mixes both symbolic and celestial stars. It depicts 5 celestial stars (seven pointed) of the Southern Cross, including Epsilon (smaller, five-pointed) which the NZ flag omits and adds large sixth symbolic (not celestial) star that represents the Australian Commonwealth.

Flag of Australia

 

The New Zealand Flag Debate: Outcome

Following up on a previous post about the New Zealand flag debate, this post considers the outcome of the referenda held in 2015/2016.

The flag debate was settled by means of a general referendum held between 20 November and 11 December 2015, and a follow-up referendum held between 3 and 24 March 2016.  In the first referendum, voters were asked to rank according to their preference five possible alternatives to the current flag.  The five shortlisted alternative designs were nominated by a panel of twelve “high-profile New Zealanders” who compiled a longlist of 40 flags, which in turn were derived from a total of 10292 suggestions from the New Zealand public. The longlist flags are pictured below:

In selecting the five shortlisted flags, the panel were guided by the following criteria:

• It should unmistakably be from New Zealand and celebrate us as a progressive, inclusive nation that is connected to its environment and has a sense of its past and a vision of its future,
• It should be a ‘great’ flag, which means that it adheres to the principles of good flag design, has an enduring quality which will not become outdated, will work well in all situations from celebration to commemoration,
• It should be inclusive, in that all New Zealanders should be able to see themselves within it, and
• It should not have any impediments to use as the potential New Zealand flag

The panel initially only announced four alternative flag designs on 1 September 2015.  A fifth design was added to the shortlist on 24 September 2015, after  Deputy Prime Minister Bill English revealed that Parliament had voted by an overwhelming majority to have an additional, fifth option added to the first postal referendum ballot paper. The late addition took the form of the so-called “red peak” flag, pictured below (last) along with the four alternative designs selected by the panel:

Koru by Andrew Fyfe

Silver Fern (Black & White) by Alofi Kanter

Silver Fern (Red, White and Blue) by Kyle Lockwood

Silver Fern (Black, White and Blue) by Kyle Lockwood

Red Peak by Aaron Dustin (fifth addition)

New Zealanders were also provided with official visual representations of each flag in everyday settings to aid there deliberation, for example:

… drawn on the ground with chalk

… flying in front of a house

… face paint

This enabled New Zealanders to visualise each flag in its “natural habitat” as part of their everyday lives. It also emphasises the role of a flag as a symbol with which individuals may connect in different ways in expressing their national and individual identities, and it is to the New Zealand government’s credit that they conceptualised the debate surrounding a national flag (new or otherwise) in this frame of reference.

The outcome of the first leg of the referendum was that voters identified Kyle Lockwood’s Silver Fern with Black, White and Blue as their preferred alternative flag, with the Koru design by Andre Fife proving the least popular of the choices.

The next leg of the referendum, held in March 2016, sought to determine which flag New Zealanders preferred – the most popular alternative, or the current flag.  The choice was therefore a simple one:

… versus the challenger

The incumbent …

On 24 March 2016 it was announced that New Zealand had voted to retain the current flag by a margin of 56.73% to 43.27%.  Despite this result indicating an overall preference for the retention of the current flag, there were a handful of voting districts in which the majority favoured the alternative.

It appears as if the New Zealand flag question has now been settled for at least a generation.  Throughout the referendum, it was evident that many New Zealanders still identify the flag as a link to their shared national history.  This is particularly true of the flag’s association with the armed forces, which had fought in numerous conflicts to uphold the values upon which contemporary New Zealand is built under the current flag.  Additionally, whilst the outcome of the final referendum indicates a relatively close contest, many have criticised the flag referendum as being a vanity project by the incumbent government and as being a diversion from more pressing socio-economic issues.  Such allegations may have merit, since it is often difficult to gauge the true intentions of politicians.  Nonetheless, Kiwis can be proud of the responsible and attentive manner through which they have handled the flag debate, since amending or abolishing national symbols can often fraught with political and emotional conflict that can divide societies.

 

The Ferrari badge and its origins

The Ferrari emblem is perhaps the most readily recognisable of Italian motor manufacturers.  Despite the exclusivity and high cost of Ferrari automobiles, the company’s distinctive logo is regularly reproduced on merchandise and clothing, which are purchased by individuals who aspire to the status of the Ferrari brand.  Probably few of them know the meaning behind the logo that they sport on everything from toiletry bags to laptops.

The founding father of Ferrari, Enzo Ferrari, related the following story about the origins of the company’s emblem:

The horse was painted on the fuselage of the fighter plane of Francesco Baracca — a heroic airman of the first world war. In ’23, I met count Enrico Baracca, the hero’s father, and then his mother, countess Paulina, who said to me one day, ‘Ferrari, put my son’s prancing horse on your cars. It will bring you good luck’. The horse was, and still is, black, and I added the canary yellow background which is the colour of Modena.

Francesco Baracca was a the son of a wealthy Italian landowner and was born in 1888  in the north of Italy.  As with many well-to-do European gentlemen of the time, Francesco enjoyed country pursuits and was an avid equestrian.  His skills in horsemanship were further honed after he enrolled in the Military Academy of Modena in 1907.  Shortly afterwards, in 1908, he received an officer’s commission in the Royal Piedmont Cavalry (Piemonte Reale Cavalleria), which was a prestigious regiment of heavy cavalry.  Prior to WWI he was stationed in Rome, where he became interested in flying.  Military aviation was in its infancy at the time, but already held out the promise of fame and military glory for early aviators, who were christened as ‘knights of the sky’.  The metaphor is an apt one, since at the outbreak of WWI air forces were not yet the independent branches of service that they are today, but were components of the army – often cavalry regiments.  This was the case with Italian military aviation during WWI, which was organised into the Battaglione Aviatori (Aviation Battalion) of the Royal Italian Army.  Many of the Battaglione Aviatori‘s early flyers were drafted from cavalry regiments, including Francesco Baracca.  Aviators often chose to decorate their aircraft with personalised markings, in order to express their individuality and personalities.  The tradition continues to this day in the form of ‘nose art’, seen on modern military aircraft.  Baracca chose a raring stallion as his own personal motif, an allusion to his equestrian skill and cavalry ties.

Major Baracca with his SPAD XIII fighter. Note the prancing stallion on the fuselage.

Baracca would become a fighter ace during the War (i.e. scoring more than five victories) as well as Italy’s most successful fighter pilot.  He was credited with 34 aerial victories.  He died in combat after his plane was shot down by ground fire on 19 June 1918.

When adopting the prancing stallion as his emblem, Enzo Ferrari modified the design slightly (the stallion’s tail points upward in the Ferrari logo) and changed the background colour to yellow, in tribute to his hometown of Modena.  He also added the colours of the Italian flag to the topmost border of the badge and the letters ‘S’ and ‘C’, which stands for Scuderia Ferrari.  ‘Scuderia’ translates into ‘stable’, signifying that the motor cars are from the Ferrari stable – a fitting homage to both the equestrian and racing worlds that are represented in the Ferrari heritage.

The yellow shield in the coat of arms of Modena was adopted in Ferrari’s badge

The first time the stallion featured on a car, it was emblazoned on an Alfa Romeo that Enzo Ferrari was racing in 1932.  The first Ferrari debuted in 1947, sporting the current emblem on its nose.  An interesting note on the usage of the badge is that when it appears on the nose of a Ferrari, it is always the rectangular version (pictured above).  However, when used on the sides of the car, the badge appears as a shield (apparently this is an optional extra).

A classic Ferrari Testarossa from 1987. This picture shows the rectangular badge on the nose and the shield badge on behind the wheel arch.

One is inclined to think that Baracca would have enjoyed the notion that his trademark stallion would endure for more than a century, albeit somewhat anonymously, on the most prestigious and flamboyant motor cars in the world.

The Alfa Romeo badge and its symbolism

In the world of car manufacturers, Alfa Romeo’s well-known badge stands out as an example of heraldic symbolism.  Each aspect of the emblem, designed by Giuseppe Merosi in 1910, is significant to the company’s origins and history.  Even though the badge has changed many times over the last century, it has retained its basic and instantly recognisable design.

The current logo of Alfa Romeo, unveiled in 2015

The Italian car manufacturer’s logo is actually compiled of two heraldic symbols.  The leftmost half of the circular badge exhibits the coat of arms of Milan, the city where the company established its operations in 1906.  This coat of arms is a red cross on a white background, and is used by the city to this day.

City of Milan

On the right of the badge a green serpent can be seen, with what appears to be a forked tongue protruding from its mouth.  However, on closer inspection this is in fact not a tongue, but a person!  This easily overlooked detail forms part of a heraldic image known as the biscione, or viper. The biscione was the emblem of the House of Visconti, one of Milan’s oldest and most powerful dynasties (not unlike the Medici’s of Florence).  The Visconti coat of arms can still be seen on many of Milan’s prominent landmarks.

The Visconti arms above the entrance of the San Gottardo church, Milan

Once again above a gate at the Sforza Castle

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

While it is certain that the biscione depicts a serpent in the act of consuming a human, who exactly the human is remains disputed.  There are two legendary accounts of the emblem’s origins.  According to Alfa Romeo, the founder of house of Visconti, Ottone Visconti, adopted the symbol after crusading in the Middle East.  Having fought and defeated a   Saracen noble, Otone annexed the symbol which his Saracen foe bore on his shield as his own, as was the custom at the time.  This symbol was a snake devouring a man.  Another origin story explains that a voracious serpentine monster once lived in a lake near Milan.  The creature terrorised all who swam in the lake, ate child bathers and poisoned the water with its foul breath.  One day, Ottone Visconti confronted the monster and slayed it in combat.  In commemoration of this famous feat, Ottone subsequently took the serpent as his personal coat of arms, depicting it in the act of devouring a child.

According to an official press-release from Alfa Romeo, the serpent is not eating the man (Saracen or bather, who knows?) but the man is in fact emerging from the serpent and being reborn.  Personally, this smells to me of political correctness, yet it is understandable that a well-known company would be hesitant to associate its brand identity with such morbidity.

Here are three other facts about the Alfa Romeo badge:

• The very first logo featured only the word ALFA, which was an acronym for Anonima Lombarda Fabbrica Automobili, the company’s original name.  Romeo was only added in 1915 after businessman Nicola Romeo acquired the company.

The first Alfa [Romeo] badge

• Subsequent badges adopted the basic design that we know today, but featured two additional figure of eight knots in the badge’s blue border.  These knots are associated with the royal House of Savoy, which ruled Italy at the time

A comparison of Alfa Romeo badges throughout history.  Note the figure-eight knot from 1910 to 1925.

• The silver border added to the 1925 redesign also has symbolic meaning.  The Alfa Romeo P2 racing car won the inaugural Automobile World Championship in 1925 (a precursor to the current Formula One competition) and it was decided to commemorate this victory by adding a silver wreath around the perimeter of the badge.  This design feature has been omitted from recent badge redesigns.