John,

I am not sure of that interpretation. It would appear that Lord De la Warr
named the one ship after himself or his family and that the other two ships
were named the Blissing (possibly Blessing) and the Hercules. It would seem
to me that the statement then indicates that as far as his fleet was
concerned he considered someone on board the De la Warr (himself) as the
admiral, someone on board the Blissing as the vice-admiral, and someone on
board the Hercules as the rear admiral. All of these would have been ranks as
commanders of a fleet in descending order. The captains on board each vessel
would have been separate offices although they might also have been
designated for the separate office of vice admiral and rear admiral. In De la
Warr's absence someone designated as vice admiral on board the Blissing would
have had command of the fleet. In naval usauge the ships may well have flown
a pennant indicating the separate ranks, but technically those pennants would
not have been flying in the absence of the person so designated. If an
admiral transfers his command from one ship to another (from one "flagship"
to another) the flag goes to the new ship. The flag follows the designated
officer not the ship.

Bill Russell

In a message dated 10/17/01 9:10:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:


> The transcription gives the names of Delaware's ships in the following
> phrase: "the first of April, 1610, in the good ship the De la Warr, admiral,
> accompanied with the Blissing of Plymouth, vice-admiral, and the Hercules of
> Rye, rear-admiral, we weighed from the Cowes, . . ."
>
> I believe that the references to admiral, vice-admiral, and rear-admiral
> have to do with the relationships of the ships rather than people. Thus, it
> appears that Lord Delaware had named his ship after himself. It is
>

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html