I read in a magazine article that antique US flags are dated by counting the number of stars and looking up when the US had exactly that many states. But on the antique flags I've seen, the stars are fabric patches, and from what I've read the arrangement of the stars wasn't standardized. So it would have been possible to update an older flag by adding more stars. Do any antique flags exist that are known to have been updated by adding stars, or whose age is in dispute because of that possibility? NeonMerlin 11:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Flags for the U.S. Navy were standardized as early as 1818, but general usage with respect to star arrangements was rather loose for a long time after that. The original Old Glory flag was updated by sewing additional stars onto it... AnonMoos (talk) 13:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A useful link might be Physical Characteristics of Antique (US) Flags which discusses the variables. Alansplodge (talk) 16:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an interesting chart on the same web site. You'll need to zoom in on the PDF (or print it on very large paper) to view it properly. --76.69.47.228 (talk) 20:35, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In David Lloyd George's War Memoirs, we read "[Colonel Repington's] diaries, where he records the interviews he had from time to time with William Robertson and his principal coadjutator, the Director of Military Operations, Sir Frederick Maurice, and some mysterious person in the confidence of the War Office, who is referred to by Repington as "X", show how complete was his collaboration with the General Staff". ^[1] Do we know who "X" was? Thanks, DuncanHill (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This source doesn't come out and directly say it, but names three War Office co-conspirators rather than your two. Besides William Robertson and Frederick Maurice, it cites a third person Maurice Hankey, which is circumstantial evidence that X may be Hankey. --Jayron32 15:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting, thanks. Reading further in War Memoirs there is a strong hint that it was Derby. "...when so influential a personage as Lord Derby, holding such a key position as that of Secretary of State for War, by letter and talk expressed sympathy with Haig's and Robertson's stubborn opposition to the Cabinet's policy, they naturally thought they could rely upon him to help them to thwart it and at any rate to prevent any serious mishap occurring to themselves if they committed their fortunes to a thwarting intrigue".^[2] DuncanHill (talk) 15:30, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]