When One Became Two: The Civil War Wig-Wag Numbering Reversal

For something built around only two basic flag motions, Civil War wig-wag signaling contains a surprisingly persistent source of confusion: which direction was "one," and which was "two"?

The answer is that both arrangements are historically correct. The numbers were deliberately reversed during the war, while the actual flag alphabet remained physically unchanged.

Two Numbering Systems

The older Army code assigned the motions from the signalman's own perspective:

Albert J. Myer's expanded 1868 manual describes the first arrangement as the "Army Code of two elements, used during the War." In that system, the flagman moved the flag to his left for 1 and to his right for 2.

Myer then contrasts it with the General Service Code, in which 1 was made to the sender's right and 2 to his left.

The familiar Plate E showing "First Motion—One" toward the left side of the printed page is therefore not being misread. The figure faces the viewer, so the page's left is the signalman's anatomical right. The plate correctly depicts the General Service convention:

Signalman's right = 1 Signalman's left = 2

When Did the Reversal Occur?

The formal change can be dated to July 11, 1864.

Myer issued the General Service Code through the headquarters of the Military Division of West Mississippi. It was intended to improve standardized communication between Army and naval forces.

The official Army history reproduces the code from that circular and notes that its movements were the reverse of Myer's original system.

Myer's first Manual of Signals appeared a few months later, in October 1864. This explains why a wartime manual can show the newer right-1 convention even though earlier Civil War signalmen had been trained with left-1.

Why Reverse the Numbers?

Myer explained that the change was made from the receiver's perspective.

A motion made to the sender's right appears on the left side of the receiver's field of view. Myer believed it was more natural for the observer to see the lower number first on the left, followed by the higher number on the right, much as a written sequence is read from left to right.

He therefore placed 1 on the sender's right and 2 on his left.

Sending signalman:     RIGHT = 1     LEFT = 2
Receiving observer:    LEFT  = 1     RIGHT = 2

The Alphabet Itself Did Not Change

The reversal changed only the written numerical notation. It did not alter the physical flag movements or their meanings.

J. Willard Brown, writing for the U.S. Veteran Signal Corps Association in 1896, stated that the symbols retained the same meaning but that their numbering had been reversed.

He gave the example of two motions to the signalman's left:

• In the older Army code, they were written 11.
• In the General Service Code, they were written 22.
• In both systems, the motions represented A, or the conventional word after.

The same substitution applies throughout the alphabet:

Every 1 became a 2, and every 2 became a 1.

Thus, an older 2222 signal became 1111 under the General Service notation, but the flagman performed exactly the same four movements.

What This Means for Reenactors

This explains why reputable scholars, museums, manuals, and reenacting organizations sometimes appear to contradict one another.

So a Gettysburg interpretation using signalman's left = 1 can be correct for July 1863, before the General Service Code was issued. Likewise, the Signal Corps Reenactors Association may preserve the older wartime Army numbering rather than teaching a different physical alphabet.

The important thing is not to treat one chart as wrong or in error. There were two historical numbering conventions that changed via a well documented wartime revision.

The motions stayed exactly the same. One and two simply traded names.

Sources

• Albert J. Myer, A Manual of Signals, enlarged edition, 1868, particularly pp. 68 and 94–96. Read the digitized edition at the Internet Archive

• Rebecca Robbins Raines, Getting the Message Through: A Branch History of the U.S. Army Signal Corps, Table 1 and accompanying text. Read the official Army publication

• J. Willard Brown, The Signal Corps, U.S.A. in the War of the Rebellion, 1896, pp. 91–93. Read the digitized edition at the Internet Archive

• Steven J. Rauch, "Founding Father Myer's First Signal Doctrine," U.S. Army Signal Corps Branch Historian. Read the article