[lenaitch]

The point wasn't necessarily how they got it but how much they fret about it.

 

[Deadpool X]

More than anything else, I would like to have simple and elegant designs for all provincial flags, including Ontario's. Most of the people can't even recount what all symbols are present in Ontario's flag. It's a mess.

Compare that with Canadian flag. 2 red stripes with a red maple in the centre - clean, elegant, easy to remember and express, and has a very distinct identity.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

From link.

Shouldn't Quebec change it's own flag to move away from the French (the country, not the language)?

From link.

The fleur-de-lis has been used in the heraldry of numerous European nations, but is particularly associated with France, notably during its monarchical period. The fleur-de-lis became "at one and the same time, religious, political, dynastic, artistic, emblematic, and symbolic," especially in French heraldry. The fleur-de-lis has been used by French royalty and throughout history to represent Catholic saints of France. In particular, the Virgin Mary and Saint Joseph are often depicted with a lily.

 

[afransen]

At this point, I think the fleur-de-lis is a very Quebec symbol, almost more than it is post-revolutionary French. So I don't see harm in them continuing to use it. Ontario continuing to use the UK flag is a different story. Nevermind that the flag is an ugly, muddled mess.

 

[Lennox970]

At this point, I think the fleur-de-lis is a very Quebec symbol, almost more than it is post-revolutionary French. So I don't see harm in them continuing to use it. Ontario continuing to use the UK flag is a different story. Nevermind that the flag is an ugly, muddled mess.

No its not, the fleurs de lis is a very distinct French symbol associated with France. Everyone knows that.
And the Ontario flag seems to have a quiet dignity to it. Just as any provincial flag (or any flag in the world for that matter) can be described as a muddled mess if you don't happen to like it.

 

[lenaitch]

No its not, the fleurs de lis is a very distinct French symbol associated with France. Everyone knows that.
And the Ontario flag seems to have a quiet dignity to it. Just as any provincial flag (or any flag in the world for that matter) can be described as a muddled mess if you don't happen to like it.

No it's not. It features prominently in French history but it has been used for centuries all over Europe. It's even in the UK coat of arms.

 

[Lennox970]

No it's not. It features prominently in French history but it has been used for centuries all over Europe. It's even in the UK coat of arms.

I am not so sure about that.

However, little known fact that the UK coat of arms has not one, but two mottos - in French. Zut alors!

Honi soit qui mal y pense and Dieu et mon droit . Both I take it both are derived from the Norman connection.

 

[PinkLucy]

It was a symbol used by French royalty ... which has been gone a long time. But that was just one application. https://www.fleurdelis.com/fleur.htm

 

[lenaitch]

I am not so sure about that.

However, little known fact that the UK coat of arms has not one, but two mottos - in French. Zut alors!

Honi soit qui mal y pense and Dieu et mon droit . Both I take it both are derived from the Norman connection.

Ancient India (1st century)

Kingdom of Albania: (13th/14th century)

Republic of Florence (12th-15th century)

 

[Lennox970]

Ancient India (1st century)

View attachment 378757

Kingdom of Albania: (13th/14th century)

Republic of Florence (12th-15th century)

Interesting - every day is a school day!

But I didn't realise Quebec's connection with Albania.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Look at the ridership numbers first if to see if service can be reduce. From my experience of riding the 97, it is pitiful for service as well ridership to the point I been the only one on it and never seen more than 10 on it. Ridership maybe higher with better service, but these days lack of funds is stopping it..

One only has to look at Sheppard headway for the subway section to see Eglinton is going to get better headway than it.

I am expecting to see 15-20 minute headway for Hurontario bus service once the LRT is in service. No need to see the bus south of the Queensway as ridership is non existing and will be a waste of money.

I am not so sure about that.

However, little known fact that the UK coat of arms has not one, but two mottos - in French. Zut alors!

Honi soit qui mal y pense and Dieu et mon droit . Both I take it both are derived from the Norman connection.

Queen Elizabeth II is the “Duke of Normandy.” From link.

In the Channel Islands – the last remaining part of the former Duchy of Normandy to remain under the rule of a British monarch – off the French coast of Normandy, the British monarch is known as the “Duke of Normandy.” The title stays as “Duke” even if the monarch is a woman, as in the case of the current monarch, Queen Elizabeth II.

During a visit to Normandy in May 1967, French locals began greeting Her Majesty and shouted “Vive la Duchesse!” to which The Queen reportedly replied, “Well, I am the Duke of Normandy!” The title is used by the islanders, during their loyal toast when they say, “The Duke of Normandy, our Queen”, or “The Queen, our Duke” or, in French “La Reine, notre Duc“, rather than simply “The Queen.”

From link.

The Duchy of Normandy has its origin in the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte , agreed in 911 between King Charles III of France (Charles III the Simple) and the Viking chief Rollón . In exchange for swearing allegiance to the King of France , protecting the lands from the invasions of other Viking peoples, converting to the Catholic faith and marrying Giselle, illegitimate daughter of the king, Rollon and his "Men of the North" (the Normans , from Latin Northmannorum ) receive the County of Rouen , the Pays de Caux and the Pays de Talou ( Dieppe region), lands conquered by the Normans . They constitute Upper Normandy , that is, the oldest Normandy , as opposed to the territories later incorporated into the duchy, which form Lower Normandy .

Anglo-Norman Normandy​

In the decade of the 1150s, and after the union of Normandy with Anjou and Aquitaine , as well as the access of the Plantegenêt to the throne of England, the Normans came to control half of France and all of England , thus reducing the power from France. However, technically, the Normans were still vassals of the French king.

After the Norman Conquest , political relations between the Anglo-Normans and France became complicated, as the former continued to retain their possessions in Normandy as vassals who had sworn allegiance to the King of France, but at the same time maintained an equal relationship when dealing with the kings of England.

Some experts consider that the Norman Conquest meant the cultural and economic stagnation of England for almost the next 150 years, since the kings of England preferred to rule from cities like Rouen, and concentrated all their interest in their continental possessions that were more lucrative to them.

However, others believe that the Norman Duke-Kings neglected their territories on the continent, where in theory they should continue to serve the kings of France, in order to focus in this way on the consolidation of their sovereignty over England. The economic and human effort used in the construction of cathedrals and castles, and the administration of the new territories, supposed a certain neglect of the needs of Normandy, earning the antipathy of the local nobility and weakening the Norman control of the borders of the territory. while the kings of France continued to increase their power at the same time.

The duchy was ruled as one more part of the Anglo-Norman kingdom until 1204 , when Philip II of France conquered the mainland of it. This caused a division in the Normans of the continent, between the supporters of the French monarchy and those of the Anglo-Norman monarchy.

During the Hundred Years War , the kings of England tried to regain their possessions in France.

By virtue of the Treaty of Paris , in 1259 , most of the territory happened to belong to France, but the Anglo-Norman Islands , located in the English Channel, continued to belong to the English crown (with the exception of the island of Chausey ).

In 1789 the French Revolution marked the end of the Duchy's historical rights and privileges, and the following year, the territory of Normandy was divided into five departments.

The Dukes of Normandy​

While his predecessors received the title of Jarl of the Normans or Count of Rouen, it was Richard II of Normandy who, succeeding Richard I, first received the title of Duke of Normandy.

In 1204 , the duchy was annexed to the crown by the King of France Philip Augustus . The different English kings continued to claim the territories of the duchy until the signing of the Treaty of Paris in 1259 . However, the English crown continued to rule the Anglo-Norman Islands as a part of the duchy.

The duchy was given on various occasions to a member of the French royal family: thus Philip IV of France gave it to his first-born, the heir to the throne; Juan II of France , to his son the future Carlos V of France , also known by his title as a dolphin . This he later gave to his brother Louis XI , better known by his title of Duke of Berry . The dolphin Luis Carlos, second son of Louis XVI , received the recognition of Duke of Normandy before the death of his first-born brother in 1789.

The Duke of Normandy was one of the six primitive lay peers.

 

[Lennox970]

Good point, and I guess the Channel Islands are all what is left from an incredibly large sized chunk of what is now France held by the English during the Middle Ages. Remember Henry V "..."we few, we happy few, we band of brothers." is set during the Hundred Years War.

 

[Lone Primate]

I don't think it's fair to say that the Union Jack on the flag only represents people of British descent. It's meant to show our British heritage as a society, not of individual people. Those of us who aren't of British descent are part of that culture just as much as those who are. That said, I do think it's a bit silly to have a flag with a Union Jack on it in the 21st century.

Some of the designs proposed a few pages back are on the right track, IMO. The trillium and some combination of red, gold, white, blue, and/or green are a great starting point. 5 colours is probably too many though.

Well, it's certainly a perspective that has some resonance; I remember writing letters to the editor in The Star back in the 80s when I was a teenager that took that position. It's legitimate to say, as you seem to be doing, that people who have come to Ontario from places that don't share a British heritage are just as free to identify with it as... let's be honest, and with due respect to other cultures... the major establishing culture of the modern province we all share. It was a big empire and that can be a pretty big tent, and people should be free to claim it as their own if they want to.

I think it's worth having the debate and perhaps putting it to the people of Ontario in an election, and if a majority of the voters are open to establishing a new flag, have some fun with it. Narrow it down to a few candidates, including the current flag, and have a referendum to see what folks prefer. It could be really interesting and re-invest the citizens of Ontario in their shared institutions. We're pretty blasé about that kind of thing in this country.

 

[Lone Primate]

I genuinely cannot understand those who see it any different. OK, there will always be people with a chip on their shoulder over the UK/UJ. I get that. But this rehashed Red Ensign flag debate from the 1960s is nothing more than ancient history with no relevance today (or to anyone born after the 1950s).

Ah, I need to edit this, as I seem I'm repeating myself. Nevertheless, I think it does bear restatement as it does, judging by the writer's name, represent the view of someone not of British heritage but yet having been brought up steeped in our ersatz provincial version of it. This was a letter to the editor that appeared in The Star on Sept. 19, 1987...

Ontario's flag isn't representative

The patriation of the Constitution in 1982 made Canada, at long last, legally and technically independent from Britain.

Unfortunately, Canada is still colonially and symbolically subordinate in carrying Britain’s symbols.

Ontario’s so-called provincial flag, for one, is nothing more than an 18th century British naval squadron-rank flag — the red ensign version with three sickly maple leaves dominated and crowned by England’s cross of St. George.

The total Canadian content of this flag is less than 10 per cent. Isn’t it time for Ontario to finally have a flag representing its plural reality with total Canadian symbolism?

ROBERT HANULAK

I think it's fair to say there are probably a lot of Ontarians who feel the same way, but it's not a big enough deal for them to really get exorcised about. Nevertheless, it's a fair take on the matter. And I think having the Union Jack on the flag, this late in history, is probably needlessly antagonistic to Franco-Ontariens (not to mention francophones elsewhere in Canada) for whom it might be a constant reminder of the Conquest. As well, to people from such places as India and Pakistan who have a complicated relationship with Britain and who, while they might be eager to raise their families in a place largely formed around a British model, might prefer to do wo without necessarily feeling they're being reminded of 'who's in charge'... and after all, let's be honest, that's why Ontario (and Manitoba) grabbed the Red Ensign before it even hit the ground back in 1965. It was a faintly cynical attempt by conservatives to hold back the tide on the sea of history. Whether we embrace the Red Ensign or not, that's genuinely a factor that needs to be taken into consideration when we discuss whether it has a proper place representing us all. I don't say it lightly; it took me a long time to come around to accepting that as a legitimate perspective.

 

[Lone Primate]

A very interesting topic, IMO. I fully admit that I am challenged how in a country that is mature and self-confident in every respect, some still do not see our provincial flag as Canadian.

This can be contrasted, for example, by how other formerly imperial symbols are considered 'Canadian' and some 'colonial'. For example, a uniform that is 90% based on a British Army cavalry regiment (RCMP uniform) or the Imperial ensign of the French empire (Quebec fleurs de lis) have explicit imperial ties. Yet try campaigning against them....

My own theories are that:

i. We are chained to the 1960s national flag debate - it has now been decided that Red Ensign = colonial, consequently our discourse on the Union Jack can never move beyond that limit.
ii. Alternatively, a case of North American throw away culture. Like so much of our urban built heritage, our other heritage is equally disposable.

Sorry, not being deliberately argumentative, just probing where this leads!

I would tend to agree to some extent; I think I'm more comfortable with seeing the Union Jack on a provincial flag, where it tends to represent local heritage and traditions, as opposed to on the national flag where it speaks for an entire nationality... I do think our national flag definitely needs to be distinctive. I'd like to say I'm not strident in wanting to change Ontario's flag, just interested in the views and what we might choose to give ourselves if we do decide to move on to a new design.