Why the Crown of Maples is not a Colonial Relic

I've noticed that quite of few non-Canadians read this blog. I suspect my foreign readers, unless they are from a Commonwealth country, don't quite understand how Canada can be an independent nation and yet share a monarch with 15 countries (including the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Bahamas, Jamaica and several other Caribbean countries, and even tiny Tuvalu). Here's the full list of countries Canada shares a Head of State with: The Commowealth Realms.

The various incarnations of the British (English/Scottish) Crowns have always included more than one kingdom: France, Ireland, Scotland, England, Germany, and Norway all have histories of sharing what was later called the British Monarch.

The term British itself is an admission that the Queen rules multiple kingdoms and has several parliaments.

Bet you didn't realize that Scottish Kings once considered Norway one of their kingdoms. Henry VIII of England, considered himself to be King of France, too. And many French Kings considered England part of their territory. Several 19th Century British Monarchs were also Electors of Hanover, in what is now Germany, and many of the King`s German subjects were counted among the loyalists who fled the American Revolution to British North America. (Canada)

This illustrates another important point: Citizenship in a Commonwealth country is not based on ethnicity. It`s based on adherence to parliamentary democracy and loyality to the Crown, including Parliament. (If only we could remember that!)

For a more modern understanding of Canada's constitutional monarchy, read, The Crown of Maples published by the Government of Canada. Just click on the headings and the text will appear.

Enjoy.

Fortis and Liber

It's sad. Too few Canadians actually know the meaning of their national and provincial symbols. Take the hoopla over Alberta's new licence plates. Talk over whether or not to put the provincial motto on the plates is causing a controversy.

Some quarters of our population think that putting 'Strong and Free', the English version of the Province's Latin Motto, Fortis and Liber, on licence plates represents Americanization of Alberta politics. Some Anti-Ottawa politicians and pundits think creating a distinction between Alberta and the rest of Canada is a great.(One gets the idea that they are more loyal to the land of their birth than the country that accepted them as immigrants.) Most Albertans do not.

But all sides in this discussion are way off base. It is ridiculous to suggest that ideas of strength and freedom are not linked to Canada's place within the British Empire. It lessens Alberta's place in the world to suggest the province does not share in that tradition. Or that the founders of the province were not loyal to those institutions.

'Strong and Free', in the Albertan context, has nothing to do with the United States of America. And while the ideas of creating and federating new Canadian provinces were radical in their day, the motto itself has little to do with political reform. It is a motto, handed to us by the Crown, indicating that our province's strength and freedom are tied to parliamentary democracy.

'Strong and Free' symbolizes Alberta's links to the Canadian Crown and pays tribute to the fortitude of Canadians who settled the NWT in the days before The District of Alberta, NWT, became a province. 'Strong and Free' is proudly Canadian. And Albertans remain deeply loyal Canadians.