Afterword
For many years, a large segment of the heraldry of the Dominion of Canada, as well as that of its provinces and territories, consisted of freely adopted emblems. Among the best sources for these devices today are old postcards and ceramic pieces. The emblems found on them, especially from Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee in 1897 up to the First World War reveal that Canadians expressed stead fast loyalty to the Crown and Great-Britain and equal attachment to the homeland. Loyalty to the Crown and mother country was conveyed by the omnipresence of the royal crown, the royal arms, the Union Jack, the British Red Ensign, and sometimes the Royal Standard. Attachment to the homeland took the form of maple leaves and beavers which accompanied all forms of Canadian emblems. The inscription: “The Maple Leaf Forever” from a song composed by Alexander Muir in 1867 was also a favourite, and a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) on a horse became popular, particularly in the second half of the twentieth century. The symbols viewed as best to represent the mother country and those thought most appropriate to represent the homeland were often intermixed.
A large number of heraldic items such as pins, buckles, and spoons displayed the Dominion shield and the Canadian Red Ensign, but similar items decked with the royal arms and Union Jack were also sold concurrently. In some cases, British and Canadian symbols appeared together on the same article. Actual flags on sale included the British Red Ensign, the Union Jack, and the Canadian Red Ensign. This is well illustrated, for instance, in the two 1901 T. Eaton Company Catalogues, combined together and republished in1970. [1]
But who were the Canadians who remained unflinchingly attached to symbols of the British Empire? Many came from England no doubt, but certainly not all. Sir John A. Macdonald, who was born in Glasgow (Scotland), kept preaching the necessity to remain loyal to the Union Jack and the mother country. Sir Joseph Pope’s grandfather, who was born in England, immigrated to Prince Edward Island in 1819. His father and he were both born on that island. Sir Joseph and his francophone wife Louise-Joséphine-Henriette Taschereau befriended the Liberal leader Sir Wilfrid Laurier and his wife, although Sir Joseph was himself private secretary to Macdonald, the Conservative leader. Pope shared with a vengeance his employer’s attachment to the Union Jack and British values. Laurier, whose ancestry was French, declared to the Liberal Club in London: “I am British to the core.” Yet the policies of both Macdonald and Laurier were clearly aimed at promoting Canadian interests.
The maple leaf triumphed over its much older rival, the beaver, when it appeared alone with the colours of the country on Canada’s flag in 1965. Still, loyalty to older symbols was not suppressed. The beaver was declared a symbol of Canada’s sovereignty by an act of Parliament in 1975. It remains prominent on 5-cent coins and has the honour of supporting the royal crown in the crests of Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. The number of beavers in emblems granted by the Canadian Heraldic Authority remains impressive. The Royal Union Flag, usually called the Union Jack, was approved by Parliament in 1964 to be flown with the Canadian flag in certain places and on appropriate occasions to signify Canada’s membership in the Commonwealth and its allegiance to the Crown.
Franco-Canadians were also conscious of a dual heritage. In the second half of the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth century, some Quebec authors promoted the idea that francophones were heirs to two great cultures and traditions, one Latin and the other Anglo-Saxon. A representative sentence asserted: “to be French Canadian is to be English by allegiance, French by origin and catholic by faith.” [2] I was exposed to these same notions in the 1940’s as a child in Ontario French schools. Later when I taught high school in the 1960’s, the French work available was Notre héritage européen by Frère Léon, published in 1963 as a manual to teach history to francophones in Ontario. Frère Léon maintains that the influence of France and England were the main factors in the development of Canada, and points out that Franco-Canadians benefited from English criminal laws and the British parliamentary system of government, while keeping their language, civil laws (in Quebec), and religion. A less optimistic aspect of this duality is that many francophones assimilate into the larger anglophone majority, particularly in regions where they are a minority.
In the first half of the nineteenth century, the francophones in Quebec had generally set aside the fleur-de-lis of royal France in favour of the beaver and maple leaf. One reason stemmed from a feeling of betrayal by France for the lost of Canada to the British in 1763, and another resided in the fact that communications with France were virtually severed until the second half of the nineteenth century. But it became evident to Quebecers that the beaver and maple leaf were not adequate to represent their origins and cultural specificity because both had also been adopted by the rest of Canada, especially by Ontario. In 1868 the Province of Quebec was granted a shield of arms with two fleurs-de-lis in the top, probably requested by George-Étienne Cartier, one of the Fathers of Confederation. But it took time for Quebecers to fully endorse the resurrection of this old symbol. A turning point was the bringing to light in the last years of the nineteenth century of an old flag with four fleurs-de-lis supposedly flown at the battle of Carillon where the troops of Montcalm were victorious in 1758. Subsequent flags of the province were inspired by this venerable relic. The fleur-de-lis gained in popularity during the first half of the twentieth century to the point of becoming the unchallenged emblem of the province of Quebec. One thing that no doubt facilitated the displacement of the beaver and maple leaf by the fleur-de-lis was the fact that the French government had discarded this symbol as a national emblem when it became a republic in 1792.
England had not discarded its emblems, and although the Union Jack was flown in Canada for many years, the country eventually sought a flag of its own. Newfoundland flew the Union Jack until 1980 when it decided to adopt its own design. The fact that the arms of Canada are closely patterned on the royal arms of Great Britain raised objections from Garter King of Arms when Canada took steps to have them made official. Republican France, on the other hand, could hardly have raised serious objections to Quebec’s adoption of the fleurs-de-lis as a symbol which had played a central role in its history at the time of New France and which the mother country had abandoned.
When dealing with heraldic souvenirs, it is difficult to know if they were primarily intended for the Canadian or the tourist market. The fact that some were sold in Canadian catalogues such as T. Eaton and the Hudson’s Bay Company indicates that there was a substantial Canadian market for such patriotic items. On the other hand, many were bought by tourists mostly from the United States, but also from other countries. Inevitably tourists would have sought imagery that was unmistakably Canadian, something which may have favoured the proliferation of beavers and maple leaves and other typically Canadian symbols on souvenirs.
A large number of heraldic items such as pins, buckles, and spoons displayed the Dominion shield and the Canadian Red Ensign, but similar items decked with the royal arms and Union Jack were also sold concurrently. In some cases, British and Canadian symbols appeared together on the same article. Actual flags on sale included the British Red Ensign, the Union Jack, and the Canadian Red Ensign. This is well illustrated, for instance, in the two 1901 T. Eaton Company Catalogues, combined together and republished in1970. [1]
But who were the Canadians who remained unflinchingly attached to symbols of the British Empire? Many came from England no doubt, but certainly not all. Sir John A. Macdonald, who was born in Glasgow (Scotland), kept preaching the necessity to remain loyal to the Union Jack and the mother country. Sir Joseph Pope’s grandfather, who was born in England, immigrated to Prince Edward Island in 1819. His father and he were both born on that island. Sir Joseph and his francophone wife Louise-Joséphine-Henriette Taschereau befriended the Liberal leader Sir Wilfrid Laurier and his wife, although Sir Joseph was himself private secretary to Macdonald, the Conservative leader. Pope shared with a vengeance his employer’s attachment to the Union Jack and British values. Laurier, whose ancestry was French, declared to the Liberal Club in London: “I am British to the core.” Yet the policies of both Macdonald and Laurier were clearly aimed at promoting Canadian interests.
The maple leaf triumphed over its much older rival, the beaver, when it appeared alone with the colours of the country on Canada’s flag in 1965. Still, loyalty to older symbols was not suppressed. The beaver was declared a symbol of Canada’s sovereignty by an act of Parliament in 1975. It remains prominent on 5-cent coins and has the honour of supporting the royal crown in the crests of Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. The number of beavers in emblems granted by the Canadian Heraldic Authority remains impressive. The Royal Union Flag, usually called the Union Jack, was approved by Parliament in 1964 to be flown with the Canadian flag in certain places and on appropriate occasions to signify Canada’s membership in the Commonwealth and its allegiance to the Crown.
Franco-Canadians were also conscious of a dual heritage. In the second half of the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth century, some Quebec authors promoted the idea that francophones were heirs to two great cultures and traditions, one Latin and the other Anglo-Saxon. A representative sentence asserted: “to be French Canadian is to be English by allegiance, French by origin and catholic by faith.” [2] I was exposed to these same notions in the 1940’s as a child in Ontario French schools. Later when I taught high school in the 1960’s, the French work available was Notre héritage européen by Frère Léon, published in 1963 as a manual to teach history to francophones in Ontario. Frère Léon maintains that the influence of France and England were the main factors in the development of Canada, and points out that Franco-Canadians benefited from English criminal laws and the British parliamentary system of government, while keeping their language, civil laws (in Quebec), and religion. A less optimistic aspect of this duality is that many francophones assimilate into the larger anglophone majority, particularly in regions where they are a minority.
In the first half of the nineteenth century, the francophones in Quebec had generally set aside the fleur-de-lis of royal France in favour of the beaver and maple leaf. One reason stemmed from a feeling of betrayal by France for the lost of Canada to the British in 1763, and another resided in the fact that communications with France were virtually severed until the second half of the nineteenth century. But it became evident to Quebecers that the beaver and maple leaf were not adequate to represent their origins and cultural specificity because both had also been adopted by the rest of Canada, especially by Ontario. In 1868 the Province of Quebec was granted a shield of arms with two fleurs-de-lis in the top, probably requested by George-Étienne Cartier, one of the Fathers of Confederation. But it took time for Quebecers to fully endorse the resurrection of this old symbol. A turning point was the bringing to light in the last years of the nineteenth century of an old flag with four fleurs-de-lis supposedly flown at the battle of Carillon where the troops of Montcalm were victorious in 1758. Subsequent flags of the province were inspired by this venerable relic. The fleur-de-lis gained in popularity during the first half of the twentieth century to the point of becoming the unchallenged emblem of the province of Quebec. One thing that no doubt facilitated the displacement of the beaver and maple leaf by the fleur-de-lis was the fact that the French government had discarded this symbol as a national emblem when it became a republic in 1792.
England had not discarded its emblems, and although the Union Jack was flown in Canada for many years, the country eventually sought a flag of its own. Newfoundland flew the Union Jack until 1980 when it decided to adopt its own design. The fact that the arms of Canada are closely patterned on the royal arms of Great Britain raised objections from Garter King of Arms when Canada took steps to have them made official. Republican France, on the other hand, could hardly have raised serious objections to Quebec’s adoption of the fleurs-de-lis as a symbol which had played a central role in its history at the time of New France and which the mother country had abandoned.
When dealing with heraldic souvenirs, it is difficult to know if they were primarily intended for the Canadian or the tourist market. The fact that some were sold in Canadian catalogues such as T. Eaton and the Hudson’s Bay Company indicates that there was a substantial Canadian market for such patriotic items. On the other hand, many were bought by tourists mostly from the United States, but also from other countries. Inevitably tourists would have sought imagery that was unmistakably Canadian, something which may have favoured the proliferation of beavers and maple leaves and other typically Canadian symbols on souvenirs.
This postcard by Raphael Tuck & Sons illustrates very well the duality of Canadians. Their attachment to the mother country is expressed by the Union Jack and the loyalty to the monarchy by the portraits of Earl Grey as Governor General of Canada and that of his viceregal consort Lady Grey. Strong Canadian sentiment is reflected in the beaver and garlands of maple leaves, the Canadian Blue Ensign displaying in the fly a four-province Dominion shield topped by the royal crown, and portraits of prominent Canadians. A message on the back of the card is dated 21 June 1909. Property of Auguste and PaulaVachon.
Notes
[1] T. Eaton Company, Catalogues 46-47, 1901 (Toronto: The Musson Book Company, 1970): 130, 197.
[2] This theme is expanded upon by Auguste Vachon, “La céramique armoriée d’importation, reflet du nationalisme canadien (1887-1921)” in Genealogica & Heraldica: Proceedings of the 22nd International Congress of Genealogical and Heraldic Sciences in Ottawa, August 18-23, 1996 (Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 1998): 490.
[1] T. Eaton Company, Catalogues 46-47, 1901 (Toronto: The Musson Book Company, 1970): 130, 197.
[2] This theme is expanded upon by Auguste Vachon, “La céramique armoriée d’importation, reflet du nationalisme canadien (1887-1921)” in Genealogica & Heraldica: Proceedings of the 22nd International Congress of Genealogical and Heraldic Sciences in Ottawa, August 18-23, 1996 (Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 1998): 490.