With all this talk about the Stars 'n Stripes, I realized something.
The US changes its flag regularly depending on the number of states, i.e., they add stars. (They started to add * stripes*, but realized that that could get pretty silly pretty quickly.) In fact, if DC or PR become states we may add some more stars this century.
Is there any other nation that has provision for modifing the national flag? I know that they change all the time, cause of wars and whatnot, but is there a nation that has the provision that when some event happens, they change thir flag.
Well, as I’m sure you know, the Union Flag (Union Jack) was built from an assemblage of English, Scottish and Irish emblems (changed in 1606 and 1801 respectively), so if either Scotland or N. Ireland were to secede from the Union there would be a precedent for redesigning the flag.
If N.I. left we might go back to the pre-1801 version, which didn’t look too ugly, but if Scotland left we’d have to rub out all the blue bits, which would look a bit weird.
Having said that, my WAG is that they wouldn’t bother changing it because of the hassle involved.
Just what would the pattern be for a 51-star US flag? We get to 50 with 5 rows of 6 stars (30) alternating with 4 rows of 5 stars (20). Perhaps three rows of seven(21), in between five rows of six (30).
Starting and ending with the shorter rows, instead of the longer, as now.
[an asterisk representation is supposed to be here, but vB left justifies everything, screwing up the spacing]
OK, how 'bout 52? (both DC and PR, or mebbe Canada?)
The Republic of the Philippines (Republika ng Pilipinas) flies its flag with the blue stripe on top during peacetime and with the red stripe on top if they’re at war.
You can check a lot of neat info at http://www.fotw.com. If that link doesn’t work, then just do a websearch for “flags of the world” just like that in quotes.
The flag of the Philippines is flown one way (blue stripe over red stripe) in time of peace, and upside down (red stripe over blue stripe) during time of war.
(Oh, well, I see Monty beat me to the punch on that one.)
Queen Elizabeth has various personal standards–for the UK itself (only a description, not a picture), as well as for Australia, Barbados, Canada, Jamaica, and probably New Zealand as well (no picture of that one either). I don’t know if they change them out completely for each new monarch, or just slap a new set of initials on them. (Since apparently the phenomenon of country-specific personal royal standards is still pretty new, the question may not have even come up yet.)
Neither is quite the same thing, but interesting vexillological trivia, nonetheless.
I think, though, that the U.S. pattern of regularly altering its national flag may be unique.
Originally posted by everton
Well, as I’m sure you know, the Union Flag (Union Jack) was built from an assemblage of English, Scottish and Irish emblems
And where is the Welsh flag? Hmmmm? Bastards
Ah, but England, Scotland and Ireland were seperate Kingdoms, while Wales was/is a Pricipality (apart from that, how could we get a bloody great Red dragon on that flag?).
(Walrus’s posting appeared while I was in preview, but here’s my two penn’orth)
Yeah, I used to wonder about that too. According to this site Wales was no longer a “separate principality” by 1606, so they never felt the need to bother with any Welsh symbol. I s’pose they could’ve had a dragon peeping from behind the red crosses couldn’t they? They were pushing their luck with the conveniently discovered St. Patrick’s cross anyway (I’ve never seen it flying separately), so perhaps neatness of design was their main priority.
BTW, if any history scholars are querying that “1606” date, James I succeeded to the joint throne of England and Scotland in 1603, so apparently it took them a few years to come up with the flag.
Hmmm, thinking ahead. Presume Scotland become self governing and Ireland united. Hence the Poms modify their flag, removing both the St Andrews and St Patrick crosses and incorporate the key element of the Welsh flag.
Wouldn’t that mean you have a big green dragon with the Cross of St George (of dragon slaying fame)?
Heh heh wooly, yer dead right (except the dragon would be red).
I’m surprised no Aussies have commented on what flag you’ve got lined up for when you finally kick Her Madge out. Southern cross only? Red-black-and-gold Aborigine flag? Fighting 'roo? Or a combination of all these?
Competitions to design a new flags for Oz have been near biannual events for many years. Most of the “winners” are excretable. e.g. the last one http://www.ausflag.com.au/new/pfdc/winner.html
My personal choice is the Eureka flag. It’s the only example we have of direct rebellion against colonial rule. The cause was not much more more than a few locals (miners)jacked off about taxes, (but then so was the Boston Tea Party), and the actual armed conflict only lasted a few minutes. Government 3, Rebels 0. It’s drawback is it was adopted by the now deregistered Builders Labourers Federation. The BLF was a old fashioned left wing standover union with lots of “colourful characters” and corrupt modus operandi. Mind you, neither side in the Australian building industry is covered in much glory. http://www.ausflag.com.au/flags/eureka.html
Interesting links there woolly. Of course I’ve seen the Aborigine flag and the Eureka flag in coverage of Republican rallies etc., but I didn’t know the Eureka story.
If you don’t mind a Pom sticking his nose in I’d say the disadvantages of the Eureka flag are that it might look a bit too “white” apart from any connections it might have with any particular union? The advantages of most of the submissions in your competition link are that they all look obviously “Australian” to an outsider, although 2nd Prize Judges’ Choice and 1st Prize Peoples’ Choice both look like Qantas corporate flags. 2nd Prize Peoples’ Choice at least tries to incorporate a multi-ethnic element (but it looks pretty ugly).
South Africa completely scrapped their old flag, and although it must’ve taken a while to get used to the look of it they seem to have managed OK.
Best of luck with the Republican bid BTW. As I’ve posted in another thread it’s much more difficult to achieve than people think, but I reckon it’s a worthwhile goal.
If you think about it, the alternating row idea, either with equal numbers of longer / shorter rows, 1 more longer than shorter (as we currently have), or one more shorter than longer, allow you:
2rn + r (equal numbers of shorter / longer)
2rn + r + (n+1) (1 more long row)
2rn + r - (n+1) (1 more short row)
stars, where r is the number of shorter rows, and n is the number of stars in the shorter row (r = 4, n = 5, middle expression, for the current flag, for instance). Covers a lot of numbers, particularly when you think about straight rectangular arrangements, too. A pity. I’d like them to have to get more creative about coming up with arrangements.
Do you think someone should let them know, or do you think we could get them to swallow live goldfish or something as part of the big Statehood Initiation?
Presumably, what the article reffered to in those cases was initiatives to split up existing states. A perennial suggestion in California, though the last time it surfaced, proponents were suggesting splitting the state into 3 pieces, and they would need a 52 star flag. I will admit that splitting Nebraska seems a bit far-fetched.
A big pink one with ‘OZ’ written on it in big letters. You know, something tasteful…… Probably have a chunk out of one corner where you have had a melanoma removed.
(Big thanks to Alan Davies for that)
Anyway, I thought we in the UK already WERE the 51st state. Might as well be the way Tony Blair hangs on your coat tails
