Flagging Flag

Post by Lynx
Recent reports make mention of Gib's flag "running aground" near Rota.
Gib, even today, is still considered a colony. What is the status of the
Castle and Key, internationally and, amongst local residents?

Your postings are getting through to me at least.

The flag subject has been covered already. The news item follows on the Sp
authorities unwillingness to permit a US ship flying the Gib flag entering
Rota - a US military base in Spain between Gib and the Algarve region of
Portugal.

It is a curious state of affairs in which the Sp do not recognise their own.
The castle and key coat emblem was the coat of arms presented to the City of
Gibraltar in 1501/2 by Isabella, the Sp queen, when she ruled over Sp AND
Gib - in that very short interlude in history when Spain ruled over Gib and
following which they assume they can, must and should do so for ever more.

But you should know all this, seeing as you are an expat Jani as you say in
other posts.

Ken

Lynx

2005-05-14 19:37:45 UTC

Your postings are getting through to me at least.
The flag subject has been covered already. The news item follows on the Sp
authorities unwillingness to permit a US ship flying the Gib flag entering
Rota - a US military base in Spain between Gib and the Algarve region of
Portugal.
It is a curious state of affairs in which the Sp do not recognise their
own. The castle and key coat emblem was the coat of arms presented to the
City of Gibraltar in 1501/2 by Isabella, the Sp queen, when she ruled over
Sp AND Gib - in that very short interlude in history when Spain ruled
over Gib and following which they assume they can, must and should do so
for ever more.
But you should know all this, seeing as you are an expat Jani as you say
in other posts.
Ken

G'day Ken. You're right, I know our history only too well, didn't realize
the topic had already been covered. I'm Manny, you may remember me from old
post-exchanges in this very group.
It was 10th July 1502, Toledo. When the Coat of Arms was granted to
Gibraltar by royal decree by the Catholic Monarchs of Spain.
Any Gibraltarian interested in history would be well rewarded in paying a
visit to San Roque, where the original Coat of Arms is kept.

Mano

Jim Watt

2005-05-15 01:03:03 UTC

Post by Lynx
Any Gibraltarian interested in history would be well rewarded in paying a
visit to San Roque, where the original Coat of Arms is kept.

If they had any decency they would return it to Gibraltar
where it belongs.

Anyhow, nice to see you again.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Lynx

2005-05-15 02:01:13 UTC

Post by Lynx
Any Gibraltarian interested in history would be well rewarded in paying a
visit to San Roque, where the original Coat of Arms is kept.

If they had any decency they would return it to Gibraltar
where it belongs.
Anyhow, nice to see you again.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Looking at things from a distance can give one a different perspective. For
this reason, I bow out of old arguments and discrepancies, which so
evidently affect the daily lives of those living in Gib and it's
surroundings, I suppose. Mine is purely a historical perspective.

It's good to be back. Hope you're keeping well.
Mano

DCC

2005-05-15 03:14:40 UTC

Well James, if we all had the decency you seek, and returned things to
'where they belong' that would put a museum or two upside-down! Not least
some British museums. Should we return that mummy to Egypt that is kept in
Gib?

The fact that the CoA is in San Roque is part of history. To me it can stay
there as long as it has to.

It should only be returned if or when ALL recognise it's significance as a
symbol of our identity (if it is that). Remember it was given to a Spanish
Gibraltar by a Spanish Queen.

In the meantime for me, the CoA on the 5 pound flag you can buy down Main
Street is as symbolic and powerful as the original.

Whilst on the subject. I propose the when we get our new constitution, the
coat of arms of the GoG should be changed. The present one we use (see the
one on the GoG website or the one hanging above the speakers chair in the
HoA) is a constant reminder to all of our colonial status. The city arms is
right smack under the Royal CoA. To me, it looks wrong, like an
afterthought. A more regal CoA with the Red/White/Castle/Key in the middle
would be more representative.

Post by Lynx
Any Gibraltarian interested in history would be well rewarded in paying a
visit to San Roque, where the original Coat of Arms is kept.

If they had any decency they would return it to Gibraltar
where it belongs.
Anyhow, nice to see you again.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Lynx

2005-05-15 04:39:41 UTC

Indeed, I cannot but agree with what you say. However, as you put it, I
should add that the coat of arms on the GoG as much as that in the HoA, is
merely a reminder that (we) Gibraltarians are mere colonials, subject to the
whims of a distant, if at times friendly, electorate. An electorate whose
constituents, I may add, do not have the foggiest of the where, what or how
of Gibraltar and its citizens.

Post by DCC
Well James, if we all had the decency you seek, and returned things to
'where they belong' that would put a museum or two upside-down! Not least
some British museums. Should we return that mummy to Egypt that is kept in
Gib?
The fact that the CoA is in San Roque is part of history. To me it can
stay there as long as it has to.
It should only be returned if or when ALL recognise it's significance as a
symbol of our identity (if it is that). Remember it was given to a Spanish
Gibraltar by a Spanish Queen.
In the meantime for me, the CoA on the 5 pound flag you can buy down Main
Street is as symbolic and powerful as the original.
Whilst on the subject. I propose the when we get our new constitution, the
coat of arms of the GoG should be changed. The present one we use (see the
one on the GoG website or the one hanging above the speakers chair in the
HoA) is a constant reminder to all of our colonial status. The city arms
is right smack under the Royal CoA. To me, it looks wrong, like an
afterthought. A more regal CoA with the Red/White/Castle/Key in the middle
would be more representative.

Jim Watt

2005-05-15 04:26:08 UTC

There is pressure to return such things to the country of origin, the
Greeks are pressing for the Elgin marbles, and the Egyptians are
getting back some of their stuff, haven't seen the mummy you refer
to and would not miss it.

Post by DCC
The fact that the CoA is in San Roque is part of history. To me it can stay
there as long as it has to.

I disagree, if it was given to Gibraltar and removed to Spain then its
stolen property

Post by DCC
In the meantime for me, the CoA on the 5 pound flag you can buy down Main
Street is as symbolic and powerful as the original.

Theres a reproduction of the original grant of arms on the wall at
number 6 convent place.

Post by DCC
Whilst on the subject. I propose the when we get our new constitution, the
coat of arms of the GoG should be changed. The present one we use (see the
one on the GoG website or the one hanging above the speakers chair in the
HoA) is a constant reminder to all of our colonial status. The city arms is
right smack under the Royal CoA. To me, it looks wrong, like an
afterthought. A more regal CoA with the Red/White/Castle/Key in the middle
would be more representative.

I shall lose no more sleep on the subject :)

HOWEVER if we got those stolen things back they might STFU about
being the 'real gibraltarians in exile'
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

DCC

2005-05-16 00:30:13 UTC

Post by DCC
The fact that the CoA is in San Roque is part of history. To me it can stay
there as long as it has to.

I disagree, if it was given to Gibraltar and removed to Spain then its
stolen property

I disagree! If it was nicked by someone at a later date from under the noses
of the Brits, then yes it may be classified as 'Stolen Property'. But if
they took it in the 'great exodus' in Aug 1704 then no. Under those
circumstances it was as legitimate as Pedro taking his soiled underwear with
him.

Post by DCC
In the meantime for me, the CoA on the 5 pound flag you can buy down Main
Street is as symbolic and powerful as the original.

Theres a reproduction of the original grant of arms on the wall at
number 6 convent place.

I'd not loose any sleep over that. Although I think the stone version in
Cathedral Patio (which dates back to Spanish times) has been so poorly
preserved that you need tons of imagination to see what it actually is. That
should have kept some guilty parties awake at night over the centuries of
neglect.

I shall lose no more sleep on the subject :)
HOWEVER if we got those stolen things back they might STFU about
being the 'real gibraltarians in exile'

Funny, but I've never heard this CoA ever being an issue in Gib. I think it
matters not where it is. As I said earlier, the fact that it is in San Roque
is part of history. As is part of history the many Church items they carted
with them in 1704. As is all that stayed behind.

Post by Jim Watt
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Jim Watt

2005-05-16 07:56:28 UTC

Post by DCC
Funny, but I've never heard this CoA ever being an issue in Gib.

It has been, because of the repeated nonsense claim that the people in
San Roque are the 'true Gibraltarians'.

It resulted in the 'straits games' being cancelled when they were
going to be held there.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Ken

2005-05-15 08:13:50 UTC

If they want it back, yes. If they are happy for it to remain there, then
there it can remain. As I recall the manner in which the mummy came to be in
Gib is different from many others around the world. While the artefact /
coffin was undoubtedly taken from Egypt before sensitivities developed to
what they are today, the mummy itself washed up on a Gib beach following the
sinking of the ship it was being transported in. It was housed in the museum
where it resides today. Those who display the mummy had no part in its
acquisition.

Post by DCC
The fact that the CoA is in San Roque is part of history. To me it can
stay there as long as it has to.
It should only be returned if or when ALL recognise it's significance as a
symbol of our identity (if it is that). Remember it was given to a Spanish
Gibraltar by a Spanish Queen.

Personally not bothered. Was it given to the CITY - buodings, streets,
addresses - or to the people themselves? If to the individuals, they were
right to take it with them. If it was part of the fixtures and fittings,
then it should have been left behind when they moved house in the same way
they probably didn't take the kitchen sinks nor the front doors. But hey,
it's a piece of parchment. The symbol remains, and that's all that matters.

Post by DCC
In the meantime for me, the CoA on the 5 pound flag you can buy down Main
Street is as symbolic and powerful as the original.

Indeed.

Post by DCC
Whilst on the subject. I propose the when we get our new constitution, the
coat of arms of the GoG should be changed. The present one we use (see the
one on the GoG website or the one hanging above the speakers chair in the
HoA) is a constant reminder to all of our colonial status. The city arms
is right smack under the Royal CoA. To me, it looks wrong, like an
afterthought. A more regal CoA with the Red/White/Castle/Key in the middle
would be more representative.

With new consitituional status would go a new symbol. What that should be
would be open to debate. For my money, it should be heavily based on
original traditional themes but as you say, giving due place to due things.

K

DCC

2005-05-16 00:14:40 UTC

Is it a piece of parchment?
I thought it was cloth and the story goes that the Queen herself embroidered
it.

If they want it back, yes. If they are happy for it to remain there, then
there it can remain. As I recall the manner in which the mummy came to be
in Gib is different from many others around the world. While the artefact
/ coffin was undoubtedly taken from Egypt before sensitivities developed
to what they are today, the mummy itself washed up on a Gib beach
following the sinking of the ship it was being transported in. It was
housed in the museum where it resides today. Those who display the mummy
had no part in its acquisition.

Post by DCC
The fact that the CoA is in San Roque is part of history. To me it can
stay there as long as it has to.
It should only be returned if or when ALL recognise it's significance as
a symbol of our identity (if it is that). Remember it was given to a
Spanish Gibraltar by a Spanish Queen.

Post by DCC
In the meantime for me, the CoA on the 5 pound flag you can buy down Main
Street is as symbolic and powerful as the original.

Indeed.

Post by DCC
Whilst on the subject. I propose the when we get our new constitution,
the coat of arms of the GoG should be changed. The present one we use
(see the one on the GoG website or the one hanging above the speakers
chair in the HoA) is a constant reminder to all of our colonial status.
The city arms is right smack under the Royal CoA. To me, it looks wrong,
like an afterthought. A more regal CoA with the Red/White/Castle/Key in
the middle would be more representative.

Ken

2005-05-16 19:41:58 UTC

Post by DCC
Is it a piece of parchment?

I thought it was parchment. It may be cloth. I have never seen the original,
nor am I going to go to Saint Patuco to see it either.

Post by DCC
I thought it was cloth and the story goes that the Queen herself
embroidered it.

News to me! Fair enough, you learn something every day. Does anyone out
there know for sure what the material is that the original is illustrated
on, and once at, who illustrated it?

K

Post by DCC

If they want it back, yes. If they are happy for it to remain there, then
there it can remain. As I recall the manner in which the mummy came to be
in Gib is different from many others around the world. While the artefact
/ coffin was undoubtedly taken from Egypt before sensitivities developed
to what they are today, the mummy itself washed up on a Gib beach
following the sinking of the ship it was being transported in. It was
housed in the museum where it resides today. Those who display the mummy
had no part in its acquisition.

Post by DCC
The fact that the CoA is in San Roque is part of history. To me it can
stay there as long as it has to.
It should only be returned if or when ALL recognise it's significance as
a symbol of our identity (if it is that). Remember it was given to a
Spanish Gibraltar by a Spanish Queen.

Personally not bothered. Was it given to the CITY - buodings, streets,
addresses - or to the people themselves? If to the individuals, they were
right to take it with them. If it was part of the fixtures and fittings,
then it should have been left behind when they moved house in the same
way they probably didn't take the kitchen sinks nor the front doors. But
hey, it's a piece of parchment. The symbol remains, and that's all that
matters.

Post by DCC
In the meantime for me, the CoA on the 5 pound flag you can buy down
Main Street is as symbolic and powerful as the original.

Indeed.

Post by DCC
Whilst on the subject. I propose the when we get our new constitution,
the coat of arms of the GoG should be changed. The present one we use
(see the one on the GoG website or the one hanging above the speakers
chair in the HoA) is a constant reminder to all of our colonial status.
The city arms is right smack under the Royal CoA. To me, it looks wrong,
like an afterthought. A more regal CoA with the Red/White/Castle/Key in
the middle would be more representative.

Lynx

2005-05-17 04:22:52 UTC

The original can be said to be on parchement, that being the monarchs decree
on which the coat of arm is not only described but is actually drawn. The
coat of arms is granted by Isabel and Ferdinand, at Toledo 10 July 1502.
Given the Old Gibraltarians loyalty to the crown, they were also granted the
title of Most Noble. In 1506, proving their mettle against the duke of
Medina Sidonia, the queen Juana granted them the title of Most Loyal, which
was added to the previous title.

The original standard coat of arms is embroidered in gold, red and white on
a red cloth. It was damaged during the French invasion, fortunately it was
salvaged, unlike the many recipes stolen from monastries, which later gave
"birth" the famous French Cuisine.

Any New Gibraltarian with the slightest interest in the past of our famous
Rock, should see this magnificent relic, also the main table and chairs,
kept and maintained with great care, of the then governing body in Gib. The
carved and painted coat of arms on each chair's backrest attests to the
pride and importance Old Gibraltarians played in the region. They governed
the whole Campo region, including all the lands and mountains of Algeciras.
The agriculture and fishing, together with the imports and exports, made
this City an important and wealthy one.

A magnificent history, if ever there was one.

Mano

Post by DCC
Is it a piece of parchment?

I thought it was parchment. It may be cloth. I have never seen the
original, nor am I going to go to Saint Patuco to see it either.

Post by DCC
I thought it was cloth and the story goes that the Queen herself
embroidered it.

News to me! Fair enough, you learn something every day. Does anyone out
there know for sure what the material is that the original is illustrated
on, and once at, who illustrated it?
K

Lynx

2005-05-17 04:27:44 UTC

Gibraltar was taken in the name of the House of Austria. Spain was at war
and devided within itself, between the Bourbons and the Austrians. Britain
merely sided with the Austrians, though never declaring war on Spain as
such. History stands as it happened, today we should all try to improve
things, especially for the New Gibraltarians.
Mano.