[ANSTHRLD] Flower question.
logiosophia at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 13 17:34:07 PDT 2009
The first SCA registration of a dogwood occurred at Heraldicon (Jul 1979). It was reblazoned later that year (Dec 79). Judging from the registered blazons this submission seems the only one which has the colored tip of the period flower you described at the Decision Meeting.
The next registration specified Cornus florida (Jul 1980). It seems to have been used ever since.
Have checked the herbal at our house, but the dogwood isn't mentioned let alone pictured. Hopefully, someone else has a better one.
Precedence Dive Results:
"Brighid of Bethanie. Device (correction). Per bend sinister Or and vert, a dogwood flower argent tipped gules fimbriated sable, and a mourning dove close to sinister argent. [July 1979]" [LoAR Dec 79]
"Sylvana Dagfinsdottir. Vert, on a head sinister vert fimbriated Or three dogwood blossoms proper. (Cornus florida) " [LoAR July 1980]
"Lyra Aithne of Aethelgard. Argent, a swan naiant sable and on a chief embattled azure three pink dogwood blossoms proper. (Cornus florida)
"NOTE: Name rejected. Lyra is Latin for harp and is not a period given name. you could be Aithne of Aethelgard. Dogwood blossoms are either pink or white and must be so specified. The device seems acceptable." [LoAR Nov 82]
"Fleur du Lac de Cristal (submitted as Fleur de Cristal Lac). Name and device. Azure, in pale three dogwood blossoms argent, tipped gules, between two flaunches Or each charged with a fleurdelys gules.
"NOTE: Cristal is a noun (Dubois I 177), not an adjective; the French for "Crystal Lake" is Lac de Cristal. We have amended the name accordingly. DISCUSSION: Dauzat notes that Fleur occurred frequently as a feminine baptismal name in the Middle Ages; it is a popular form of the name of Saint Florus. From the shape of the flower, this appears to be a Flowering Dog-wood (Cornus Florida), the bracts of which may be white or pink (Handbook of Natural History, p. 269), so the tinctures should be specified explicitly. [Loar May 85]
Adaleide de Warewic. Device. Per chevron azure and gules, three dogwood blossoms one and two and a tower argent.
"This device conflicts with the device of Jamila al-Zuhayriyya, Per pale gules and azure, four quatrefoils in cross argent, which is registered elsewhere on this letter. There is a CD for changes to the field but nothing for changing the type only of one quarter of the charges. Both Adaleide and Jamila are paid members. As Atenveldt's LoI is dated one day earlier than Outlands's LoI, Adaleide's device takes precedence and is registered. She has provided a letter of permission to conflict to Jamila.
"The submitted device does not conflict with the device for Aldgytha of Ashwood, Per saltire gules and sable, four roses argent barbed and seeded proper. There is a CD for changes to the field. Dogwood blossoms are essentially quatrefoils, and thus have a CD from roses. "This is in line with the precedent:
Ærne Clover. Device. Or, a four-leaved clover saltirewise slipped vert. This is clear of conflict with Kathleen Regina the Wild Irish Rose, Or, a rose vert, its stem nowed sable, in chief two lions rampant gules. The type comparison between the primary charges in the devices is, effectively, the difference between a rose and a quatrefoil, and these two charges have a type CD between them: "Quatrefoils and roses do not appear to have been considered equivalent charges in our period" (LoAR of October 1995). [LoAR 08/2002]
"This overturns the October 1998 precedent (v. David Cade) which said that there is no difference between dogwood blossoms and roses." [LoAR Mar 08]
--- On Mon, 7/13/09, Cisco Cividanes <engtrktwo at gmail.com> wrote:
From: Cisco Cividanes <engtrktwo at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ANSTHRLD] Flower question.
To: "Heralds List, Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <heralds at lists.ansteorra.org>
Date: Monday, July 13, 2009, 6:44 PM
Well, first of all, no apologies are necessary. I am very new to the
world of book heraldry, so the misunderstanding most likely rested
entirely in my reading of the commentary. We live, we learn, we go
on... right? :)
However, thank you for clarifying the details, that does help me see
things much more clearly.
As for the blazon... hum.... like I said before, I'm new to this.
Here is what I know about the flower, though I can't document any of
it at the moment.
1. The name, I believe, comes from "dagwood' , in reference to the
wooden spears or arrows that could be made from its tough wood.
2. Wikipedia has the following alternate name, as cited by Chaucer.
"Another earlier name of the dogwood in English is the whipple-tree.
Geoffrey Chaucer uses the word whippletree in the Canterbury Tales
(The Knight's Tale, verse 2065) to refer to the dogwood. Another
larger item made of dogwood still bears the name of the tree from
which it is carved. The whippletree is an element of the traction of a
horse-drawn cart, which links the drawpole of the cart to the
harnesses of the horses in file."
I'm not usually one to rely on Wikipedia alone, but its all I had on
the spur of the moment.
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Tim McDaniel<tmcd at panix.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, Cisco Cividanes <engtrktwo at gmail.com> wrote:
> [Cornus florida]
>> And for people wondering where this question came from. A proposed
>> badge of mine displays four dogwood flowers. As they are drawn, they
>> depict the species of dogwood that I understand to be native to
>> Europe. It has been pointed out that the badge might be rejected on
>> the grounds that these flowers do not match previously passed
>> devices that displays what are distinctly a round petaled flower
>> like the type found in north America or China.
> It would not be returned. My apologies if I gave that impression at
> the consultation table. Rules for Submission VII.4,
> <http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/rfs.html#7.4>, quoted in full
> below, is explicit that European flora can be registered (ceteris
> paribus) and is not a step from period practice. The emblazon you
> showed me had long skinny flowers like C. sanguinea.
> The only thing I would expect to be argued is the blazon. I'd have to
> do a precedents dive, but I would not be surprised if some previous
> Laurel defined the flower of Cornus florida to be the default dogwood
> flower. Wikipedia at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornus_florida>
> says that it's "Flowering Dogwood" and it's "native to eastern North
> America". That's the dogwood that Americans would ID as "dogwood".
> not knowing of the Common Dogwood, Cornus sanguinea,
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Dogwood>, "native to most of
> Europe and western Asia, occurring north to southern England and
> southern Scandinavia, and east to the Caspian Sea", or any of the
> other 30ish species of dogwoods and cornels that have flowers similar
> to yours.
> If Laurel did define a North American species as the heraldic default,
> then I too would think that it's whack.
> 4. Period Flora and Fauna. - Flora and fauna that were known in
> the period and domain of the Society may be registered in
> Flora and fauna documented as having been used as charges in
> period heraldry, including crests and badges, will not be
> considered a step from period practice. This includes New World
> and sub-Saharan African flora and fauna.
> The use of flora and fauna native to Europe, including coastal
> waters, that cannot otherwise be documented as heraldic charges
> will not be considered a step from period practice. While some
> flora (such as roses and lilies) and fauna (such as lions and
> dogs) are much more common than others, there is still a wide
> practice of using a variety of flora and fauna in period
> The use of flora and fauna native to the New World, Africa,
> Asia, and other non-European locales will be registerable if it
> is reasonable to believe that Europeans knew them in
> period. Their use will be considered a step from period
> practice, unless they were used as charges in period heraldry,
> including crests and badges, in which case their use is not a
> Consider a turkey and a manatee: they are both New World fauna,
> but the turkey is documented as part of a crest in period
> armory. The use of a turkey, therefore, is not a step from
> period practice. The use of a manatee as a charge, pending
> evidence that it was used in period armory, is a step from
> period practice.
> Hybrids or mutations of period forms known to have been
> developed after 1600 generally may not be used as charges. For
> example, the English Sheepdog may not be used in Society armory
> because it was developed after 1600.
> Danel Lincoln
> Tim McDaniel, tmcd at panix.com
> Heralds mailing list
> Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
Heralds mailing list
Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
More information about the Heralds