Thistle

From SCA Heraldry Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WARNING: Do not cite this page as a reference. This page is on this wikispace only to make the content "searchable" and easier to find. If you find the information you seek here, go to the original sources as linked below to verify the information and use them for your documentation.

Illustrations:[edit | edit source]

Illustration from period source[edit | edit source]

Modern[edit | edit source]

Pictorial Dictionary of SCA Heraldry (3rd edition):[edit | edit source]

Pennsic Traceable Art Project[edit | edit source]

Glossary of Terms:[edit | edit source]

Conventional "Proper" Colorings -

Charge Tincture or Blazon Tincture Class
Thistle Green sepals, stem, leaves; purple or red flower Color
http://heraldry.sca.org/coagloss.html

Precedents:[edit | edit source]

Precedents of the SCA College of Arms - http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents.html

Morsulus Heralds Website - http://www.morsulus.org/ (to search the LoARs and Precedents)

Restatement Wiki - http://yehudaheraldry.com/restatement/index.php?title=Main_Page (restatements of Precedents)

Use the above links to be sure any precedents listed below haven't been superseded by newer precedents.


Definition:[edit | edit source]

July 1993 Cover Letter - branch with flower vs slipped flower[edit | edit source]

In cases [where a slipped and leaved flower consists primarily of the branch portion rather than the flower portion], I will register the plant as a branch with a flower. Moreover, I intend to grant a Substantial Difference (i.e., sufficient to invoke Rule X.2) between a branch (flowered or not) and a flower. Slipped flowers drawn with the flower dominant will still be considered negligibly different from a plain flower. Flowers whose slips are part of the definition (e.g., trefoil, thistle) will not get extra difference for the slip [for full discussion, see under BLAZON (24 July, 1993 Cover Letter (June, 1993 LoAR), pg. 7) http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/bow.html

November 1990 - slipped and leaved by default:[edit | edit source]

"In the SCA, thistles are slipped and leaved by default." (LoAR 11/90 p.11). http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/daud/daud1f.html


Registerability:[edit | edit source]

(Restricted, Reserved, SFPP, OOP)

January 2010 - head of thistle SFPP[edit | edit source]

[Isabele de Torriden. Device. Argent, three thistle heads proper.] The use of just the head of a thistle is a step from period practice. http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2010/01/10-01lar.html


Conflict:[edit | edit source]

January 2010 - thistles vs artichokes[edit | edit source]

[Isabele de Torriden. Device. Argent, three thistle heads proper.] This device is returned for conflict with the device of Deborah the Dextrous, Argent, three artichokes vert. We note that artichokes are a species of thistle, which explains the similarity in appearance. We will grant significant, but not substantial, difference between an artichoke and a thistle head. Therefore, there is a single CD for the change of type of primary charges; there is no CD for changing the tincture of less than half the charges. The use of just the head of a thistle is a step from period practice. http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2010/01/10-01lar.html

July 1993 Cover Letter - branch with flower vs flower slipped[edit | edit source]

In cases [where a slipped and leaved flower consists primarily of the branch portion rather than the flower portion], I will register the plant as a branch with a flower. Moreover, I intend to grant a Substantial Difference (i.e., sufficient to invoke Rule X.2) between a branch (flowered or not) and a flower. Slipped flowers drawn with the flower dominant will still be considered negligibly different from a plain flower. Flowers whose slips are part of the definition (e.g., trefoil, thistle) will not get extra difference for the slip [for full discussion, see under BLAZON (24 July, 1993 Cover Letter (June, 1993 LoAR), pg. 7) http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/bow.html

December 1992 - teazel vs thistle:[edit | edit source]

Period heralds seem to have distinguished between a teazel and a thistle, despite the similarity of the nouns. For armory as simple as this [(fieldless) A teazel slipped and leaved vs. <Field>, a thistle], we can see granting a CD for type of flower. (Ealdgytha of Spalding Abbey, December, 1992, pg. 12) http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/flower-thistle.html

December 1992 - thistle purpure vs proper[edit | edit source]

[A thistle purpure] was returned Feb 92 for conflict with the badge of Clan Stewart (Fox-Davies' Heraldic Badges , p.146): A thistle [proper]. At the time, it was assumed that the Stewart badge was tinctureless. However, in blazoning the Scots plant badges, Fox-Davies did not account for their most common use: as sprigs actually worn on the person. This makes the Scots plant badges' coloration proper in correct usage. The original submission was therefore returned in error; [the submittor] might consider resubmitting it. (Fionna Goodburne, December, 1992, pg. 19) http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/bruce.html


August 1992 - thistle vs pomegranate:[edit | edit source]

I would grant a CD between a thistle and a pomegranate. (Magdalena Aeleis MacLellan, August, 1992, pg. 24) http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/flower-thistle.html

October 1990 - single vs double-headed thistle[edit | edit source]

[Double flowered thistle] "Given the normal emblazon of thistles...wherein the leaves rather than the heads are the most visually prominent element, we could not see giving a CVD for the addition of the second head (not too dissimilarly to not granting a CVD for the difference between an eagle and a double-headed eagle)." (LoAR 10/90 p.14). http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/daud/daud1f.html


Identifiability:[edit | edit source]

December 1992 - thistle per chevron:[edit | edit source]

[A thistle per chevron throughout purpure and vert] The division of the thistle could not be identified as such by the heralds at Laurel's meeting. On such an irregular shape as a thistle, any division must be exceptionally simple to be recognized. Per pale might have been acceptable; Per chevron, where the line must cross the empty space between the leaves and the blossom, is not. (Fionna Goodburne, December, 1992, pg. 19) http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/flower-thistle.html


Collected Precedents:[edit | edit source]

The Ordinary :[edit | edit source]