Flowers (Charge): Difference between revisions

From SCA Heraldry Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 50: Line 50:


----
----
=Sources:=
* Academy of St. Gabriel "Medieval Heraldry Archive" - http://www.s-gabriel.org/heraldry/
* Archive of St. Gabriel reports - [[http://www.panix.com/~gabriel/public-bin/archive.cgi]]
* Laurel Armory Articles - http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/armory_articles.html
* New Heraldic Primer (Heraldry for Non-Heralds) - http://heraldry.sca.org/armory/newprimer/
* Pictorial Dictionary of Heraldry (PicDic), 3rd Edition - http://mistholme.com/pictorial-dictionary-of-heraldry
* [[Period Armorials]]
* Parker's Heraldry - http://karlwilcox.com/parker/
* Riestap's ''Armorial Général - //http:''www.euraldic.com/lasu/bl/bl_a_aa.html


=Precedents:=  
=Precedents:=  
<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">Precedents of the SCA College of Arms - [[http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents.html]]</span>
Precedents of the SCA College of Arms - http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents.html <br>
<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">Morsulus Heralds Website - [[http://www.morsulus.org/]] (to search the LoARs and Precedents)</span>
Morsulus Heralds Website - http://www.morsulus.org/ (to search the LoARs and Precedents) <br>
<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">Restatement Wiki - [[http://yehudaheraldry.com/restatement/index.php?title=Main_Page]] (restatements of Precedents)</span>
'' '''Use the above links to be sure any precedents listed below haven't been superseded by newer precedents.'' '''
''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">'''Use the above links to be sure any precedents listed below haven't been superseded by newer precedents.'''</span>''
 
==<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">[[#x--Precedents:-Definition/Defining Instance:]]<u>'''Definition/Defining Instance:'''</u></span>==
===<span style="display: inline !important;">October 2016 - Where the Wild Foils Grow</span>===


==Definition/Defining Instance:==
===October 2016 - Where the Wild Foils Grow===
* Often enough we see submission with flowers of X petals blazoned as X-foils. It is not clear where this originated from, but foils are heraldic depictions of clovers and their leaves have a fairly defined shape (with some minor variations). Using the blazon of an X-foil to describe the emblazon of a flower with X petals, where the petals are typically round and attached to the center at a single point or in such other manner that there's obvious "seeding", does not necessarily ensure the reproducibility of the submitted charge from that blazon. SENA A.1.B states that We register the emblazon, rather than the blazon. Any discrepancies between the image and the description will be resolved by changing the description to match the image. To allow for reproducibility of what the submitter has submitted, we have been and will continue reblazoning X-foils that do not look like actual X-foils as the closest known period flower of X petals, or returning for redraw if no accurate blazon can be found.
* Often enough we see submission with flowers of X petals blazoned as X-foils. It is not clear where this originated from, but foils are heraldic depictions of clovers and their leaves have a fairly defined shape (with some minor variations). Using the blazon of an X-foil to describe the emblazon of a flower with X petals, where the petals are typically round and attached to the center at a single point or in such other manner that there's obvious "seeding", does not necessarily ensure the reproducibility of the submitted charge from that blazon. SENA A.1.B states that We register the emblazon, rather than the blazon. Any discrepancies between the image and the description will be resolved by changing the description to match the image. To allow for reproducibility of what the submitter has submitted, we have been and will continue reblazoning X-foils that do not look like actual X-foils as the closest known period flower of X petals, or returning for redraw if no accurate blazon can be found.
* http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2016/10/16-10cl.html
* http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2016/10/16-10cl.html


<span style="font-size: 1.1em;">'''March 2013 - slipping and leaving doesn't count for difference'''</span>
===March 2013 - tiny tertiary charges on petals are artistic detail===
'''Elyse Morgaine.''' Badge. (Fieldless) A rose proper.Blazoned on the Letter of Intent as ''each petal charged with a lozenge Or//, the lozenges here are sufficiently small and match the center seeding tincture, giving the overall impression of just an artistic detail on the rose, not a distinct tertiary charge group. This then is indistinguishable from an uncharged rose.This badge is returned for conflict with the well-known badge of the House of Lancaster, //(Fieldless) A rose gules//.This badge is also returned for conflict with the badge of Dana of Coleraine, //(Fieldless) A primrose gules, slipped and leaved and seeded proper''. There is a DC for fieldlessness, but no difference between a rose and a primrose, nor any difference for the slipping and leaving.
'''Elyse Morgaine.''' Badge. (Fieldless) A rose proper. Blazoned on the Letter of Intent as ''each petal charged with a lozenge Or'', the lozenges here are sufficiently small and match the center seeding tincture, giving the overall impression of just an artistic detail on the rose, not a distinct tertiary charge group. This then is indistinguishable from an uncharged rose.This badge is returned for conflict with the well-known badge of the House of Lancaster, //(Fieldless) A rose gules//.This badge is also returned for conflict with the badge of Dana of Coleraine, //(Fieldless) A primrose gules, slipped and leaved and seeded proper''. There is a DC for fieldlessness, but no difference between a rose and a primrose, nor any difference for the slipping and leaving.


==='''<span style="font-size: 1.1em; line-height: 1.5;">July 2007 Cover Letter</span>''':===  
===July 2007 - sunflower proper with brown or sable seeds, seeds not a tertiary charge===  
"We hereby overturn the November 2000 precedent and allow sunflowers proper to be registered. Just as a thistle proper can have its tuft either gules or purpure, a sunflower proper may have either brown or sable seeds. For purposes of conflict checking, the tincture of a sunflower's seeds is not worth a difference. The presence of these seeds does not count as a tertiary charge. [[http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2007/09/07-09cl.html|July 2007 LoAR Cover Letter]]
"We hereby overturn the November 2000 precedent and allow sunflowers proper to be registered. Just as a thistle proper can have its tuft either gules or purpure, a sunflower proper may have either brown or sable seeds. For purposes of conflict checking, the tincture of a sunflower's seeds is not worth a difference. The presence of these seeds does not count as a tertiary charge. [http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2007/09/07-09cl.html July 2007 LoAR Cover Letter]


==='''<span style="line-height: 1.5;">July 1993 Cover Letter: </span>'''===  
===July 1993 - flower slipped vs branch flowered: ===  
<span style="line-height: 1.5;">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 </span>''<span style="line-height: 1.5;">branch with a flower</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">. Moreover, I intend to grant a Substantial Difference (i.e., sufficient to invoke Rule X.2) between a </span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">branch</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;"> (flowered or not) and </span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">a</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;"> 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., </span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">trefoil</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">, </span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">thistle</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">) will not get extra difference for the slip [for full discussion, see under [[http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/blazon.html#blazon-31|BLAZON]]] (24 July, 1993 Cover Letter (June, 1993 LoAR), pg. 7) [[http:''heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/bow.html]]</span>
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 [http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/blazon.html#blazon-31 BLAZON] (24 July, 1993 Cover Letter (June, 1993 LoAR), pg. 7) [http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/bow.html]




==<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">[[#x--Precedents:-Registerability:]]<u>'''Registerability:'''</u></span>==  
==Registerability:==  
<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">(Restricted, Reserved, SFPP, OOP)</span>
(Restricted, Reserved, SFPP, OOP)</span>


==<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">[[#x--Precedents:-Conflict:]]<u>'''Conflict:'''</u></span>==
===July 2007 - sunflowers proper now registerable===  
==='''<span style="line-height: 1.5;">July 2007 Cover Letter</span>'''<span style="line-height: 1.5;">: </span>===  
"We hereby overturn the November 2000 precedent and allow sunflowers proper to be registered. Just as a thistle proper can have its tuft either gules or purpure, a sunflower proper may have either brown or sable seeds. For purposes of conflict checking, the tincture of a sunflower's seeds is not worth a difference. The presence of these seeds does not count as a tertiary charge. [http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2007/09/07-09cl.html July 2007 LoAR Cover Letter]
<span style="line-height: 1.5;">"We hereby overturn the November 2000 precedent and allow sunflowers proper to be registered. Just as a thistle proper can have its tuft either gules or purpure, a sunflower proper may have either brown or sable seeds. For purposes of conflict checking, the tincture of a sunflower's seeds is not worth a difference. The presence of these seeds does not count as a tertiary charge. [[http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2007/09/07-09cl.html|July 2007 LoAR Cover Letter]]</span>


==='''<span style="line-height: 1.5;">July 1993 Cover Letter: </span>'''===
<span style="line-height: 1.5;">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 </span>''<span style="line-height: 1.5;">branch with a flower</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">. Moreover, I intend to grant a Substantial Difference (i.e., sufficient to invoke Rule X.2) between a </span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">branch</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;"> (flowered or not) and </span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">a</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;"> 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., </span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">trefoil</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">, </span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">thistle</span>//<span style="line-height: 1.5;">) will not get extra difference for the slip [for full discussion, see under [[http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/blazon.html#blazon-31|BLAZON]]] (24 July, 1993 Cover Letter (June, 1993 LoAR), pg. 7) [[http:''heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/bow.html]]</span>


==Conflict:==
===July 2007 - no difference for tincture of sunflowers seeds===
"We hereby overturn the November 2000 precedent and allow sunflowers proper to be registered. Just as a thistle proper can have its tuft either gules or purpure, a sunflower proper may have either brown or sable seeds. For purposes of conflict checking, the tincture of a sunflower's seeds is not worth a difference. The presence of these seeds does not count as a tertiary charge. [http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2007/09/07-09cl.html July 2007 LoAR Cover Letter]


==<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">[[#x--Precedents:-Identifiability:]]<u>'''Identifiability:'''</u></span>==
===July 1993 - flower slipped vs branch flowered: ===
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 [http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/blazon.html#blazon-31 BLAZON] (24 July, 1993 Cover Letter (June, 1993 LoAR), pg. 7) [http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents/bruce/bow.html]


==Identifiability:==




==<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">'''<u>Collected Precedents:</u>'''</span>==  
==Collected Precedents:==  
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">Tenure of Elisabeth de Rossignol (May 2005 - July 2008)</span>'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;"> - </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">[[http:''heraldry.sca.org/precedents/elisabeth/armory.html#FLOWERLily|FLOWER -- Lily]] , [[http:''heraldry.sca.org/precedents/elisabeth/armory.html#FLOWERMisc|FLOWER -- Miscellaneous]]</span>
* 2nd Tenure of Elisabeth de Rossignol (April 2011 - August 2011) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/elisabeth/armory2.html Collected Armory Precedents]
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The 2nd Tenure of François la Flamme (October 2004 - May 2005) - </span>'''<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">[[http:''www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/sca/armoryprec.html#FLOWERLily|FLOWER -- Lily]]</span>, <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">[[http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/sca/armoryprec.html#FLOWERMisc|FLOWER -- Miscellaneous]]</span>, [[http:''www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/sca/armoryprec.html#FLOWERTrillium|FLOWER -- Trillium]]
* 1st Tenure of Elisabeth de Rossignol (May 2005 - July 2008) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/elisabeth/armory.html#FLOWERLily FLOWER -- Lily] , [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/elisabeth/armory.html#FLOWERMisc FLOWER -- Miscellaneous]
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Tenure of Shauna of Carrick Point (May 2004 - August 2004) -</span>'''
* The 2nd Tenure of François la Flamme (October 2004 - May 2005) - [http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/sca/armoryprec.html#FLOWERLily FLOWER -- Lily], [http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/sca/armoryprec.html#FLOWERMisc FLOWER -- Miscellaneous], [http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/sca/armoryprec.html#FLOWERTrillium FLOWER -- Trillium]
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Tenure of François la Flamme (August 2001 - April 2004) -</span>'''
* The Tenure of Shauna of Carrick Point (May 2004 - August 2004) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/shauna/armory.html Collected Armory Precedents]
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Tenure of Elsbeth Anne Roth (June 1999 - July 2001) -</span>'''
* 1st Tenure of François la Flamme (August 2001 - April 2004) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/francois/wreath.html Collected Armory Precedents]
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Tenure of Jaelle of Armida (June 1996 - June 1999) -</span>'''
* The Tenure of Elsbeth Anne Roth (June 1999 - July 2001) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/elsbeth/armory.html Collected Armory Precedents]
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The 2nd Tenure of Da'ud ibn Auda (November 1993 - June 1996) -</span>'''
* The Tenure of Jaelle of Armida (June 1996 - June 1999) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/jaeprec.html Single HTML Document]
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Tenure of Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme (June 1992 - October 1993) -</span>'''
* 2nd Tenure of Da'ud ibn Auda (November 1993 - June 1996) -
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The 1st Tenure of Da'ud ibn Auda (June 1990 - June 1992) -</span>'''
** [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/daud2/volume3.html the 1st part (Nov 1993 - June 1994)] and
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Tenure of Alisoun MacCoul of Elphane (September 1986 - June 1990) -</span>'''
** [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/daud2/daudIITOC.html the 2nd part (July 1994 - June 1996)]
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Tenure of Baldwin of Erebor (August 1984 - August 1986) -</span>'''
* The Tenure of Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme (June 1992 - October 1993) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/bruce/ Collected precedents]
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Tenure of Wilhelm von Schlüssel (August 1979 - August 1984) -</span>'''
* 1st Tenure of Da'ud ibn Auda (June 1990 - June 1992) -
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Tenure of Karina of the Far West (December 1975 - June 1979) -</span>'''
**  [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/daud/daud1toc.html the 1st year (June 1990 - June 1991)] and
'''<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">The Early Days (June 1971 - June 1975) - </span>'''
**  [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/daud/daud1btoc.html the 2nd year (July 1991 - June 1992)]
* The Tenure of Alisoun MacCoul of Elphane (September 1986 - June 1990) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/alisoun/AMETOP.html Collected Precedents]
* The Tenure of Baldwin of Erebor (August 1984 - August 1986) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/baldwin.html Single HTML Document]
* The Tenure of Wilhelm von Schlüssel (August 1979 - August 1984) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/wilhelm/volume3.html Collected Precedents]
* The Tenure of Karina of the Far West (December 1975 - June 1979) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/karina/volume2.html Collected Precedents]
* The Early Days (June 1971 - June 1975) - [http://heraldry.sca.org/precedents/early/volume1.html Collected Precedents]


----
=<u>'''In the Ordinary'''</u>:=  
=<u>'''In the Ordinary'''</u>:=  
(includes blossum, bud)
(includes blossum, bud)

Revision as of 11:56, 4 July 2019

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

Illustrations:

Period:

Image
Image created by Christie Ward (Gunnvor silfraharr). Used with permission.
Image #1 has the earliest known depictions of tulips on tiles excavated from the thirteenth-century palace that one of the Seljuk sultans, Alaeddin Kaikubad I, built on Lake Beysehir in eastern Anatolia. (Photos http://www.pbase.com/dosseman)

Image #2 is from the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts in Istanbul and shows the back of a simple cotton shirt made to be worn beneath armor and richly decorated with verses from the Koran on the front and embroidered tulips on the back. This shirt was taken from the tomb of one of the Ottoman generals who fought at Kosovo at the Field of Blackbirds, 1389. (http://www.museumwnf.org/islamicart/database_item.php?id=object%3BISL%3Btr%3BMus01%3B18%3Ben]])

Image #3 is a caftan with tulip motifs belonging to Sultan Murad III 1574-1595 (http://www.defineyeri.net/tarihi-takilar-ve-resimleri/sultan-iii-murad%27in-kaftani-1574-1595-topkap isarayi/).

Image #4 "Tulip in the Garden of Johann Heinrich Herwart" by Swiss botanist Conrad Gesner, April 1559. Gesner thought it looked looked like a red lily, and he called it Tulipa turcarum. (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/aconite/gesner.html)

Image #5 Conrad Gesner's wood block print of a tulip in his De Hortis Germaniae Liber Recens, 1561. (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/aconite/gesner.html)

Research courtesy of Christie Ward (Gunnvor silfraharr).

Modern:

Pictorial Dictionary of SCA Heraldry (3rd edition):

Vector Graphics:

Book of Traceable Heraldic Art

Annotated Pennsic Traceable Art Project

A Heraldic Primer: Flowers, Trees and Plants

http://heraldry.sca.org/primer/flora.html

The animal kingdom is not the only resource which was drawn upon for period armory. There are many forms of plant life which can be used as charges. These include flowers, trees and fruits/nuts. When a flower has a stem attached, it is termed slipped. When it has a stem and leaves attached, it is termed slipped and leaved. When the leaves of a rose have a different tincture than the flower, they are referred to as barbed and when the center of the rose is a different tincture, it is referred to as seeded.

rose.gif thistle.gif FDL.gif trefoil.gif
A rose argent, barbed vert A thistle argent, slipped and A Fleur-de-lys argent A trefoil argent
and seeded gules leaved vert

Note that the trefoil and the Fleur-de-lys are stylised representations of flowers.


Sources:




Precedents:

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

Definition/Defining Instance:

October 2016 - Where the Wild Foils Grow

  • Often enough we see submission with flowers of X petals blazoned as X-foils. It is not clear where this originated from, but foils are heraldic depictions of clovers and their leaves have a fairly defined shape (with some minor variations). Using the blazon of an X-foil to describe the emblazon of a flower with X petals, where the petals are typically round and attached to the center at a single point or in such other manner that there's obvious "seeding", does not necessarily ensure the reproducibility of the submitted charge from that blazon. SENA A.1.B states that We register the emblazon, rather than the blazon. Any discrepancies between the image and the description will be resolved by changing the description to match the image. To allow for reproducibility of what the submitter has submitted, we have been and will continue reblazoning X-foils that do not look like actual X-foils as the closest known period flower of X petals, or returning for redraw if no accurate blazon can be found.
  • http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2016/10/16-10cl.html

March 2013 - tiny tertiary charges on petals are artistic detail

Elyse Morgaine. Badge. (Fieldless) A rose proper. Blazoned on the Letter of Intent as each petal charged with a lozenge Or, the lozenges here are sufficiently small and match the center seeding tincture, giving the overall impression of just an artistic detail on the rose, not a distinct tertiary charge group. This then is indistinguishable from an uncharged rose.This badge is returned for conflict with the well-known badge of the House of Lancaster, //(Fieldless) A rose gules//.This badge is also returned for conflict with the badge of Dana of Coleraine, //(Fieldless) A primrose gules, slipped and leaved and seeded proper. There is a DC for fieldlessness, but no difference between a rose and a primrose, nor any difference for the slipping and leaving.

July 2007 - sunflower proper with brown or sable seeds, seeds not a tertiary charge

"We hereby overturn the November 2000 precedent and allow sunflowers proper to be registered. Just as a thistle proper can have its tuft either gules or purpure, a sunflower proper may have either brown or sable seeds. For purposes of conflict checking, the tincture of a sunflower's seeds is not worth a difference. The presence of these seeds does not count as a tertiary charge. July 2007 LoAR Cover Letter

July 1993 - flower slipped vs branch flowered:

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) [2]


Registerability:

(Restricted, Reserved, SFPP, OOP)

July 2007 - sunflowers proper now registerable

"We hereby overturn the November 2000 precedent and allow sunflowers proper to be registered. Just as a thistle proper can have its tuft either gules or purpure, a sunflower proper may have either brown or sable seeds. For purposes of conflict checking, the tincture of a sunflower's seeds is not worth a difference. The presence of these seeds does not count as a tertiary charge. July 2007 LoAR Cover Letter


Conflict:

July 2007 - no difference for tincture of sunflowers seeds

"We hereby overturn the November 2000 precedent and allow sunflowers proper to be registered. Just as a thistle proper can have its tuft either gules or purpure, a sunflower proper may have either brown or sable seeds. For purposes of conflict checking, the tincture of a sunflower's seeds is not worth a difference. The presence of these seeds does not count as a tertiary charge. July 2007 LoAR Cover Letter

July 1993 - flower slipped vs branch flowered:

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) [3]

Identifiability:

Collected Precedents:

In the Ordinary:

(includes blossum, bud)

Gendy flower - see [- Iris]