Rose (charge)

From SCA Heraldry Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WARNING: Do not cite this page as a reference. This page is on this wiki 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:[edit | edit source]

Period:[edit | edit source]

BSB277InsigFlorenf128DeSernigiRosesMount.JPG
BSB 277, Insignia Florentinorum, folio 128, roses growing out of a mount

Modern:[edit | edit source]

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

Per Mistholme, may use PicDic art for submission purposes without prior permission.

Vector Graphics:[edit | edit source]

Annotated Pennsic Traceable Art Project[edit | edit source]

Sources:[edit | edit source]



From FREQUENTLY GIVEN ANSWERS (That Are Wrong)[edit | edit source]

by Master Gawain of Miskbridge

WRONG - Only queens can use roses on their arms. What is reserved to queens (and Companions of the Rose) are rose wreaths. Chaplets of roses are reserved to princesses. By extension, orles and bordures of roses are also reserved. Single and multiple roses... are not reserved, and are registered all the time, so long as they don't look too much like a wreath.

  • A rose tinctured gules and argent is an English royal badge, the "Tudor rose", and is not registerable in the Society.

http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/wrong.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)
Use the above links to be sure any precedents listed below haven't been superseded by newer precedents.

Definition:[edit | edit source]

(includes defaults, proper tinctures, blazoning)

Example[edit | edit source]

Registerability:[edit | edit source]

(Restricted, Reserved, SFPP, OOP)

December 2015 - A Tudor Rose by Any Other Name...[edit | edit source]

This month a submission brought up a discussion about presumption upon the Tudor rose. Per the Cover Letter of December 2010, the number of forms of half argent half gules roses that were restricted was reduced to six forms rather than "in some other manner which creates a half-white, half-red rose". The currently protected forms are:

  • A double rose gules and argent or argent and gules.
  • A rose quarterly either in argent and gules or gules and argent.
  • A rose per pale either in argent and gules or gules and argent. [Cover Letter, Dec 2010]

The current submission interpreted the wording on the December 2010 Cover Letter "We are, therefore, removing the restriction on using half-white and half-red roses as part of a larger armorial design. We are registering those six badges to the Tudors, as they are important period badges, but we will no longer restrict their use entirely" as meaning that these six forms are not restricted anymore. This is not the case. What is not restricted is any other form of a half-white, half-red rose. http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2016/01/16-01cl.html

October 2012 - rosebuds not registerable:[edit | edit source]

#190Elina of Beckenham. Device. Gules, a gryphon segreant queue-forchy Or maintaining a raven displayed sable and a garden rose Or slipped and leaved vert. "...the rose on the color emblazon here is the long-banned garden rosebud, which is itself cause for return.... We suggest the submitter draw the rose as a slipped heraldic rose." http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2012/10/12-10lar.html#190

March 2012 - artistic depictions[edit | edit source]

A submission provoked a discussion of various period depictions of roses. A heraldic rose has typically five petals, occasionally six, or even four in Italian heraldry as seen in Stemmario Trivulziano. Documentation proved that long stems and leaves are completely unremarkable with an otherwise heraldic rose. Certainly multi-petaled natural roses existed in period, most notably the Damask rose and the Apothecary's rose; however, the cabbage rose is modern. Roses in period heraldry, even when depicted more naturalistically, are always shown affronty, not in profile, and even the more naturalistic multi-petaled depictions use five main petals around the outside edge, with the other petals as internal detail. Therefore, the use of a depiction of a modern rose in profile is now a step from period practice. There is no difference granted between a modern rose in profile and a heraldic rose, and the difference will not be blazoned as we would prefer to encourage the use of heraldic roses instead. http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2012/03/12-03cl.html

December 2010 - only 6 roses restricted:[edit | edit source]

We are, therefore, removing the restriction on using half-white and half-red roses as part of a larger armorial design. We are registering those six badges to the Tudors, as they are important period badges, but we will no longer restrict their use entirely. Note that this does not remove the issue of presumption. The combination of the surname Tudor with armory which incorporates half white and half red roses may be considered to violate our rules on presumption and pretense. December 2010 Cover Letter

January 2004 - damask roses proper:[edit | edit source]

Cecily d'Abernon. Device. Azure, on a pale between two turtles argent three damask roses proper slipped and leaved vert. The damask roses proper are drawn as naturalistic pink roses. The Letter of Intent cited the Pictorial Dictionary, which states that "When blazoned as a 'garden rose' or a 'damask rose', the rose is depicted as found in nature, the petals overlapping and slightly spread... a garden rose may not be blazoned 'proper', but must have its tinctures explicitly blazoned. (The exception is the 'damask rose', a breed attested in Elizabethan herbals; this variety was always pink, so a 'damask rose proper' is pink, slipped vert)."The commentary was consistent in feeling that we should no longer blazon charges as damask roses, since damask roses are garden roses, citing the following precedent: "The commentary is in, with a clear majority of commenters in favor of adopting Baron Bruce's proposal that we continue to accept garden roses in SCA armory, but simply blazon them as roses. As a consequence, we will immediately and henceforth blazon a rose, whether the default heraldic rose or the garden rose, as a rose" (Cover Letter with the November 1994 LoAR).

The commentary also took issue with the statement in the Pictorial Dictionary that the damask rose was "always pink": both the commentary and the researches of Wreath's staff indicated that damask roses in the Elizabethan period could be found in both pink and white forms. If a "garden rose" is just an artistic variant of a heraldic rose, and a damask rose is a garden rose, then the "damask rose proper" has a problem because heraldic roses may not be pink, as pink is not a heraldic tincture. Some commenters suggested that perhaps the pink roses could be considered a "light gules" but the color of these roses is too far from gules to be considered a "light gules" (and is, moreover, too far from argent to be considered a "dark argent.")

The SCA has only registered three damask roses in its history. Of these three registrations, only one of them is still registered: one of the registrations was really gules, not pink (and was later reblazoned as gules) and another one was released. Because the pink naturalistic damask rose is not found in period heraldry, is not compatible with period heraldry, and is not found with great frequency in existing SCA heraldry, it will no longer be registered as of the July Laurel meeting. http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2004/01/04-01lar.html

May 2014 - Complexity Counts and You:[edit | edit source]

We will not count the tincture of purely artistic details, whether they are blazoned or not. This means a rose proper has only one tincture, gules, as the tincture of the barbing and seeding are considered artistic. http:heraldry.sca.org/loar/2014/05/14-05cl.html#4

Conflict:[edit | edit source]

February 2013 LoAR - trefoil vs. rose/cinquefoil:[edit | edit source]

#27Rois O Faye. Device. Per chevron vert and argent, two roses slipped and leaved and a trefoil, a bordure counterchanged. As there is a DC between a trefoil and a rose or cinquefoil, there is no sword-and-dagger issue under SENA A3D1 with this design. http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2013/02/13-02lar.html#27

Identifiability:[edit | edit source]

Collected Precedents:[edit | edit source]

The Ordinary:[edit | edit source]

(includes adonis, almond, borage, brooklime, chamomile, cherry, cinquefoil, clover, cornflower, dogwood, dondril, dryas, eglantine, flax, forget-me-not, fraise, garden rose, gendy, hawthorn, heartsease, jasmine, kendal, peony, periwinkle, pimpernel, primrose, sedum, trillium, violet)

Retrieved from "http://scaheraldry.info/index.php?title=Rose_(charge)&oldid=7269"