[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Flower - Fleur-de-lys) |Next Page (Flower - Rose)]
[A pansy vs. an ivy blossom] Comparing the emblazons showed no visible difference in the shapes of the two flowers [thus there is not a CD for type]. (Catherine Elizabeth Anne Somerton, August, 1992, pg. 32)
[A pansy vs. a rose] I cannot grant another CD for type of flower in this case. It's true that flowers of genus Viola have three large petals and two small ones; but in the case of the pansy, the size change is very hard to see. The petals' shape is the same for pansies as heraldic roses. Pansies don't seem to have been used as charges in period, so I must fall back on visual difference; and I must rule that pansies and roses are too close to yield a CD.
The same arguments bring this clear of [a sunflower] and [a rue flower]. (Catherine Elizabeth Anne Somerton, August, 1992, pg. 32)
[Per bend sinister, a lotus blossom in profile and a moose vs. Per bend sinister, an iris and a dove] There is a CD for type of primary charges, but because both armories contain a cup-shaped flower in dexter chief, we cannot grant Sufficient Difference of Charge per Rule X.2. (Simon Rodbeorhting, September, 1992, pg. 42)
There is no heraldic difference between a gillyflower and a carnation (Luciano Giovanni di Churburg, September, 1992, pg. 50)
While we're willing to blazon [the charge] as a hollyhock, we note that there's no heraldic difference between it and a rose. (Megan Althea of Glengarriff, October, 1992, pg. 2)
[A trillium flower vs. a rose] There is a CD for type of flower, but not the substantial difference required by Rule X.2. (Gwyneth MacAulay, October, 1992, pg. 29)
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)
I am willing to grant a CD between a rose and a correctly drawn daisy. (Arielle le Floer, January, 1993, pg. 7)
[Three leaves conjoined in pall inverted within a annulet vs. A trillium and a chief] There's a CD for changing the annulet to a chief, but the central charges are indistinguishable. (Jaric de l'Ile Longe Sault, January, 1993, pg. 28)
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)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Flower - Fleur-de-lys) |Top of Page |Next Page (Flower - Rose)]