Spanish Rapiers, a Bilbo FYC.

[katana]

Hi Fearn,
I agree with what you have said. However, you have previously stated that there are no 8 petaled flowers .... if it was a literal interpretation of a flower then it must be incorrect. Assuming that it was not a mistake then we could asume that the Fleur-de-lys is also not a 'literal' interpretation either.

Irrespective of this ....why are two symbols associated with the tree of life, together on the cup

It seems that this and the serpentine rapier display similar symbology ....coincidence

Regards David

[fearn]

Hi David,

I guess it's botany lesson time. I've been fudging, and it's time to be more precise. (WARNING: LONG-WINDED MESSAGE TO FOLLOW )

In most groups of plants, the number of petals per flower is strongly controlled. The basic rule is that it's generally five petals for dicots (less often four petals). In monocots, petal number is generally three, sometimes six (when the petals and sepals are indistinguishable as in a lily). There are some dicots, a very few monocots, and some primitive plants (neither dicot nor monocot) where the petal number is something else. In one small group, it's nine. More often, it's labelled "many" which is botanist's code for: lots of petals (usually more than 10), and the number is not strongly controlled, so it varies by flower. This is true for the sacred lotus, and for cactus flowers.

Now for the exceptions: I'll deal with the artificial one first. Some roses have more than five petals. They are not primitive. What happens in roses is that, occasionally, one of the stamens gets the wrong hormonal message and turns into a petal instead. Plant breeders noticed this, and deliberately bred mutants, where many of the stamens instead become petals. This is actually what happens naturally with cactus flowers, but that's a side issue. We're not looking at a cactus flower on this sword.

The second, bigger exception is composite flowers. Some groups, most notably the aster family, have decided to make a bigger "flower" by gathering a lot of smaller, simpler flowers together into one composite flower. The outer flowers in the composite (the "petals" on a sunflower) 3 or 5 petals fused together into one large banner (these are called ray florets, technically), while the flowers that make up the disk of the sunflower (technically, the disk florets) have highly reduced petals. It gets much more complicated, but that's enough for now. Sunflowers are not the only group to produce composite flowers, but they are by far the biggest and most successful.

ONE FINAL NOTE: I believe people widely really realized that the number of petals was important around the time of Linnaeus, who published Systema Naturae in 1735. Linnaeus' system was grouped plants based on the number of stamens and carpels inside the plant and got everyone counting flower parts. Prior to 1735, I suspect that the only people who noticed the numbers of petals and such were accurate observers. As botany spread following Linnaeus, people knew that the number of flower parts was really important, and the pictures became more accurate.


NOW, TO GET BACK TO THE SWORD. we have a three-parted smaller figure, and an eight-petaled bigger figure.

Start with the smaller one: if those structures are petals, it's pretty definitely a monocot. The iris (on which the fleur-de-lys is modeled) is a monocot, so we've got a possible answer.

Problem is, if that's an iris, we're missing all the other parts of the flower. So far, I've just been talking about petals. Flowers also usually have sepals (below and outside the petals), and stamens and carpels (above and inside the petals). That's why I said that, if it's a fleur-de-lys, the artist didn't know what he was drawing.

Alternatively, those figures could be fruits, which develop from the carpels. When fruits develop, typically the sepals, petals, and stamens fall away. The rules for petal number do not govern the rules for stamen number, and in any case, those fruits could be from some member of the buttercup family, such as a larkspur or a wolfsbane.

That's how I interpreted the smaller figure.

Now for the bigger figure: Eight petals. Again, either the artist was drawing something realistically, or he was not.

If he was drawing something realistic, it's highly unlikely that it was a simple flower, because no group consistently has eight petals. To get there, you have to start with something five petaled, and add three mutant stamens. Doesn't happen often.

Or, the artist could be drawing a composite flower. This is possible, as there are some that have eight ray florets per composite flower. I'd have to sit down with a European flora to look, as there are literally dozens of possibilities. Most of these are obscure weeds, but one might be culturally important.

If the artist was not portraying a realistic flower, then either he was drawing some sort of symbol, or he was drawing a generic flower. In this case, the best we can do is figure out the symbolism, if any.

Eight-fold flowers happen to be easy to draw (i.e. make a petal every 45 degrees around a circle), so I've seen a lot of them in artwork. For various reasons I won't get into here (aren't you glad? ), eight petals doesn't work as well as five in the wild, and eight-petaled flowers are very uncommon.

That's the gist of it. So, if anyone wants to figure out the ID of a flower on a sword hilt, this is how I do it.

Hope it helps,

F

[Atlantia]

Hi guys, thanks for debating this one! I've had one thought... I'm thinking the radiate lines might be significant, as in a 'hairy' stem and leaves, seems a bit more weird on the petals but.......
Have either of you had any thoughts on this 'feature'?

[fearn]

Hi Atlantia,

The hairs definitely could be a clue. Some plants have more hairs than others, so it could be a clue.

F

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fearn

Hi David,

I guess it's botany lesson time. I've been fudging, and it's time to be more precise. (WARNING: LONG-WINDED MESSAGE TO FOLLOW )

In most groups of plants, the number of petals per flower is strongly controlled. The basic rule is that it's generally five petals for dicots (less often four petals). In monocots, petal number is generally three, sometimes six (when the petals and sepals are indistinguishable as in a lily). There are some dicots, a very few monocots, and some primitive plants (neither dicot nor monocot) where the petal number is something else. In one small group, it's nine. More often, it's labelled "many" which is botanist's code for: lots of petals (usually more than 10), and the number is not strongly controlled, so it varies by flower. This is true for the sacred lotus, and for cactus flowers.

Now for the exceptions: I'll deal with the artificial one first. Some roses have more than five petals. They are not primitive. What happens in roses is that, occasionally, one of the stamens gets the wrong hormonal message and turns into a petal instead. Plant breeders noticed this, and deliberately bred mutants, where many of the stamens instead become petals. This is actually what happens naturally with cactus flowers, but that's a side issue. We're not looking at a cactus flower on this sword.

The second, bigger exception is composite flowers. Some groups, most notably the aster family, have decided to make a bigger "flower" by gathering a lot of smaller, simpler flowers together into one composite flower. The outer flowers in the composite (the "petals" on a sunflower) 3 or 5 petals fused together into one large banner (these are called ray florets, technically), while the flowers that make up the disk of the sunflower (technically, the disk florets) have highly reduced petals. It gets much more complicated, but that's enough for now. Sunflowers are not the only group to produce composite flowers, but they are by far the biggest and most successful.

ONE FINAL NOTE: I believe people widely really realized that the number of petals was important around the time of Linnaeus, who published Systema Naturae in 1735. Linnaeus' system was grouped plants based on the number of stamens and carpels inside the plant and got everyone counting flower parts. Prior to 1735, I suspect that the only people who noticed the numbers of petals and such were accurate observers. As botany spread following Linnaeus, people knew that the number of flower parts was really important, and the pictures became more accurate.


NOW, TO GET BACK TO THE SWORD. we have a three-parted smaller figure, and an eight-petaled bigger figure.

Start with the smaller one: if those structures are petals, it's pretty definitely a monocot. The iris (on which the fleur-de-lys is modeled) is a monocot, so we've got a possible answer.

Problem is, if that's an iris, we're missing all the other parts of the flower. So far, I've just been talking about petals. Flowers also usually have sepals (below and outside the petals), and stamens and carpels (above and inside the petals). That's why I said that, if it's a fleur-de-lys, the artist didn't know what he was drawing.

Alternatively, those figures could be fruits, which develop from the carpels. When fruits develop, typically the sepals, petals, and stamens fall away. The rules for petal number do not govern the rules for stamen number, and in any case, those fruits could be from some member of the buttercup family, such as a larkspur or a wolfsbane.

That's how I interpreted the smaller figure.

Now for the bigger figure: Eight petals. Again, either the artist was drawing something realistically, or he was not.

If he was drawing something realistic, it's highly unlikely that it was a simple flower, because no group consistently has eight petals. To get there, you have to start with something five petaled, and add three mutant stamens. Doesn't happen often.

Or, the artist could be drawing a composite flower. This is possible, as there are some that have eight ray florets per composite flower. I'd have to sit down with a European flora to look, as there are literally dozens of possibilities. Most of these are obscure weeds, but one might be culturally important.

If the artist was not portraying a realistic flower, then either he was drawing some sort of symbol, or he was drawing a generic flower. In this case, the best we can do is figure out the symbolism, if any.

Eight-fold flowers happen to be easy to draw (i.e. make a petal every 45 degrees around a circle), so I've seen a lot of them in artwork. For various reasons I won't get into here (aren't you glad? ), eight petals doesn't work as well as five in the wild, and eight-petaled flowers are very uncommon.

That's the gist of it. So, if anyone wants to figure out the ID of a flower on a sword hilt, this is how I do it.

Hope it helps,

F

Fearn, this is absolutely fantastic application of 'botanical forensics in studying decorative motif on weapons'!! On the Ethnographic Forum , Jens has for considerable time devoted a great deal of study on this subject as applied to Indian swords and daggers. Robert Elgood discusses this in some degree in his great book "Hindu Arms and Ritual", where much of the symbolism of various botanicals are used in ceremony, decorative motif and even in metallurgy.
I really enjoy the discussions you and David get into on these subjects, which really add dimension to better understanding these motifs on weapons.


All the best,
Jim

[fearn]

Hi Guys,

Possible ID on the big flower. I think it's something like a marigold. My girlfriend and I were out at a farmer's market, and there they were, eight petals/flowers around the rim, and the petals were red on the inside and yellow on the outside. Leaves are lobed too. Not a perfect ID, but that's my guess for now.

Although my girlfriend wanted something more decorative, I've got a bouquet of said flowers on the table right now. I'll get a picture when the light's better.

Best,

F

[celtan]

Aren't Marigolds and Margaritas the same flower?

Best

Manolo

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by celtan

Aren't Marigolds and Margaritas the same flower?

Best

Manolo

Are they? I thought Margaritas were Sunflowers?

[fearn]

Hi All,

Here's the deal. All the flowers (sunflowers, margaritas, marigolds) are in the sunflower family (Asteraceae). Sunflowers are in the genus Helianthemum. Marigolds are in the genus Tagetes. Margaritas (actually marguerite, aka the ox eye daisy) are genus Leucanthemum.

Thing to remember is that the sunflower family (Asteraceae) has on order 23,000 species worldwide. It's an easy group to get confused about, so don't worry if you are confused right now. So far as the picture on the sword being a marigold, I rate that as probable, and I'll get a picture up later.

Best,

F

[fearn]

I've got an ugly picture of the marigold (or whatever it is), showing a flower with 8 "petals" (ray florets). Oddly, on this plant, the ones with eight petals aren't in good shape for the most part. Don't know why that might be. Still, this is what I'm talking about.

Note above: Actually, sunflowers are genus Helianthus, not Helianthemum, which is another genus that I worked with. My bad.

Best,

F

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by fearn

I've got an ugly picture of the marigold (or whatever it is), showing a flower with 8 "petals" (ray florets). Oddly, on this plant, the ones with eight petals aren't in good shape for the most part. Don't know why that might be. Still, this is what I'm talking about.

Best,

F

Ah, yes I see it :-)
I've found a similar on on my googling but single colour petals.

[Atlantia]

Hi Fearn, I see what you mean :-)


I also googled up some of the ones with the same variagation in the petals but I havent seen one with all the element somcined yet, ie the varigated petals, numbering 8 and the parge centre.

Be very interested to see yours.
Thanks
Gene