What’s the charge at http://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00001755/images/index.html?id=00001755&fip=208.68.26.71&no=4&seite=176 that looks like a turnip with an attached "root"?  Is that indeed what it is?

Daniel C. Boyer wrote:

What’s the charge at http://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00001755/images/index.html?id=00001755&fip=208.68.26.71&no=4&seite=176 that looks like a turnip with an attached "root"?  Is that indeed what it is?

To me it looks most like the rutabaga or white turnip in shape. The foliage of the rutabaga divides horizontally from a series of central stems like those in the illustration. On the other hand the root looks more like that of a standard turnip, being a central root rather than a group of small roots like those of the rutabaga. Could it be that the artist took some liberties in the rendering? After all he was a manuscript painter not a botanist.

David Pritchard wrote:

To me it looks most like the rutabaga or white turnip in shape. The foliage of the rutabaga divides horizontally from a series of central stems like those in the illustration. On the other hand the root looks more like that of a standard turnip, being a central root rather than a group of small roots like those of the rutabaga. Could it be that the artist took some liberties in the rendering? After all he was a manuscript painter not a botanist.

And it’s also true that vegetable charges are not necessarily, and are not necessarily even intended to be, faithful depictions of what is found in the field (or under it in this case)(cf. the mandrake).

My guess would be a canting charge for a German surname that soulds a bit like the German word for some type of turnip or other root vegetable.  I have an old essay (from an old book at home) on the Zurich wappenrolle (sp?) which shows a number of such canting arms.