 |
 |
Dear Chris, There was a discussion of this over on Medtextl last summer I think. You might check their archives. As I remember, the practice of using rose petals for prayer beads started in the East (India?) and gradually moved west. Karen Reeds discussed a lecture she had heard in which the lecturer had passed out rose petal beads that he had made from medieval recipes. Sorry I can't be more specific, but do check the archives. A reference, which I haven't seen but that might prove helpful, is M. Chery, *Histoire generale du rosaire et de sa confrerie* (1869). Regards, Clint Atchley Dr. Clinton Atchley Department of English Box 7652 Henderson State University Arkadelphia, AR 71999 Phone: 870.230.5276 Email: [log in to unmask] URL: http://www.hsu.edu/faculty/atchlec >-----Original Message----- >From: Chris Laning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 11:47 PM >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Rose petal beads? > > >(My apologies to anyone who's already heard me ask this question on >another list.) > >Has anyone ever run into any *medieval* source that mentions beads >made out of crushed rose petals? > >I'm asking because it is a popular modern notion that medieval >rosaries were made of rose-petal beads, and that this is where >rosaries got their name -- both notions being completely unsupported, >as far as I've been able to find. > >Apparently there has been little scholarly work on the actual >physical object, namely the *beads* of the rosary or paternoster, and >their materials, manufacture, arrangement, fastening, et cetera. >Most, if not all, scholars seem to be focusing exclusively on the >history of the devotional practice (which is fascinating too, of >course), including the recent and very good _Stories of the Rose: >The Making of the Rosary in the Middle Ages_ by Anne Winston-Allen. > >Most of the other citations I've seen that even *mention* the actual >beads of the rosary refer to one book, Eithne Wilkins' _The >Rose-Garden Game_ (1969). I can only say that it's not *quite* as bad >as I remember from reading it many years ago. The text *is* rather >heavily into the "mystical East" and a lot of its historical >statements are simply not referenced; I suspect that means that most >of them are unsupported hand-waving. However it *does* have more >pictures of actual rosaries (and rosary paintings) than I've seen >together in one place anywhere else. > >Anyway, I've been unable to find any references to beads made of rose >petals before about 1920, and am still looking. > >Regards, >