242 THE .TOUBNAL OF BOTAyT 



142, 190. 218, 289, 299, 381 Isatis, 468 Good King Henry, 469, 674, 

 751, 792, 829, 828. 



Other figures are especially characterized by the breadth and 

 dignity of th« design as a whole ; and these naturally attract the most 

 attention, even if the botanical details be a little vague : but such 

 types are the joy of the book, and give it its value as a work of art. 

 Cf. Paris 87, Clematis 77, (xentian, with one blossom centred, 200, 

 Lactiica 299, Melon 868 (design better than the botany). Cabbage 

 416, Pea 627 (with a centred pod opened, good enough for a work 

 on Mendel), Fetasites 644, Ar. 126; Radish 660, Comfrey 695, 

 Echallium 705, Millet 771, Mullein 848, Cowslip 850 (for once 

 beyond Brunfels' i. 96, washed-out plant). 



Finally, there remains the new departure of the more definitely 

 scientific diagram, in which a composite structure is built up to express 

 facts drawn from the life of the plant at diiferent seasons — whether 

 of flower and fruit, or summer and winter habit ; the whole being 

 fitted into a conventional growth-form, planned to fill the plate-space. 

 The idea lacks the perfect scientific accuracy of Brunfels, and is 

 obviously open to abuse, may be readily misunderstood by the ignorant, 

 and may serv^e as an excuse for malrepresentation of the facts ; but it 

 is a distinctly legitiLuate method to attempt, and appeals to the 

 designers, though the verdict of succeeding generations has been 

 against it. These figures are clearly due to the direction of Fuchs 

 himself ; they give the botanical value of the work, and the method 

 grows from small beginnings — -<?. y. 



The early media? val oak (229) is touched up by adding acorns and 

 their cups as separate items. The Arum (F. 59, Ar. 179 j with a dead 

 shrivelled spathe and spadix, suspiciously the reversed one of Brunfels 

 (i. ^:>^). has a fruiting specimen added, and an interior of the bottle- 

 cavity, with remarkably correct detail of ovaries and stigmas, etc. The 

 figures are kept separate ; a more crude effort in Dracuiiculus (284) 

 fits the fruits and the spathe on the same stem ; and must be so far 

 regarded as a definite failure. The same applies to the Columbine 

 (102) and Paeonia (202) ; though the practice lasted for a long time, 

 and may be noted in the Pa?ony of Besler (1618), Hort. Eyst. p. vi, 10. 

 Two figures again are given for Crocus vernus (441), one with a 

 second dimerous flower, and another of a later stage with the leaves 

 shooting, the dead flowers, and fine contractile roots pushing — an 

 admirable set of botanical facts. Colchicum (356) is also shown 

 separately in flowers and fruit. 



The method is clearly more satisfactory as adapted to conven- 

 tionalized fruit-trees, in which different branches are set apart for the 

 different effects and the whole grouped as a tree-form : it is question- 

 able whether the shreds and patches of the Cambridge British Flora 

 are really any better as affording an adequate presentation to the 

 ignorant of the growth-form of a tree-type. Many examples are par- 

 ticularly neat. Gf. especially the Gooseberry, 187 ; Blackthorn, 404 — 

 a beautiful study, with bare branch, flowering branch, and fruiting 

 branch, — only requiring colour to make it vividly accui'ute. The 

 Hazel (898), with a catkin-bearing twig, Cherry (415), also with 

 three types of branch-system : Juglans (379) with catkins added, and 



