vii] Egenolph and Fucks 175 



the plagiarism remains. The two figures here reproduced 

 — the Lesser Celandine (Text-fig. 33) and the Hart's- 

 tongue Fern (Text-fig. 85) — are reduced copies from 

 Brunfels. 



It is interesting to notice that, as the third part of 

 Brunfels' great work had not appeared when Egenolph's 

 book was published, the latter must have been at a loss for 

 figures of the plants which Brunfels had reserved for his 

 third volume. We find that in the case of one such plant, 

 the Asparagus, he solved the problem by going back to 

 the old familiar wood-cut which had done duty in the 

 ' Ortus Sanitatis' and the ' Herbarius zu Teutsch.' 



In the third volume of Brunfels' herbal (which appeared 

 after his death) there is a small figure, that of "Auricula 

 muris," which differs conspicuously in style from the other 

 engravings, and which appears to represent a case in which 

 the tables were turned, and a figure was borrowed from 

 Egenolph. 



In his later books, Egenolph used wood-cuts pirated 

 from those of Fuchs and Bock, which we must now 

 consider. 



In the work of Leonhard Fuchs (Frontispiece) plant 

 drawing, as an art, may be said to have reached its cul- 

 minating point. It is true that, at a later period, when the 

 botanical importance of the detailed structure of the flower 

 and fruit was recognised, figures were produced which 

 conveyed exacter and more copious information on these 

 points than did those of Fuchs. Nevertheless, at least 

 in the opinion of the present writer, the illustrations to 

 Fuchs* herbals (' De historia stirpium,' 1542, and 'New 

 Kreiiterbuch,' 1543) represent the high-water mark of that 

 type of botanical drawing which seeks to express the 

 individual character and habit of each species, treating 

 the plant broadly as a whole, and not laying more stress 

 upon the reproductive than the vegetative organs. 



Fuchs' figures are on so large a scale that the plant 

 frequently had to be represented as curved, in order to fit 

 it into the folio page. The illustrations here reproduced 

 (Text-figs. 30, 31, 32, 58, 69, 70, 86, 87, 88) do not give an 

 entirely just idea of their beauty, since the line employed in 

 the original is so thin that it is ill-adapted to the reduction 



