THE ORAFTSMAN’S PLANT-BOOK 113 
work are twelve or thirteen inches in length, have had t 
reduced ; but although this a little detracts from their beauty, ‘thelr 
accuracy remains unim 
In certain ST le these figures have, I think, never been 
surpassed by any subsequent artist. They combine to an un- 
equalled extent artistic beauty and botanical accuracy—the truth 
with which the habit of each plant is conveyed is one of their most 
flowers a per: h d. r necessarily feta the 
whole plant is caidalty given, including the t; beautiful 
examples of this reduction are the Currant and Gooseberry 
(pp. 228, 229), on both of which flower and fruit exist synchro- 
nously ; the representation of a complete Oak-tree in the limits of 
a folio or (as here, p. 412) a quarto page is distinctly quaint, as 
about half of the figure i . An hough accuracy is 
ne 
remarkable skill noes for example, the Bottle Gourd (p. 223), 
where the large fruit quite naturally forms the centre of the 
drawing, the stems and branches forming exquisite curves. The 
artists are at their best in their studies of climbing plants; the 
two plates of the Ivy—one of the barren and one of the flowering 
and fruiting state—and of the Clematis—the last reproduced by 
Mr. Hatton on p. 52—are wonderful studies in arrangement. Tn 
the original the names of the plants are printed on the plates, and 
even this detail is so planned as to produce a artistic effect. 
One of the pleasantest features of the book i eae 
not only of the gma who, in his forty fieak oa meets us 
the volume. “ Albertus ‘aie is drawing t he plant on paper ; 
dra g, 
perhaps one of Meyer's.” One cannot fail to perceive that Vitus 
Rudolphus pe la the engraver, has executed his own ia ok 
q ne alm 
word must be said as to the t graphy y of the age which, 
especially in the German (black-letter) edition, is very beautiful. 
In every respect, indeed, this Histoss Stirpium may rank among 
i the sixteenth cen 4: 
regarded es = standpoint of science, art, or typography. 
: thinks “the figures in Fuchsius look as ‘if they 
‘want setodting* but in this I cannot concur with him; he may, 
however, be right in SS ‘it was 
