200 



SCIENCE OF THE STUDY OF TREES. 



PART II. 



tree, as it must add greatly to the enjoj ment derivable from them, ought 

 always to form a part of their individual history. 



One of the most common and generally understood expressions of trees 

 is, that which is called their picturesque beauty. B'luch has been written, by 

 Gilpin, Uvedale Price, and others, in order to define the meaning of the 

 word picturesque ; and the expression of this beauty has been' divided into 

 two kinds : that of the beautiful, or smooth picturesque, suitable for culti- 

 vated scenery, and also for painting; and that of the rough picturesque, 

 suitable for wild and forest scenery, and eminently so for graphic represent- 

 ation, whether by the pencil, or the palette. Among trees, whether in a wild 

 or cultivated state, are found both these expi'essions ; and, as an example of 

 the first, we may give young specimens of the willow and the lime, and 

 young trees generally ; and of the second, the oak, the cedar, the thorn, and 

 old trees generally. For a tree to be picturesque, it is not necessary that it 

 should stand singly, or be at all symmeti'ical in point of form, or the general 

 balance of its head ; on the contrary, a mutilated tree, or one the trunk of 

 which, from some accidental cause, has grown to one side, may be as pic- 

 turesque as a tree which grows erect, and is comparatively perfect in all its 

 parts ; provided only that it is not a peculiar tree, such as that shown in 

 fig. 1. p. 195. The only thing which is essential to picturesque beauty in a 

 tree, is, that it should be capable of readily grouping with another tree, or 

 with any building, object, or animal, so that the combination may form a satis- 

 factory whole. It is evident that this remark applies alike to trees of 

 the rough picturesque, and of the smooth picturesque; since young trees, 

 which belong to the latter kind of beauty, will group together, or with other 

 objects, just as readily as old trees which belong to the former kind of this 

 expression. 



The expression of gardenesque beauty, in individual trees, differs from the 

 picturesque, in being (whether in the rough or the poUshed variety of the 

 expression), at all times, regular, or sjmimetrical. The gardenesque is found 

 exclusively in single trees, which have been planted in favourable situations ; 

 not pressed on, during their growth, by any other objects ; and allowed to 

 throw out their branches equally on every side, uninjured by cattle or other 

 animals ; and, if touched by the hand of the gardener, only to be improved 

 in their regularity and symmetry. A truly gardenesque tree, when fully 

 grown, has always some of its branches depending on the ground, in order to 

 mark it as a tree of the garden or lawn ; and not one of the park, where its 

 lower branches would be separated from the ground by that horizontal Hne 

 formed by the browzing of cattle; or one of the forest, where, from being 

 pressed on by other trees, or, when young growing up under the shade 

 of an old tree, its form would necessarily belong to some division of the pic- 

 turesque, or be peculiar; and peculiarity, in trees, as in other objects, as Sir 

 Joshua Reynolds has shown, is deformity rather than beauty. 



Architectural and scidpturesque trees are now no longer in repute : but M'e 

 see no reason why trees should not be cut into the forms of colonnades, 

 arcades, triumphal arches, and the figures of men and animals, as shrubs 

 are cut into the form of those green walls which, under the name of hedges, 

 separate our fields ; and exotic plants are dwarfed, by being grown in pots or 

 boxes ; and fruit trees flattened by being spread out against walls. We do not 

 say that arcades of trees, tonsile bowers, and sculptured evergreens, such 

 as were formerly common in French gardens, rank high in the scale of ver- 

 dant beauty ; we merely assert, that they are productive of distinct kinds of 

 beauty; and that it is by no means desirable to be exclusive, and limit our 

 notions of what is beauty to that which is highest in the scale, or to those 

 kinds only that happen to be fashionable in our time. 



Viewing trees with reference to their beauty as organic forms, and to the in- 

 terest which they are capable of exciting by calhng forth associated ideas, 

 the tree which is considered the most beautiful by man, in any country, will 

 vary according to the knowledge of every individual, and the country in 



