I IO 
PARK AND CEMETERY, 
scenes that are most apt to delight the imagination.” 
Again he says, “Our English gardens are not so 
entertaining to the fancy as those in France and 
Italy,” (referring to some examples of natural gar- 
dening already attempted in those countries,) 
“where we see a large extent of ground covered 
over with an agreeable mixture of garden and for- 
est, which represent everywhere an artificial rude- 
ness, much more charming than that neatness and 
elegancy which we meet with in those of our own 
country. Why may not a whole estate be thrown 
into a garden by frequent plantations that may 
turn as much to the profit as the pleasure of the 
owner?” Pope with his caustic tongue heaps his 
sarcasm upon the gardens of his period. This is a 
portion of his description of a garden : 
“His gardens next your admiration call, 
On every side you look, behold the wall ! 
No pleasing intricacies intervene, 
No artful wildness to perplex the scene ; 
Grove nods at grove, each alley has a brother, 
And half the platform just reflects the other. 
The suffering eye inverted nature sees, 
Trees cut to statues, statues thick as trees. 
With here a fountain never to be played, 
And there a summer house that knows no shade." 
Pope, at the same time, in a poem addressed to 
the Earl of Burlington, lays down the fundamental 
principles of the art of which here is a part: 
“To build, to plant, whatever you intend, 
For rear the column, or the arch to bend, 
To swell the terrace, or to sink the grot, 
In all let nature never be forgot. 
Consult the genius of the place in all, 
That tells the waters, or to rise or fall ; 
Calls in the country, catches opening glades, 
Joins willing woods, and varies shades from shades, 
Now, breaks, or now directs, the intending lines, 
Paints as you plant, and as you work, designs.” 
This was written in 1732, although he had already 
written an essay in 1713 immediately following 
Addison’s in which he ridicules the practice of cut- 
ting shrubs into monstrous forms. Thomson, too, 
in his “Seasons” had already just preceded him 
with his rural dreams. The rules, however, were 
not original with Pope but learned from Bridge- 
man, although the credit of the preception belongs 
with him. Bridgeman was a designer of the transition 
who had learned from Loudon and Wise of Queen 
Anne’s time. Wise had made winding walks in one 
ofhis gardens to the admiration of Addison, had cov- 
ered a parterre with turf, and had introduced other 
innovations. Bridgeman went farther and banished 
verdant sculpture and symmetry, although he still 
-adhered to straight walks and high dipt hedges. 
Later, he introduced cultivated fields, and even a 
little forest appearance, but never went far from 
old traditions. This is what remained to the gen- 
ius of Kent and Brown, as Mason, the poet, says, 
“Bacon was the prophet, Milton the herald; and 
Addison, Pope and Kent the champions of true 
taste.’ ’ 
While to Kent and Brown belong the honor of 
being the first practitioners in Landscape Garden- 
ing, this art cannot be said not to have existed pre- 
vious to their work. Loudon says: “Without 
doubt examples of wild scenery with walks have 
existed from the earliest ages. In fact, it is impos- 
sible to doubt that beautiful scenery was admired 
by minds of refinement in all times and places, and 
that the wealthy would frequently endeavor to cre- 
ate it. Semiram imitated nature two thousand 
years before Nero, and Nero nearly as long a period 
before Pope and Shenstone. ” The French contend 
that the first landscape gardener was theirs in the 
person of Dufresny. In fact, a great change oc- 
curred in French taste through the extremes of Le 
Notre ’s followers which made his garden as un- 
popular as it had been popular before. 
LeNotre’s successor in office, Dufresny, dif- 
fered from him decidedly in taste. He designed 
several gardens in imitation of nature, but his ex- 
ample was not followed but only admired at the 
time. It was not until 1753 that the natural garden 
found a place in France. It is to Dufresny’s gar- 
dens in France and Italy that Addison may refer 
in his essay quoted above. The first artists who 
practiced in the modern style were Kent and Brown. 
It was for Kent to carry Pope’s ideas into execu- 
tion, “to realize the descriptions of the poets,” as 
Walpole says, “for which he was peculiarly 
adapted by being a painter. He was painter 
enough to taste the charms of landscape, bold and 
opinionative enough to dare and to dictate, and 
born with a genius to strike out a greater system.” 
It was for Brown to carry on this movement, spa- 
ring many of the beauties of the old style, and car- 
rying on all wdth much taste. The straight lines, 
the stiff terraces, and formal avenues of the ancient 
style were followed by the flowing lines, the large 
smooth lawns and the irregularity of the new. We 
cannot say but that the Kent school of modern 
gardening went to extremes, as it was character- 
terized by the complete absence of lines, terraces, 
or architectural forms adjoining the house, making 
the house rise abruptly from the lawn, while the 
general surface was characterized by smoothness and 
barrenness. Later, a revulsion against this ex- 
treme took place, and this school of landscape gar- 
dening gave rise to another distinguished by rough- 
ness and intricacy, called the Picturesque School. 
This, in turn, was followed by a third, the Garden- 
esque, which sought to display the beauty of single 
trees and shrubs, and, finally, the landscape gar- 
dening of to-day. 
