1892 - Artist Deborah Griscom Passmore Starts With the USDA

       

The previous post on seed jewelry brought me in contact with an extraordinary botanical watercolor of the Carob pod.  

Signed DG Passmore, and the date of 1904, the illustration prompted me to look for information about the illustrator.  
It was easy-peasey!  

Deborah Griscom Passmore is a widely respected botanical illustrator who left her mark mainly through the many illustrations she did for the USDA. 



Wikipedia gives all the details.



I just want you to enjoy her work in this post.  

1759 - Botanical Engraver, John Miller/Johannes Sebastian Mueller

After spending a large portion of my life with craftsman and pursuing a livelihood within a craft,  I am drawn to reading about others, especially when they feature in my historical botanical meanderings.  John Miller was good, and you may be interested to see his work. Here are two articles.  
 Enjoy!

JOHN MILLER,  AND HIS WORK.

WHEN writing the history of the Botanical Magazine, I alluded to this accomplished botanical artist (see Gardeners' Chronicle, third series, i., p. 451), and mentioned his work, Illustration of the Serial System of Linnaeus. 

This abbreviated title is hardly intelligible, standing alone, yet it is almost unnecessary in this place to add that the sexual systems of plants is intended.  At the time I wrote, I had not seen the work, but a magnificent copy, or rather double copy, one coloured and one uncoloured, has lately been presented by the Bentham Trustees to the library of the Royal Gardens, Kew, and I dare say a few particulars of the man and his work may interest many persons who have not direct facilities for obtaining such information. 

Johannes Sebastian Mueller was born at Nürnburg in 1715, and became an artist and engraver, An early inclination for botany led him to make his profession as an engraver subservient to the cultivation of his favourite science.  At what date he came to England I have not ascertained, but, so far as I know, he did not begin publishing until 1759, though, as he himself states, he had laboured many years at the engravings. 

© Victoria and Albert Museum, London

Pulteney does not mention him, and Pritzel, the great botanical bibliographer, does not seem to have been aware that there was a coloured edition of the work in question; but he gives the price as twenty-one pounds. This work is a large folio, containing 108 plates, with explanatory letterpress opposite; and it was issued uncoloured, except the first four plates, or rather four separately numbered plates placed at the beginning, and representing the forms of leaves; and some copies were coloured, though probably only a few. 

Of the good quality of the work there can be no difference of opinion, both as to the drawing and the accurate and careful colouring. Some of it is almost or quite equal to Ehret's work; some of it, on the other hand, was evidently not done from life, and is faulty in drawing and colouring. Linnaeus, to whom a copy had been sent, declared that the figures were prettier and more accurate than any that had been seen since the foundation of the world. 

Here are his words: 

Hamamelis virginica

“Donum tuum operis immortalis charioris veniet pretio quam, ut id remunerare valeam. Figurae enim sunt et pulchriores et accuratiores quam ullae quas vidit mundus a condito orbe." 

In several other letters the great Swedish botanist speaks most highly of the quality of Miller's work, and stated that he should be under everlasting obligation to the author for so magnificently illustrating his classification of plants. Without going so far as to say that Miller was unsurpassed, even by his contemporaries, it may safely be asserted that much of the work of the present day is far behind him, and he will always rank as a master.

Momordica charantia

The plants selected for the purpose are mostly common ones, in order to render the book useful to persons who had not access to the rarer plants of botanic gardens and large private gardens; and the arrangement is, of course, after the Linnean classes and orders, beginning with Canna indica, to represent the Monandria monogynia, followed by Blitum virgatum, referred to the Monandria digynia, though it is now known that the stamens vary in number from one to five. 

Each class and order is taken in its turn, and some of the plates are most elaborate productions, exhibiting an amount of detail that is truly surprising, both in the drawing of the plant itself, and the number of dissections. Although the object was to choose common plants, such comparatively little known subjects appear as Hamamelis virginica, Turnera ulmifolia, Petiveria alliacea, Galenia africana, Cassytha baccifera, Melianthus major, Pentapetes phoenicea, Hermannia alnifolia, and Momordica charantia. 

Specially effective among commoner plants are the Sunflower, Hollyhock, common Marigold, a single Paeony, Blackberry, Apple, Fig, and the common Passion-flower. The figures of the Sunflower and single Hollyhock are really admirable pictures, representing the flowers of the natural size, the Sunflower being 8 inches across. 

The rest of this article can be found in Gardeners Chronicle & New Horticulturist, 1890.

MILLER, JOHN, otherwise Johann Sebastian Muller (1715?-1790?), draughtsman and engraver, was born at Nuremberg about 1715, and studied there under J. C. Weigel and M. Tyroff.  

In 1744 he came to England with his brother Tobias, an engraver of architecture, and he passed the remainder of his life in this country, chiefly practicing as an engraver. He signed his early works J. S. Muller or J. S. Miller, but after 1760 used the signature of John Miller. 

In 1759 and 1760 he was living in Maiden Lane, Covent Garden; in 1777 in Dorset Court, near Parliament Street; and in 1789 at 10 Vauxhall Walk, Lambeth.

In the preface to his 'Illustration of the Sexual System' Muller speaks of his own early inclination to Botany,' and 'desire of rendering his Profession as an Engraver subservient to the Cultivation of his favourite Science;' but though most of his work is faithful to nature and artistically excellent, Philip Miller [q.v.], Dr. Gowan Knight [q. v.], and Lord Bute are probably largely responsible for its scientific supervision. 

On 31 March 1759 he issued 

"Proposals for publishing one hundred prints, exhibiting a curious Collection of Plants and Insects by John Miller . . . Each Print will contain a Plant coloured from Nature, with the peculiar Insects which feed on [it] . . . The Plants will be classed under their proper Genera, according to the Botanick System of Mr. Miller of Chelsea (who has generously offered his kind assistance). . . . The Insects will be ranged as by Dr. Linnaeus in his Systema Naturae . . . This work will be published in Fifty Numbers, one. . . every Month. Each Number will contain Two. . . plates, with a half-sheet of letter-press,. . .Price Five Shillings. The first number on 10 May. . .If the Proprietor meets with Encouragement ... he proposes to go through the whole Animal Creation according to the System adapted by Dr. Linnaeus." 

for  more info: Cincinnati History Library and Archives

1777

Of this work, equal if not superior to the previously published ' Plantae et Papiliones' of Ehret, only ten folio plates were published, with the letter-press to the first eight, the plates bearing date between May 1759 and April 1760.

Richard Weston, in his 'Catalogue of English Authors on Agriculture' (1773), notes, under 1770, that Miller then published  'No. 1' of his 'System of Linnaeus explained ... To be compleated in 15 Numbers, one Guinea each. Each Number contains 4 plants coloured and 4 plain.' 

John Ellis wrote to Linnaeus of this undertaking on 28 Dec. 1770,

"There is a valuable work now carrying on upon your system by Mr. John Miller, a German painter and engraver, under the direction of Dr. Gowan Knight, of the British Museum. This will make your system of botany familiar to the ladies, being in English as well as Latin. The figures are well drawn, and very systematically dissected and described. I have desired that he may send to your ambassador for you the two first numbers to know your opinion of it, and if you approve you may get him subscriptions" {Correspondence of Linnceus, i. 255). 

The plates are dated from 1771 to 1776, and in 1777 the work was issued complete in three volumes folio, containing 108 coloured plates, 104 uncoloured, and 109 sheets of letter-press in Latin and English, 'published and sold by the author.' 

The English title was 'An Illustration of the Sexual System of the Genera Plantarum of Linnaeus.' A list of eighty-two subscribers, taking about 125 copies, and including the name of David Garrick, is prefixed, and in the preface' are given four letters to the author from Linnaeus, in one of which he writes, 'Donum tuum operis immortalis chariori veniet fretio quam, ut id remunerare valeam. 'igurae enim sunt et pulchriores et accuratiores quam ullae quas vidit mundus a condito orbe.' 

© Victoria and Albert Museum, London

In Linnaeus's own copy of the work, now in the Linnean Society's library, in that in the King's library (36 i. 1-3), in the Banksian copy, at the Natural History Museum, and in that at Kew, formerly belonging to James Lee of the Vineyard, Hammersmith, some plates are proofs before letters.

 In 1779 Miller published an octavo edition of the 'Illustration', with 107 uncoloured plates and a preface containing a letter of encouragement from the younger Linnaeus, and promising a second volume to exhibit specific characters.   

This second volume was not issued until 1789, the delay being stated in the preface to be due to 'a particular engagement.' It is entitled 'An Illustration of the Termini Botanici of Linnaeus,' and contains eighty-six uncoloured plates. 

New title pages for the folio edition and the first volume of the octavo edition of the 'Illustration' seem to have been issued subsequently, copies at the Natural History Museum bearing the imprint, 'Printed for Robert Faulder, New Bond Street, 1794.' 

The ' Illustration' was published in German in folio by Konrad Felsing, Darmstadt, 1792, and at Frankfurt-on-Maine, 1804, both coloured; the octavo edition, by Dr. F. G. Weiss, at Frankfurt in 1789, with the plates of the first volume, re-engraved by Charles Goepfert and coloured, in a separate volume, entitled 'Johannis Milleri Tabulae Iconum centum quatuor plantarum ad illustrationem systematis sexualis Linnaeani.'

Meanwhile Miller attempted another ambitious work dealing with new plants. 
Of this seven folio plates, dated 1780, were published, with a half-sheet of letter-press, but no title.  In the botanical department of the Natural History Museum are five volumes, including in all 1072 original coloured drawings, with the manuscript title, 'Drawings of the Leaves, Stalks, and Ramifications of Plants for the purpose of ascertaining their several Species, executed for the Rt. Hon'ble, the Earl of Bute, for the years 1783 and 1784, by John Miller, Author of the Illustration of the Sexual System of Linnaeus.' 
These drawings were not utilized in Lord Bute's great work, 'Botanical Tables' (1785) ; but all the plates in the nine volumes of that work are also signed by Miller.

Miller engraved numerous plates other than botanic from his own designs; they are somewhat feeble in drawing and treatment, but his plates from compositions by good masters have much merit. ...

 ... Furthermore he painted landscapes, which, as well as some of his engravings, he exhibited with the Society of Arts and at the Royal Academy from 1762 to 1788. Though the date of his death is unknown, it was probably soon after 1789, and almost certainly before 1794.

Miller engraved his own portrait with that of Linnaeus on the frontispiece of his 'Illustration of the Sexual System,' 1777.

He was twice married, and had in all twenty-seven children, two of his sons, John Frederick and James Miiller or Miller, becoming known as draughtsmen, and as frequent exhibitors of topographical views at the Society of Artists. 

Miller's son's work

The former accompanied Sir Joseph Banks and Dr. Solander to Ireland in 1772 as a draughtsman, and published in numbers in 1785 ' Various Subjects of Natural History wherein are delineated Birds, Animals, and many curious Plants: with the parts of fructification of each plant, all of which are drawn and coloured from Nature,' London, imp. fol.













[Naglor'sKiinstler-Lexikon; Mason's Memoirs of Gray, 1814, i. 335; Dortd's manuscript Hist, of English Engravers (Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 38403); Universal Catalogue of Books on Art; Catalogues of the Society of Artists: Bryan's Diet, of Painters and Engravers; Miller's own works.] F. M. O'D.—G. S. B.

1869 - BOTANICAL DRAWING - A How-To Series by Walter Hood Fitch

This series of articles is certainly worth my collecting and posting!  A botanical illustrator of Mr. Fitch's caliber and place in history shouldn't be ignored.  Any guidance should taken seriously.  I feel very fortunate to have found it.  My appreciation for the great resources at plantillustrations.org knows no limits.

Originally published starting in 1869 in Gardeners Chronicle & New Horticulturist, Fitch produced eight articles.  I am inserting more of his work than was in the original articles, choosing it to enhance whichever technique he is addressing.  

 I couldn't resist this cheery oncidium to start!

BOTANICAL DRAWING. - No. I

It has been suggested to me by some who, I trust, are better able to appreciate my qualifications than my native modesty will allow me to do, that a few hints on botanical drawing, from my pen, might be useful to some of the readers of the Gardeners' Chronicle. Yielding to their superior judgment— though I am more accustomed to the pencil than the pen—I shall venture to make a few remarks, which, however simple and trilling they may appear to me, and perhaps to others, may be of some service to those who are ambitious of doing correctly what any one is supposed to be capable of doing, viz., sketching a flower, or a plant.


I have frequently heard the remark, that Mr. So-and-so is a good colourist but a bad draughtsman—a very left-handed compliment, equivalent to that of being pronounced able to write but not to spell, to paint a portrait but not to represent the individual. It is as well that correct drawing and colouring should be found in the same work, for the absence of the former cannot be compensated by any excellence in the latter. Most beginners in flower drawing are desirous of rushing into colour before they can sketch—unaware that the most gorgeous daub, however laboured, if incorrectly drawn is only a crude effort at "paper staining", as it is technically termed. The eye of a qualified critic is not to be soiled by colour. Facility in colouring is easily acquired, but a correct eye for drawing is only to be rendered by constant observation.


I may have occasion hereafter to say something about colouring—botanical and fanciful, for there is a difference between the two—similar to that between a portrait, and a mere picture. A strictly botanical drawing generally represents but one or two individual plants, and they must be equally correctly drawn and coloured. A fancy drawing or group in proportion to the number of plants introduced may have the details judiciously slurred over, for the eye of the observer cannot comprehend the minute points of all at a glance, so there is no labour lost. I may state that this dependence upon the carelessness of the observer is very frequently carried too far—and if at all times far from flattering, is often offensive; and that the works of many professors of flower drawing are not calculated to improve the public taste for the domain of Flora.


To argue the propriety of correctness in anything may seem like discussing a truism, but correctness is very often a question of degree, or a matter of taste. We judge according to the light that is in us.


I have particularly in view the edification of young gardeners; for in the numerous works intended for their instruction, I am not aware that there are any hints in relation to botanical or flower drawing. Judging from the omission, one might almost suppose it was thought that if the pupils but mastered half the matter that was written for their improvement, they might well dispense with so trifling an accomplishment. I need not dilate on the usefulness to gardeners of a knowledge of sketching, not flowers only, but anything in the way of their profession, for many have expressed to me their regret at their inability, being deterred from testing it by imaginary difficulties. 

I may state that a slight sketch is often more explanatory than any description; and to collectors and cultivators, figures of the plants they collect or deal in are particularly desirable. I purpose making a few remarks, which I hope will be of assistance to beginners in overcoming the difficulties they may encounter in their first attempts. The simple means I have employed in the course of some years experience will be found applicable equally to drawing dried as well as living plants.

I may premise that a knowledge of botany, however slight, is of great use in enabling the artist to avoid the errors which are occasionally perpetrated in respectable drawings and publications, such as introducing an abnormal number of stamens in a flower; giving it an inferior ovary when it should have a superior one, and vice verse. I have frequently seen such negatively instructive illustrations of ignorance, — quite inexcusable, for a little knowledge would enable them to be avoided. It is more creditable that one's works should furnish an example than a warning.      W. H. Fitch.

BOTANICAL DRAWING. - No. II.


For flower drawing smooth paper is best suited, as it allows of finer touches and lines, and smoother washes of colour.

The best pencil to use is an H. for delicate subjects, such as white flowers, and an F. for leaves, and any part which is to receive dark colours, so that the lines may not be  entirely obliterated. 

In botanical subjects it is sometimes desirable to represent the root, bulbs, &c, but they are so easily drawn that I think no special directions are necessary.


Stems.—In the straight stem there is always some degree of curve, therefore the ruler should never be used; it is the last resort of those unable to make "straight strokes," and only worthy of schoolboys. It is more difficult to draw parallel lines and the best practice is to sketch grasses or long-leaved plants. Leafy stems or branches should be first faintly outlined their whole length, of their proper thickness, so that the drawing may occupy a well-balanced position on the paper. Then mark whence the leaves spring. It it also desirable to note the shape of the stem, whether square, round, winged, &c The slight sketch below will show the advantage of proceeding thus cautiously, and will enable every leaf petiole to have its proper point of attachment, whether visible or not.

original article illustration

Oxyanthus formosus
Hooker, W.J., Hooker, J.D., Icones Plantarum (1848)

Alsophila salvinii 
Hemsley, W.B., Biologia Centrali-Americani

Leaves. -  If the leaves are more or less erect in relation to the stem, sketch the lower ones first, as a guide for those above, as in the left-hand cut in the following sketch.

If reflexed, commence with the upper leaves, for the same reason.  If done thus systematically, there will be a great saving of time and india-rubber.

Opposite leaves are best shown slightly askew, but if a stem is branched, the leaves on some of the branches should be more or less foreshortened, for the sake of variety.

original article illustration

In serrated leaves it is safer to put in the serrated outline before doing the veins; and, in cases where the latter terminate in the points of the serratures, commence the veins at the points, and they are sure to terminate properly.

original article illustration

In lobed leaves, after faintly indicating the lobes, put in the ribs and veins first, and the outline of the lobes particularly if they be toothed, will be found much easier. 

In digitate leaves indicate the petiole and midribs first, the relative position of the leaflets can be kept with greater certainty. In pinnate leaves, when large, alter faintly sketching the rachis and the points whence the leaflets spring, put in the midribs first, and define the leaflets last; if the pinnate leaf is small, this is unnecessary.       W. H. Fitch.

Blakea gracilis 
Hemsley, W.B., Biologia Centrali-Americani

original article illustration

BOTANICAL DRAWING. - No. III. Leaves in Perspective.

Leaves have been subjected to more bad treatment by the draughtsman than perhaps any other portion of the vegetable kingdom; they have been represented, or rather misrepresented,

original article illustration

in all kinds of impossible positions.  Numerous are the tortures to which they have been subjected:  dislocated or broken ribs, curious twists, painful to behold - even their wretched veins have not escaped; and all these errors in perspective arise from inattention to the simple fact, that in a curved leaf, showing the under side, the midrib should be continuous, and the veins should spring from the midrib.   

original article illustration

The simple way to avoid perpetrating such vagaries, is to treat a leaf as if it were skeletonised, and I would recommend skeletonised leaves as admirable subjects to illustrate their own perspective. A little study of them in this state would be beneficial to those who are wont to take unwarrantable liberties with them when rejoicing in their summer garment of green, which veils their curious anatomy.

Aucuba himalaica 
Hooker, J.D., Fitch, W.H., Illustrations of Himalayan plants, (1855)

In representing leaves in perspective, then, the first faint outline will be found of the greatest service, and in making it, the leaves should be treated as if they were skeletonised, i.e., continue the outline through the curved portion of the leaf. Here I may impress upon the reader the importance of noting the angle formed by the veins with the midrib, their respective distances apart, their faintness or prominence. It is also useful in drawing for scientific purposes, to represent a leaf cut across, to show the thickness; but that is chiefly desirable when it is leathery or succulent. The cuts in the preceding column (above) will illustrate these remarks.

Little more need be said about sketching leaves, save that the leaves themselves are the best teachers, for in them there are no errors in perspective.    W. H. Fitch.

Psorospermum tenuifolium 
Hooker, W.J., Hooker, J.D., Icones Plantarum  (1848)

Leycesteria formosa 
Curtis’s Botanical Magazine

BOTANICAL ILLUSTRATION. IV.

Flowers are often considered the most difficult parts of a plant to sketch; but such, I think, is not really the case, their perspective being more evident and less varied than that of leaves whose positions are almost infinite.

Penstemon gentianoides 
Curtis’s Botanical Magazine

The most common error perpetrated is that of not placing the flower correctly on its stalk or peduncle, but with its neck dislocated as it were, thus imparting to the sufferer an air of conscious comicality. To avoid this infliction, in making the first faint sketch prolong the stalk or axis through the flower to the centre, whence the petals or divisions may be made to radiate correctly beyond a doubt. Another common fault is to represent them all pointing in one direction: sometimes this may occur in Nature, but it is not artistic to copy it in every case.

For scientific purposes it is desirable that positions should be as varied as possible, so that at least a front side and back of a flower be exhibited. A third error I may also allude to, and it is one very common in drawings made from dried specimens for scientific purposes—I have often seen otherwise correct and beautiful plates marred by it—viz., the representing all or most of  the flowers in a panicle or mass, with one particular division of the corolla directed towards the spectator; such uniformity is too mechanical to be natural. 

As good a flower as any to commence with is a Primrose, and for a mass of flowers the Polyanthus or Oxlip, as in these cases they are presented to the eye in various positions.

For the front view a faint circle should be pencilled, the centre and the divisions of the corolla indicated, and then sketched in as firmly as is desirable. If the drawing is to be coloured, the outline and veins, if any, should be strong enough not to be quite obliterated by dark colour.

original article illustration

In the side view the tube should be properly adjusted to correspond with the throat or eye; the simplest way to do so is to carry the outline of the tube faintly through the center of the flower, as in the foregoing cut.  In the position showing the tube  foreshortened, or in the back view, the same method should be adopted as shown in the following illustrations.  

original article illustration

Tubular flowers are often sadly treated by draughtsmen. take, for instance, the common Daffodil, in which, if lines were drawn around each centre, they ought to be in the same plane.  The next sketch will better explain my meaning.

original article illustration

It is one of the most difficult flowers to sketch correctly in its natural position, and the best way to test correctness is to turn the paper so that the flower be erect, when the bad drawing, if any, will be obvious.      W. H. Fitch.

This illustration IS NOT, to my knowledge, W.H.F's...but it was too appropriate not to use!

BOTANICAL DRAWING.-No. V.


Composite flowers, such as the Daisy, after being faintly defined, should be subdivided by lines radiating from the centre, as a guide for the direction of the outer florets. Inattention to this precaution is apt to result in tbe said florets being all endowed with a twist or curve to one side or the other, an arrangement unknown, I believe, to botanists, in this natural order.

original article illustration

In drawings for scientific purposes, it is proper to mark the number of outer florets, also the number of teeth at the tips, as in some plants they are more or less numerous. The direction the florets assume, whether spreading or reflexed, should be noted.

Erigeron speciosus 
Curtis's Botanical Magazine

The florets of the disc, or centre, will be found rather troublesome to render, being geometrically arranged, and often very numerous. An attempt to put in every floret particularly would be certain to result in confusion, therefore it is a saving of labour, and more effective, merely to put in the more prominent parts which strike the eye of the observer, such as the anthers and stigmas.

Echinacea angustifolia 
Curtis’s Botanical Magazine(1861)
Nice!

original article illustration

Four-petaled flowers, such as the Wallflower, should be treated somewhat similarly when they are large enough to be worthy of that trouble; a square or circle should be drawn round the petals, then divide it into four parts - great assistance will be derived from it in insuring the relative size of the petals.

Pendulous flowers, such as the Fuchsia, may be treated likewise, but in such flowers there is one thing that should be particularly attended to—the curve formed by the peduncle or flower-stalk, owing to its slenderness or the weight of the flower. 

Fuchsia splendens 
Curtis’s Botanical Magazine

To make sure of the proper curve, it is useful to indicate the flower-stalk by a faint line carried through the flower as its axis in sketching, which will be found of great service, and the errors frequently visible in drawings of such things would be of less common occurrence, not to speak of the protruding filaments pointing in various singular though impossible directions. I shall not attempt to furnish more than hints as to sketching oblique or irregular flowers.

The foregoing cut will show how to fit the corolla on its tube with some degree of certainty, but the amount of obliquity must be given by observation. To flowers such as those of the Aconitum or Monkshood, the Larkspur, and labiate flowers generally, often very varied in form, many of the previous remarks will hardly apply; and the best way to proceed is to measure one part by another; thus the tube may be rather longer than the calyx, the upper lip may be shorter or longer than the lower one, &c.

Penstemon glandulosus 
Curtis’s Botanical Magazine

Be careful to represent the teeth of the calyx in their proper place in relation to the divisions of the corolla, viz., alternate with them, or intermediate.  And as a general fact, however irregular the flower may be, the teeth of the calyx point betwixt the petals or divisions. The want of observation of this fact is an error very common in slovenly drawings, but in the estimation of a botanist its exhibition would be quite enough to shako his faith in the trustworthiness of any artist, however beautiful his works might otherwise be, as it betrays carelessness, which is worse than ignorance.

Hymenoxys californica Hook.
Curtis’s Botanical Magazine

Botanical artists require to possess a certain amount of philosophical equanimity to enable them to endure criticism, for as no two flowers are exactly alike, it is hardly to be expected that a drawing should keep pace with their variations in size or colour, and I may add that I never yet ventured to exaggerate a little in that way but I have found that adverse criticism has been nullified by Nature excelling itself, as it were, under the fostering care of the many able cultivators of tLe present day.          W. H. Fitch.

BOTANICAL DRAWING.-No. VI.


Perhaps there are no flowers more varied in size form, and colour, than those of Orchids, and I think I may add more difficult to sketch, if the artist has not some general knowledge of their normal structure. 
Dr. Lindley remarked, upon seeing the representatives of three different genera flourishing on the same spike, that after that they were capable of any eccentricity. Indeed they almost seem to have been created to puzzle botanists, or to test an artist's abilities, and consequently they are all the more worthy of a skillful pencil in endeavouring to do justice to them.

Owing to the great variation in form presented by some species, if the artist render correctly any specimen put in his hands, he is liable to have his veracity called into question, and, if any abnormal growth come in his way, he had better not be rash enough to represent what may be regarded as impossible by some authority who has made Orchids his specialty.

 It might tend to upset some favourite theory, or possibly to destroy a pet genus—an act of wanton impertinence which no artist endowed with a proper respect for the dicta of men of science would ever willfully be guilty of.  (Uh-oh...sounds like someone gave him a very hard time.  Seems to me like he is getting back at someone!)




It is impossible to lay down any rules for sketching these protean plants, but if the structure in not correctly rendered in a drawing it is worse than useless, as no colouring will redeem it.  At the risk of saying what I presume is well known, I may state that the parts of the flower consist of a germen, or ovary, surmounted by three sepals, two petals, a lip, and a column, as in the following cut.  (1826  Botanical Terminology- Germen, the seed-bud, the part where the seeds are perfected, which is placed at the base of the pistil.)

original article illustration

 As Orchid flowers are so very irregular in the relative size of their parts, and especially so as regards the lip, the best way is to measure one part by another, and, if a front view of a large flower be given, a perpendicular line should be made, or imagined, through the centre, and also transverse ones, as guides for the pose of the petals, &c.

In the following sketch I suggest a means of testing the relative size of a front and side view. The artist should be guided by the front flowers in his drawing, for there is a liability to make the side views too large. Another matter to be noted, and which is often neglected, is the junction of the flower-stalk and column; the way to prevent any hitch in this respect is to carry the outline of the germen and flower-stalk through to the back of the column, as in the right-hand figure.

original article illustration

 Drawings of the smaller species of Orchids are of little scientific value without a flower and magnified representations of its parts, as the smaller they are the more curious is often their structure.

In magnified portions of simple flowered species, it is generally enough to give a side and front view of the lip and column, but in some cases it is necessary to pull the flower asunder, in order to represent parts otherwise hidden. If the flower or its parts be just large enough to be comprehended by the naked eye without a lens, it would be as well for the artist to regard it with one eye only, or he will find if he sketches it as seen with both eyes, that he sees round the corners, and is apt to commit an error similar to that of representing both ends of a drum as visible from the same point of view.

Christchurch Enso Ella pumila 
Curtis's Botanical Magazine,(1837)

In the next cut I offer a sketch of an Orchid, to show how to fill a sheet of paper as tastefully as the plant will allow, so as to leave no unnecessary vacant space. Some Orchids are very unmanageable in this respect.

original article illustration

If the pseudobulbs are compressed, it is as well to show the flowering one edgewise, so as to have variety in the position of the leaves, viz., a front and back view of them; the same may be said also of the spikes of the flowers.  After deciding whence the spike should spring, and the curve, if any, to be given to it, I would recommend that the attachment of the flower-stalks should be ticked off and that a line continuous with the stalks be carried through the flower faintly to the column, which should be put in first as the axis, then the lip and other petals can be correctly placed with reference to it. 

By following this simple plan, the flowers, though they may hide the flower-stalk, will be certain to be correctly placed.          W. M. Fitch.

Catasetum discolor 
Curtis’s Botanical Magazine, (1837)

BOTANICAL DRAWING.—No. VII.


Is drawing analyses of flowers, their size should be regulated by that of the drawing in which they are to be introduced, as small dissections added to a large plate appear trifling, and if they are to be of use in explaining the structure they should always be sufficiently magnified to exhibit unmistakably and correctly the smallest peculiarity that may be of interest.

In some earlier works on botany, the dissections are often represented of even less than the natural size, and are placed, perhaps judiciously, so as almost to escape observation: an instance of bad taste or timidity, which is not so common in later productions of the pencil or the press.       If analyses are intended to be useful, they should be large enough to be sufficiently explanatory even in respect to their hairs, glands, &c.  

There is a general tendency in first attempts at dissection to represent the portions too small, on the same principle, possibly, that schoolboys are rather partial to small handwriting, under the impression that errors are not so easily detected.  (As an elementary school art teacher I will attest to the accuracy of Fitch's observation although the small size of drawings in some young, in my opinion, is due to the perception that a short line has less chance of messing up than a long one...so it is not to hide a boo-boo, but to avoid making it in the first place.)


For general purposes a flower shown cut open through the middle is sufficient, but for scientific enlightenment much more is requisite; and the beginner, if he wishes to perfect himself in these matters, should consult some botanical work, for it is not my object in these notes to give a lecture on structural botany.

If a Forget-me-Not be the subject of study, the beginner should first faintly define the contour, then mark off the relative position and size of the stamens, and notice whether they are betwixt or opposite the lobes of the corolla, as in the following cut.

original article illustration

 When the ovary is represented cut open, to show the arrangement of the ovules, it is advisable to cut the corolla also in half vertically, and treat it as in the former case. Cruciferous plants, such as the Wallflower, will be found easier to render if treated as in the next diagram ; the lines there marked across as a test of the distance and size of the parts, may be put in or imagined. In making sections of the ovary, it will save much trouble and use of india-rubber if they be treated as in the section given below; if there are many compartments this circle should be divided systematically, by lines radiating from the centre, and it is possible thus to make them all of the same dimensions. The right-hand figure in this diagram shows how the structure of the Cowslip may be shown.

original article illustration

 Irregular flowers, such as those of the Mint or Dead Nettle, may be represented neatly divided vertically with but half the parts remaining, as in the following cut, or spread open like any regular flower. It must be remembered that, however unequal the lobes of the corolla may be, the stamens or filaments almost always spring from between them, and it is a certain test to draw a faint line from the base of each filament to the cleft of the flower. The filaments in such flowers are often attached low down in the tube, and if this precaution bo not taken, a botanist might have some reason to doubt the correctness or botanical knowledge of the draughtsman. The following cut will, perhaps, be of service in illustration of my observations.

Papilionaceous, or Pea-flowers are often represented, for scientific purposes, with all the parts separated, but it is a good and concise method to show a flower j cut vertically in half through the ovary, so as to explain the relative position of the parts, the number of ovules in tho seed-vessel, &c.

original article illustration

The foregoing remarks may be serviceable to those who are ambitious of testing their patience, and correctness of eye, by dissecting flowers.  Indeed, one of the finest exercises of the former virtue with which I am acquainted, is the analysis of a dried flower, from an herbarium specimen, perhaps very small, worm eaten and gluey, and having no apparent analogy to any known plant.

After treating of the inside of flowers, it may be well to allude to the various coverings of the outside, and of plants generally, viz., the hairs, down, and spines with which they are sometimes clothed. Let not the botanical artist who would earn a character for careful observation and correct representation, regard these as trifling matters, for they have caused more schism in the botanical world, perhaps, than their apparent importance would justify—ay, even to the bandying between opposing parties of opprobrious epithets, such as "hair-splitters" and " lumpers."   It is best to steer a middle course between the contending factions, for an artist, if judicious, should have no bias either way—he is generally regarded as a neutral person.  

Daphne mucronata[as Daphne linearifolia] 
Hart, H.C., On the botany of Sinai and South Palestine (1885)

Hairs, however, if very obvious on a plant, should certainly be rendered, and not in a slovenly manner. The angle they form with the part covered should be noted, as well as their general form, whether glandular or stellate, &c. : if they are represented at all, they should be done correctly. 

The artist will see that it is safest to be correct to a hair, and if he wishes to educate and refine his eye in this respect, I could not recommend more suitable subjects for the purpose than the British Roses and Brambles, two groups of plants greatly indebted to acute British botanists for their numerous subdivisions, and which, without the aid of particularly correct drawings, it would be very difficult to define.              W. H. Fitch.

Hieracium collinum Fr.
Journal of botany, British and foreign(1868)

BOTANICAL DRAWING.—No. VIII.

The few hints given in my former communications, if applied practically, will, I hope, induce the beginner to proceed systematically in flower drawing, as he should do in any other pursuit. Then, by dint of zealous application, he may become qualified even to draw a dried specimen from the herbarium—an effort which will test his judgment, and call forth all his knowledge of perspective and adjustment.

This would, indeed, be a challenge!

It is not absolutely desirable (as some by their works would seem to imagine) that a drawing should exhibit any amount of evidence that it has been made from a dried specimen, but it is a curious fact that in drawings made from such materials some latent manifestation is seldom wanting, though the acute botanical critic would not hesitate to whom he should award credit for bad taste or ignorance—the plant or the artist. 

Sketching living plants is merely a species of copying, but dried specimens test the artist s ability to the uttermost; and by drawings made from them would I be judged as a correct draughtsman.

Amphitecna macrophylla 
Journal of botany, British and foreign (1865)

Having delivered myself of these truisms, and my humble opinion thereon, I shall venture to say something about the shading of plants, premising that I do not allude to the artistic treatment of which they are susceptible, but rather to theoretical shading.

In drawings with a background all the shades require to be proportionally deeper than in those on white paper, and various effects of light and shade may be rendered which should be charily indulged in when the background is white, for in the latter case the tone may be as light or dark as suite the taste of the artist. 

In strictly botanical drawings a background is seldom given, and in most cases all the shading necessary is just enough to give unmistakable form to the parts, which should be all treated as if opaque. The transparency of the flowers may be slightly rendered, but the translucency of the leaves should never be attempted.

Cyttaria gunnii 
The London journal of botany(1848) 

As a general rule in shading with pencil or with brown or black, if the drawing is not to be coloured, the shading should be faintly put in, and any attempt to supply the place of actual colour by tinting all the surface of a flower or leaf should be avoided as a useless waste of labour, and consequently in bad taste. I make an exception in the case of dark-coloured fruits or stems, they maybe tinted and shaded deeper with good effect.

In using the lead-pencil it is of course necessary to produce the effect of shade by a series of touches, and unless the leaves ho small, the lines should never be made in the direction of the midrib, but should follow the direction of the veins as shown in the following cut.

If the artist should have occasion to lithograph or draw for wood-engraving, he will find the advantage of proceeding in this manner, as the lines answer a double purpose, and impart both shade and texture. In the shadow of one leaf on another (an effect which should always be rendered in a coloured or highly-shaded drawing) the lines may be hatched, as it is technically termed, i.e., crossed diagonally. In flowers the touches should blend with the visible or supposititious venation, for the shading, however finely done, if the lines be not systematically arranged, will never give the proper effect of shading. 

To make the lines of the shading harmonize with the venation may appear a very simple thing, but if the reader will test his skill in that respect, I venture to predict that he will discover it to be one of the most difficult exercises of the pencil.

Glycine latrobeana
Hooker, J.D., The botany of the Antarctic voyage of H.M. discovery ships Erebus and Terror
 in the Years 1839-1843, under the command of Captain Sir James Clark Ross,  (1860)

Stems, or any cylindrical portions of plants, should be treated as in the instance in the foregoing cut— a reflected light should be left on the shaded side; this will suggest that a section would be circular, but were the shading deepest near the outline of the stem, it would appear compressed, and a section would be oval. I have heard it remarked that reflected lights are an artistic refinement in botanical drawings for scientific purposes, but as it is certainly effective and natural an artist may safely give the paper on which he draws some credit for reflection.        W. H. Fitch

Botanical Illustrations ... designed to explain the terms employed in a course of lectures on botany, etc
Sir William Jackson Hooker ,  1837, illustrated by Fitch

This series was published in
Gardeners Chronicle & New Horticulturist
Haymarket Publishing, 1869

Link:
Botanical Illustrations ... designed to explain the terms employed in a course of lectures on botany, etc
Sir William Jackson Hooker ,  1837, illustrated by Fitch