From<i>bosquet a l'angloise</i>to<i>jardin a l'angloise</i>The progression of the mingled manner of planting from its inception to its decline and survival
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes 1. For example: Christopher Hussey, The Picturesque: Studies in a Point of View (London and New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1927); H. F. Clark, The English Landscape Garden (London: Pleiades, 1948), pp. 3–5; Derek Clifford, A History of Garden Design (London: Faber & Faber, 1966), p. 136. 2. Hussey, The Picturesque, p. 8. 3. Mark Laird, The Flowering of the Landscape Garden: English Pleasure Grounds 1720–1800 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999) provides a profound analysis of planting design of the emerging landscape garden; Clemens Alexander Wimmer, Bäume und Sträucher in historischen Gärten: Gehölzverwendung in Geschichte und Denkmalpflege (Dresden: Verlag der Kunst, 2001) provides a historical overview of the use of woody vegetation through an encyclopaedic treatment of various authorities arranged under predetermined garden styles. 4. The Oxford English Dictionary online credits Lady Luxborough with the first use of the word shrubbery, in a letter to William Shenstone dated 16 October 1748, quoted in Letters to William Shenstone (1775), p. 56: ‘Nature has been so remarkably kind this last October to adorn my Shrubbery with the flowers that usually blow at Whitsuntide’. 5. Jan Woudstra, ‘The early eighteenth century wilderness at Stainborough’, New Arcadian Journal, 57/58, 2004–05, pp. 65–84. 6. see: Jan Woudstra, The Wilderness in Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Gardens: History and Conservation Case Studies, MA thesis, Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies, University of York, 1986; ‘The bosquet and wilderness’ in David Jacques and Arend Jan van der Horst, The Gardens of William and Mary (London: Christopher Helm, 1988), pp. 153–166. 7. Philip Miller, The Gardener's Dictionary (London, 1731), under Wilderness. 8. NA (Kew), Work 5/52, 1701–2. 9. NA (Kew), Work 5/53, f. 441: 22 August 1702–7 January 1702/3. 10. Joseph Addison (1672–1719) in The Spectator, No. 477, 6 September 1712, reprinted in Gregory Smith (ed.), Addison & Steele and others: The Spectator (London, Melbourne and Toronto: Dent, 1907, 1979 edition), Vol. IV, pp. 11–14. 11. John Laurence, ‘The Clergy-Man's Recreation’ (London, 1717), p. 23. 12. Thomas Fairchild, The City Gardener (London, 1722), p. 12ff. 13. Batty Langley, New Principles of Gardening (London, 1728), section xxi, p. 182. 14. Langley, New Principles of Gardening (London, 1728), p. ix. 15. Batty Langley, A Sure Method of Improving Estates (London, 1728), p. 90ff. 16. Langley, New Principles of Gardening, e.g. on plate v. 17. Philip Miller, The Gardener's Dictionary (London, 1731), under Wilderness. 18. For the original reference to Sharawadgi, see: Sir William Temple, ‘Upon the Gardens of Epicurus, with other XVIIth Century Garden Essays’, in Sir William Temple and others, The King's Classics: Essays on Gardens (London: Chatto & Windus, 1908), pp. 1–65 (54); Takau Shimada, ‘Is sharawadgi derived from the Japanese word sorowaji?’ The Review of English Studies, 48/191, 1997, pp. 350–352 (352); Ciaran Murray, Sharawadgi: The Romantic Return to Nature (London: International Scholars Publications, 1999); Ciaran Murray, ‘Sharawadgi resolved’, Garden History, 26/2, 1998, pp. 208–213 (210); Lei Gao and Jan Woudstra, ‘Re-solving Sharawadgi: some thoughts on its Chinese roots’, Shakkei, 17/1, 2010, pp. 2–9. 19. Philip Miller, The Gardener's Dictionary (London, 1740), under Wilderness. 20. William Chambers, Designs of Chinese Buildings, Furniture, Dresses, Machines, and Utensils (London, 1757), p. 17. 21. William Chambers, A Dissertation on Oriental Gardening (Dublin, 1773), pp. 55–56. 22. J. C. Loudon, An Encyclopaedia of Gardening (London, 1822), pp. 916–917; v. (London, 1834), pp. 1009–1010. 23. On Picturesque debate see: John Dixon Hunt, The Picturesque Garden in Europe (London: Thames and Hudson, 2002). 24. William Marshall, On Planting and Rural Ornament (London, 1803), ii, pp. 437–451. 25. Walter Nicol, The Villa Garden Directory (Edinburgh, 1814), p. 15. 26. J. C. Loudon, An Encyclopaedia of Gardening (London, 1822), pp. 912–7, 1022–8. 27. J. C. Loudon, An Encyclopaedia of Gardening (London, 1822), p. 904. 28. See, e.g., Johan Hermann Knoop, Beschrijving van Plantagie-Gewassen (Amsterdam and Dordrecht, 1790), p. 4. 29. A ‘bosquet à l'angloise’ even featured in a contemporary play: Mlle A. C. de Kinschott, Le philosophe soit-disant (Maestricht, 1767), p. 15 (see: Elizabeth Blood, ‘Adapting to the Theater: Representations of the ‘Philosophe’ by French Women Writers’ in Altered Writings, Servanne Woodward, ed. (London, Canada: Mestengo, 1997), pp. 109–142). 30. Wimmer, Bäume und Sträucher in historischen Gärten (2001), p. 87. 31. Wimmer, Bäume und Sträucher in historischen Gärten (2001), pp. 84–86. 32. Christian Cay Lorenz Hirschfeld, Theorie der Gartenkunst, i (Leipzig, 1779), pp. 72–73 (author's translation). 33. Christian Cay Lorenz Hirschfeld, Theorie der Gartenkunst, iv (Leipzig, 1782), pp. 48–64. 34. J. C. Krauss, Afbeeldingen der Fraaiste Meest Uitheemsche Boomen en Heesters die tot Versiering van Engelsche Bosschen en Tuinen op onzen Grond, kunnen Geplant en Gekweekt worden … (Amsterdam, 1802). 35. F. M. Piper, Beskrifning öfwer Idéen och General-Plan till en Ängelsk Lustpark forfattead aren 1811 och 1812 [Descriptions of the Idea and General-Plan for an English Park] (Stockholm: Byggforlaget, 2004), p. 151, plus p. 36 of original ms; my translation of the wording is added from that given, included between [square brackets]. 36. J. C. Loudon, ‘Foreign notices. Germany’, Gardener's Magazine iv (1828), p. 494. 37. J. C. Loudon, ‘Foreign notices. Germany’, Gardener's Magazine iv (1828), p. 492. 38. W. S. Brussels, ‘Landscape-gardening at Munich’, Gardener's Magazine v (1829), p. 210. 39. Charles Sckell, ‘Observations on the landscape-gardening of Germany, as compared with that of England’ Gardener's Magazine x (1834), pp. 197–200; see Jan Woudstra, ‘The Sckell Family in England (1770–1830)’, Die Gartenkunst, 14/2, 2002, pp. 211–220. 40. Prince Pückler Muskau, Tour in England, Ireland and France in the Years 1826, 1827, 1828 and 1829 (Philadelphia, 1833), Vol. i, p. 19. 41. Prince Pückler Muskau, Hints on Landscape Gardening, ed. Samuel Parsons (Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1917), pp. 71–72. 42. Pückler Muskau, Hints on Landscape Gardening (1917), pp. 73–74.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it