1 Published only in Victorian times, this Life has become something of a battle-ground for understanding what that relationship actually was (see below in Chapter Nine). It reminds me of the bon mot that ‘hindsight is a fine thing, and hindsight about a bit of foresight is even better when it comes to storytelling’ (Michael Wood, London Review of Books, 18 February 2016).
2 London, BL, Add. MS 78392, f. 36. The text of his Instructions was written out by his scribe, Richard Hoare. Evelyn would have known that in Xenophon’s Oeconomicus the husband instructs the wife on home management.
3 BL, Add. MS 78440.
4 BL, Add. MS 78441.
5 The term is used by my old friend Douglas Chambers in his mammoth undertaking to transcribe and explain Evelyn’s letters. See Chambers, ‘“Excuse These Impertinences”: Evelyn in his Letterbooks’, in John Evelyn and his Milieu, ed. Frances Harris and Michael Hunter (London, 2003), pp. 21–36, and then his edition, with David Galbraith, of The Letter Books of John Evelyn, 2 vols (Toronto, 2014). I am myself more convinced that Evelyn did have a more holistic sense of what he was up to, which both the term ‘virtuoso’ (though of less force today) and my own theme of domestication attests.
6 All my quotations from New Atlantis are referenced to the edition by Alfred B. Gough (Oxford, 1915).
7 In a letter written to Lord Burghley, Queen Elizabeth’s chief minister, and cited in the Introduction to New Atlantis, p. ix.
8 Michael McKeon, The Secret History of Domesticity (Baltimore, MD, 2005), p. 40. This is an omnibus of a book, subtitled Public, Private, and the Division of Knowledge, that sorely needed severe copyediting; not all of McKeon’s excursions pay fruit in regard to Evelyn (who is cited only three times; Pepys has more). But McKeon offers a history of the term that has some relevance to my project.
9 John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690), Bk 2, chap. 1, sec. 2 (my italics).
10 Elizabeth Yale, Natural History and the Nation in Early Modern Britain (Philadelphia, PA, 2016).
11 The introduction to the Chambers and Galbraith edition of the letterbooks offers a clear and useful overview of the role and styles of letter-writing that Evelyn employed. This emphasis has a long history: Plato saw the house as a small city and the city as a big house. In 1657 (LB, I.212) Evelyn thanks Jeremy Taylor for sending A Discourse of the Nature, Offices and Measures of Friendship, with Rules of Concluding It (1657), and to Benjamin Maddox the next January he urged ‘above all, procure acquaintance, and settle a correspondence with learned men; by whom there is so many advantages to be made and experiments gotten’ (LB, I.220).
12 Quoted by Ruth Scurr, in her remarkable and wonderful John Aubrey: My Own Life (London, 2015), p. 5, during her discussion of Aubrey’s books and manuscript collections.
1 I cite the modern edition of The Diary of John Evelyn, ed. E. S. de Beer, 6 vols (Oxford, 1955). For the actual composition of the Diary and its editorial rearrangements, see the useful synopsis in LB, I.xxii and note. De Beer explains that early parts of the Diary were a free copy from his much earlier notes, to which he added from or drew upon other books, newspapers and maybe manuscripts; this rewriting was undertaken between 1660 and 1665; therefore all citations from the early Diary were in many respects retrospective and concerned to shape his legacy. Later parts dating from July 1649 were written after 1680. After about 1684, the Diary consists of periodical entries and not fair copy. The evidence is set out by de Beer in volume I, along with an early version of the Diary, ‘De Vita Propria’. The sixth volume has an incomparable index, so that I will throughout not cite individual references, except where a long passage is invoked. I have also throughout used modern spellings of Evelyn’s orthography (except for his ampersands!) and expanded his abbreviations.
2 See Mary Dobson, Contours of Death and Disease in Early Modern England (Cambridge, 1997).
3 John Bowle, John Evelyn and his World (London, 1981), pp. 12–13.
1 See George B. Parks, ‘John Evelyn and the Art of Travel’, Huntington Library Quarterly, X (1946–7), pp. 251–76. A general account of European travels can be found in Chloe Chard, Pleasure and Guilt on the Grand Tour: Travel Writing and Imaginative Geography, 1600–1830 (Manchester, 1999). Evelyn often advised friends on the ‘fruit of travel’: see LB, I.237–80.
2 Anthony Radcliffe and Peter Thornton, ‘Evelyn’s Cabinet’, Connoisseur, 197 (April 1978), pp. 256–61, which included details of the brass reliefs of animals along the base of illus. 6; this concerns the one made for Evelyn in Florence. His wife would eventually order her own cabinet in France, which is now in the Geffrye Museum, London. And in 1704 Evelyn urged his grandson to preserve several different cabinets at Wotton (see Chapter Twelve). On cabinets generally, see The Origins of Museums: The Cabinet of Curiosities in 16th- and 17th-century Europe, ed. O. Impey and A. MacGregor (Oxford, 1985). Among Evelyn’s letters of 1665 is a catalogue of the ‘precious treasures and curiosities’ that the keeper of the king’s cabinet should consider (LB, I.356).
3 Browne as the English Resident in Paris had served in other quasi-diplomatic roles. For more on Browne see Darley, John Evelyn, pp. 37ff.
4 And he would find in books he later owned that other virtuosi were fascinated by ‘natural’ echoes: Robert Plot’s histories of both Oxfordshire and Staffordshire contain entries on echoes, the former with eight entries in its index. And clearly this idea travelled, for an artificial echo was constructed in the grounds of David Meade in Kentucky – see James D. Kornwolf, ‘David Meade II: Pioneer of le jardin anglais in the United States’, Journal of the History of Gardens, XVI (1996), p. 265.
5 Evelyn corresponded with the artist and engraver Hendrik van der Borcht, who accompanied him on the visit to Fontainebleau and reminded Evelyn to send any sketches of it so they could be engraved by Wenceslaus Hollar: see Robert Harding, ‘John Evelyn, Hendrick van der Borcht the Younger and Wenceslaus Hollar’, Apollo, CXLIV (1996), pp. 39–44, specifically p. 42 (letter to Evelyn of 17 October 1645).
6 In this ‘civil’ letter to his cousin Keightly (LB, I.86–9), who had converted to Catholicism while in Rome, Evelyn engages with another member of his large family by explaining that his curiosity led him to inquire into religious customs in Italy, but that Keightly could ‘seriously weigh the real foundation, with the superstructure, and tried [that is, drew] the pure gold from the dross (and other her adulterate ingredients) [and then] certainly you cannot but acknowledge that the metal is foully mixed, and all is not gold that glisters’. Another letter to John Cosin, son of the Bishop of Durham, in 1652 (LB, I.105–11) considers at length his conversion to the Catholic faith; ‘for mine own part, I am satisfied in my religion, and have nothing to do to judge of others . . .’, yet embarks on a lengthy critique of Catholicism. Cosin eventually reverted to the Church of England.
7 Evelyn in 1659 wrote of Browne’s ‘incomparable elucubrations . . . a magazine of all erudition’ (LB, I.251). My colleague and friend the late C. A. Patrides described this work’s ‘breathtaking range of interests and stupendous learning’, some samples of which he provided in his Penguin collection of Sir Thomas Browne, The Major Works (London, 1977), pp. 163–260. In his Diary (II.397–8) Evelyn expressed his annoyance that he had not taken more seriously a ‘Mountebank’ who demonstrated a phosphorescent ring; yet elsewhere he was both inquisitive and sceptical in equal measure. In the large folio notebook ‘Adversaria. Historical, Physical, Mathematical, Mechanical, &c’ (BL, Add. MS 78333), he notes ‘superstitions still remaining among us’.
8 In March 1645 he wrote in Italian from Rome to a former schoolfriend in Lewes, Robert Heath, to describe his visit to the Naples area, and his verses ‘On Travel to R. Heath Esq.’ are in BL, Add. MS 78357, fol. 41.
1 It was ultimately transcribed by John Ingram and published by the University of Pennsylvania Press in 2001. I take up this large topic and possible reasons for its incompletion in Chapter Ten.
2 As Evelyn explained to his father-in-law in January 1649: BL, Add. MS 78221, fol. 30ff.
3 Quoted in Michael Hunter, Science and the Shape of Orthodoxy: Intellectual Change in Late 17th-century Britain (Woodbridge, 1995), p. 70.
4 Darley, John Evelyn, gives an account of this, pp. 75–6, 80–82.
5 This ‘merriness’, though surprising perhaps to those who think of Evelyn as a sombre and even sometimes melancholy person, was not unusual: see the ‘spirit of mirth’ from Evelyn and the company’s almost ‘dying of laughing’ at his antics in September 1665 in The Diary of Samuel Pepys, ed. R. Latham and W. Matthews (London, 1970–83), VI.220, which interestingly did not get recorded in Evelyn’s own Diary.
6 Keynes (Bibliophily, p. 35) suspects that the regicides were too preoccupied to pay attention to an unknown author. The pamphlet is scarce, but Keynes notes that it was still being advertised in 1656 and 1658.
7 I interpret ‘theatre’ here as the theatre or stage of the world in England; but the editors of LB gloss the same word in a different context as ‘into the issue’ (I.169).
8 Darley, John Evelyn, p. 115, speculates that the dedication to ‘your honor’, to whom he is indebted for ‘so many signal obligations’, was his father-in-law.
9 Keynes, Bibliophily, p. 36, thinks that some copies with this monogram may have been printed especially for Evelyn.
10 LB, I.92 (writing to John Cosin, ejected from the Mastership of Peterhouse in 1644).
11 Diary, III.1. He had visited Maisons before in 1649, apparently alone (Diary, III.563, from which I have taken some of his observations); he was showing Mary what he clearly regarded as rewarding new architecture and landscape.
12 Aubrey also, in 1634, thought it might be ‘possible to count and number the stones. I will do so one day’: Ruth Scurr, John Aubrey: My Own Life (London, 2015), p. 24.
13 Hartlib is a truly fascinating figure to whom I cannot do justice here. See Charles Webster, Samuel Hartlib and the Advancement of Learning (Cambridge, 1970), and Samuel Hartlib and Universal Reformation: Studies in Intellectual Communication, ed. Mark Greengrass, Michael Leslie and Timothy Raylor (Cambridge, 1994), which gathers eighteen essays on this man and his work. Darley, John Evelyn, has useful accounts of the contacts between Hartlib, Evelyn and many others. I take up later Hartlib’s specific contributions to Evelyn’s garden work and what he learned through him.
14 See F. Sherwood Taylor, ‘The Chemical Studies of John Evelyn’, Annals of Science, VIII/4 (1952), pp. 286–92. This is a detailed account of experiments, diagrams of vessels, sketches of the layout of rooms, furnaces and so on. A chemistry book in the British Library (Add. MS 78345) is partly filled with diagrams, notes on the distillation of vegetables and spices, and ‘chemical processes experimented by me’. See also his chemical studies in BL Add. MS 78335.
15 Correspondence, pp. 114–15; secondly to William Wotton, p. 391.
16 Evelyn recalls his recollection of Hartlib for William Wotton in 1703: Correspondence, p. 391, and earlier for Boyle in 1659, ibid., p. 115.
17 Leslie discusses in detail the relations between the two men in Evelyn DO, pp. 131–52, whose pages I quote here; interestingly Beale also shared his reservations about Hartlib, while remaining in contact with Evelyn after Hartlib’s death.
18 Evelyn thanked Creech in 1682 for sending his translation (LB, II.689 and note). Howard Jones, The Epicurian Tradition (1989) provides a useful survey of the tradition and (in a final chapter) its fortunes in England, on which I draw; here p. 204. See also T. F. Mayo, Epicurus in England (1650–1725) (Dallas, TX, 1934), and Michael M. Repetzki, John Evelyn’s Translation of Titus Lucretius Carus (Frankfurt, 2000). It is useful to recall that Lucretius wrote during the Roman Civil Wars, and Evelyn started his translation during the Interregnum in the aftermath of the English Civil Wars; but with that unrest behind him at the Restoration, Evelyn may have felt it less useful to pursue the task of publishing more.
19 This is a line from Lady Margaret Cavendish’s Poems and Fancies (1653), quoted by Jones, Epicurian Tradition, p. 198.
20 Fanshawe’s response to his sending the manuscript is answered by Evelyn in a rather florid and convoluted manner that also suggests some embarrassment about the project: LB, I.137–8. Fanshawe’s letter: Notes and Queries, CXCVI (1951), pp. 315–16; Taylor’s and Evelyn’s response: Correspondence, pp.72 and 73ff.
21 I am indebted for this point to Darley, John Evelyn, p. 145, where she notes that Evelyn never mentioned this 1657 book. However, a ‘dialogue’ between discussants allows a measure of openness in the matters raised.
22 Stuart Gillespie writes on ‘John Evelyn’s Occasional Poems and Translations’ in the TLS (30 January 2015), but does not address the quality of the Lucretian verses, though they are mentioned once in passing.
23 See H. Jones, Pierre Gassendi, 1592–1655: An Intellectual Biography (Nieuwkoop, 1981).
24 Michael Leslie, in his ‘“Without Design, or Fate, or Force”: Why Couldn’t John Evelyn Complete the Elysium Britannicum?’, in Gardens, Knowledge and the Sciences in the Early Modern Period, ed. Hubertus Fischer, Volker Remmert and Joachim Wolschke-Bulmahn (Springer, 2016). Darley, John Evelyn, chap. 8 also notes Evelyn’s probable concerns with giving a classical author like Lucretius a proper and solid Christian interpretation. Carola and Alastair Small, ‘John Evelyn and the Garden of Epicurus’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 60 (1997), pp. 194–214, make some sweeping claims for the influence of Lucretius on Evelyn’s gardening projects (see Chapter Ten). Michael Hunter also discusses this book in Evelyn DO, pp. 96–101. See also the collection of essays Lucretius and Modernity: Epicurean Encounters across Time and Disciplines, ed. Jacques Lezra and Lisa Blake (Basingstoke, 2016).
25 His harping on the ‘villainy of the printer’ continued through several letters (LB, I.177–8, 195, 201), as did also his waverings about Lucretius: see LB, I.176 (to Taylor), his father-in-law about a better edition (I.195) and William Rand (I.201), and thinking nonetheless to proceed with it to Elizabeth Mount, Lady Cary (I.189). Much later in 1674 he wrote to Meric Casaubon that the continuation of the translation was ‘long since escaping me’, and that it was perhaps his youth, rashness and ambition that made him undertake this ‘poor essay’ in the first place (LB, I.557).
26 For more, see Walter E. Houghton Jr, ‘The History of Trades: Its Relation to 17th-century Thought as Seen in Bacon, Petty, Evelyn, and Boyle’, Journal of the History of Ideas, II (1941), pp. 33–60, and Hunter, Science and the Shape of Orthodoxy, pp. 74–82.
27 An insight into Evelyn’s faith and its practices can be gathered from A Devotional Book of John Evelyn, ed. Walter Frere (London, 1936), an editor who has written widely about the state of religion in England during the seventeenth century.
28 MW dates this to 1651, but there is no evidence for this; it was published in 1659, at the very end of the Interregnum. Given its topic, it may well have been initiated while Evelyn was still in France, and it certainly offers an ironic and satirical riposte to his 1652 book on France itself.
29 Some similar comments on the social and sartorial habits in Hyde Park were written by Evelyn to his cousin Sanders: LB, I.144–7.
30 See again the book by Mary Dobson, Contours of Death and Disease mentioned above in Chapter Two, n. 2. In the late seventeenth century, for example, Queen Anne, after seventeen pregnancies, had only one child survive past infancy.
31 Quoted Darley, John Evelyn, p. 149.
32 His tomb was recorded and transcribed by John Aubrey in his Natural History and Antiquities of Surrey (1718), IV.137–42, where he also reprinted a long quotation from Evelyn’s translation of the Golden Book.
33 MW, pp. 169–92, with numerous footnotes added, being taken from the fourth edition; Keynes (Bibliophily, p. 71) says the pamphlet was reprinted four times. This was republished, along with Evelyn’s A Panegyric to Charles the Second of 1661, by the Augustan Reprint Society, 28 (Los Angeles, CA, 1951), with an introduction by Geoffrey Keynes.
34 The text is reprinted in MW, pp. 193–204, and in running footnotes it reprinted Needham’s diatribe.
1 This first remark, from Evelyn to Sir Thomas Browne, means, surely, that there are Continental details that the English have not fathomed or ‘descended to’, but Evelyn will do so, if he can. The second motto is from Kalendarium Hortense, p. 55, as published in the first edition of Sylva in 1664.
2 For whatever reason, but mainly increased taxes under the Commonwealth, he was forced to sell two other properties in August and September, the first being a newly acquired estate that he had destined for Mary. But throughout his tenure of Sayes Court, he was preoccupied with funds: indeed, his ongoing quest for remunerative employment for himself and his father-in-law was as much the need for regular funds as his wish to find a useful public role.
3 Letter from Mary Evelyn in June 1685, quoted in Prudence Leith-Ross, ‘The Garden of John Evelyn at Deptford’, Garden History, XXV (1997), p. 146. That Mary would help to tend the garden when Evelyn was involved in civil services duties did not deter her prevent her writing to a close friend that the garden required ‘no end of improvement’ and that the ‘fancies of men have the reward of praise, when poor women are condemned for altering their dress’ (quoted in Darley, John Evelyn, p. 183).
4 Frances Harris, Transformations of Love: The Friendship of John Evelyn and Margaret Godolphin (Oxford, 2002), p. 300.
5 The ‘particulars’ are difficult to read but have been transcribed by Leith-Ross, ‘The Garden of John Evelyn at Deptford’, pp. 138–52, to which my text makes occasional reference.
6 Southeast of Surrey Quays Underground station is Evelyn Street, which leads to Deptford and thereafter changes into Creek Road and continues into Greenwich. There are moves to recreate his garden: see www.sayescourtgarden.com.
7 This was the task originally taken up by Mark Laird, ‘Parterre, Grove and Flower Garden: European Horticulture and Planting Design in John Evelyn’s Time’, Evelyn DO, pp. 171–219; since then in three further essays he has pushed his subject into the effects of storms and ‘chaos’ at Sayes Court, in both ‘Sayes Court Revisited’ in Milieu, pp. 115–44, and ‘Greenhouses and the Great Storm’, in Celebration, pp. 99–119. A final approach, something of a ‘conclusion’, comes in chap. 2 of Laird’s A Natural History of English Gardening, 1650–1800 (New Haven, CT, and London, 2015).
8 I wish here simply to signal how I understand garden ‘translation’: in my Garden and Grove: The Italian Renaissance Garden in the English Imagination, 1600–1750 (London, 1986; Philadelphia, PA, 1996), I showed that Italian ideas were adapted in England – referential, for sure, but also often explicitly ‘naturalized’ or ‘domesticated’; in chapter 12 of The Making of Place (London, 2015) I argued that reinvented gardens, however faithful or facsimiled, were also new recreations and susceptible to ‘the day’s predilections’.
9 Letter to Sir Thomas Browne in 1657. Douglas Chambers, in his essay in Evelyn DO, tracks Evelyn’s thinking about ‘Elysium Britannicum’ through his correspondence, not always identifying it by that title. Many learned and ingenious commentaries have sought to make connections between what he wrote with what he did on the ground at Sayes Court, but given the difference between a gentry and a royal garden, which he must himself have realized, such connections are hard to accept.
10 Mark Laird has published a conjectural reconstruction of the oval garden and also of the grove in A Natural History, plates 1 and 24. This may be compared with the plan in illus. 13. Laird also discussed this and its planting in Evelyn DO.
11 On ‘dials’ see the index references in the modern EB, this being an essential item for telling the hours of the day; in his garden retreat and his poem ‘The Garden’, the poet Andrew Marvell salutes the ‘skillful gardener’ for providing a ‘dial’ of ‘flowers and herbs’; this is presumably a floral sundial that serves as both a daily and a seasonal clock, depending on the times of day and year in which flowers bloomed.
12 He had used the term ‘villa’ about the estate at Albury belonging to the Earl of Arundel in a letter of August 1646: LB, I.66. And John Aubrey, without the advantage of visiting Italy, also used the term frequently, especially about his hope to make one at the Aubrey family home in the hamlet of Easton Piers, Wiltshire: see Ruth Scurr, John Aubrey: My Own Life (London, 2015), pp. 180–82, and Hunt, Garden and Grove, pp. 153–7.
13 Quoted in Harris, Transformations, 22, citing BL, Add. MS 78340, fol. 88v. Evelyn would take up this need to deal with the soil in his Discourse on Earth (see Chapter Seven).
14 Leith-Ross, ‘The Garden of John Evelyn’, p. 145.
15 Quoted in Laird, in Celebration, where he discusses Evelyn’s attention to greenhouses and solar heat. See also Douglas Chambers, ‘John Evelyn and the Invention of the Heated Greenhouse’, Garden History, XX/2 (1992), pp. 201–6.
16 For more on this ‘chaos’, Laird’s essays in John Evelyn and his Milieu (London, 2003), ed. Frances Harris and Michael Hunter, and Celebration, can be consulted, as can Leith-Ross’s articles.
17 The planting annotations on the plan are discussed by Prudence Leith-Ross, ‘Fruit Planting around a New Bowling Green at John Evelyn’s Garden at Sayes Court, Deptford, Kent, in 1684/5’, Garden History, XXXI/1 (2003), pp. 29–33.
18 It saw three editions by 1792, and also appeared in MW, and a reprint of the first edition by the Women’s Auxiliary, Brooklyn Botanical Garden in 1937. See also Graham Parry, ‘John Evelyn as Hortulan Saint’, in Culture and Cultivation in Early Modern England, ed. Michael Leslie and Timothy Raylor (Leicester, 1992), pp. 130–50; I quote him here from p. 147.
19 Diary, III.72. Jonson was both a pious man and a member in the 1620s of Gresham College. The poem was first published in 1616. See Don E. Wayne, Penshurst: The Semiotics of Place and the Poetics of History (London, 1984).
1 This was not a chore that Evelyn relished. He wrote that it was ‘published’ in 1661, but Keynes, Bibliophily, pp. 100–101, notes that it may not have been printed, as no copy has been seen or described, nor is it recorded in the catalogue of his own library. Maybe by ‘published’ Evelyn meant ‘circulated’.
2 For the coats of arms see Michael Hunter, Establishing the New Science: The Experience of the Early Royal Society (Woodbridge, 1989), plate 1 and pp. 41–2.
3 The phrase on ‘domesticity’ is taken from a book on Robert Hooke by Michael Cooper, ‘A More Beautiful City . . .’ (Stroud, 2003), where Hooke’s life and apartment in Gresham College is discussed and illustrated (pp. 66ff), and has some interesting similarities to Evelyn’s project. In BL, Add. MS 78344 Evelyn sketches this new college (fols 112 verso and 113 recto) and notes the groves of trees and the individual gardens there.
4 I have consulted Charles Webster, The Great Instauration: Science, Medicine and Reform, 1626–1660 (London, 1975), and Samuel Hartlib and the Advancement of Learning, ed. Charles Webster (Cambridge, 1970). Also major works on the Royal Society by Michael Hunter, Science and Society in Restoration England (Cambridge, 1981), The Royal Society and its Fellows, 1660–1700: The Morphology of an Early Scientific Institution (British Society for the History of Society, 1982 and 1985), his essay on ‘John Evelyn in the 1650s: A Virtuoso in Quest of a Role’, in Evelyn DO, pp. 79–106, and Establishing the New Science. For work on precursors of the Royal Society and non-members in touch with it, see Samuel Hartlib and Universal Reformation: Studies in Intellectual Communication, ed. M. Greengrass, M. Leslie and T. Raylor (Cambridge, 1994), and the CD-ROM edition of The Hartlib Papers: A Complete Text and Image Database (Ann Arbor, MI, 1995, and www.hrionline.ac.uk/hartlib). For the Society’s involvement in landscape and agriculture see Culture and Cultivation in Early Modern England, ed. Michael Leslie and Timothy Raylor (Leicester, 1992), a topic that is taken up in the next chapter (see n. 16).
5 The lists in Hunter’s The Royal Society and its Fellows, pp. 133ff., are illuminating, and I have pulled a few names from among the early elected fellows. The list also shows the offices they held, like Evelyn’s secretaryship and his frequent membership of its Council (pp. 142–3).
6 On this project, see Michael Hunter, in Evelyn DO, pp. 87–95. It corresponds to many of Hartlib’s activities in Evelyn’s response to technological and mechanical matters, though he would later find them either too uncongenial for an aristocratic virtuoso, or maybe a betrayal of trade secrets. But many of Evelyn’s activities (engraving, arboriculture, buildings, shipping) had relevance to, or impinged upon, a history of trades.
7 For a larger survey see Christine L. Cotton, London Fog: A Biography (Cambridge, MA, 2015).
8 Evelyn’s Sculptura. With the Unpublished Second Part, ed. C. F. Bell (Oxford, 1946); the first text is also in MW, pp. 243–336. Bell did not think Prince Rupert was the inventor of mezzotint, though presumably Evelyn thought so at the time; but later in his Numismata of 1697 (p. 283) he ascribed it, correctly, to Ludwig von Siegen. See Anthony Griffiths, ‘The Etchings of John Evelyn’, in Art and Patronage in the Caroline Court: Essays in Honour of Oliver Millar, ed. David Howarth (Cambridge, 1993); for other advice I am indebted to Peter Parshall’s unpublished lecture on Sculptura.
9 In contrast, Christopher Hussey, English Gardens and Landscapes, 1700–1750 (London, 1967), p. 15, finds Sylva a major influence on late seventeenth-century English gardens, and John Bowle’s John Evelyn and his World (London, 1981), pp. 114–21, is excited when detailing some of its contents.
10 This is admirably discussed by Douglas Chambers in chapter 3 (‘A Grove of Venerable Oaks’), The Planters of the English Landscape (New Haven, CT, and London, 1993).
11 Prudence Leith-Ross, ‘The Garden of John Evelyn at Deptford’, Garden History, XXV (1997), pp. 146 and 148.
12 Evelyn seems the first to have used this word ‘avenue’ in his Diary of 25 August 1654, though having admired the ‘extraordinary long walks set with elms’ at Maisons in France. See S. Couch, ‘The Practice of Avenue Planting in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’, Garden History, XX/2 (1992), pp. 173–200.
13 Evelyn was also presumably the translator in 1660 of Le Gengre’s La Manière de cultivar les arbres fruitiers, first published in France in 1660: see Keynes, Bibliophily, p. 83, where Keynes records John Beale assuming that The Manner of Ordering Fruit-Trees is ‘I guess from the style of Mr Evelyn’; but Evelyn does not record this in his Diary.
14 Chambers, ‘A Grove of Venerable Oaks’, cites Traherne, p. 32. A modern discussion of ancient groves is Patrick Bowe, ‘The Sacred Groves of Ancient Greece’, Studies in the History of Gardens and Designed Landscapes, XXXIX/4 (2009), pp. 235–45. A more modern and even philological attention to how we talk about or name aspects of landscape comes in John Stilgoe’s What is Landscape? (Cambridge, MA, 2015).
15 Respectively Correspondence, p. 226, and Pell’s letter in the Bodleian Library, MS Aubrey 13, fol. 93v.
1 R. Lennard, ‘English Agriculture under Charles II: The Evidence of the Royal Society’s Enquiries’, Economic History Review, 4 (1932), pp. 23–45. Douglas Chambers pursues the theme of the ‘translation of antiquity’, in particular Pliny and Virgil, in The Planters of the English Landscape Garden (New Haven, CT, and London), chap. 2.
2 Ruth Scurr, John Aubrey: My Own Life (London, 2015), p. 145.
3 I have explored the substantial effect of these travel volumes on a variety of English explorers of Italy, including Evelyn, in my Garden and Grove: The Italian Renaissance Garden in the English Imagination, 1600–1750 (London, 1986; Philadelphia, PA, 1996).
4 This sketch is not dated, but suggests Kent’s continued interest in how English landscape and history was described after his own return from Italy: see John Dixon Hunt, William Kent: Landscape Garden Designer (London, 1987), cat. no. 62.
5 On Enlightenment geography see Rhonda Lemke Sanford, Maps and Memory in Early Modern England: A Sense of Place (New York, 2002), and Geography and Enlightenment, ed. David N. Livingstone and Charles W. J. Withers (Chicago, IL, 1999).
6 Scurr, John Aubrey, respectively, pp. 23, 26, 91; other instances are frequently recorded throughout his writing.
7 The Works of Francis Bacon, ed. James Spedding, Robert Ellis and Douglas Heath (London, 1860), pp. 252–70. Bacon’s Sylva silvarum; or, A Natural History was published posthumously in 1616.
8 See Scurr, John Aubrey, pp. 114, 143, 150–54.
9 See Gwyn Walters, ‘The Antiquary and the Map’, Word and Image: A Journal of Verbal/Visual Enquiry, IV/2 (1988), pp. 529–44, to which I am indebted here.
10 Royal Society Classified Papers, XIX, no. 43. Also published in Robert Boyle, General Heads for the Natural History of a Country, Great or Small; Drawn Out for the Use of Travellers and Navigators (London, 1692).
11 Aubrey’s involvement in the natural histories of English landscapes is well discussed in Michael Hunter, John Aubrey and the Realm of Learning (London, 1975), and he had himself been endlessly curious and sharply observant of British landscapes and antiquities, as the material set out by Scurr, John Aubrey, makes clear: see his remarks on Avebury Circle (which he preferred to Stonehenge), p. 75, or notes on his extended visit to Bacon’s house, garden and park (pp. 85–7).
12 Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Ashmole 1820a.
13 See John Rogan and Eric Birley, ‘Thomas Machell, the Antiquary’, Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, LV (1956), pp. 132–53.
14 Aubrey’s ‘Monumenta Britannica’ was published in an edition by John Fowles, 2 vols (Sherborne, Dorset, 1980–82). Even earlier manuscript examples were George Owen’s ‘Description of Pembrokeshire’ (1607), published and edited later by Henry Owen in Cymmrodorion Record Series, 1 (1892), and Rice Merrick’s 1578 ‘Booke of Glamorgan’, published in 1825. The rapid increase in the study of English landscape and antiquities during the late seventeenth century took those early inquiries far beyond books, ancient manuscripts and coins to encompass a much larger social and cultural topography.
15 A very useful volume on Royal Society membership is Michael Hunter, The Royal Society and its Fellows, 1660–1700: The Morphology of an Early Scientific Institution (Oxford, 2nd edn, 1994).
16 The draft plans are reprinted as an appendix to Culture and Cultivation in Early Modern England, ed. Michael Leslie and Timothy Raylor (Leicester, 1992); the long letter similarly in an appendix to Samuel Hartlib and Universal Reformation: Studies in Intellectual Communication, ed. M. Greengrass, M. Leslie and T. Raylor (Cambridge, 1994); the letter must have been passed to Evelyn from Hartlib. I discuss them also in Chapter Ten. I have written about these variously in both volumes. Those who want to see the letter as unproblematic pleas for ‘natural gardening’ are Peter H. Goodchild, ‘No phantasticall utopia, but a real place’, Garden History, XIX (1991), pp. 106–27, and Timothy Mowl, ‘New Science, Old Order: The Gardens of the Great Rebellion’, Journal of Garden History, XIII (1993), pp. 16–35.
17 See Michael Leslie in Culture and Cultivation on his tentative animism, and Will Poole, ‘Two Early Readers of Milton: John Beale and Abraham Hill’, Milton Quarterly, 38 (2004), pp. 76–99.
18 For an extended discussion of this notion of a hierarchy of land use and formulation see chapters 3 and 7 of my Greater Perfections: The Practice of Garden Theory (London, 2000).
19 Ernest A. Kent, ‘The Houses of the Dukes of Norfolk in Norwich’, Journal of the Norfolk and Norwich Archaeological Society (1931), pp. 73–87.
20 Sally Jeffery, ‘“The Flower of all the Private Gentlemen’s Palaces in England”: Sir Stephen Fox’s “Extraordinary Fine” Garden at Chiswick’, Garden History, XXXII/1 (2005), pp. 1–19.
21 Reported in Aubrey’s Natural History of Surrey (1718), IV, pp. 66–7; there are many references to Arundel in Evelyn’s Diary. My discussion here is drawn from what I wrote in Garden and Grove, pp. 148–52, and from Douglas Chambers, ‘The Tomb in the Landscape: John Evelyn’s Garden at Albury’, Journal of Garden History, I (1981), pp. 37–54. Hollar’s engravings are illustrated in John Harris, The Artist and the Country House (London, 1979), pp. 30–31. Evelyn’s design for Albury was first published, with a commentary, in Evelyn DO by Michael Charlesworth, pp. 289–93.
22 The list of recommendations given to Evelyn when leaving Padua on his way north is printed in Mary F. S. Hervey, The Life, Correspondence and Collections of Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel (Cambridge, 1921), pp. 449–53.
23 Cited in Michael Hunter, Science and Society in Restoration England (Cambridge, 1981), p. 101.
1 Brian Vickers, ed., Public and Private Life in the Seventeenth Century (New York, 1986), p. xxvii.
2 Guy de la Bédoyère, ed., Particular Friends: The Correspondence of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn (Woodbridge, 1997). Darley, John Evelyn, pp. 193–202 has a useful, detailed account of this work for the Commission, and the ill-health he suffered doing it. See also her essay ‘“Action to the Purpose”: Evelyn, Greenwich, and the Sick and Wounded Seamen’, in John Evelyn and his Milieu, ed. Frances Harris and Michael Hunter (London, 2003), pp. 165–84.
3 The Diary of Samuel Pepys, ed. Robert Latham and William Matthews (1972), VII.49 and 112.
4 This redrawn map is reproduced in Bédoyère, ed., Particular Friends, fig. 4, p. 337. The stained, faded original is held at Princeton University in the Pforzheimer collection (item 28620).
5 He is still harping on this topic in 1679 (Keynes, Bibliophily, p. 105), writing to the Provost of Eton.
1 See Joseph M. Levine, ‘John Evelyn: Between the Ancients and the Moderns’, in Evelyn DO, pp. 57–78.
2 Claude Perrault’s Ordonnance for the Five Kinds of Columns after the Manner of the Ancients (Santa Monica, CA, 1993), pp. 57ff., makes clear his objection to an ‘exaggerated respect for antiquity’ by those humanists who can only ‘reason in anything other than a theological way’ – an approach that might have given pause to Evelyn.
3 Letter to Cowley in March 1667, asking for a poem to preface Sprat’s History of the Royal Society: LB, I.434–6.
4 His Account, Br. I am using the posthumous second edition of Evelyn’s Parallel here, since it usefully addresses issues of ancient and modern with the hindsight of the works done in and around London that are acknowledged in 1707, where Evelyn cites his recent visit to the new St Paul’s and the encouragement of men who worked there who profited from his first edition. Difficulties delayed the second edition until after his death of this, ‘Evelyn’s most splendid book’ (Keynes, Bibliophily, p. 166). Evelyn’s contributions are printed in MW. There were two issues of the first edition, in 1664 and (with a new title page) in 1680; that of 1707 augmented his ‘Account of Architects and Architecture’, added a new title page and a dedication to Wren. Another, posthumous, third edition of 1723 added Wotton’s Elements of Architecture (1624), to which the second edition refers. Rudolf Wittkower, in Palladio and English Palladianism (London, 1974), thinks the work was ‘a somewhat incongruous brew’ (p. 102).
5 See Gillian Tindall, The Man who Drew London: Wenceslaus Hollar in Reality and Imagination (London, 2002), p. 128.
6 See John Evelyn, London Revived: Consideration for its Rebuilding, ed. E. S. de Beer (Oxford, 1938). I have also been helped by passages in Kerry Downes, Christopher Wren (London, 1971), and Adrian Tinniswood, His Invention So Fertile: A Life of Christopher Wren (Oxford, 2001), pp. 150–57, including Wren’s plan, and Joseph Rykwert, The First Moderns (Cambridge, MA, 1980), pp. 144–8.
7 See Michael Cooper, ‘A More Beautiful City’: Robert Hooke and the Rebuilding of London after the Great Fire (Stroud, 2003). Evelyn’s own assessment of Hooke was that he and two others (John Wilkins and William Petty) were ‘three such persons together not to be found else where in Europe for parts and ingenuity’ (Diary, III.416).
8 There is a modern edition of Palissy’s Recepte véritable, with a preface by Frank Lestringant (Paris, 1996), and an English version of the garden project was published, in a limited edition, as A Delectable Garden, translated and with an introduction by Helen Morgenthau Fox (Peekskill, NY, 1931).
1 The Genius of the Place: The English Landscape Garden, 1620–1820, ed. John Dixon Hunt and Peter Willis (London 1957, revd edn Cambridge, MA, 1998), pp. 57–8, where the correct date of the letter should be January 1659/60. The following letter from Jasper Needham and Oxford fellows can be found as Appendix 11 in EB, pp. 460–61. All quotations from ‘Elysium Britannicum’ refer to pages in Ingram’s edition, where he also provides the relevant folio or page number in the MS.
2 Hartlib saw Evelyn working on the ‘History of All Trades’ in 1653, when he visited him in Deptford, while also describing him as a ‘chemist’. The ‘History’ was to be the collection of all information about the ‘Circle of Mechanical Trades’ that Evelyn talked about at the Royal Society in January 1660 (Diary, III.268). A manuscript preserved in the Royal Society is entitled ‘History of Arts Illiberal and Mechanical’ (Keynes, Bibliophily, p. 116). A detailed account can be found in Michael Hunter’s Science and the Shape of Orthodoxy: Intellectual Change in Late 17th-century Britain (Woodbridge, 1995), pp. 74–82. For the unpublished ‘History of Religion’ see Keynes, Bibliophily, p. 251.
3 Furthermore, two manuscripts at the British Library (Add. MSS 78342 and 78343) contain vast collections of notes relevant to and (in the latter) ‘Rude collections to be inserted into Elysium Britannicum, referring to the several changes of what is beg[un]’, including texts now missing from the former. This complicated archive is described in the BL online catalogue of the Evelyn Papers. It is clear enough how much work was needed to bring the text into publishable form.
4 My italics: what he calls his ‘manner’ of proceeding suggests an instinct for accumulating addenda and glosses, something he shares with John Aubrey, among others. But it was also a necessary early modern approach that accompanied the need for careful observation, the sharing of information and experiments. In this respect see Elizabeth Yale, Social Knowledge: Natural History and the Nation in Early Modern Britain (Philadelphia, PA, 2016).
5 A collection of Taylor’s sermons and other writings in The Golden Grove, ed. Logan Pearsall Smith (Oxford, 1930), affords a rich canvas of his ideas, including some letters sent to Evelyn, and has a useful introduction.
6 Frances Harris, Transformations of Love: The Friendship of John Evelyn and Margaret Godolphin (Oxford, 2002), p. 300.
7 Michael Leslie, ‘“Without design, or fate, or force”: Why Couldn’t John Evelyn Complete the Elysium Britannicum?’, in Gardens, Knowledge and the Sciences in the Early Modern Period, ed. Hubertus Fischer, Volker Remmert and Joachim Wolschke-Bulmahn (Basel, 2016). Leslie kindly shared these ideas with me before its publication. He has also suggested to me that Lucretius, writing during the Roman Civil Wars, made it appropriate for Evelyn to translate during the Interregnum, but afterwards found it more uncomfortable after the Restoration. Darley, John Evelyn, also notes Evelyn’s probable concerns with giving a classical author like Lucretius a proper and solid Christian interpretation: pp. 102–3, 137–8, 141–7.
8 My information and quotations come from Keynes, Bibliophily, p. 251.
9 Leslie, ‘“Without design, or fate, or force”: Why Couldn’t John Evelyn Complete the Elysium Britannicum?’, note 6, has a very useful examination of Grew’s work, from which I quote.
10 R.W.F Kroll, The Material Word: Literate Culture in the Restoration and the Early Eighteenth Century (Baltimore, MD, 1991), pp. 165–6. Also the article by Alastair and Carola Small, ‘John Evelyn and the Garden of Epicurus’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 60 (1997), pp. 194–214, to which references are given in my text. I discuss two of these gardens where Evelyn was involved, to a lesser or greater extent, in chapters Nine (on Albury) and Twelve (on the Wotton grotto).
11 It would also have been difficult to accept the four elements, as Boyle argued that the classical four elements have to be repudiated, as they do not stand up to scientific scrutiny – that is what The Sceptical Chymist: or Chymico-Physical Doubts & Paradoxes (1661) is about; The Sceptical Chymist is set in a garden. Evelyn clearly loves the notion of the four elements; but could he publish it when one of his best friends, a fellow member of the Royal Society, had debunked it? I am grateful to Michael Leslie for pointing this out to me.
12 Alessandro Scafi, ‘Mapping Eden’, in Mappings, ed. Denis Cosgrove (London, 1999), pp. 57–8.
13 However, a recent symposium from Dumbarton Oaks does address this topic; see Scent and Sound in the Garden, ed. R. Didi Ruggles (Washington, DC, 2016).
14 John Dixon Hunt, ‘Evelyn’s Idea of the Garden: A Theory for All Seasons’, in Evelyn DO, pp. 269–93.
1 Darley, John Evelyn, p. 280, notes how much Evelyn appreciated Locke’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding of 1690 for its confirmation of God’s existence and authority, his zeal to remove medieval jargon and above all his celebration of modern ‘mechanical arts, and experimental philosophy’ rather than subscription to ancient learning.
2 It is an ‘uncommon trifle’, say Keynes, Bibliophily, p. 213, although it was published three times in 1690. The first edition was republished in MW, pp. 697–713.
3 On Susanna, see Carol Gidson-Wood, ‘Susanna and her Elders: John Evelyn’s Artistic Daughter’, in John Evelyn and his Milieu (London, 2003), ed. Frances Harris and Michael Hunter (London, 2003), pp. 233–54.
4 Nauteuil’s portraits, reproduced in Darley’s biography, are standard and conventional, except perhaps the unflinching looks that the artist gives to Mary and her two parents; the eyes of Evelyn himself are slightly more hooded, reserved.
5 Francis Harris, ‘The Letter-books of Mary Evelyn’, English Manuscript Studies, VII (1998), pp. 204–23, offers a shrewd assessment of both her letter-writing and her ‘secluded domesticity’.
6 His Life was composed to make the best of his ‘friendship’, which includes, as Harris argues, ‘his fantasy of a pious infant beauty bringing religion to a corrupt court (p. 113). There are several manuscripts of the Life, one of which is illustrated here as illus. 33. It was edited in 1939 by Harriet Sampson (Oxford University Press), with a useful and straightforward introduction by Margaret Blagge herself.
7 This episode certainly needs consideration in any discussion of Evelyn’s domesticity, which I try and do here; but for a much fuller and carefully modulated narrative Frances Harris’s Transformations of Love: The Friendship of John Evelyn and Margaret Godolphin (Oxford, 2002) remains the best and provides full references to the considerable archival materials.
8 For Evelyn’s ‘Oeconomics’, see Frances Harris, Transformations of Love, pp. 247–57; for Mary’s advice, BL, Add. MS 78386 and 78392. Evelyn writes to Pepys in Particular Friends: The Correspondence of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn, ed. Guy de la Bédoyère (Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1997), pp. 160–61, and notes how Margaret Blagge had been ‘known to me, and my wife in particular’.
9 Harris, in Transformations of Love, argues that this drawing, made in October 1672, required more forethought than the sketch and the circumstances of drawing and exchange of it on the spur of the moment would suggest; she sees the lozenge of the Evelyn coat of arms, its ‘perspective properly observed’ and shaded washes (‘clearly applied before the inscriptions were added’) as evidence of a preconceived move; surely such graphic skill is something he’d readily have done, given his own skills, while making the simple sketch before their inscription. But the imagery itself, even if carefully composed, is equally telling: the heart in not pierced by any arrow shot by cupid, and it rests (unconventionally) on a double base with its pointed end toward the stars, where it is encircled with an enormous halo.
10 Ironically, this masque, Calisto, was something that Evelyn might have appreciated, being a representation of ‘the Splendour & Grandeur of the English Monarchy’ and a demonstration of the usefulness in England of European ideas, though one marvelously inept stage direction announces ‘The Genius of England enters and is reassuring’! It was equally a reprise of the glorious and more intellectual masque tradition of the early Stuarts’ world under Inigo Jones and Ben Jonson.
11 This letter is quoted in full in Harris, ‘The Letter-books of Mary Evelyn’, p. 212.
12 For details about the manuscripts of the Life, see Appendix A in Harris, Transformations of Love (pp. 304–5), as well as Harris’s four-page discussion of Hiscock’s writings on the subject in Appendix B (pp. 306–9).
1 This is printed in Helen Evelyn, The History of the Evelyn Family (London, 1915), p. 54.
2 Particular Friends: The Correspondence of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn, ed. Guy de la Bédoyère (Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1997), p. 256.
3 The family quarrels continued to disturb their arrival at Wotton but are not mentioned in his Diary, but they are chronicled briefly in Keynes’s notes to his edition of the Memories, pp. 93–4, where it notes that a printed broadside directed to the House of Commons has Evelyn affirming that he and George had a ‘perfect understanding’ of this inheritance and that the trouble caused by George’s litigious son-in-law, Dr Fulham, a clergyman, is simply in his imagination and can be ignored.
4 There is some discussion as to who was responsible for this revision, whether George, another cousin George who had travelled in Europe, or John himself: it was attributed to the last, citing his Diary of 22 February 1652, by the Smalls (see Chapter Ten, n. 9, but the suggestion that he did not want to acknowledge his role in the garden’s reformulation was due to his rejection of Epicurean ideas is far from plausible). Whether or not it was John Evelyn’s work, this sketch was surely drawn after the work was done, as his note on it reads ‘here is now the grotto’ (my italics), which means that he is aware of how the moat would have been filled in and the mount itself cut back for a hundred yards to insert the parterre. If it was indeed his ‘brother’s work’ undertaken at his suggestion or that of cousin George, the sketch is retrospective, a memory of the site before the work was embarked upon. We know from George’s letter to his brother in Europe that John would have supplied ideas and materials for the work, notably plants and items to decorate the grotto – this is admirably explained by Harris in Celebration, pp. 58ff. Evelyn’s later objections to the grotto columns came in the Memories for my Grand-son and seem to be his more nuanced understanding of the classical orders, as a result of his own 1664 Parallel of Architecture, then in the process of being revised in the early years of the eighteenth century while at Wotton.
5 As at Sir John Danvers’s Chelsea garden or Lucy Harrington’s Moor Park, Hertfordshire: I discuss these in my Garden and Grove: The Italian Renaissance Garden in the English Imagination, 1600–1750 (London, 1986; Philadelphia, PA, 1996), pp. 126–39.
6 This note is printed in the Directions for the Gardiner at Sayes-Court But which may be of use for other gardens, ed. Geoffrey Keynes (London, 1932).
7 He was writing to La Quintinie in April 1669 (LB I.43–4) about the visit of Granville.
8 Douglas Chambers, The Planters of the English Landscape Garden (1993), p. 44 and note 51 (p. 197) makes this a firmer attribution. The book was dedicated by its publishers to Baron Capel, a Privy Councilor, whose famous gardener, Moses Cook, had moved by 1681 to join the Brompton Nursery founded by London; Evelyn records (Diary, V.176) taking the secretary of the Royal Society, Richard Waller, there in 1694.
9 One wonders whether London and Wise neglected to use Evelyn’s name on the abridged 1699 issue of La Quintinie because of some resentment that London’s name had been less visible on the first issue.
10 A manuscript or draft of this book is held in the British Library, Add. MS 78350. Sean Silver, ‘John Evelyn and Numismata: Material History and Autobiography’, Word and Image, XXXI/3 (2015), pp. 331–42, uses this one medal to show how it can illuminate what he calls the ‘belletrist’(!) Evelyn’s own life. Using several modern writers, especially Roland Barthes, to link autobiography to his life (as Silver presents it), the article lacks any sense that the thrust of Numismata is Evelyn’s attempt to explore a large narrative of English history rather than his own.
11 Two articles in Frances Harris and Michael Hunter, eds, John Evelyn and his Milieu (London, 2003), attend to these library matters: Giles Mandelbrote, ‘John Evelyn and his Books’ (pp. 71–94) and Miriam Foot, ‘John Evelyn’s Bindings’ (pp. 61–70).
12 Two inventories were made: a general one, BL, Add. MS 78403, and one for Mary, Add. MS 78404. And also 1696 inventories for ‘stuff’ left at Sayes Court.
13 See John Bowle, John Evelyn and his World (London, 1981), p. 241. On the same page he writes that Evelyn ‘stumbled in his garden’ (my italics) and broke his shin; but it seems to have been at Brompton that the accident occurred (see Darley, John Evelyn, p. 303), which suggests Evelyn’s continuing interest in that nursery.
1 I am much indebted to Ruth Scurr’s John Aubrey: My Own Life (London, 2015), from whom I have drawn some remarks on his own life. Evelyn’s letter to Aubrey was published eventually in The Natural History and Antiquities of Surrey, 5 vols (1718–19; republished Dorking, 1975), and a section of it in Celebration, pp. 268–9. Monumenta Britannica was eventually published, edited by J. Fowles (Boston, MA, 1980).
2 Recently David Jacques has attempted this narrative in his Gardens of Court and Country: English Design, 1630–1730 (New Haven, CT, 2017).