Osorio 1
Michael Osorio
Writing Assignment 10
Drayton, Walpole, and Thomas Abstracts
31 October 2011
Richard Drayton, Nature's Government: Science, Imperial Britain, and the "Improvement" of the
World (Yale UP, 2000), chapter 2, 26-49, 281-266
Drayton writes this chapter in order to argue the significance of botanical gardens in the
history of the British monarchy. More specifically, he describes how nature, in the context of the
empire, was used for medicine, scientific study, and other practical purposes but also more
importantly for aesthetics and as a display of knowledge and political power. A common theme
throughout his writing is that monarchs searched for governmental power in the wealth of
botanical knowledge that lay in their gardens. His chapter was a bit difficult to follow because of
all the historical references, and he does pay a bit too much attention to dates and names and
other details unnecessary to his main argument. There is a sense that this paper lacks his own
interpretive voice, since he was merely saying what was. Nonetheless, he uses a number of first
hand sources in order to either quote or demonstrate his points, sometimes going too off track.
The importance of his contributions to our studies of natural history is indisputable, because he
ties in royal influence and religious tradition with that of the power of green.
Horace Walpole, “The History of the Modern Taste in Gardening (1771/1780)” in The Genius of
the Place, 313-316
Being that our excerpt from Walpole consists solely of 18th century letters and has none
of his actual individualized opinion, it is difficult but not impossible to decipher that his reason
for compiling this work is to bring into light the particular opinions of individuals held on the
Osorio 2
garden. The fact that in this particular excerpt we find no contribution from the writer diminishes
from the strength of his argument based on what we were given. But there is little doubt that
Walpole would provide ample reasoning on his own part throughout the book. The letters were
the absolute number one source for finding out what men in the 1700s thought about gardening
because that’s exactly what they are: personal letters written between men (living in that era) on
what they thought about the style and method of gardening. Despite the value of this being a
primary source, it has a downside with being a bit difficult to follow because of the style these
men of the past write in. Confusing details and thoughts that may have nothing to due with the
main topic take away from the effectiveness of Walpole’s use of these sources. However, I am
sure that if I were to analyze Walpole’s actual writing, he would make a decent argument on the
essence of the value of the garden in 18th century England.
Keith Thomas, “Cultivation or Wilderness?” Man and the Natural World: Changing Attitudes in
England, 1500-1800 (New York: Oxford UP, 1983), 254-269
In his work, Thomas traces the chronological development of popular opinions regarding
encounters with nature and also goes a step further by critically analyzing their formation.
Thomas’ research is very similar to Cronon’s in that they both regard a change over time of
views about nature. However, Thomas is different because he is not arguing that our idea of
nature is wrong, but instead he takes the time to decipher what forces have had significant
influence on its change, and why. To kick-off his chapter, he makes it clear that for people in the
17th century: “The cultivation of soil was a symbol of civilization” (255). And from his historical
observations he comes to the conclusion that “Neatness, symmetry and formal patterns had
always been the distinctively human way of indicating the separation between culture and
nature” (256). And Thomas goes about his other historical observations in a similar fashion,
Osorio 3
supporting them with what he claims to be the biggest factor influencing them, whether it be
landscape paintings, or mystical searches for God, or the people’s economic relationship with the
land, or even the stage of industrialization of the world at that point in history. Thomas’ style is
like that of a highly analytical storyline, making it interesting for his readers and easy to follow
while at the same time incorporating sources to provide ample evidence for his findings.
Although similar to an article we read early on, I find the different perspective of this author to
be a valuable source of factual and reasoned knowledge in our road to understanding encounters
with nature.