[Illustration:  FIG. 11.]

Dr. Sintenis, the botanist, who last year traveled through Asia Minor and Greece, tells me that he saw beautiful specimens of the plant in many places, e.g., in Assos, in the neighborhood of the Dardanelles, under the cypresses of the Turkish cemeteries.

The inflorescence corresponds almost exactly to the ornament, but the multipartite leaf has also had a particular influence upon its development and upon that of several collateral forms which I cannot now discuss.  The shape of the leaf accounts for several as yet unexplained extraordinary forms in the ancient plane-ornament, and in the Renaissance forms that have been thence developed.  It first suggested the idea to me of studying the plant attentively after having had the opportunity five years ago of seeing the leaves in the Botanic Gardens at Pisa.  It was only afterward that I succeeded in growing some flowers which fully confirmed the expectations that I had of them (Figs. 10 and 11).

[Illustration:  FIG. 12.]

The leaf in dracunculus has a very peculiar shape; it consists of a number of lobes which are disposed upon a stalk which is more or less forked (tends more or less to dichotomize).  If you call to your minds some of the Pompeian wall decorations, you will perceive that similar forms occur there in all possible variations.  Stems are regularly seen in decorations that run perpendicularly, surrounded by leaves of this description.  Before this, these suggested the idea of a misunderstood (or very conventional) perspective representation of a circular flower.  Now the form also occurs in this fashion, and thus negatives the idea of a perspective representation of a closed flower.  It is out of this form in combination with the flower-form that the series of patterns was developed which we have become acquainted with in Roman art, especially in the ornament of Titus’ Thermae and in the Renaissance period in Raphael’s work. [The lecturer here explained a series of illustrations of the ornaments referred to (Figs. 12, 13, 14).]

The attempt to determine the course of the first group of forms has been to a certain extent successful, but we meet greater difficulties in the study of the second.

[Illustration:  FIG. 13.]

It is difficult to obtain a firm basis on which to conduct our investigations from the historical or geographical point of view into this form of art, which was introduced into the West by Arabico-Moorish culture, and which has since been further developed here.  There is only one method open to us in the determination of the form, which is to pass gradually from the richly developed and strongly differentiated forms to the smaller and simpler ones, even if these latter should have appeared contemporaneously or even later than the former.  Here we have again to refer to the fact that has already been mentioned, to wit, that Oriental art remained stationary throughout