Customer Reviews

The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Trees of the World

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I was very much prepared to like "The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Trees of the World" when I first opened it. Indeed, the illustrations are very beautiful and while the reproductions are a bit small, they are very clear. I also generally like the way the pages are arranged. However the authors (Tony Russell, Catherine Cutler and Martin Walters) made several errors that in my opinion make this book less useful than it could be. First I do not like the mixing of native and exotic trees for different parts of the World. It makes me unsure as to the target audience (is this for identification or horticulture or both?) and also results in the same tree appearing more than once. The authors are inconsistent in their use of family names. It would be preferable I think to insert the Latin family name just under the common name than to mention (or often not mention it!) it in the preamble to the section. They also use old names, such as Palmae and Leguminosae in several areas, with the current Arecaceae being substituted in other parts of the book for Palmae! This inconsistent use is maddening and certainly confusing to the beginner who might think that the palms consisted of two or more families! In some cases the common names used are unusual ones or more local forms (Bull Bay is commonly called Southern Magnolia in most books- the former name is the Southeastern U.S. version. It is, however, not a true bay tree!)

I would also take exception to the section on tamarisks (pp. 434-435) in that the authors should have mentioned that, while probably suitable for Eurasia, most of these species can become pestilential weeds in other parts of the world (such as in North America). We are in fact having a very difficult time controlling several of these species around water courses.

All in all I think the authors missed a great opportunity to produce a really great reference book. With some editing and the reduction of the repetition of descriptions more tree species could have been covered in the same space. Why not a list of exotic trees for horticulture at the end of each section? This could refer to the particular description in the section for the geographical origin of the tree, rather than have, for example, Bull Bay or Breadfruit appear several times?

This could be a very useful reference book, but it only frustrated me. Perhaps somebody will publish a better reference in the future. The idea of a reasonably complete world-wide guide to trees certainly has merit, but unfortunately this book is not it, despite its lavish production.

I approached the title wary in the light of David Richman's review. Turning first to the section on Eucalyptus the entry for Eu Camaldulensis has the wrong common name and an incorrect distribution map.

This is one of the best known and most widely distributed trees in the country. To get this wrong makes me wonder how accurate the rest of the work is.

The entries for the genus Eucalyptus are also wrongly located in the book, under Trees of Temperate America, rather than SE Asia/Australia. The raises questions about the quality of editing and proofing.