I almost sent this post privately to Tom MacWood, but hoped that a public post might bring other insights.
First, as a frame of reference:
The work of such noted landscape architects as Capability Brown during the latter half of the 18th century ( The Picturesque Era), involved enormous jobs of earth moving and shaping over many (sometimes more than a thousand) acres of land.
During this period, it is my understanding that much of the work was directed toward creating 'the illusion of the natural', while at the same time molding landscapes which were 'picturesque' and visually appealing.
These grand-scale undertakings were commissioned by the wealthy land owners. Designs were created by architects and then carried out by great teams of human and animal labour. Plants were moved, removed, imported and rearranged. Drainage was considered, bodies of water were altered and created, etc.
Not surprisingly, more than one of those landscape parks eventually became golf courses themselves.
Later, (about 100 years) The Arts and Crafts movement was in full swing and many of the great thinkers and doers, including some of the classic era golf course architects, were in agreement with the movement's basic philosophies. As a result, history credits the Arts and Crafts movement as being the philosophical foundation beneath many of the Classic Era designs.
However, Arts and Crafts era gardening was an intimate affair, with many close, closed-in, smaller, personal and functional gardens, drawing on the medieval influence which was the basis of the Arts and Crafts movement.
My question:
Given the fact that works of the Picturesque era and such well-known and highly regarded architects as Capability Brown were so similar to classic era golf design in terms of scale, philosophy and execution; why do we not see greater connection between the two?
It seems that the lessons learned through the creation of the great landscape parks would have been of paramount importance to the work of classic era golf course architects.