Drawings Attributed to Andreas Coner.

II

the interest of the collection. Nor can I hope to have identified all the
plans, elevations, or architectural fragments, some of which further search
would undoubtedly have enabled me to find. I prefer (not solely upon
my own responsibility, but following the advice of others more experienced
than myself) to publish so important a series of drawings at once, rather
than to wait longer, in the hope of being able to make my text a little less
imperfect—though, to one who is not a professed student of architecture,
there will always be a considerable amount of difficulty in attempting a
commentary upon a work of this kind.
I may perhaps be allowed to adopt the very apt remarks of
M. Salomon Reinach, in his preface to the facsimile of the Albuin de
Pierre Jacques :— Mon commentaire . . . dans 1'etat ou je 1'offre au
public, ne peut guere etre qu'une epreuve bonne a corriger. . . . La
redaction du texte est, apres tout, chose secondaire ; elle peut etre faite
expeditivement, quitte a ne point refuser aux critiques, ces collaborateurs
du lendemain, le plaisir de decouvrir quelques erreurs.' It is only fair to
add that it was M. Reinach's preface that led us to employ MM. Berthaud
freres to execute the reproductions which form the illustrations to the
present work. He is, so far, one of the very few scholars who have
published in facsimile and in their entirety any of the many important
archaeological sketchbooks of the Renaissance.1
The contents of the sketchbook are arranged in a definite order
(whether with a view to publication or not we cannot tell), and may be
classified roughly as follows :—2
1. Title.
2-25. Ground plans (in which the parts existing and not existing are
not accurately distinguished).
[26-30. Tombs (plans and elevations) by the later hand.]
31-69. Elevations.
70-155. Architectural details.
a. 71-83. Doric entablatures.
B. 84-91. Ionic and Corinthian entablatures and cornices, corbelled.
7. 92-98, 105-111. The same, not corbelled.

1 The only two other publications of the kind known to me are Le rovine di Roma al principio
del secolo xvi. Studi del Bramantino (Bart. Suardi), Milan 1875, and II Taccuino Senese di
Giuliano da Sangallo, Florence 1902. In both cases the text is the weak point.

2 The later hand in making additions has in most cases respected the original arrangement.