British School at Rome: Papers of the British School at Rome (9.1920)

144

The British School at Rome.

He substituted his own name on the title pages for that of Giando-
menico, but cancelled the date without inserting a new one. He was
also responsible for the numbering of the plates (see Table a, Col."IX :
Table 7, Col. II).
The contents of the collection were the same as those of the edition
of 1645.
The only copy I have seen is in the Biblioteca Casanatense in Rome
(20. A. IV. 60-61).
5. The plates passed,’ as we have seen, to the Calcografia Camerale
in 1738 : and in the catalogue of 1797 (p. 4) they are entered as 140 in
number, at the price of 2 scudi 50 baiocchi. But in 1823, in all. pro-
bability, seven of them were suppressed by order of Leo XII. as indecent
(Ehrle, p. 24, n. 9) (Cavalieri iii. iv. 30, 66-67, 68, 70, 81 : Table 7, 33),
and the latter part of the collection was consequently renumbered.
The plates are still preserved in the Regia Calcografia (Catalogo, No. 1341).
It will be seen that the matter is by no means so simple as Hiibner
seemed to think. He dismisses the whole question as follows (p. 47),
“ the plates of Cavallieri (sic) and Vaccarius were thus in 1621, as the
title of the volume cited proves, in the possession of Gottifredus de
Schaichis. Cavallieri’s plates have been preserved until the present day :
they are in the Calcografia Camerale.” If this were all, the foregoing
paper need never have been written.1
Clement XII. for 45,000 scudi, after an attempt to sell it to some Englishmen for 60,000
scudi had been frustrated, and the Pope thus founded the Calcografia Camerale: this was
taken over in 1870 by the Italian Government, and became the Calcografia Reale. (Ovidi,
La Calcografia Romana, pp. n sqq.f
1 The article which was announced in the Catalogue of the Museo Capitolina published
by the School (p. 12) as about to appear in Bibliofilia, vol. xiv. ^1912), was never written,
and its place has been taken by the present paper, which also supersedes the bibliography
given in Cap. Cat. p. 11 sqq. I have not thought it necessary to mention all the errors and
omissions which will be found there : though I may point out that the misquotation of the
title of the Collectio XLIX Statuarum (supra, p. 136) and that of the 1668 edition of Marcucci
(III. A. 4) are due to Michaelis and Schreiber respectively. I must also acknowledge the
help received from Prof. H. Stuart Jones, in conjunction with whom I first worked through
the collections of engravings I have described.