 |
 |
 |
This is unclear in the manuscript, but is perhaps ‘2’ with ‘1’ written over it. The ‘(1)’ that follows would then be a clarification of what had become difficult to read. It is not clear how ‘318 (2)’ would then relate to ‘319 (1)’. The numbers have no relevance as a reference to Sansovino (1663), and are perhaps an indication by Ruskin of the sequence he intended to follow in using the information.
|
|
|
[Version 0.05: May 2008]