464 APPENDIX, 15

of publishing separately some of the plates in The Stones of Venice, together with additional photographs, was, as already stated, abandoned (Vol. IX. p. 16); and in the later issues of the “Travellers’ Edition,” a publisher’s note was appended to that effect. Nor was The Stones of Venice included in the “Works” series; it was republished instead in its original form. Ruskin did, however, have several photographs taken at Venice, copies of which he placed on sale (from the year 1877 onwards) with his agent and former assistant, Mr. William Ward, of 2 Church Terrace, Richmond, Surrey. A list of these is given in the later volume of this edition containing St. Mark’s Rest; some of them may still be obtained from Mr. Ward. Several of the Venetian drawings, etc., in the Ruskin Museum have also been photographed; copies may be obtained from the Curator. Some casts which were made for Ruskin in 1851-1852 are mentioned below.

(2) and (3) Particulars on these subjects are given in the later volume, just referred to, which includes various fly-leaves and occasional pieces by Ruskin on the subjects in question.

(4) It is desirable, however, to give here some particulars with regard to restorations of the Ducal Palace, because the foregoing chapter contains Ruskin’s principal, and a very detailed, account of the capitals, etc. Ruskin says (Notes on Prout and Hunt, s. No. 58 n.) that “no man with a heart will ever draw the patched skeleton” of the Palace any more; but the restorers have, as far as possible, aimed at obscuring the distinction between new and old; and readers who use the volume on the spot may, therefore, desire information on this point.

The principal restoration of the Ducal Palace, in modern times, after being in progress for some twenty years, was completed in 1889. The following account of the work, no doubt derived from the architect in charge, appeared in the Times of September 16, 1889, and states the case for the restoration. The Palace, it should be explained, is built on piles, but rests on a stratum of stiff sand.

“To appreciate what has been done, it is necessary to know the weaknesses of construction in the old building, due to the carelessness or ignorance of the early builders, or to the lack of those mechanical appliances which modern art has developed. ... (When the second palace was built) the exterior of the old building was pulled down and the new laid on the old foundations, and at the south-east angle certainly without strengthening the foundations intended for a much lighter building. ... The consequence of the piling of the enormous weight of the present mass on the slight foundation was that the foundation sank to such an extent that the superstructure on the angle was thrown forward to the distance of twenty-eight centimetres, and, but for shoring, must finally have sent the angle into the canal. The columns of the lower colonnade, at the angles south-east and south-west, were braced by iron bars, which ran through the capitals so as to add the strength of the whole to the corner column which bore the direct push. These bars, increasing in size by oxidation, split the capitals without a single exception, thus weakening the building rather than strengthening it. Where the columns rested on the stylobate the bed was prepared for equalising the pressure by pouring lead between. But this was never equally distributed, and the pressure was not equalised, the consequence of which was that the columns sometimes split, and, as the capitals were similarly arranged and took more directly the pressure, they oftener split, and in some cases were crushed into many pieces, the corner-stone on the south-west angle into thirty or forty fragments. On the second-story colonnade the capitals were tried in a similar manner, but through the entire extent of the colonnade, and every capital was split, and in some cases fractured badly. Then came the fire of 1577, which ruined the angle of the Ponte di Paglia especially, and when the building had escaped the Renaissance restorers, and the commission of architects decided to restore it as much as possible to its original condition, the five arches at that angle were walled up solidly. This prevented any further deterioration on that side, but the south-west angle, that of the Adam and Eve group, was so weakened that, but for the shoring up, it had fallen into the Piazzetta.

“To remedy all these defects and release the building from the disfigurements of the balks of timber, which alone prevented it from falling into the Grand Canal or

[Version 0.04: March 2008]