xxii INTRODUCTION

themselves in his scheme. The connexion, as we have already seen,¹ was often in his thoughts.

Ruskin returned to the principle described above as the kernel of his art-teaching, in the epilogue to The Stones of Venice, written a quarter of a century later. “The simple rendering of natural or historical fact” is, he says,² indispensable as training, and is a condition of all great painting; but the essence of the thing resides not in that, but in the expression of the ideas and feelings of the individual artist.

The conclusion, the résumé, the epilogue are followed by an appendix which, in this volume, is of exceptional importance. In previous volumes we have seen how Ruskin threw into appendices his thoughts and observations on collateral and even disconnected subjects.³ And he does the same in this volume;⁴ but in addition to notes of that kind, the pages headed “Appendix” include in this case supplementary matter which is essentially related to the main theme of the book. This remark applies more particularly to Appendix 1 (“Architect of the Ducal Palace”) and 10 (“Final Appendix”). Owing to the place in which Ruskin threw this matter, and perhaps also to its somewhat technical character, this supplement to The Stones of Venice is not always given by readers the importance which it deserves.⁵ These two appendices, and especially the long one, No. 10, contain much of the detailed evidence on which the author based the conclusions on chronological and technical points which he stated in the principal text. We have already described and illustrated the long and laborious minuteness of his architectural studies;⁶ a perusal of Appendix 10 will show how methodically he marshalled his evidence. His conclusions on vexed questions of Venetian architecture are sometimes spoken of as if he had jumped at them;⁷ the fact is that they were reached after exhaustive examination, and the nature of the evidence, on which they were ultimately based, is indicated in this appendix. Conclusions thus founded are not to be upset except after consideration of the author’s whole case, and by examination as thorough and minute as that which he himself devoted to the subject. It should be noted

¹ See Vol. X. pp. xlvii., 207.

² See below, p. 241.

³ See Vol. IX. p. xxxviii.

⁴ As, for instance, Appendix 2 (“Theology of Spenser”) and 7 (“Modern Education”).

⁵ A good many copies of the volume have passed through my hands. I have observed that in the majority of cases the leaves of Appendix 10 were not cut.

⁶ See Vol. IX. p. xxiv.

⁷ Thus, in the current edition of Murray’s Handbook to Northern Italy, reference is made to the “dogmas and opinions of The Stones of Venice, which the reader may accept or reject.” He may; but he has the right to do so, only after considering the evidence on which the opinions are based.

[Version 0.04: March 2008]