Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-f9bf7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-15T14:54:52.032Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

PIETRO SANTI BARTOLI'S ‘PITTURE ANTICHE MINIATE’: DRAWINGS OF ROMAN PAINTINGS AND MOSAICS IN PARIS, LONDON AND WINDSOR

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2014

Abstract

Pietro Santi Bartoli was esteemed for his elegant ‘ancient pictures in miniature’, based on the records he made of new discoveries in Rome, but few of the collections made by his patrons survive intact. This paper reconstructs one such, by combining the contents of two sets of coloured drawings, one in London (RIBA Drawings Collection) and the other in Paris (Bibliothèque Nationale de France) to produce a series of records that includes some little-known discoveries of the 1680s. The relationship between Bartoli's sketchy on-site records and the coloured ‘miniatures’ is examined via the ‘Vittoria album’ at Windsor, which contains many of his preparatory drawings.

Pietro Santi Bartoli era apprezzato per le sue eleganti ‘pitture antiche miniate’, basate sulla sua documentazione delle nuove scoperte in Roma. Tuttavia solo una piccola parte delle collezioni realizzate dai suoi committenti è sopravvissuta integra. Il presente articolo ne ricostruisce una, combinando il contenuto di due insiemi di disegni a colore, uno in Londra (RIBA Drawings Collection) e l'altro a Parigi (Bibliothèque Nationale de France), con il fine di produrre una serie di testimonianze che includono scoperte poco note degli anni attorno al 1680. La relazione tra gli schizzi in loco di Bartoli e le miniature colorate è esaminata attraverso il ‘Vittoria album’ conservato a Windsor, che contiene molti dei disegni preparatori.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © British School at Rome 2014 

During his lifetime, Pietro Santi Bartoli (1635–1700) was the most celebrated illustrator and copyist of ancient art and artefacts, working for and with the leading antiquaries and collectors of the day. He was known to a wider public through the many volumes of his engravings published with commentaries by Giovanni Pietro Bellori (1613–96) and others. His status as a copyist and engraver was already recognized in 1675 in an admiring note on his work at the end of the list of Italian artists published by the artist and biographer Joachim von Sandrart (Reference Sandrart and Peltzer1971: 294). Sandrart also briefly noted in this context another fine draughtsman, Giovanni Battista Galestruzzi, but neither he nor others at work in the burgeoning antiquarian scene of seventeenth-century Rome attained the reputation enjoyed by Bartoli. The volumes of engravings published during his lifetime were reprinted frequently thereafter, and the coloured copies he made of wall-paintings and mosaics became collectors' items in their own right. To the publications more directly associated with him may be added the celebrated Recueil de peintures antiques (Reference Mariette, de Tubières and de Caylus1757) published by the Comte de Caylus and Pierre-Jean Mariette on the basis of an incomplete set of Bartoli's coloured drawings that Caylus had acquired in rather unusual circumstances. Those drawings are now in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France in Paris,Footnote 1 while others related to Bartoli's engravings, together with some that were never published, are scattered by the haphazard circumstances of acquisition and disposal in various collections of drawings after the antique, many of them in England (Connor Bulman, Reference Connor Bulman, Jones and Matthew2001). Only rarely do they survive in any systematic arrangement; one of the welcome exceptions is the volume compiled by Bartoli in 1674 for his first and most significant patron, Cardinal Camillo Massimo (1620–77). Rediscovered in the 1970s in Glasgow University Library, the volume was described in a paper by Claire Pace (Reference Pace1979) that provided an assessment of Bartoli's work in the context of the seventeenth-century reception of Roman painting.Footnote 2

The Glasgow volume contains 127 coloured drawings, with the newly-discovered paintings in the Tomb of the Nasonii, found north of Rome beside the Via Flaminia, given pride of place in the arrangement of the volume (Pace, Reference Pace1979: 130–1). It is perhaps to be identified as the bound collection of ‘pitture antiche miniate’ listed amongst the contents of the Cardinal's library in the inventory drawn up shortly after his death.Footnote 3 Two other albums connected with Camillo Massimo, but known by the names of subsequent owners, St Clair Baddeley and the first Marquess of Lansdowne (William Petty, Lord Shelburne), survive; neither is readily identifiable in the inventory (Pace, Reference Pace1979: 124–9; Pomponi, Reference Pomponi1992: 224 n. 111). The Baddeley Codex, now in the library of Eton College, is a heterogeneous compilation including copies of the Old Testament scenes from Raphael's Vatican Logge, as well as ancient works; it dates probably to the mid-1670s, and some 50 drawings may be missing from it, since the numbered folios begin at ‘li’ (Ashby, Reference Ashby1916: 48–51). The Lansdowne volume, now in the British Library, is a facsimile of the Vatican Vergil that was incomplete at Camillo Massimo's death and was bound posthumously (Claridge and Herklotz, Reference Claridge and Herklotz2012: 28 n. 14). The style of the coloured copies in this is comparable to Bartoli's work, but they are more hesitant in execution and colouring, and also on occasion more faithful to the originals than Bartoli's published engravings of the Vergil manuscript (Reference Bartoli1677). The likely source for these has been identified recently amongst drawings in the Paper Museum of Cassiano dal Pozzo, and the Lansdowne copies have been attributed tentatively to Cardinal Camillo Massimo himself (Claridge and Herklotz, Reference Claridge and Herklotz2012: 20, 23–4, 133); a more than competent draughtsman, he is said to have studied with both Nicolas Poussin and Bartoli (Pomponi, Reference Pomponi1992: 206).Footnote 4

The connection with Cardinal Camillo Massimo was an important element in establishing Bartoli's reputation as the foremost copyist of wall-paintings; he was noted especially for his rapid work in situ, recording these frail and often ephemeral relics of Roman antiquity, a work of salvage that the Cardinal, possessed of a keen antiquarian instinct, actively promoted (Pio, Reference Pio, Enggass and Enggass1977: 140; Beaven, Reference Beaven2010: 330–5). To the name of this first patron was sometimes added that of Cavaliere dal Pozzo: not Cassiano, founder of the Museum Chartaceum, that great systematic collection of drawings of antiquities, but his younger brother, Carlo Antonio (1606–89). During his tutelage of the Paper Museum, drawings by Bartoli were added to the collection, although the scale of his patronage can scarcely be compared with Camillo Massimo's, and the volume of Bartoli drawings reported by his biographers to be in the Paper Museum has not been located — the eighteen drawings after paintings, mosaics and the Vatican Vergil attributable to him in the large portion of the Paper Museum surviving at Windsor are possibly the disiecta membra of such a volume (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 48–50). A notable patron in the last decade or so of Bartoli's career was the Director of the French Academy in Rome, who acquired both drawings and engravings for the Cabinet of Louis XIV; the correspondence between Matthieu de la Teulière and his superiors in Paris provides significant information about the artist (Joyce, Reference Joyce1992: 236–7; and see below, pp. 274–5).

Bartoli's work reached its wider public, however, via ‘the archaeological coffee-table books of the seventeenth century’ (Herklotz, Reference Herklotz, Bell and Willette2002: 143), the publications in which his engravings were accompanied by the learned commentaries of Bellori.Footnote 5 His senior by 22 years, and Commissario delle Antichità di Roma from 1670 on, Bellori has been seen as a major influence on the style and documentary aim of Bartoli's work (Prosperi Valenti Rodino, Reference Prosperi Valenti Rodino, Borea and Gasparro2000: 133–4). In the early stages of their partnership, he steered him towards the Renaissance masters, above all Raphael (Borea, Reference Borea, Borea and Gasparro2000: 145–6, 149–50), an important factor in setting the aesthetic filter through which ancient paintings were viewed. He also fostered and helped shape Bartoli's enthusiasm for the archaeology of Rome: Bellori shared Camillo Massimo's concern for the investigation and preservation of its ancient remains, and was able to translate this into action as Commissario, exercising this office with great rigour (Montanari, Reference Montanari, Borea and Gasparro2000: 43–4); Bartoli's skills were the ideal complement to his knowledge and scholarship. The first of their publications dealing extensively with paintings was Le pitture antiche del Sepolcro de' Nasonii (1680), featuring the discovery of 1674.Footnote 6 Another, Gli antichi sepolcri, illustrating funerary monuments, notably the painted tombs discovered at Rome a few years earlier in the grounds of the Villa Corsini, was in the making when Bellori's death in 1696, before he could write the commentary, brought their collaboration to an end. The volume appeared in 1697, thanks to the editorial intervention of Ivan Paštrić, a process that has been examined in detail by Bruno Gialluca (Reference Gialluca2013).

Despite this setback, Bartoli, who was active in sketching and recording new discoveries in Rome until the late 1690s, planned further volumes, for which some engravings already had been made before he died in 1700. An expanded edition of the 1680 publication, Le pitture antiche delle grotte di Roma e del Sepolcro de' Nasonij, finally appeared in modified form in 1706 with the additional assistance of his son Francesco, and a commentary by Michelange de la Chausse. Francesco Bartoli (1670–1733), his only surviving son and his pupil, continued to produce copies of paintings and mosaics in the same vein (though with less refined style and colouring), both recording new discoveries and using the reference material accumulated by his father (Almagno, Reference Almagno2007). The noteworthy collection of his work formed by Richard Topham, now at Eton College, includes documentation that offers some insight into Francesco's business acumen — a letter from his agent Francesco Fernando d'Imperiali in response to Topham's complaint regarding the visible differences in detail between his copies and those acquired by Thomas Coke of Holkham (Ashby, Reference Ashby1914: 3–4; Connor, Reference Connor1993; Pomponi, Reference Pomponi1994). Apart from changes in pictorial content and the deliberate switching of colours, a particular shortcoming of Francesco's work was the erroneous information on provenance given on some copies, seemingly part of the secretive attitude manifested in this letter, and the strategies he allegedly employed to prevent fraud (Pomponi, Reference Pomponi1994: 261–2, 268–9).

His father's work also was not without its critics: the most palpable charge to be laid against him is his penchant for embellishing the subject-matter, manifest in those cases where it is possible to check the originals against his copies, and extending across the whole range of his work, not just the category of faded or fragmentary ancient paintings where the case for some restoration might have been urged; see, for instance, Gialluca's analysis (2013: 77–84) of the ‘improvements’ in his drawings of Etruscan urns. This drawback was perceived in his own time (Pace, Reference Pace1979: 122–3; and see below, p. 286), and in later assessments of the value of his work, the absence of systematic arrangement in the surviving sets of drawings perhaps also has contributed to the rather negative view of his achievements in recording archaeological discoveries that he saw at first hand; it imposes limitations on their use as evidence. This is all the more frustrating since he apparently left an extensive list of notable finds made in Rome in his day in the manuscript Memorie attributed to him; these were published by Fausto Amidei, in conjunction with a new edition of Famiano Nardini's Roma antica, in Reference Nardini1741, when the manuscript was in the possession of the Marchese Frangipani. They are more familiar, however, in the topographical rearrangement, numbered and lightly edited, subsequently published by Carlo Fea in Reference Fea1790, apparently working from the earlier published text rather than the manuscript. It would be satisfying if we could compile a pictorial record to accompany these archaeological notes, just as a comparison between the Memorie and the excavation licences issued for the relevant dates and sites would be illuminating — as recently demonstrated by Mirco Modolo (Reference Modolo2011) for one group of discoveries noted here (Appendix, 36–40). The role of Commissario delle Antichità passed from Bellori to Pietro Santi in 1694, so he was uniquely well placed to record the archaeological scene, both from his long association with Bellori, whose notes may be incorporated in the Memorie (Claridge, Reference Claridge and Bignamini2004: 40–2), and from his own tenure of the post.Footnote 7 On his death in 1700, it duly passed to his son (Ridley, Reference Ridley1992: 133–7; Almagno, Reference Almagno2007).

The Recueil published by Caylus, with a commentary by Mariette, exemplifies the problem posed by random arrangement. It contains reproductions of 33 coloured drawings ‘found by chance in Paris’, as Caylus himself told us in a note inserted in the album in which the mounted drawings are bound.Footnote 8 Further details of this discovery, which seems to have taken place around 1756, can be found elsewhere (Restout, Reference Restout1771: 6–7): Caylus was stopped in his tracks in a Parisian street by the sight of some children playing with coloured drawings in their father's shop. Upon enquiry, the man revealed that he had further sheets in the loft; Caylus offered him a louis for each one, secured the little collection, which he recognized as the work of Pietro Santi, engraved and published the pictures, and presented the set to the Cabinet du Roi in 1764, whence it passed eventually to the Bibliothèque Nationale.

The vicissitudes that the pictures have undergone is clear. Their condition is markedly less good than that of the pristine copies in the Glasgow volume, for instance — the paper is soiled, the colours have run in some places, and there are stains and blotches on both sides of the sheets. Given their history, however, it is surprising that they are not more damaged. The album in which they are mounted was assembled immediately after their arrival in the royal collection, and is arranged as a de luxe version of the printed Recueil, with the text of the latter handwritten on the pages preceding the mounted drawings.Footnote 9 The drawings have been cut down to within a few millimetres of their borders for mounting (the largest measures 421 × 277 mm), and they are inlaid on window mounts so that the reverse is visible. Appended to the volume is the coloured drawing of the Nile mosaic of Palestrina that Caylus commissioned for his publication from an unnamed Italian artist, and there are also six mounted drawings of paintings and mosaics that were added after the publication of the Recueil in 1757, five of them acquired by Caylus and the sixth presented after his death in 1765. Amongst them are four coloured drawings by Francesco Bartoli, which provide an opportunity to see the difference between his style and his father's:Footnote 10 Poussin was Pietro Santi's acknowledged teacher in drawing (Pascoli, Reference Pascoli1965: 229), but his fluid sketches seem a long way from the discontinuities of Poussin's workmanlike lines, and the graciously smiling faces that he conferred on his figures, who possess a genial sensuality, are apparent only intermittently in Poussin's work. As Pace noted (1979: 130), the elongated proportions of Pietro Santi's figures evoke the attenuated forms with which Claude Lorrain peopled his visions of classical antiquity. In Francesco's work, the figures retain — to the point of blandness — the smiling faces typical of his father's style, but the bodies lack the elegantly extended proportions. Pietro Santi's soft and subtle modelling of the limbs with tiny strokes of paint, and the contouring of the faces with delicate touches of pink on the rounded cheeks and crimson on the lips, become mannerisms in his son's work, and Francesco extended the crimson modelling to knees, ankle bones, soles of feet and toe joints, the latter articulated to an unusual degree. His pictures also show a significant shift to brighter colours, giving a harder and at times almost garish effect by comparison with his father's palette. He employed repetitive effects of shading, such as red on yellow garments or ochre with body-colour on green, giving a velvety lustre to drapery that complements the plasticity of the figures.

Although the original drawings have received some comment, the set is better known in the published Recueil — ‘one of the most beautiful memorials of French typography’,Footnote 11 a limited edition of 30 copies in which the outlines of the pictures were reproduced in engravings that were then hand-coloured in each copy. A pencil note on the flyleaf of the volume now in the British Library records that three copies were coloured by Caylus himself.Footnote 12 The book achieved further, if not wide, circulation in an expanded second edition (Mariette and Caylus, Reference Mariette, Caylus and de Tubières1783–7). The importance of these drawings was recognized by Rodolfo Lanciani in his pioneering study of drawings of Roman paintings and mosaics in their topographical context (1895: 166), and subsequently the plates of the Recueil were reproduced in their entirety, with brief notes decocted from the text, by Richard Engelmann (Reference Engelmann1909: 22–5, pls 24–9).

Given the circumstances in which they were found, the copies acquired by Caylus were obviously in total disarray, and they were arranged in a logical order for publication by utilizing the information contained in the inscriptions that many of the pictures carry, together with key numbers and letters. A feature of these drawings is the provision of plans or elevations that set the individual paintings or mosaics in context. This archaeological approach, so different to the work of other copyists who did not regularly work from paintings and mosaics in situ, is typified by Bartoli and Bellori's documentation of the paintings in the Tomb of the Nasonii, and the subsequent volume of Gli antichi sepolcri, in which the monuments or discoveries were treated systematically, with ground-plans, elevations and interior views keyed with numbers or letters that refer to details illustrated subsequently; Bartoli's pride in having assembled a number of plans by ‘diligent architects’ is reflected in his manuscript ‘Motivi’ relating to this publication (Gialluca, Reference Gialluca2013: 43–4). It seems likely that he intended to give similar treatment to other discoveries in the further publications he planned, and the Caylus set may display the remnants of such an endeavour. The drawings have manuscript captions, mostly in gold (which has sometimes oxidized to a dull green), interspersed with letters and Roman numerals in red; on some sheets, the writing is in brown ink. Several of the pictures are framed by red borders or show traces of red around the edge, indicating that a border has been trimmed away.

Caylus and Mariette did the best they could with the information provided by the inscriptions, but there are mistakes in the order devised for the publication –– detailed examination of the pictures, and comparison with surviving Bartoli copies elsewhere (notably those in the Glasgow volume), suggest some ways of reordering the sheets into more coherent (but still lacunose) groups of discoveries. This possibility is confirmed by the identification of further drawings related to the Paris set: the album of Bartoli copies in the drawings collection of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) in London (Harris, Reference Harris1972: 58–9).Footnote 13 Nothing is known of its history before its purchase in 1933, save for two inscriptions on the first flyleaf at the front: ‘F M Musgrave/Tourin’ in sepia pen,Footnote 14 subsequently erased with some chemical, and above, right, ‘T(?) Keele/ 36 Knights(?) Park/ Kingston on Thames’, in what is probably an early twentieth-century hand, rubbed out.

The volume was rebound in 1960 but retains its original boards covered in light-brown leather decorated with a simple blind-tooled design; the new spine is lettered ‘Bartoli: Roman Deco.’. The page edges are gilded and goffered with a design of alternating Greek key and oval patera, a style that accords with the date of 1813 in the watermark on one of the two flyleaves of Whatman paper. The volume contains 32 coloured drawings by Pietro Santi Bartoli, 26 of which (fols 1–26) are intact (but trimmed) paper sheets that measure 425 × 315 mm as bound (height × width); the lower edge of the drawing on fol. 15, the largest in the set, has been cut away. There follow two leaves of mounted drawings (fols 27 and 28, with two drawings on each) and two further drawings that are now loose but once formed fols 29 and 30.Footnote 15 The severed remains of these still can be seen in the binding, together with the remnants of the flyleaves and the endpaper, which have been removed from the back of the volume; fols 27 and 28 also bear the marks of aborted cutting. There are also traces of five extra drawings, added to the volume after it was bound but subsequently removed; the vestiges of paint and paper that they have left suggest that they were unrelated to the main Bartoli set.Footnote 16 The mounted drawings on fols 27 and 28, however, are certainly part of the original Bartoli set, as are the sheets of paper on which they are mounted (see below, p. 275). The drawings themselves are in quite good condition, with a few smudges and marks, and some foxing at the fore-edge of the sheets, where there is also evidence of handling.

The order of the pictures in the RIBA album is random. Almost half of them depict the tombs discovered from 1689 onwards in the grounds of the Villa Corsini at the Porta San Pancrazio in Rome, and partly published in Gli antichi sepolcri (Reference Bartoli1697; Gialluca, Reference Gialluca2013: 50 n. 5). These pictures, which are not themselves in a rational order in the album, are interspersed with other subjects, some explicitly identified by their captions, some enigmatically bearing key numbers, letters or cross-references to other drawings no longer adjacent to them. Like the Caylus set, they have manuscript captions in gold with key letters and numbers in red, or in brown ink; some also have red borders. The drawings in both sets are executed in brown ink with watercolour, body-colour and the occasional touch of gold; black chalk draughts are visible on many, both free-hand sketching and ruled setting-out lines, the latter sometimes impressed with a stylus, as are the guidelines for the inscriptions. In addition, they share two watermarks with the Caylus set: a lamb within a double circle, surmounted by ‘M’,Footnote 17 and a fleur-de-lis within a double circle surmounted by ‘V’, which appears only on the Corsini tomb series in either set.Footnote 18

That these drawings were in fact once part of the same set, or sets, is indicated by the presence on the reverse of many of the ‘ghost’ of another drawing, in the form of traces of paint, particularly the rich and thick-textured browns, blues and reds that are so characteristic of these coloured copies. As already noted by Pomponi, with reference to the RIBA drawings (Reference Pomponi1992: 224–5 n. 118), these indicate some earlier arrangement and the presence of other sheets; crucially, they help to confirm the relationship between the London and Paris sets. Sometimes the traces are too faint and dispersed to be diagnostic, but often the outlines of an individual picture are identifiable. In some cases, the ‘ghost’ is that of the next drawing, but more often it can be identified as that of another drawing now placed elsewhere, and in this way cross-links between the Caylus and RIBA sets, as well as transpositions within both sets, can be established. Occasionally the ‘ghost’ is a double image, that of the sheet that currently follows overlying that of another that formerly occupied this place.

Taking the evidence of the ‘ghosts’ in conjunction with the clues provided by the key numbers and letters, the cross-references in the captions, significant visual relationships between the pictures themselves, and the information provided by other Bartoli copies of the same works, it is possible to rearrange the combined Caylus and RIBA sets into orderly groups, the majority of which record discoveries made in Rome. The resulting rearrangement is presented in the Appendix to this paper, where the drawings have been assigned individual numbers (165), by which they are identified in the following discussion. Topographical and archaeological information is given in the notes to the Appendix.

In general the connections formed by the ‘ghosts’ do not extend across two different subject groups (unless the ‘ghost’ is that of the drawing that now follows), which suggests that these drawings originally existed as discrete sets, each devoted to a single discovery. This is supported by the distinction to be observed in the occurrence of gold-and-red or brown ink inscriptions: these are uniform within each group, with two exceptions — 5 to 19 (discussed below) and 29 to 32. The gold-and-red inscriptions seem to belong to a grander presentation than those in brown ink: the lettering has been executed carefully, often ending with a decorative flourish. By comparison, the ink inscriptions are less formal, even shakily written in a few cases.Footnote 19

The united RIBA and Caylus sets thus present a collection of Bartoli drawings apparently accumulated from distinct groups. In their subject-matter these groups reflect his lifetime's oeuvre, but there is a notable representation of discoveries made in the 1680s; the Corsini tombs (4360, 1689–91) are the latest dated material. At least one set was prepared in response to an ongoing commission: the group devoted to the 1668 discoveries in the ‘Casa di Tito’ (519), where the captions change from gold to brown ink halfway through, and the first ink caption (11) begins by restating the details of the find-spot and ends with a reference to the ‘plan already sent with the other pictures’.

Where might such a collection have been formed, and when and where might these drawings have parted company? The dispersal perhaps occurred in the mid-eighteenth century, in the Parisian shop where Caylus purchased his drawings. He had no doubt that the set that he obtained so fortuitously was incomplete, and he may even have learnt from the vendor that others had been sold already, since he wrote: ‘I have reason to believe that the 33 drawings that I have had engraved once formed part of a more numerous collection; I was not lucky enough to reassemble the whole; but it is still quite something to have made such a discovery in France …’.Footnote 20

A collection of 65, as represented by the united Caylus and RIBA sets, is certainly ‘more numerous’, but the total could be still higher, since items known from other Bartoli copies or publications to belong to the groups represented here are missing. Thus, there are no drawings of the mosaic and harbour scene that were part of the 1668 ‘Casa di Tito’ find (5–19: see note c on p. 311); the large Corsini group, 43–60, includes eight drawings that were not published but lacks twelve that were, and there are further preparatory drawings by Bartoli of Corsini material that would amplify the documentation of specific tombs here (see note j to the Appendix). In addition, a few drawings bear on the verso the ‘ghost’ of a picture that cannot be identified among the extant copies but was once part of the collection.

The potential total of drawings is of interest, because — as already noted by Joyce (Reference Joyce1992: 239 n. 99) with reference to the Caylus set — there is a tempting connection to be made with a collection of Bartoli's work that seems to have gone missing in France. These are the drawings bought in Rome through the second half of the 1680s by the director of the French Academy, La Teulière, and sent to his superior in Paris, François Michel Le Tellier de Louvois, Surintendant des Bâtiments du Roi, for the royal Cabinet (Gady, Reference Gady and Bonfait2002: 168–9). It seems they may never have reached it: Louvois died in July 1691, and two years later his successor, Edouard Colbert de Villacerf, was hunting in vain for them. In July 1693, he wrote to La Teulière: ‘From 15 December 1685 until 9 July 1690, I checked your accounts: you sent M. de Louvois 59 drawings of miniatures similar to the latter two which you have sent me. I found not a single one after his death’.Footnote 21

La Teulière sent a reassuring reply the following month, to the effect that the missing drawings were undoubtedly in the royal Cabinet, but we find no confirmation of this in the rest of the correspondence. The two new drawings sent to Villacerf were of Corsini tomb interiors, probably those published as plates 9 and 18 of Gli antichi sepolcri, to judge by the descriptions given by La Teulière (Montaiglon, Reference Montaiglon1887–1912: I, 401), and it is clear from the correspondence that some of the missing 59 also belonged to this series, as well as showing the 1683 discoveries near the Sette Sale (cf. 23–7) and some of the Orto Guglielmini find (cf. 3640).Footnote 22 The ‘missing’ royal collection evidently covered some of the same subject-matter as the united Caylus/RIBA set, and a study comparing the subject-matter with the accounts of payment adds support to the likelihood of the relationship (Modolo, pers. comm.).

The drawings in the RIBA set, which are in better condition than the Caylus drawings, may have remained as a collection of unbound sheets until being made up into the present album early in the nineteenth century. The mount sheets used for fols 27, 28 and 29(1) are in fact surplus blank paper removed from some of the drawings.Footnote 23 This generous provision of paper was evidently a feature of Bartoli's drawings: writing to Villacerf in May 1693, La Teulière sought to justify his purchase of the two new drawings despite the high price being asked, but noted candidly ‘They are on large sheets of paper, like those I have sent previously, and are not burdened with work …’.Footnote 24

From the letters of La Teulière and Villacerf we learn something of the protracted publication of Gli antichi sepolcri, mentioned in correspondence from 1692 to 1697, and also Bartoli's plans for a third volume, for which twelve of the planned 40 pictures had been engraved, as of September 1697, and that he was optimistic that he had found a commentator to replace Bellori (Montaiglon, Reference Montaiglon1887–1912: II, 335–6, 342). In his last years it seems that his ideas had expanded to a tetralogy of volumes, including a reprint of the Sepolcro dei Nasonii (Gialluca, Reference Gialluca2013: 67 n. 2). But the project remained unfinished; with the loss of his old collaborator in 1696, Pietro Santi seemed to lose heart, and there was also his increasing age and infirmity to check his progress — ‘he is very stout, and is not young’, as La Teulière already had observed in 1693Footnote 25 — as well as the amount of time devoted to engraving other subjects, and his need of immediately lucrative work to support his family. The piecemeal publication eventually produced by Francesco Bartoli and La Chausse in 1706 may be a pale reflection of what Pietro Santi had intended, and the Caylus/RIBA drawings probably give us a better idea of what might have been published if his plans had come to fruition. They include some notable groups of material hardly represented elsewhere: the Sette Sale discoveries of 1683 (237), the structures near San Lorenzo in Panisperna (335), and the building in the Orto Guglielmini (36–40). The detailed treatment of these, with plans, suggests that these discoveries would have been presented in the same ‘archaeological’ manner as the material in the other volumes.

The basis for such a presentation was the working sketches that Pietro Santi made in situ and for which he was particularly celebrated, and in assessing the merit of his work in recording Roman paintings and mosaics, one set of drawings in particular deserves comment for the light it sheds upon his working practices. This is the volume that once belonged to the writer, collector and aspiring artist Vicente Victoria of Valencia (1650–1709) and is now in the Royal Library at Windsor Castle. The contents were listed by Adolf Michaelis (Reference Michaelis1910: 111–22),Footnote 26 and the volume was described briefly by Anthony Blunt (Reference Blunt1967) in a note on its former owner. Victoria arrived in Florence in 1675 as a member of a Spanish monastic order, but moved a few years later to Rome, where he remained until 1686, studying painting with Carlo Maratta and living in the Piazza di Spagna.Footnote 27 He then returned to Spain as a Canon, but was back in Rome from 1698 onwards. Over the course of his two Roman sojourns, his circle of acquaintances included Bellori, Bartoli father and son, and La Chausse. His manuscript Academia de Pintura del Señor Carlos Maratti, conceived as a series of dialogues between Bellori, Maratta and the author, opens with an idealized description of Victoria's home in Rome, housing a collection of drawings and prints including ‘the most intriguing of all … the [volume] of ancient Paintings of pagan times copied in colour in miniature style from various ruins of Rome which the enthusiasm, and the vigilance of Pedro Santi Bartoli was able to accomplish over many years’.Footnote 28 This is followed by a list of volumes of engravings of reliefs and sculpture, mostly by Pietro Santi and identifiable with his works published jointly with Bellori, such as those on the Colonna Traiana (1673) and the Colonna Antoniniana (1679). The terms in which the ‘ancient paintings … in miniature style’ are described, however, recall the kind of coloured copies commissioned by Camillo Massimo; Victoria perhaps aspired to ownership of such an album in his ideal collection — at the time at which the Academia was apparently composed (1686–90), the only published Bartoli volume of paintings was the Sepolcro dei Nasonii (1680), and Victoria did not as yet possess the album of drawings now in Windsor.

Most of the drawings in the Vittoria album, as it is known from the Italianized form of his name which appears on the title-page (Fig. 1), are preparatory material for finished work that appeared elsewhere. The title-page is itself the draught by Pietro Santi Bartoli and Camillo Massimo for the 1674 album of drawings now in Glasgow, converted by Victoria for his own use;Footnote 29 his handwriting may be recognized in the inscriptions on the column plinths.Footnote 30 As Blunt observed, the collection is heterogeneous but a substantial number of the drawings are the work of Pietro Santi, bearing out the title on the spine, ‘Pitture antiche Dise. da Piet. Santi’; Bassegoda I Hugas (Reference Bassegoda I Hugas1994: 53) suggested the likely presence of some of Victoria's own work, too. The binding of the album is Victoria's, and although eight pages have been removed and a few show signs of the removal or transposition of drawings,Footnote 31 the contents appear to be substantially the same as when it was bound. As noted by Blunt (Reference Blunt1967: 32), the latest dated drawing belongs to the year 1698.Footnote 32 In addition to the Bartoli working drawings, the album opens with a set of engravings of the wall-paintings in the Pyramid of Gaius Cestius, enhanced with wash and white heightening (Michaelis, Reference Michaelis1910: 112 fols 2–7). It also contains a group of cinquecento drawings, including sketches of decoration in the Domus Aurea (RL 9567–8; Dacos, Reference Dacos1969: 39), which could have formed part of Bartoli's reference stock, assuming that they were not collected by Victoria himself. The order followed for these early pages in the volume is, significantly, that of the chronological survey of surviving Roman paintings, Delli vestigi delle pitture antiche dal buon secolo de' Romani, compiled by Bellori and published in 1664 as an appendix to the notes on the galleries and collections of Rome (Zocca, Reference Zocca1976: 122–37, reproducing pp. 56–66 of the original).Footnote 33 It seems that Victoria may have been planning a publication of his own on ancient paintings in conjunction with Domenico de' Rossi: in his manuscript Indice dell'opere di Raffaello Sanzio d'Urbino (dating to 1703), he refers to ‘my Book of Ancient Paintings, which is currently being engraved for publication’.Footnote 34

Fig. 1. Title-page of the Vittoria album, drawn by Cardinal Camillo Massimo and Pietro Santi Bartoli, and adapted by Vicente Victoria. Inscribed: (left-hand plinth) L'Architettura e inventione, e Disegno del Em moSig. Card l. Massimi. (right-hand plinth) Le Vittorie laterali sono disegnate da Pietro Santi Bartoli. Pen and ink and wash; Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RL 9566. (Reproduced courtesy of the Royal Collection Trust © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2014.)

Among the sketches in the Vittoria album are the original drawings executed in situ at the Tomb of the Nasonii, including one inscribed with the Incidatur for the printed edition (RL 9610; Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 300 fig. 33). The 1702 publication of the tomb included on plate II a fulsome acknowledgement of Victoria's ownership of these that did not appear in the republication of the engravings in 1706 (cf. Rudolph, Reference Rudolph1990: 245–6 n. 81). The volume also contains a celebrated pen-and-ink drawing of a figure panel in the ‘Volta degli Stucchi’ of the Domus Aurea (RL 9573; Weston–Lewis, Reference Weston-Lewis1992: 313 no. 2). The drawing, identified in the seventeenth century as depicting Coriolanus and his womenfolk, traditionally has been attributed to Annibale Carracci and assumed to be the Carracci drawing of this subject known to have been in Bellori's possession. It has been suggested, however, that it is in fact a copy of Bellori's drawing, since the latter is documented as having passed from him to the collection of Padre Resta and thence via various collectors to Jonathan Richardson (Wood, Reference Wood1996: 11, 44–5, appendix I, 1).Footnote 35 Victoria's drawing, however, enjoyed the reputation of being the Carracci ‘Coriolanus’ and was cited as such in Le pitture antiche (1706).Footnote 36 Following Victoria's death, a large part of his collection of prints and drawings (45 volumes) was acquired by Pierre Crozat in Rome in 1715 (Montaiglon, Reference Montaiglon1887–1912: IV, 377 and cf. p. 368), and the Carracci ‘Coriolanus’ subsequently was reported to be in his possession (Du Bos, Reference Du Bos1719: 343) though neither the drawing nor the Vittoria album can be traced in the later dispersal of the Crozat collection.Footnote 37 An alternative hypothesis is that the album was one of the 49 volumes from Victoria's collection that had already passed to the Albani collection in 1713, and thus subsequently reached the Royal Library at Windsor with the Dal Pozzo Paper Museum, purchased from the Albani family in 1762 (Blunt, Reference Blunt1967: 32; Lyons, Reference Lyons, Fejfer, Fischer-Hansen and Rathje2003: 483–4). The presence of the ‘Coriolanus’ drawing in the album, however, makes this otherwise plausible scenario problematic.

It seems likely that the drawings in the Vittoria album belonged substantially to Bartoli's studio stock, a large part of those ‘original sketches of everything that he had painted and engraved for [Cavalier del Pozzo and Cardinal de Massimi]’, mentioned in a letter of 1693 from La Teulière to Villacerf.Footnote 38 They might have been transferred to Victoria at or just before Pietro Santi's death in 1700, though the transfer of such an important body of reference material contrasts strongly with the jealous attitude towards his notes displayed by Francesco Bartoli when his own career was established, as evidenced in the letter of 1730 to Topham (see above, p. 268). The removal of the acknowledgement of Victoria's ownership of the Nasonii drawings from the 1706 publication might be read as denoting some pique on Francesco's part, possibly also some controversy regarding Victoria's own plans for a publication, but relations between the two seem in fact to have been cordial — Francesco engraved some of Victoria's work (Bassegoda I Hugas, Reference Bassegoda I Hugas1994: 50 fig. 15), and seems to have had continuing access to the reference material in the Vittoria album after Pietro Santi's death, possibly with a view to a joint publication with Victoria.

The preparatory nature of these drawings was recognized by Thomas Ashby (Reference Ashby1914: 5): they are sketches with draught strokes, corrections and annotations, including colour references (some lost when the drawings were trimmed for mounting). The colour terms used by Bartoli are: bigio, cinabro, giallo, lacca, pavonazzo, rossiccio, rosso, torchino, verde, sometimes qualified by epithets such as chiaro; they are more often abbreviated as single letters or contractions than fully written out. A few comparable drawings are to be found in the volumes at Holkham, as Ashby observed, and may have belonged to the same reference collection.Footnote 39 Two of them carry the enigmatic letter ‘m’ which appears on many items in the Vittoria album, on the drawings themselves (Figs 2 and 3), or occasionally on the mount sheet. The letter cannot stand for ‘M[assimi]’, as suggested by Michaelis (Reference Michaelis1910: 114 fol. 29), because some of the drawings with which it appears show discoveries made long after Cardinal Camillo's death and the end of active Massimi patronage, as observed by Beatrice Cacciotti (Reference Cacciotti and Palma Venetucci2001: 39 n. 43). Two Holkham drawings that have been attributed to Francesco Bartoli and apparently relate to wall-paintings found under the Palazzo Rospigliosi in 1709 would furnish the latest date associated with this letter, if the Rospigliosi attribution is correct (Holkham II, fols 53–4; Ashby, Reference Ashby1914: 46; Connor Bulman, Reference Connor Bulman1999: 205–6, fig. 2; contra: Modolo, Reference Modolo, Bruschetti, Giulierini, Swaddling, Gialluca and Reynolds2014: 165–70). The ‘m’ might signify ‘memorie’, or ‘museo’, two words used with some frequency in connection with the antiquarian records of the time, both of them present on Victoria's title-page for his album (Fig. 1). It thus might indicate some selection for publication being made by Francesco, possibly in conjunction with Victoria, though the latter died in May 1709, just as the first Rospigliosi discoveries were being made. The ‘m’ group (45 drawings in all, comprising both chalk and pen-and-ink draughts) does not consist solely of unpublished material: ten of the drawings show subject-matter in the Corsini tombs engraved for Gli antichi sepolcri, and six others correspond to plates in Le pitture antiche (1706). Footnote 40

Fig. 2. Detail of a wall-painting, with colour notes; possibly part of the same discovery as 23–32. Inscribed: Pittura nella facciata di una stanza nel orto delle sette sale scoperta l'anno 1683; in the upper right corner, m. Pen and ink with black chalk draughting; Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RL 9680. (Reproduced courtesy of the Royal Collection Trust © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2014.)

Fig. 3. Draught plan of the Villa Corsini cemetery, with annotations, on two sheets of paper with a horizontal join. Inscribed: (below the join, left-hand side, partly cut away) sepolcri scoperti il mese di Xbre 1689; (on the mount sheet, below the drawing) Queste piante con le seguenti pitture sino al N o106 furono trovate nella villa Corsina fuori la porta di San Pancratio L'anno 1690. Pen and ink; Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RL 9644. (Reproduced courtesy of the Royal Collection Trust © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2014.)

The greater part of the Holkham drawings, whether finished coloured copies or preparatory sketches, may be attributed to Francesco, although there are some in either category that appear to be the work of Pietro Santi (Figs 4 and 5),Footnote 41 as well as a few that are the work of neither Bartoli. Distinguishing their hands in the preparatory sketches as opposed to the finished work is not so easy; Ashby suggested a simple (perhaps too simple) criterion, that the ‘pencil [i.e. black chalk] sketches with colour notes’ were Francesco's work (Ashby, Reference Ashby1914: 3). This would by default characterize the pen-and-ink sketches (which often have chalk draughting lines) as the work of Pietro Santi, typified by the series devoted to the Tomb of the Nasonii, a discovery made when Francesco was only four years old. At that time, Pietro Santi was living in the household of his father-in-law, Giovan Francesco Grimaldi ‘il Bolognese’, who may have been responsible for the picturesque frontispiece to the Sepolcro de' Nasonii set (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 298 fig. 31; attribution suggested by Lanciani (Reference Lanciani1895: 190)), and with whom he was involved in other enterprises (see below). It seems likely that Francesco, who lived at home until his first marriage at the age of 22 (Almagno, Reference Almagno2007: 454–5) would have assisted his father in the recording of discoveries, even though his name is absent from the contemporary records, a fact that may reflect the commercial desirability of branding all the work as Pietro Santi's, as well as the latter's tight control over the workshop and its output. Noting the huge volume of demands made on him, Maximilien Misson (Reference Misson1714: II.i, 172), an appreciative visitor to Pietro Santi at home, commented ‘… if he had an hundred Hands, they would scarce be enough for him’. We should consider the degree to which those hands were not Pietro Santi's own, albeit unacknowledged. As his father's pupil, Francesco's draughting style would have been similar to Pietro Santi's, and this might be true also of the handwriting with which the sketches are annotated, which is somewhat uniform whether they are executed in chalk or pen-and-ink. Adolf Michaelis (Reference Michaelis1910: 118 fol. 75) tentatively suggested Francesco's as the hand of one of the Villa Corsini pen-and-ink sketches (RL 9650: Fig. 6), in which he saw a difference in both the handwriting and the ‘rather coarse’ drawing; Pomponi (Reference Pomponi1992: 210) noted the possibility that Pietro Santi's brothers-in-law, as well as Francesco, assisted him.

Fig. 4. Quarter detail of the ceiling in tomb ‘Q’ of the Villa Corsini cemetery, with colour notes and details of the other three canephorae that support the central tondo (cf. 56). Inscribed: Pittura di una volta sepolcrale nella villa di Monsig reCorsini fuori Porta S. Pancratio / segnata nella pianta alla littera Q. Pen and ink with black chalk draughting; Library of Holkham Hall, vol. II. fol. 34 (85). (Reproduced by permission of Viscount Coke and the Trustees of the Holkham Estate.)

Fig. 5. A brick stamp and a cinerary urn with measurements in dita (inches), from the Villa Corsini cemetery (unpublished). Inscribed: (top right) Tevolone con il presente merco. trovato ne sepolcre della Villa Corsina; (bottom) Vasetto ove erano le cenerij di un picciolo putto. mede[si]mamente della Villa Corsina. Pen and ink with black chalk draughting; Library of Holkham Hall, vol. II. fol. 39 (106). (Reproduced by permission of Viscount Coke and the Trustees of the Holkham Estate.)

Fig. 6. Lunette in tomb ‘C’ of the Villa Corsini cemetery (cf. 47). Inscribed: pittura anticha; trovata in un sepolcro nella in una vignia fuori della porta di san Pancratio, posseduta dal ill moMo reCorsini: trovata ó scoperta lanno 1689 il mese decembre, largo pallmi [sic] .ii. longo 22 17. Colour notations with pointers; in the upper right-hand corner, m. Pen and ink with black chalk draughting; Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RL 9650. (Reproduced courtesy of the Royal Collection Trust © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2014.)

From the sketches with colour notes of the Vittoria album to the highly-wrought and exquisitely coloured finished works exemplified by both the Glasgow album and the Caylus/RIBA set is a long step. The sketches are fluid but perfunctory — the elaborate décors recorded for the vaulted ceilings of the Corsini tombs, for instance, are regularly represented by quarter details only, with further elements sketched beside them for reference. The colour notes are meagre indications when compared with the subtle splendours of the finished versions, and the colours are in any case sometimes arbitrarily changed in the latter (see, for instance, Appendix 12, 13, 15, 38 and note c, and cf. Pomponi, Reference Pomponi1992: 208–9). It is worth in conclusion examining the implications of the expression ‘ancient pictures in miniature’.

In his finished drawings Pietro Santi did indeed miniaturize ancient paintings and mosaics that in themselves were often of considerable size. The addition of framing borders — gold in the albums of the 1670s with Massimi bindings, and red for some of the paintings shown in the Caylus/RIBA set — increases the miniaturized effect. The existence of framing or demarcating borders around the separate elements in Roman wall-paintings is an actual feature, and red with a white fillet is one of the most common forms;Footnote 42 but the addition of red borders to many of Pietro Santi Bartoli's copies brings them close to the red-bordered miniatures of the Vatican Vergil (Wright, Reference Wright1993: 1–2). Perhaps this authentic example of ancient miniature painting was a determining influence in the formation of his copying aesthetic.Footnote 43 The use of red borders in Bartoli's later work may reflect also an economical step down from the ‘de luxe’ Massimi albums.Footnote 44 Reduced and thus framed, wall-paintings and mosaics also became ‘ancient miniatures’, worthy to be assembled in fine volumes for connoisseurs; and where paintings in particular were concerned, the effect was heightened by his tendency to complete and embellish the often defective ancient original. This trait was already noted critically in his own time, famously by Misson (Reference Misson1714: II.i, 172) — ‘It is true, that he designs so well, that he cannot resolve with himself to design ill: and from thence it proceeds, that we cannot always be certain that the antick venerable Figures he has engraven have not been mightily embellish'd by his Tool’. Jonathan Richardson the Younger was shocked at the sight of the ‘altogether Gothic’ illustrations of the Vatican Vergil compared with Pietro Santi's engravings thereof, from which ‘One would imagine the Pictures to be of the Best Antique …’ (Richardson, Reference Richardson1722: 264–5).

Another potential influence on the way such subjects were treated was the use to which the copies might be put. Bartoli's records of the Corsini tombs are exquisite in their refinement of detail and colouring, notably in the rendering of the elaborate decoration of the vaulted ceilings. We may doubt that the originals shared the perfection of his coloured copies, but by his own admission in Gli antichi sepolcri, which also included architecture and reliefs, such monuments were fit to serve as ‘the most noble models, and exemplars for the disciplines of Architecture, Painting, and Sculpture …’. Footnote 45 He himself may have experienced the utility of such sources earlier in his career, assisting his father-in-law with the decoration of the vaulted ceiling of the Galleria in the Palazzo Borghese.Footnote 46 We know that at least one of the French purchases was intended as the model for a painted ceiling (above, n. 22), and the work of both Pietro Santi and Francesco certainly nourished neoclassical designs in eighteenth-century England (Bristow, Reference Bristow1996: 78–123; Aymonino, Gwynn and Modolo, Reference Aymonino, Gwynn and Modolo2013). The drawings were perhaps worked up with this function in mind.

In any case, Pietro Santi Bartoli was ever confident in perfecting and completing in his records the picture suggested by the fragmentary evidence before him. As Licia Luschi (Reference Luschi1992: 11) observed in her study of his drawings of the painted cupola of the ‘Mausoleo dei Gordani’, the intention was not to deceive but to offer a reasoned reconstruction. In looking at his fluent preparatory sketches, we sense his faith in his ability to recreate the original work from a knowledge of Roman art that was built on both instinct and experience. Yet the paradox remains — more than any other artist in this field, Bartoli, working in situ, was able to record the total context of a discovery and catch the elusive survivors in paint, stucco and mosaic before their destruction or decay, and much emphasis was placed on this aspect of his work by his admirers (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse1995: 241–2); yet once the record was captured, he seems to have transmuted it into an art form in its own right. The limitations thus placed upon the value of his drawings must be remembered whenever we use them to fill the gaps in our knowledge of ancient Rome. With this caveat in mind, we may none the less be grateful for the records that he left, amongst which the Caylus/RIBA drawings form a valuable and impressive series; moreover, they point to the desirability of examining in more detail other volumes and portfolios of mixed content from which further records may be reassembled, ‘lost’ drawings recovered, and original sequences restored.Footnote 47 As La Teulière wrote to Villacerf in 1693, bemoaning the almost simultaneous destruction of wall-paintings at the moment of their discovery, ‘Without Pietro Santi's devotion, all but the memory of everything therein would be lost’.Footnote 48

Acknowledgements

My thanks are due to Pascal Griener and Colin Harrison, who generously shared their research on the Caylus Recueil, and who provided information and a set of slides that have been valuable tools in my own work. The publications of Hetty Joyce, Claire Pace and the late Louisa Connor Bulman have been fundamental to the present study, which grew out of my work on the Dal Pozzo drawings in the Royal Library at Windsor Castle; this paper offers some additions and revisions to the publication of 2001. Tim Knox provided information on the history of the volume in the RIBA's Drawings Collection, and Neil Bingham facilitated study of it there. For the opportunity to work on the volumes in their charge, I am also grateful to Mme Laure Beaumont-Maillet and the curators of the reserve collections of prints and drawings in the Bibiliothèque Nationale de France; Dr Timothy Hobbs and staff in the Special Collections of Glasgow University Library; Mrs Christine Butler at Corpus Christi College, Oxford; Mr T.B. Ronnay at Holkham Hall, where more recently Dr Suzanne Reynolds, Curator of Manuscripts in the Library, has assisted with the provision of images; and Martin Clayton and staff in the Print Room of the Royal Library at Windsor Castle. I am most grateful to Amanda Claridge, Hetty Joyce and Claire Pace for reading and commenting on drafts of this paper, and to Mirco Modolo for reading the paper, offering some different interpretations, and sharing his ongoing research on these drawings, which has run in parallel with the latter stages of preparing this paper.

APPENDIX. THE COMBINED CAYLUS AND RIBA DRAWINGS

In the following tabulation, the drawings are grouped according to the site of the discoveries they record, and listed in ascending order of the dates of discovery. Where applicable, references in the Bartoli Memorie (ed. Fea), are noted after the date. Undated finds are listed at the end. Each group is arranged in the order corroborated by the evidence of their inscriptions and the ‘ghosts’ on the versos of some, which are noted after the folio numbers in the third column.

In the second column, the subject of each drawing is identified as P = painting, M = mosaic, or other medium/format, and the inscriptions are given in full; some alternative readings to those published by Harris (Reference Harris1972) in RIBA Catalogue B are offered here. Unless otherwise stated, the inscription is below the picture; the medium — gold lettering with red key letters, or brown ink — is noted in square brackets.

The fourth column lists Bartoli drawings of the same subject known to the author in other collections (but not drawings by other artists): firstly, those attributable to Pietro Santi [PSB], then Francesco's [FB]. Some of the Holkham drawings are here reattributed to Pietro Santi, whose initials are given in square brackets. Publications of the related engravings are noted where applicable: see pp. 288–9 for a list of abbreviations used for these and the collections of drawings cited here.

Fig. 7. Elevation of the upper part of a wall in room V of the complex discovered in 1668, with the location of the details shown in drawings 11–18. After the coloured drawing, Glasgow Massimi album, Glasgow University Library MS Gen 1496, fols 54v–55. (Reproduced courtesy of the University of Glasgow Library. Special Collections.)

Footnotes

1 Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Département des Estampes et de la Photographie, réserve GD- 9B- FOL; Pinot de Villechenon, Reference Pinot de Villechenon1990; Décultot, Bickendorf and Kockel, Reference Décultot, Bickendorf and Kockel2010: 58–63. A digitized copy of the Recueil (Reference Mariette, de Tubières and de Caylus1757) can be viewed on the website http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b7300358v (last consulted 10.07.2014). Details of the principal sources (both drawings collections and publications) are given at the beginning of the References (pp. 288–9).

2 For subsequent surveys, see: Luschi, Reference Luschi1992; Pomponi, Reference Pomponi1992; Pace, Reference Pace and de Grummond1996; Joyce, Reference Joyce, Bell and Willette2002: 176–9; Carpita, Reference Carpita2006. Many of the copies made for Cardinal Camillo Massimo in 1674 were reproduced in colour by Bernard Andreae and Pace (Reference Andreae and Pace2001).

3 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Capponi 260, fol. 15v, no. 71 (Pace, Reference Pace1979: 125 n. 48); the inventory, edited and indexed, was published by Massimo Pomponi (Reference Pomponi, Buonocore, Cacciotti, di Carpegna Falconieri, de Angelis d'Ossat, Fusconi, Molinari, Pomponi and Sproti1996: this item is cited on p. 104, and identified in n. 145 on p. 145 as the Glasgow volume).

4 For his drawings, see: Barberini, Reference Barberini1993: 136–9; Beaven, 2010: 53–77; also below, Fig. 1.

5 Their publications were listed by Kenneth Donahue (Reference Donahue, Ghisalberti, Pavan and Bartoccini1965: 788) and Maria Cecilia Mazzi (Reference Mazzi1973); see also the Corpus Informatico Belloriano website: http://bellori.sns.it/postIndex.html (last consulted 21.07.2014).

6 A subsequent edition was published in 1702; the Nasonii engravings were then reprinted in Le pitture antiche (1706) with an additional 24 plates; four further editions of this, as Picturae antiquae cryptarum Romanarum et Sepulcri Nasonum delineatae ..., appeared in the course of the eighteenth century, culminating in the 1791 publication, with an additional nineteen plates.

7 The time-span covered by the Memorie is unclear: amongst the few year dates given, 1682 (‘nel presente anno 1682’: Fea, Reference Fea1790: I, 153 no. 107) has been taken to indicate the latest material in the compilation, but the more frequent dating by papal reigns runs up to Innocent XI (1676–89), and the reference to discoveries made in connection with the new road near San Lorenzo in Panisperna (see Appendix, 33–5) could date to 1684.

8 ‘… trouvés par hazard dans Paris’ (Recueil, Reference Mariette, de Tubières and de Caylus1757: 10).

9 A note penned by Hugues-Adrien Joly, Garde du Cabinet du Roi, on the flyleaf bearing Caylus's portrait, recorded his reaction: ‘il me dit … que j'avois trop bien habillé son livre …’ (Mariette, Reference Mariette1851–3: 75).

10 Although a note on fol. 66 (Mariette, Reference Mariette1851–3: 74–5) attributed them to Pietro Santi Bartoli, Francesco's name appears on fols 67–9, plus the drawing (presumably the posthumous addition) added to fol. 48. The other additional drawings (fols 70–1) are without name; fol. 70 shows the marine mosaic from the De Marchis vineyard, 1698 (see below, n. 32), and fol. 71 a mosaic pavement (now lost) found in Spain a decade after Francesco's death, during roadworks at Sagunto (Vall de Pla, Reference Vall de Pla1961: 143–7).

11 ‘… l'un des plus beaux monumens de la Typographie Françoise’ (Restout, Reference Restout1771: 7).

12 British Library 130.h.9 (1), from the library of King George III.

13 Ref. no. VOS/84 in the RIBA Drawings and Archives collection (now housed in the Victoria and Albert Museum); the complete set of drawings can be viewed online at www.ribapix.com (last consulted 29.06.2014). I noted the link previously (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse1995: 221–2; Reference Whitehouse2001: 405–6 nos. 6, 7), and it has been utilized more recently in the analysis of specific discoveries by Modolo (Reference Modolo2011) and Gialluca (Reference Gialluca2013).

14 Possibly Frances Mary Musgrave, who married the fourth baronet, Sir Richard Musgrave of Tourin (Co. Waterford) in 1845, and died in 1895; or, as suggested by Modolo (pers. comm.), her daughter Florence Sophia [Margaret], who signed herself ‘F.M. Musgrave’.

15 Listed by John Harris (Reference Harris1972: 59) as 29(1) and (2).

16 On the second flyleaf at the front (traces of three drawings, roughly 140 × 265 mm, 122 × 244 mm and 121 × 245 mm); fol. 7 (a single drawing, about 195 mm wide), and fol. 16 (a drawing about 186 mm wide).

17 RIBA fols 3, 9, 14, 18, 21 and 28(2); Caylus fols 33, 35, 43–6, 55–6, 59, 60 and 62.

18 Caylus fol. 51; RIBA fols 2 and 25.

19 See 42, 49, and the second part of the caption on 11, where there is a change of hand.

20 ‘J'ai des raisons pour croire que les trente-trois Desseins que j'ai fait graver, ont fait autrefois partie d'un Recueil plus nombreux: je n'ai pas été assez heureux pour rassembler la totalité; mais c'est toujours beaucoup d'avoir fait une pareille découverte en France …’ (Recueil, Reference Mariette, de Tubières and de Caylus1757: 12).

21 ‘Depuis le 15 décembre 1685 jusqu'au 9 juillet 1690, j'ai vériffié vos comptes: vous avez envoyé à M. de Louvois 59 desseins de mignature pareil aux deux derniers que vous m'avez envoyé. Je n'en ai pas trouvé un seul après sa mort’ (Montaiglon, 1887–1912: I, 406).

22 ‘Je vous envoie deux peintures du Sr Pietro Santi copiées après l'antique. L'une est tirée d'un plafons trouvé, dans le ruines que l'on apelle le sette Sale, ou le Palais de Titus, il y a environ six ans. L'autre n'est qu'une seule figure, dont l'original a esté trouvé avec d'autres, il y a environ un mois, parmi de vieilles ruines dans une Vigne d'un Seigneur Romain, nommé Guillelmini’: La Teulière writing to Louvois in May 1688 (Montaiglon, Reference Montaiglon1887–1912: I, 172). The Sette Sale drawing was being sent with the suggestion that it could serve as a model for a painted ceiling.

23 The paper of drawings 10 and 26 is of the same type as the sheet on which they are mounted (fol. 27), which has traces of paint from another drawing on the recto; mount sheet fol. 28 has the same watermark as drawing 9, and on the verso are the mosaic patterns of 63; mount sheet fol. 29(1) has traces of drawing 64 on the verso, and the same fold line just before the right edge. It seems that the surplus blank paper had earlier been folded down on to the surface of the drawings.

24 ‘Elles sont en grand papier, commes celles que j'ay envoyées autrefois, et ne sont pas chargées d'ouvrage …’; the price was 15 écus for the two Corsini pictures, but he actually paid 12 (Montaiglon, Reference Montaiglon1887–1912: I, 389–90, 400). The accounts for 1684–6 in Paris record a sum of 12 écus paid for a single, but large and detailed, copy of the painted ceiling shown in Appendix 1 (Gady, Reference Gady and Bonfait2002: 185 no. 47). By comparison, a copy of the published Sepolcro dei Nasonii cost 2 écus (Montaiglon, Reference Montaiglon1887–1912: I, 408).

25 ‘… il est fort gros, et n'est pas jeune …’: Montaiglon, Reference Montaiglon1887–1912: I, 409.

26 The folio numbers from 16/17 on have been changed since his list was compiled in 1877. Reference to the drawings here is by Royal Library inventory number.

27 Bonaventura Bassegoda I Hugas (Reference Bassegoda I Hugas1994) provided details (including revised dates) additional to the accounts of Victoria's early career by Edward Goldberg (Reference Goldberg1983: 173–83, 344–51), and Stella Rudolph (Reference Rudolph1990). See also: Lyons, Reference Lyons, Fejfer, Fischer-Hansen and Rathje2003.

28 ‘… el mas curioso de todos … el [tomo] de las Pinturas antiguas de tiempo de los jentiles copiadas de colores a modo de miniatura de algunas ruinas de Roma que la aficion, y el desvelo de Pedro Santi Bartoli pudo conseguir en muchos años’ (Bassegoda I Hugas, Reference Bassegoda I Hugas1994: 52). The text is Biblioteca Corsini MS 660, previously noted by Adriano Prandi (Reference Prandi1941).

29 See: Pace, Reference Pace1979: 138 no. 1, pl. XVI; Beaven, Reference Beaven2010: 76–7 with figs 2.28, 2.29 (the latter showing the engraved version that served as the frontispiece to the published Vatican Vergil).

30 Prandi (Reference Prandi1941: 202–3 with figs 1, 2) identified Victoria's hand in the marginal notes and corrections on Biblioteca Corsini MS 660, and Rudolph (Reference Rudolph1990: 253, 260–1 figs 7–10) suggested that both copies of his manuscript Indice dell'opere di Rafaello Sanzio d'Urbino (Florence and Windsor) are autographs.

31 Following the present fol. 31 (two), between fols 39–40 (five) and 40–1 (one). RL 9593 on fol. 30 is a substitute for another drawing whose outline can still be seen; two drawings have been removed from fol. 33 (Michaelis, Reference Michaelis1910: 115). The drawings are variously mounted by inlaying, or by laying down onto blank pages.

32 RL 9661, a marine mosaic found in the vineyard of Signor de Marchis (Michaelis, Reference Michaelis1910: 119 fol. 85); Lucilla De Lachenal (Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 631–2 fig. 17) showed the engraving published in Le pitture antiche (1706), pl. 18.

33 M. Daly Davis (Reference Davis2005) has suggested that the preceding Nota delli Musei, also generally attributed to Bellori, was in fact the work of Fioravante Martinelli. See also the comments of Lucia Faedo (Reference Faedo, Borea and Gasparro2000: 113–15).

34 ‘… il mio Libro delle Pitture Antiche, che al presente s'intaglia per pubblicarsi’ (Rudolph, Reference Rudolph1990: 245–6), citing the manuscript in Florence (Kunsthistorisches Institut J.7559), fols 148r–149v; cf. Blunt, Reference Blunt1967: 31.

35 Its present whereabouts are unknown; in its absence, no firm conclusions can be drawn, but comparison of the Vittoria ‘Coriolanus’ with other Carracci drawings at Windsor suggests that it may indeed be a copy, though conceivably an autograph copy by Annibale: my thanks are due to Martin Clayton for discussing this drawing with me.

36 Note on p. 1 to the engraving, pl. I. The two ‘Coriolanus’ pictures seem to have been confused in the literature (although not by George Turnbull (Reference Turnbull1740: 23)).

37 For the collecting history of the Crozat family, see: Stuffmann, Reference Stuffmann1968: esp. pp. 33–5.

38 ‘… les esquisses originaux de tout ce qu'il avoit peint et gravé pour [le Cavalier del Pozzo et le Cardl de Maximi]’ (Montaiglon, Reference Montaiglon1887–1912: I, 400).

39 For Coke's acquisition of these drawings in Rome as ‘a booke’ in 1714, see: Connor Bulman, Reference Connor Bulman1999: 208. They were divided subsequently, together with further drawings, between two albums, in an arrangement that overrides at least two earlier, incomplete sets of numbers that give some more logical sequences of subject-matter (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 406; Modolo, Reference Modolo, Bruschetti, Giulierini, Swaddling, Gialluca and Reynolds2014: 149–62).

40 RL 9600–2, 9661, 9667 and 9670 = Le pitture antiche (1706), pls 8, 7, 9, 18, 19 and 16 respectively; Ashby noted on their mount sheets that the latter three had appeared also in editions of Gli antichi sepolcri in 1689 (RL 9661) and 1699 (for this expanded edition, see: Gialluca, Reference Gialluca2013: 63–72). The other ‘m’ drawings in the Vittoria album are: RL 9591, 9593–4, 9675–6, 9678–80, 9682–8 and 9689–98.

41 Gialluca (Reference Gialluca2013: 32–3 figs 5 and 6) shows the difference between the quarter-ceiling sketch (Fig. 4 here) and a finished coloured copy (56).

42 Werner Ehlich (Reference Ehlich1954: 92–3) noted the ‘simple’ red or blue framing of central pictures in the Fourth Pompeian Style of wall-painting, but the use of red frames extends well beyond this, chronologically and typologically, in Roman painting.

43 Ironically, the Vergil copies made for the Lansdowne volume (above, p. 266), are framed in gold, with a thin outer red line.

44 Some coloured copies attributable to Pietro Santi in the Holkham albums (I, fols 28–30, 34–7, 44, 61, 64; II, fol. 24) have red borders, and there are traces of such borders on the verso of others not now followed by drawings thus framed. A number of the Bartoli copies in the Paper Museum (above, p. 267) have had their red borders cropped (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 49).

45 ‘… nobilissimi modelli, & esemplari per le professioni dell'Architectura, Pittura, e Scoltura …’ (Gli antichi sepolcri, 1697: iv).

46 As suggested by Danuta Batorska (Reference Batorska1998) on the basis of an album in Leipzig showing details of the ceiling decoration and bearing both their names; the style of the drawings for this work, carried out around 1674, does not, however, uniformly support an attribution to Pietro Santi.

47 See, for instance, the volume of drawings attributed to Bartoli that once belonged to Horace Walpole (Yale University, Lewis Walpole Library 49 2371; Aghion, Reference Aghion and Snodin2009: 175, with 293 no. 85; Gialluca, Reference Gialluca2013: 37–8, 53–4). This includes a few sheets inscribed with topographical information, one of them (fol. 147) bearing the date ‘1689’. The volume can be viewed online at http://images.library.yale.edu/walpoleweb/default.asp (last consulted 10.07.2014).

48 ‘Sans la passion de Pietro Santi, l'on perdroit jusqu’á la mémoire de tout ce qui se trouve' (Montaiglon, Reference Montaiglon1887–1912: I, 390).

Notes

a) The painted subterranean chamber’ discovered in 1639 in the garden lying behind the church of San Gregorio Magno: De Lachenal, Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 643–4 nos. 9–11; Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 229–35. Despite contemporary reports that it was ruined not long after discovery, it seems that it survived, with some protection: in connection with the issue of a licence to excavate at the site in 1682, Bellori gave instructions that the painted room ‘with its gate’ must not be destroyed (Montanari, Reference Montanari, Borea and Gasparro2000: 44). Bartoli's records are therefore likely to have been made in situ, and the dating of the find to the pontificate of Alessandro VII Chigi (1655–67) in the inscription may reflect new work on it at this time. The location of the garden, sometimes confused with the ‘Orto Guglielmini’ (note i, below) is clarified by Modolo (Reference Modolo2011: 2–5).

b) Apart from the inscription here, there is apparently no record of this painting (now lost) amongst discoveries made in the area of San Giovanni in Laterano in the seventeenth century; the attribution might have been influenced by its being displayed in the Palazzo Barberini beside the celebrated ‘Barberini Roma’, discovered in 1655 near the baptistery of the basilica (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 54–5, 65, 254–7). On the basis of the Caylus drawing, Lanciani (Reference Lanciani, Malvezzi Campeggi and Russo1994: 205, and fig. 113 on p. 140) aptly described the picture as michelangiolesco in style. A copy by Giovanni Domenico Campiglia in the Topham Collection (Eton Bn. 9.11; Ashby, Reference Ashby1914: 67, pl. xxiv) shows it in tondo form; Turnbull, whose engravings were made from drawings by Camillo Paderni, published a version closer to the Bartoli format (1740: pl. C).

c) A richly-decorated complex of five rooms and a corridor, for which 5–19, together with other drawings, provide a substantial record (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse1995; for additional details, see: Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 262–95; De Lachenal, Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 630, 652–6 nos. 21–2). The Caylus/RIBA set includes the only surviving plan, and details of the figure paintings in rooms V and VI. For the shift from gold to brown ink for the inscriptions on 11–18, details from one wall of room V, see above, p. 273. Other records show the complete wall as a white-ground scheme compartmentalized by architectural details in red (Glasgow Massimi fols LIV–LV = Fig. 7 here; Eton Baddeley fols CVII–CIX: De Lachenal, Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 653–4 no. 22; Eton Bn. 6.27: Ashby, Reference Ashby1914: 34). Two other items from this find, a wall mosaic depicting Apollo and the painted harbour landscape probably located at ‘IV’ on the plan (5) are absent from this set, although recorded in coloured copies by Pietro Santi and Francesco Bartoli, as well as other artists (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 174–5 no. 38, 265–7). A suggestion that the harbour scene was not part of the 1668 find (Brandizzi Vittucci, Reference Brandizzi Vittucci2000: 92) overlooked the fact that it is recognizable in the detailed contemporary descriptions of work in progress at the site (Giovannini, Reference Giovannini1984: 206, 208–9, 210–11).

d) Three mosaics of a bath-building discovered in a plot of ground below the southern flank of Monte Celio, the Orto del Carciofolo located by Lanciani (Reference Lanciani1990: sheet 35) beside the Via Appia just outside the Porta Capena. The two emblemata showing gladiators were removed to Camillo Massimo's collection and are now in Madrid (De Lachenal, Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 630–2, 656–7 nos. 25, 26; Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 176–8 no. 39). The solitary copy of 21 in Berlin, attributed to P.S. Bartoli (Staatliche Museen, Kupferstichkabinett KdZ. 27789) was published for the first time by De Lachenal (Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 656–7 no. 26). It has the inscriptions, but lacks the indication of tesserae, as do the Glasgow Massimi copies of the mosaics from this site (cf. Pace, Reference Pace1979: 131), and the Dal Pozzo copy of 20 (RL 11397). It is likely that there were also Dal Pozzo copies of the two emblemata, which served as the basis for Johann Joachim Winckelmann's published engravings while they were in the Albani collection (Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 178): they are, however, missing from the Paper Museum as preserved at Windsor.

e) Drawings 2332 record a series of discoveries possibly made in the same locality c. 1683–4, although the site is not consistently named on all of them; 2932 are discussed separately in the note below. The most striking feature is the lavishly decorated aula in the Corinthian style, shown in plan (23) and sectional elevation (27); Lanciani located this just northwest of the Sette Sale (1990: sheet 23; cf. Lanciani, Reference Lanciani, Malvezzi Campeggi and Russo1994: 270–1; De Lachenal, Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 634–5 with figs 23–5 on p. 633). The ceiling (28), of which the octagon illustrated in 25 (‘Casa di Tito’) is the centrepiece, is to be identified as one of the ‘side vaults’ noted at ‘IV’ in the legend on 27; a sketch with colour notes showing a quarter detail of this ceiling can be made out on the verso of RL 9600 (the preparatory sketch for 24), obscured by a mount sheet pasted over it. A pen-and-ink sketch in the Vittoria album (RL 9680, Fig. 2 here; Michaelis, Reference Michaelis1910: 121 fol. 100, lower drawing), showing the right-hand side of a painted wall, is captioned Pittura nella facciata di una stanza nel orto delle sette sale / scoperta lanno 1683. This may have belonged to the same structure, though it is not distinguishable amongst the features described on the plan or the elevation. Some of the figures and ornaments therein were sketched also on RL 9684 (Michaelis, Reference Michaelis1910: 121 fol. 103, 2); a coloured version by Francesco Bartoli (Holkham II, fol. 12) differs from the colour notes on the sketch, as noted by Ashby (Reference Ashby1916: 41).

f) Six fragments of a frieze with scenes of Amazons battling with Greek warriors, interspersed with a decorative motif of centaurs, are shown in 2932. The four drawings may have belonged to two different sets: 2930, attributing the pictures to the Palazzo di Tito, are inscribed in gold, while 312 are inscribed in brown ink, and 31 gives the find-spot as the Terme di Tito, the baths of which the Sette Sale were the cisterns. The designation Casa/Palazzo di Tito was applied to the ruins within this area, in part the site of a large wing of Nero's Domus Aurea, which was not recognized in the seventeenth century; the topography of the area and the identification of the various structures therein remains problematic (cf. 519 for another structure found within the same general area, and see also: Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse1995: 219–20). Lanciani associated this frieze with the building found in the previous year (see note above, and De Lachenal (Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 669–70 nos. 42–3)), but the attribution remains uncertain. Two small fragments of it survived in the collection of Cardinal Gualtieri, as recorded on Topham drawings showing the warrior and Amazon of the lower fragment in 32 as separate pieces (Ashby, Reference Ashby1914: 61 nos. 6–7, pl. XXII). They were seen there by Edward Wright (Reference Wright1730: I, 300 –– ‘Two little pieces of antique Fresco, Diana and Mars, found at Tivoli’), and are now in the British Museum. Another, showing the upper part of the left-hand warrior of 29, together with the overlapping arm of the next figure, was owned by Victoria, and subsequently by Crozat (Turnbull, Reference Turnbull1740: 172; Lyons, Reference Lyons, Fejfer, Fischer-Hansen and Rathje2003: 496, fig. 7). This may be the piece acquired by Caylus himself and published in the first volume of his Recueil d'antiquités (1752), with Herculaneum as the alleged provenance. Now in the Cabinet des Medailles, recently it has been associated with the forgeries ascribed to Giuseppe Guerra (?1709–61), but definitive technical confirmation of this has not been possible (Burlot, Reference Burlot2012: 164–6, noting that the Gualtieri fragments in the British Museum show authentic ancient painting underneath modern retouching).

g) Drawings 335 may be grouped together as a record of discoveries made separately over a period of time in the area adjacent to San Lorenzo in Panisperna, a location associated in post-antique sources with two ancient structures, the Palazzo di Decio and the Terme d'Olimpiade (De Spirito, Reference De Spirito and Steinby1999a; Reference De Spirito and Steinby1999b), as well as episodes in the martyrdom of Saint Laurence. A lengthy annotation on RL 9586 (Michaelis, Reference Michaelis1910: 113 fol. 25; the preparatory drawing for 33) associates work there firstly with Cardinal Antonio Barberini, and subsequently, ‘in tempo de Rospigliosi’ (Clement IX Rospigliosi, 1667–9), with Queen Christina, who also acquired a statue of Venus (now in Madrid, Museo del Prado, EA 1534-36: Blanco Freijeiro and Lorente, Reference Blanco Freijeiro and Lorente1981: 26–7 no. 31, pl. 7) found when work was begun on a new road. In Memorie no. 16 the earlier work was reported as carried out ‘by order of Leonardo Agostini, at the request of [ad istanza del] Cardinal Barberini’, which suggests that it took place after 1655, when Agostini became Commissario delle Antichità, and Cardinal Antonio had returned from France; Agostini's tenure of the post ended in 1670, and Antonio died in 1671. The large statue of Livia, 13 palms high (c. 2.9 m) is not identifiable in the published Barberini inventories, and the pen-and-ink drawing of the ceiling has not come to light in the Barberini archives; it might have been made by Pietro Santi in situ and served as the basis for the coloured copies, 33 and that in the Massimi album (Pace, Reference Pace1979: pl. xxiv.b). Fea (1790: I, 56), citing Flaminio Vacca, associated this find-spot with the Terme d'Olimpiade, noting discoveries made here already in the sixteenth century within a vaulted structure: large statues of Pan and Mars, ceilings decorated with grotesques, and altre belle bizzarrie –– elements suggesting an opulent building, and in accord with the thematic content of the ceiling shown in 33. Memorie no. 17 (Fea, 1720: I, 226) mentions the new road and the Venus, together with the discovery of further structures and fragmentary sculpture, but gives no date. Also associated with this location is the pavement with a vintaging scene recorded by Bartoli in a preparatory drawing (RL 9671; Michaelis, Reference Michaelis1910: 121 fol. 93), where the find-spot á S. Lorenzo in panisperna is noted, and then, added in different ink, Nelle rovine del Palazzo di Decio pavimento intarsiato de marmi di diversi colori; an engraving was published in Le pitture antiche (De Lachenal, Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 626–7, fig. 6).

h) An apsidal hall or dining-room with triconch plan and opulent decoration, of a type associated with late Roman dwellings of some status. The evidence provided by 3640 together with other drawings in the Vittoria and Holkham albums has been analysed, in conjunction with relevant archival documents, by Modolo (Reference Modolo2011), who identifies the Guglielmini plot as the tract of land southeast of the Temple of Divus Claudius and bounded on the east by the road running from the Colosseum to Santa Maria in Navicella. The site seems to have been quite renowned in its day –– see La Teulière's reference to paintings found there in the spring of 1688 (above, p. 275 n. 22; Modolo (Reference Modolo2011: 19–20 n. 60) notes that the date and subject-matter probably connect them with a different structure there). Subsequently it became confused with discoveries elsewhere on Monte Celio, such as the painted room at San Gregorio (note a above).

i) De Lachenal (Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 670–1 no. 45) suggested that a small painting in the Louvre (inv. P 50) showing a single figure may be a surviving fragment of the frieze shown in 41, corresponding to the figure and scrolls at the right, although both are much simpler (and the figure wingless) in the fragment; the drawing would thus be an instance of abbellimento by Bartoli. The find-spot indicated on 412 would be on the Via Appia Antica (cf. Lanciani, Reference Lanciani, Malvezzi Campeggi and Russo1994: 280, where the Caylus drawing is illustrated). The shaky handwriting on 42 is comparable to that on 11.

j) This well-preserved necropolis, like a little town with brick tomb-houses on narrow streets, was unearthed over the period December 1689 to March 1691. Situated between the ancient Via Aurelia and the via di San Pancrazio, it was revealed by preparations for the building of the Casino dei Quattro Venti in the grounds of the Villa Corsini (now Doria Pamphili), within the area of the present-day piazzale Ragazzi del 1849 (Benocci, Reference Benocci1996: 21–3, 29–30; Verrando, Reference Verrando1996: 37–40 with figs 1–2). It was recorded partly in Gli antichi sepolcri (Reference Bartoli1697), in the introduction to which (pp. iv–v), Bartoli noted that some tombs already had been destroyed before he could record them. The genesis of the publication and its relationship to various drawings listed here has been studied in detail recently by Gialluca (Reference Gialluca2013); see also: Cacciotti, Reference Cacciotti and Palma Venetucci2001. The destruction of the cemetery removed it effectively from the archaeological record, save for the occasional discussion based on Bartoli's published engravings (see, for instance, von Hesberg, Reference von Hesberg, von Hesberg and Zanker1987: 48, 50, 52–4, 58), and the publication of some of the inscriptions (CIL VI 2, nos. 7784–7807; 59 includes an unpublished one). A more extensive record is provided by combining 4360 with the preparatory sketches in the Holkham and Vittoria albums, but further items could probably be added: Michaelis (Reference Michaelis1910: 117 fol. 69) noted the significant annotation on the mount sheet of the first of the Corsini series in the Vittoria album, the plan (Fig. 3, RL 9644), … le seguenti pitture sino al N° 106 …; the sequence in the album only runs as far as fol. 84, RL 9660 (minus some extraneous subjects preceding it, RL 9655–7), with one further Corsini subject (RL 9682) later on. The numbers 85 and 106 carried by the Holkham sketches (Figs 4 and 5) might relate them to this larger series. The coloured plan, 43, seems to belong to an early stage in the work, and shows roughly half of what appears on the published plan; the letters identifying the tombs do not tally entirely with those on the draught (Fig. 3), and the varied information provided by the three plans cannot be reconciled completely: see: Gialluca, Reference Gialluca2013: 26–30 figs 1–3.

k) A fragment possibly derived from excavations at the Villa Adriana during the papacy of Innocent X Pamphili (1644–55); De Lachenal (Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 646–7 no. 14) noted that the style of the painting is more redolent of cinquecento art.

l) The mosaics in the dome and ambulatory of the fourth-century mausoleum of Constantina, the later church of Santa Costanza, were much studied and recorded (Amadio, Reference Amadio1986: passim, esp. pp. 6, 54–64, 71–6, for drawings by Pietro Santi and Francesco Bartoli). The decoration of the dome was destroyed in 1620, and Bartoli's record of this was derived from Cardinal Massimo's copy of the drawing in the Escorial, as acknowledged by Giovanni Ciampini who used it as the source for his published engraving (Amadio, Reference Amadio1986: 70–1).

m) Two opus sectile panels removed in the course of the seventeenth century from the walls of the late Roman basilica, which had been converted into the church of Sant'Andrea cata Barbara (De Lachenal, Reference De Lachenal, Borea and Gasparro2000: 659–60 nos. 32–3; Whitehouse, Reference Whitehouse2001: 148–54 nos. 28–9; Sapelli, Reference Sapelli, Ensoli and La Rocca2000). Displayed thereafter in the Palazzo Massimo alle Quattro Fontane, they are now in the Museo Nazionale Romano (Palazzo Massimo alle Terme). Bartoli would have known them in the truncated form in which they appeared in Cardinal Camillo's collection, and he used the earlier records compiled in situ for Cassiano dal Pozzo to complete the missing details, as acknowledged on 65.

References

REFERENCES

Principal sources cited in abbreviated form:

Capponi 285 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Capponi 285 (Engelmann, 1909: pls 16.1–23.4).Google Scholar
Caylus ‘Peintur[es] Antiqu[es] Bartoli Caylus’, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Département des Estampes et Photographies, réserve GD-9B-FOL (Engelmann, 1909: pls 24–9).Google Scholar
Coleraine Vol. VII, ‘[Rome] Ripa’, Coleraine Collection, Corpus Christi College, Oxford (unpublished).Google Scholar
Eton Topham I–VII, Eton College Library, Bn. 4–9 (Ashby, 1914; Connor, 1993).Google Scholar
Eton Baddeley Baddeley Codex, Eton College Library 354 (Ashby, 1916: 48–51).Google Scholar
Glasgow Massimi ‘Antiquae picturae …’, Glasgow University Library MS Gen 1496 (Pace, 1979).Google Scholar
Holkham, I and II Volumes in the Library of Holkham Hall, Norfolk (Ashby, 1916: 35–48).Google Scholar
RIBA ‘Bartoli. Roman deco.’, Drawings and Archives collection of the Royal Institute of British Architects VOS/84, Victoria and Albert Museum, London (Harris, 1972).Google Scholar
Windsor Nett. ‘Antichità di Nettuno’, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, vol. no. 196 (earlier A.31; Michaelis XIII); drawings RL 11120–11521 (Michaelis, 1910: 122–4; Whitehouse, 2001: 176–94, 285–97).Google Scholar
Windsor Vitt. ‘Pitture antiche Dise. da Piet. Santi’, Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RCIN 970359 (earlier no. 175; A.22; Michaelis XIX); drawings RL 9566–9700. (Michaelis, 1910: 111–22; and further details here, pp. 276–81).Google Scholar
Gli antichi sepolcri (1697) — Bartoli, P.S., Gli antichi sepolcri, overo mausolei romani, et etruschi. Trovati in Roma & in altri luoghi celebri, nelli quali si contengono molte erudite memorie: raccolti, disegnati, & intagliati da Pietro Santi Bartoli. Rome, A. de Rossi.Google Scholar
Le pitture antiche (1706) — Le pitture antiche delle grotte di Roma, e del Sepolcro de' Nasonij, disegnate da P. Santi Bartoli, e F. Bartoli, descritte da G.P. Bellori e M. Causei de la Chausse. Rome, G. degli Zenobj.Google Scholar
Memorie ed. Fea — Memorie di varie escavazioni fatte in Roma, e nei luoghi suburbani vivente Pietro Santi Bartoli. See: Fea, 1790: I, 222–73.Google Scholar
Picturae antiquae (1791) — Picturae antiquae cryptarum Romanarum et Sepulcri Nasonum delineatae, et expressae ad archetypa a Petro Sancti Bartholi et Francisco ejus filio, descriptae vero, & illustratae a Johanne Petro Bellorio et Michaele Angelo Causseo. Opus latine redditum, proditque absolutius et exactius cum Appendice numquam edita. Rome, Lazarini.Google Scholar
Recueil (1757) — Mariette, P.J. and de Tubières, A.-C.P., de Caylus, Comte, Recueil de peintures antiques, imitées fidèlement, pour les couleurs et le trait, d'après les desseins coloriés faits par Pietre-Sante Bartoli. Paris.Google Scholar
Sepolcro de' Nasonii (1680) — Le pitture antiche del Sepolcro de' Nasonii nella Via Flaminia: disegnate, ed intagliate alla similitudine degli antichi originali da Pietro Santi Bartoli. Rome, G.B. Bussotti.Google Scholar
Aghion, I. (2009) Horace Walpole: antiquarian of his time. In Snodin, M. (ed.), Horace Walpole's Strawberry Hill: 171–81. New Haven/London, Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Almagno, I. (2007) Francesco Bartoli ‘Commissario delle Antichità’: nuovi contributi. Studi Romani 55 (3–4): 453–72.Google Scholar
Amadio, A.A. (1986) I mosaici di S. Costanza. Disegni, incisioni e documenti dal XV al XIX secolo. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Amidei, F. (1741) Roma antica distinta per regioni secondo l'esempio di Sesto Rufo, Vittore, e Nardini … Coll'aggiunta … delle memorie di varie antichità … scritte da Ulisse Aldrovandi, Flaminio Vacca, Francesco de' Ficoroni, Pietro Santi Bartoli, ed altri fino all'anno MDCCXLI, I: 293369. Rome, Amidei.Google Scholar
Andreae, B. and Pace, C. (2001) Das Grab der Nasonier in Rom. Antike Welt 32: 369–82, 461–73.Google Scholar
Ashby, T.A. (1914) Drawings of ancient paintings in English collections, I. Papers of the British School at Rome 7: 162.Google Scholar
Ashby, T.A. (1916) Drawings of ancient paintings in English collections, II–IV. Papers of the British School at Rome 8: 3554.Google Scholar
Aymonino, A., Gwynn, L. and Modolo, M. (2013) Paper Palaces: the Topham Collection as a Source for British Neo-Classicism. Exhibition catalogue, Eton College.Google Scholar
Barberini, F. (1993) Francesco Barberini e l'edizione seicentesca dei Documenti d'amore. Xenia Antiqua 2: 125–48.Google Scholar
Bartoli, P.S. (1677) P. Virgilii Maronis opera quae supersunt in antiquo codice Vaticano ad priscum imaginum formam incisa a Petro Sancte Bartoli. Rome.Google Scholar
Bassegoda I Hugas, B. (1994) Noves dades sobre el canonge Vicente Vitoria (Dènia, 1650–Roma, 1790), tractadista, pintor, gravador i colleccionista. Butlletí del Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya 2: 3762.Google Scholar
Batorska, D. (1998) Designs for the Galleria in Palazzo Borghese in Rome: new proposals. Paragone Arte anno XLVIII, ser. 3, 14 (1997): 2649, pls 20–50 a,b.Google Scholar
Beaven, L. (2010) An Ardent Patron. Cardinal Camillo Massimo and his Antiquarian and Artistic Circle. London, Holberton.Google Scholar
Benocci, C. (1996) Villa Doria Pamphilj. Rome, Editalia.Google Scholar
Blanco Freijeiro, A. and Lorente, M. (1981) Catálogo de la Escultura. Museo del Prado. Madrid, Patronato Nacional de Museos Madrid.Google Scholar
Blunt, A. (1967) Don Vincenzo Vittoria. The Burlington Magazine 109 no. 766: 31–2.Google Scholar
Borea, E. (2000) Bellori e la documentazione figurativa fra l'antico il moderno e il contemporaneo. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori, I: 141–51. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Brandizzi Vittucci, P. (2000) Antium. Anzio e Nettuno in epoca romana. Rome, Bardi.Google Scholar
Bristow, I.C. (1996) Architectural Colour in British Interiors 1615–1840. New Haven/London, Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Burlot, D. (2012) Fabriquer l'antique. Les contrafaçons de peinture murale antique au XVIIIe siècle (Mémoires et documents sur Rome et l'Italie méridionale n.s. 7). Naples, Centre Jean Bérard.Google Scholar
Cacciotti, B. (2001) Scoperte di antichità tra Cinquecento e Seicento. In Palma Venetucci, B. (ed.), Villa Doria Pamphilj. Storia della collezione: 3140. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Carpita, V. (2006) Agostino Scilla (1629–1700) e Pietro Santi Bartoli: il metodo scientifico applicato allo studio dei fossili e la sua trasmissione ai siti e monumenti antichi. Atti dell'Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rendiconti ser. 9, 17: 307–84.Google Scholar
CIL: Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1862–) Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. Berlin, G. Reimer/W. de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Claridge, A. (2004) Archaeologies, antiquaries and the memorie of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Rome. In Bignamini, I. (ed.), Archives and Excavations. Essays on the History of Archaeological Excavations in Rome and Southern Italy from the Renaissance to the Nineteenth Century (Archaeological Monographs of the British School at Rome 14): 3353. London, British School at Rome.Google Scholar
Claridge, A. and Herklotz, I. (2012) The Paper Museum of Cassiano dal Pozzo A. VI. Classical Manuscript Illustrations. London, Royal Collection Trust.Google Scholar
Connor, L.M. (1993) The Topham Collection of drawings in Eton College Library. Eutopia 2 (1): 2539.Google Scholar
Connor Bulman, L.M. (1999) The eighteenth-century collection of antique paintings in Palazzo Rospigliosi. Xenia Antiqua 8: 205–17.Google Scholar
Connor Bulman, L.M. (2001) ‘All the profusion of Eaton and Santo Bartoli’: the first collections of ancient painting in Britain. In Jones, L.R. and Matthew, L.C. (eds), Coming About … A Festschrift for John Shearman: 343–8. Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Art Museums.Google Scholar
Dacos, N. (1969) La découverte de la Domus Aurea et la formation des grotesques à la Renaissance (Studies of the Warburg Institute 31). London, Warburg Institute.Google Scholar
Davis, M.D. (2005) Giovanni Pietro Bellori and the ‘Nota delli musei’. Modern libraries and ancient paintings in Seicento Rome. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 68: 191233.Google Scholar
Décultot, E., Bickendorf, G. and Kockel, V. (2010) Musées de papier. L'antiquité en livres 1600–1800. Paris, Louvre Éditions/Gourcuff Gradenigo.Google Scholar
De Lachenal, L. (2000) La riscoperta della pittura antica nel XVII secolo: scavi, disegni, collezioni. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori II: 625–36, catalogue entries pp. 643–4 nos. 9–11, 646–7 no. 14, 652–7 nos. 21–6, 662–3 no. 36, 669–70 nos. 42–3, 670–1 no. 45. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
De Spirito, G. (1999a) Palatium Decii. In Steinby, E.M. (ed.), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae IV (P–S): 43–4. Rome, Quasar.Google Scholar
De Spirito, G. (1999b) Thermae Olimpiadis. In Steinby, E.M. (ed.), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae V (T–Z): 62–3. Rome, Quasar.Google Scholar
Donahue, K. (1965) Bellori, Giovanni Pietro. In Ghisalberti, A.M., Pavan, M. and Bartoccini, F. (eds), Dizionario biografico degli italiani VII (Bartolucci–Bellotto): 781–9. Rome, Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana.Google Scholar
Du Bos, J.B. (1719) Réflexions critiques sur la poésie et sur la peinture. Paris, J. Mariette.Google Scholar
Ehlich, W. (1954) Bild und Rahmen im Altertum. Munich, W. Seemann.Google Scholar
Engelmann, R. (1909) Antike Bilder aus Römischen Handschriften in Phototypischer Reproduction. Leiden, A.W. Sijthoff.Google Scholar
Faedo, L. (2000) Percorsi secenteschi verso una storia della pittura antica: Bellori e il suo contesto. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori I: 113–20. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Fea, C. (1790) Miscellanea filologica critica e antiquaria dall'avvocato Carlo Fea, 2 vols. Rome, Pagliarini.Google Scholar
Gady, B. (2002) L'étrange Monsieur de La Teulière. In Bonfait, O. (ed.), L'idéal classique. Les échanges artistiques entre Rome et Paris au temps de Bellori (1640–1700): 161–85. Rome/Paris, Académie de France à Rome/Somogy Éditions d'Art.Google Scholar
Gialluca, B. (2013) Gli antichi sepolcri e Ivan Paštrić (Giovanni Pastrizio). Ricerche sopra la produzione estrema di Pietro Santi Bartoli. Symbolae Antiquariae 5 (2012): 23106.Google Scholar
Giovannini, L. (1984) (ed.) Lettere di Ottavio Falconieri a Leopoldo de' Medici. Florence, EDAM.Google Scholar
Goldberg, E.L. (1983) Patterns in Late Medici Art Patronage. Princeton, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Harris, J. (1972) Catalogue of the Drawings Collections of the Royal Institute of British Architects, B. London, Gregg International.Google Scholar
Herklotz, I. (2002) Bellori, Fabretti, and Trajan's Column. In Bell, J. and Willette, T. (eds), Art History in the Age of Bellori: 127–44. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Joyce, H. (1992) Grasping at shadows: ancient paintings in Renaissance and Baroque Rome. The Art Bulletin 74: 219–46.Google Scholar
Joyce, H. (2002) From darkness to light: Annibale Carracci, Bellori, and ancient painting. In Bell, J. and Willette, T. (eds), Art History in the Age of Bellori: 170–88. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lanciani, R. (1895) Le picturae antiquae cryptarum romanarum. Bullettino della Commissione Comunale di Archeologia 23: 165–92.Google Scholar
Lanciani, R. (1990) Forma Urbis Romae (reprint; first impression Milan, 1893–1901). Rome, Quasar.Google Scholar
Lanciani, R. (1994) Storia degli scavi di Roma e notizie intorno le collezioni romane di antichità, V (1605–1700), ed. Malvezzi Campeggi, L. and Russo, M.R.. Rome, Quasar.Google Scholar
Luschi, L. (1992) Pietro Sante Bartoli e le pitture del Mausoleo ‘Dei Gordiani’. Bollettino d'Arte anno 77, ser. 6. 71: 114.Google Scholar
Lyons, C. (2003) Antiquities art theory in the collections of Vicente Victoria. In Fejfer, J., Fischer-Hansen, T. and Rathje, A. (eds), The Role of the Artist in the Rediscovery of Antiquity (Acta Hyperborea 10): 481507. Copenhagen, Museum Tusculum Press.Google Scholar
Mariette, P.-J. (1851–3) Abecedario de P.-J. Mariette et autres notes inédites de cet amateur sur les arts et les artistes. Ouvrage publié d'après les manuscrits autographes conservés au cabinet des estampes de la Bibliothèque Imperiale, et annoté par Mm Ph. de Chennevières and A. de Montaiglon I. A–Col. Paris, J.-B. Dumoulin.Google Scholar
Mariette, P.J. and Caylus, A.-C.P.de Tubières, Comte de (1783–7) Recueil des peintures antiques trouvées à Rome, imitées fedelement, pour les couleurs et le trait, d'après les desseins coloriés faits par Pietro-Sante Bartoli, et autres dessinateurs, 3 vols (second, expanded edition). Paris, Didot l'Aîné.Google Scholar
Mazzi, M.C. (1973) L'incisore perugino Pietro Sante Bartoli. Bollettino della Deputazione di Storia Patria per l'Umbria 70 (1): 2139.Google Scholar
Michaelis, A. (1910) Das Grabmal der Nasonier. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 25: 101–26.Google Scholar
Misson, M. (1714) A New Voyage to Italy. With Curious Observations on Several Other Countries: as, Germany; Switzerland; Savoy; Geneva; Flanders; and Holland. Together with Useful Instructions for Those Who Shall Travel Hither. In Four Volumes (fourth, enlarged, edition). London, [printed for R. Bonwicke et al.].Google Scholar
Modolo, M. (2011) Dal Clivus Scauri al Vicus Capitis Africae: gli affreschi della Vigna Guglielmina a Roma nei disegni dei Bartoli. Bollettino d'Arte anno 95, ser. 7. 8 (2010): 120.Google Scholar
Modolo, M. (2014) I disegni dei Bartoli nella collezione di Thomas Coke a Holkham Hall. In Bruschetti, P., Giulierini, P., Swaddling, J., Gialluca, B. and Reynolds, S., Seduzione etrusca. Dai segreti di Holkham Hall alle meraviglie del British Museum: 149–62, with catalogue entries pp. 163–72 nos. I.24–I.27d. Milan, Skira.Google Scholar
Montaiglon, A. de (1887–1912) (ed.) Correspondance des Directeurs de l'Académie de France à Rome avec les surintendants des bâtiments, 18 vols. Paris, Charavay Frères.Google Scholar
Montanari, T. (2000) La politica culturale di Giovan Pietro Bellori. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori, I: 3949. Rome, Edizioni De Luca.Google Scholar
[Nardini, F.] (1741) Roma antica distinta per regioni secondo l'esempio di Sesto Rufo, Vittore, e Nardini: ornata di rami delle più celebri fabbriche antiche diligentemente intagliate. Coll'aggiunta dello stato di Roma nel secolo XII., e delle memorie di varie antichità trovate in diversi luoghi della città di Roma scritte da Ulisse Aldrovandi, Flaminio Vacca, Francesco de' Ficoroni, Pietro Santi Bartoli, ed altri fino all'anno 1741. Tomo primo: 293369. Rome, Fausto Amidei.Google Scholar
Pace, C. (1979) Pietro Santi Bartoli: drawings in Glasgow University Library after Roman paintings and mosaics. Papers of the British School at Rome 47: 117–55.Google Scholar
Pace, C. (1996) Bartoli, Pietro Santi (Sante; 1635–1700). In de Grummond, N.T. (ed.), An Encyclopedia of the History of Classical Archaeology I, AK: 122–4. London/Chicago, Fitzroy Dearborn.Google Scholar
Pascoli, L. (1965) Vite de' pittori, scultori, ed architetti Perugini (reprint; first edition Rome, 1732). Amsterdam, B.M. Israel.Google Scholar
Pinot de Villechenon, M.N. (1990) Fortunes des fresques antiques de Rome au XVIIIe siècle. Pietro Santi Bartoli et le Comte de Caylus. Gazette des Beaux Arts 132 no. 1461: 105–15.Google Scholar
Pio, N. (1977) Le vite di pittori scultori et architetti (cod. ms. Capponi 257), ed. Enggass, C. and Enggass, R..Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana.Google Scholar
Pomponi, M. (1992) Alcune precisazioni sulla vita e la produzione artistica di Pietro Santi Bartoli. Storia dell'Arte 27: 195225.Google Scholar
Pomponi, M. (1994) Fonti per la storia dei monumenti antichi di Roma. I. Collezionisti inglesi e artisti romani nel primo Settecento. Una lettera di Francesco Fernando d'Imperiali a Richard Topham. Atti dell'Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rendiconti ser. 5, 9: 259–69.Google Scholar
Pomponi, M. (1996) La collezione del cardinale Massimo e l'inventario del 1677. In Buonocore, M., Cacciotti, B., di Carpegna Falconieri, T., de Angelis d'Ossat, M., Fusconi, G., Molinari, M.C., Pomponi, M. and Sproti, A., Camillo Massimo. Collezionista di antichità. Fonti e materiali (Xenia Antiqua Monografie 3): 91147. Rome, ‘L'Erma’ di Bretschneider.Google Scholar
Prandi, A. (1941) Un ‘academia de pintura’ della fine del Seicento. Rivista dell'Istituto Nazionale d'Archeologia e Storia dell'Arte 8: 201–16.Google Scholar
Prosperi Valenti Rodino, S. (2000) ll disegno per Bellori. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori, I: 131–40. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Restout, J.-B. (1771) Galerie françoise: ou portraits des hommes et des femmes célébres qui ont paru en France. Paris, Hérissant et Fils.Google Scholar
Richardson, J. (1722) An Account of some of the Statues, Bas-reliefs, Drawings and Pictures in Italy, France &c with Remarks. London, J. Knapton.Google Scholar
Ridley, R.T. (1992) To protect the monuments: the papal antiquarian (1534–1870). Xenia Antiqua 1: 117–54.Google Scholar
Rudolph, S. (1990) Vincenzo Vittoria fra pitture, poesie e polemiche. Labyrinthos 13–16 (1988–9): 223–66.Google Scholar
Sandrart, J. von (1971) Joachim von Sandrarts Academie der Bau-, Bild- und Mahlerey-Künste von 1675: Leben der Berühmten Maler, Bildhauer und Baumeister (reprint, ed. Peltzer, R.A.). Farnborough, Gregg.Google Scholar
Sapelli, M. (2000) La basilica di Giunio Basso. In Ensoli, S. and La Rocca, E. (eds), Aurea Roma. Dalla città pagana alla città cristiana: 137–9, with catalogue entries pp. 534–6 nos. 176–8. Rome, ‘L'Erma’ di Bretschneider.Google Scholar
Stuffmann, M. (1968) Les tableaux de la collection de Pierre Crozat. Gazette des Beaux Arts ser. 6, 72: 11143.Google Scholar
Turnbull, G. (1740) A Treatise on Ancient Painting, Containing Observations on the Rise, Progress, and Decline of that Art. London, A. Millar.Google Scholar
Vall de Pla, M.A. (1961) Mosaicos romanos de Sagunto. Archivo de Prehistoria Levantina 9: 141–75.Google Scholar
Verrando, G.N. (1996) Topografia varia e sepolcrale del tratto suburbano delle due vie Aurelie. Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria 118: 546.Google Scholar
von Hesberg, H. (1987) Planung und Ausgestaltung der Necropolen Roms im 2. Jahrhundert nach Christ. In von Hesberg, H. and Zanker, P. (eds), Römische Gräberstrassen: Selbstdarstellung, Status, Standard: Kolloquium in München vom 28. bis 30. Oktober 1985: 4360. Munich, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Weston-Lewis, A. (1992) Annibale Carracci and the antique. Master Drawings 30: 287313.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, H. (1995) The rebirth of Adonis. Papers of the British School at Rome 63: 215–43.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, H. (2001) The Paper Museum of Cassiano dal Pozzo, Series A, Part I: Ancient Mosaics and Wallpaintings. London/Turnhout, Brepols.Google Scholar
Wood, J. (1996) Padre Resta as a collector of Carracci drawings. Master Drawings 34: 371.Google Scholar
Wright, D.H. (1993) The Vatican Vergil: a Masterpiece of Late Antique Art. Berkeley/Oxford, University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wright, E. (1730) Some Observations Made in Travelling through France, Italy, &c. in the Years 1720, 1721, and 1722, 2 vols. London, T. Ward and E. Wicksteed.Google Scholar
Zocca, E. (1976) Nota delli musei, librerie, gallerie, et ornamenti di statue e pitture ne' palazzi, nelle case, e ne' giardini di Roma (reprint with commentary). Rome, Istituto Nazionale di Archeologia e Storia dell'Arte.Google Scholar
Capponi 285 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Capponi 285 (Engelmann, 1909: pls 16.1–23.4).Google Scholar
Caylus ‘Peintur[es] Antiqu[es] Bartoli Caylus’, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Département des Estampes et Photographies, réserve GD-9B-FOL (Engelmann, 1909: pls 24–9).Google Scholar
Coleraine Vol. VII, ‘[Rome] Ripa’, Coleraine Collection, Corpus Christi College, Oxford (unpublished).Google Scholar
Eton Topham I–VII, Eton College Library, Bn. 4–9 (Ashby, 1914; Connor, 1993).Google Scholar
Eton Baddeley Baddeley Codex, Eton College Library 354 (Ashby, 1916: 48–51).Google Scholar
Glasgow Massimi ‘Antiquae picturae …’, Glasgow University Library MS Gen 1496 (Pace, 1979).Google Scholar
Holkham, I and II Volumes in the Library of Holkham Hall, Norfolk (Ashby, 1916: 35–48).Google Scholar
RIBA ‘Bartoli. Roman deco.’, Drawings and Archives collection of the Royal Institute of British Architects VOS/84, Victoria and Albert Museum, London (Harris, 1972).Google Scholar
Windsor Nett. ‘Antichità di Nettuno’, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, vol. no. 196 (earlier A.31; Michaelis XIII); drawings RL 11120–11521 (Michaelis, 1910: 122–4; Whitehouse, 2001: 176–94, 285–97).Google Scholar
Windsor Vitt. ‘Pitture antiche Dise. da Piet. Santi’, Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RCIN 970359 (earlier no. 175; A.22; Michaelis XIX); drawings RL 9566–9700. (Michaelis, 1910: 111–22; and further details here, pp. 276–81).Google Scholar
Gli antichi sepolcri (1697) — Bartoli, P.S., Gli antichi sepolcri, overo mausolei romani, et etruschi. Trovati in Roma & in altri luoghi celebri, nelli quali si contengono molte erudite memorie: raccolti, disegnati, & intagliati da Pietro Santi Bartoli. Rome, A. de Rossi.Google Scholar
Le pitture antiche (1706) — Le pitture antiche delle grotte di Roma, e del Sepolcro de' Nasonij, disegnate da P. Santi Bartoli, e F. Bartoli, descritte da G.P. Bellori e M. Causei de la Chausse. Rome, G. degli Zenobj.Google Scholar
Memorie ed. Fea — Memorie di varie escavazioni fatte in Roma, e nei luoghi suburbani vivente Pietro Santi Bartoli. See: Fea, 1790: I, 222–73.Google Scholar
Picturae antiquae (1791) — Picturae antiquae cryptarum Romanarum et Sepulcri Nasonum delineatae, et expressae ad archetypa a Petro Sancti Bartholi et Francisco ejus filio, descriptae vero, & illustratae a Johanne Petro Bellorio et Michaele Angelo Causseo. Opus latine redditum, proditque absolutius et exactius cum Appendice numquam edita. Rome, Lazarini.Google Scholar
Recueil (1757) — Mariette, P.J. and de Tubières, A.-C.P., de Caylus, Comte, Recueil de peintures antiques, imitées fidèlement, pour les couleurs et le trait, d'après les desseins coloriés faits par Pietre-Sante Bartoli. Paris.Google Scholar
Sepolcro de' Nasonii (1680) — Le pitture antiche del Sepolcro de' Nasonii nella Via Flaminia: disegnate, ed intagliate alla similitudine degli antichi originali da Pietro Santi Bartoli. Rome, G.B. Bussotti.Google Scholar
Aghion, I. (2009) Horace Walpole: antiquarian of his time. In Snodin, M. (ed.), Horace Walpole's Strawberry Hill: 171–81. New Haven/London, Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Almagno, I. (2007) Francesco Bartoli ‘Commissario delle Antichità’: nuovi contributi. Studi Romani 55 (3–4): 453–72.Google Scholar
Amadio, A.A. (1986) I mosaici di S. Costanza. Disegni, incisioni e documenti dal XV al XIX secolo. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Amidei, F. (1741) Roma antica distinta per regioni secondo l'esempio di Sesto Rufo, Vittore, e Nardini … Coll'aggiunta … delle memorie di varie antichità … scritte da Ulisse Aldrovandi, Flaminio Vacca, Francesco de' Ficoroni, Pietro Santi Bartoli, ed altri fino all'anno MDCCXLI, I: 293369. Rome, Amidei.Google Scholar
Andreae, B. and Pace, C. (2001) Das Grab der Nasonier in Rom. Antike Welt 32: 369–82, 461–73.Google Scholar
Ashby, T.A. (1914) Drawings of ancient paintings in English collections, I. Papers of the British School at Rome 7: 162.Google Scholar
Ashby, T.A. (1916) Drawings of ancient paintings in English collections, II–IV. Papers of the British School at Rome 8: 3554.Google Scholar
Aymonino, A., Gwynn, L. and Modolo, M. (2013) Paper Palaces: the Topham Collection as a Source for British Neo-Classicism. Exhibition catalogue, Eton College.Google Scholar
Barberini, F. (1993) Francesco Barberini e l'edizione seicentesca dei Documenti d'amore. Xenia Antiqua 2: 125–48.Google Scholar
Bartoli, P.S. (1677) P. Virgilii Maronis opera quae supersunt in antiquo codice Vaticano ad priscum imaginum formam incisa a Petro Sancte Bartoli. Rome.Google Scholar
Bassegoda I Hugas, B. (1994) Noves dades sobre el canonge Vicente Vitoria (Dènia, 1650–Roma, 1790), tractadista, pintor, gravador i colleccionista. Butlletí del Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya 2: 3762.Google Scholar
Batorska, D. (1998) Designs for the Galleria in Palazzo Borghese in Rome: new proposals. Paragone Arte anno XLVIII, ser. 3, 14 (1997): 2649, pls 20–50 a,b.Google Scholar
Beaven, L. (2010) An Ardent Patron. Cardinal Camillo Massimo and his Antiquarian and Artistic Circle. London, Holberton.Google Scholar
Benocci, C. (1996) Villa Doria Pamphilj. Rome, Editalia.Google Scholar
Blanco Freijeiro, A. and Lorente, M. (1981) Catálogo de la Escultura. Museo del Prado. Madrid, Patronato Nacional de Museos Madrid.Google Scholar
Blunt, A. (1967) Don Vincenzo Vittoria. The Burlington Magazine 109 no. 766: 31–2.Google Scholar
Borea, E. (2000) Bellori e la documentazione figurativa fra l'antico il moderno e il contemporaneo. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori, I: 141–51. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Brandizzi Vittucci, P. (2000) Antium. Anzio e Nettuno in epoca romana. Rome, Bardi.Google Scholar
Bristow, I.C. (1996) Architectural Colour in British Interiors 1615–1840. New Haven/London, Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Burlot, D. (2012) Fabriquer l'antique. Les contrafaçons de peinture murale antique au XVIIIe siècle (Mémoires et documents sur Rome et l'Italie méridionale n.s. 7). Naples, Centre Jean Bérard.Google Scholar
Cacciotti, B. (2001) Scoperte di antichità tra Cinquecento e Seicento. In Palma Venetucci, B. (ed.), Villa Doria Pamphilj. Storia della collezione: 3140. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Carpita, V. (2006) Agostino Scilla (1629–1700) e Pietro Santi Bartoli: il metodo scientifico applicato allo studio dei fossili e la sua trasmissione ai siti e monumenti antichi. Atti dell'Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rendiconti ser. 9, 17: 307–84.Google Scholar
CIL: Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1862–) Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. Berlin, G. Reimer/W. de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Claridge, A. (2004) Archaeologies, antiquaries and the memorie of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Rome. In Bignamini, I. (ed.), Archives and Excavations. Essays on the History of Archaeological Excavations in Rome and Southern Italy from the Renaissance to the Nineteenth Century (Archaeological Monographs of the British School at Rome 14): 3353. London, British School at Rome.Google Scholar
Claridge, A. and Herklotz, I. (2012) The Paper Museum of Cassiano dal Pozzo A. VI. Classical Manuscript Illustrations. London, Royal Collection Trust.Google Scholar
Connor, L.M. (1993) The Topham Collection of drawings in Eton College Library. Eutopia 2 (1): 2539.Google Scholar
Connor Bulman, L.M. (1999) The eighteenth-century collection of antique paintings in Palazzo Rospigliosi. Xenia Antiqua 8: 205–17.Google Scholar
Connor Bulman, L.M. (2001) ‘All the profusion of Eaton and Santo Bartoli’: the first collections of ancient painting in Britain. In Jones, L.R. and Matthew, L.C. (eds), Coming About … A Festschrift for John Shearman: 343–8. Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Art Museums.Google Scholar
Dacos, N. (1969) La découverte de la Domus Aurea et la formation des grotesques à la Renaissance (Studies of the Warburg Institute 31). London, Warburg Institute.Google Scholar
Davis, M.D. (2005) Giovanni Pietro Bellori and the ‘Nota delli musei’. Modern libraries and ancient paintings in Seicento Rome. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 68: 191233.Google Scholar
Décultot, E., Bickendorf, G. and Kockel, V. (2010) Musées de papier. L'antiquité en livres 1600–1800. Paris, Louvre Éditions/Gourcuff Gradenigo.Google Scholar
De Lachenal, L. (2000) La riscoperta della pittura antica nel XVII secolo: scavi, disegni, collezioni. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori II: 625–36, catalogue entries pp. 643–4 nos. 9–11, 646–7 no. 14, 652–7 nos. 21–6, 662–3 no. 36, 669–70 nos. 42–3, 670–1 no. 45. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
De Spirito, G. (1999a) Palatium Decii. In Steinby, E.M. (ed.), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae IV (P–S): 43–4. Rome, Quasar.Google Scholar
De Spirito, G. (1999b) Thermae Olimpiadis. In Steinby, E.M. (ed.), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae V (T–Z): 62–3. Rome, Quasar.Google Scholar
Donahue, K. (1965) Bellori, Giovanni Pietro. In Ghisalberti, A.M., Pavan, M. and Bartoccini, F. (eds), Dizionario biografico degli italiani VII (Bartolucci–Bellotto): 781–9. Rome, Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana.Google Scholar
Du Bos, J.B. (1719) Réflexions critiques sur la poésie et sur la peinture. Paris, J. Mariette.Google Scholar
Ehlich, W. (1954) Bild und Rahmen im Altertum. Munich, W. Seemann.Google Scholar
Engelmann, R. (1909) Antike Bilder aus Römischen Handschriften in Phototypischer Reproduction. Leiden, A.W. Sijthoff.Google Scholar
Faedo, L. (2000) Percorsi secenteschi verso una storia della pittura antica: Bellori e il suo contesto. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori I: 113–20. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Fea, C. (1790) Miscellanea filologica critica e antiquaria dall'avvocato Carlo Fea, 2 vols. Rome, Pagliarini.Google Scholar
Gady, B. (2002) L'étrange Monsieur de La Teulière. In Bonfait, O. (ed.), L'idéal classique. Les échanges artistiques entre Rome et Paris au temps de Bellori (1640–1700): 161–85. Rome/Paris, Académie de France à Rome/Somogy Éditions d'Art.Google Scholar
Gialluca, B. (2013) Gli antichi sepolcri e Ivan Paštrić (Giovanni Pastrizio). Ricerche sopra la produzione estrema di Pietro Santi Bartoli. Symbolae Antiquariae 5 (2012): 23106.Google Scholar
Giovannini, L. (1984) (ed.) Lettere di Ottavio Falconieri a Leopoldo de' Medici. Florence, EDAM.Google Scholar
Goldberg, E.L. (1983) Patterns in Late Medici Art Patronage. Princeton, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Harris, J. (1972) Catalogue of the Drawings Collections of the Royal Institute of British Architects, B. London, Gregg International.Google Scholar
Herklotz, I. (2002) Bellori, Fabretti, and Trajan's Column. In Bell, J. and Willette, T. (eds), Art History in the Age of Bellori: 127–44. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Joyce, H. (1992) Grasping at shadows: ancient paintings in Renaissance and Baroque Rome. The Art Bulletin 74: 219–46.Google Scholar
Joyce, H. (2002) From darkness to light: Annibale Carracci, Bellori, and ancient painting. In Bell, J. and Willette, T. (eds), Art History in the Age of Bellori: 170–88. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lanciani, R. (1895) Le picturae antiquae cryptarum romanarum. Bullettino della Commissione Comunale di Archeologia 23: 165–92.Google Scholar
Lanciani, R. (1990) Forma Urbis Romae (reprint; first impression Milan, 1893–1901). Rome, Quasar.Google Scholar
Lanciani, R. (1994) Storia degli scavi di Roma e notizie intorno le collezioni romane di antichità, V (1605–1700), ed. Malvezzi Campeggi, L. and Russo, M.R.. Rome, Quasar.Google Scholar
Luschi, L. (1992) Pietro Sante Bartoli e le pitture del Mausoleo ‘Dei Gordiani’. Bollettino d'Arte anno 77, ser. 6. 71: 114.Google Scholar
Lyons, C. (2003) Antiquities art theory in the collections of Vicente Victoria. In Fejfer, J., Fischer-Hansen, T. and Rathje, A. (eds), The Role of the Artist in the Rediscovery of Antiquity (Acta Hyperborea 10): 481507. Copenhagen, Museum Tusculum Press.Google Scholar
Mariette, P.-J. (1851–3) Abecedario de P.-J. Mariette et autres notes inédites de cet amateur sur les arts et les artistes. Ouvrage publié d'après les manuscrits autographes conservés au cabinet des estampes de la Bibliothèque Imperiale, et annoté par Mm Ph. de Chennevières and A. de Montaiglon I. A–Col. Paris, J.-B. Dumoulin.Google Scholar
Mariette, P.J. and Caylus, A.-C.P.de Tubières, Comte de (1783–7) Recueil des peintures antiques trouvées à Rome, imitées fedelement, pour les couleurs et le trait, d'après les desseins coloriés faits par Pietro-Sante Bartoli, et autres dessinateurs, 3 vols (second, expanded edition). Paris, Didot l'Aîné.Google Scholar
Mazzi, M.C. (1973) L'incisore perugino Pietro Sante Bartoli. Bollettino della Deputazione di Storia Patria per l'Umbria 70 (1): 2139.Google Scholar
Michaelis, A. (1910) Das Grabmal der Nasonier. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 25: 101–26.Google Scholar
Misson, M. (1714) A New Voyage to Italy. With Curious Observations on Several Other Countries: as, Germany; Switzerland; Savoy; Geneva; Flanders; and Holland. Together with Useful Instructions for Those Who Shall Travel Hither. In Four Volumes (fourth, enlarged, edition). London, [printed for R. Bonwicke et al.].Google Scholar
Modolo, M. (2011) Dal Clivus Scauri al Vicus Capitis Africae: gli affreschi della Vigna Guglielmina a Roma nei disegni dei Bartoli. Bollettino d'Arte anno 95, ser. 7. 8 (2010): 120.Google Scholar
Modolo, M. (2014) I disegni dei Bartoli nella collezione di Thomas Coke a Holkham Hall. In Bruschetti, P., Giulierini, P., Swaddling, J., Gialluca, B. and Reynolds, S., Seduzione etrusca. Dai segreti di Holkham Hall alle meraviglie del British Museum: 149–62, with catalogue entries pp. 163–72 nos. I.24–I.27d. Milan, Skira.Google Scholar
Montaiglon, A. de (1887–1912) (ed.) Correspondance des Directeurs de l'Académie de France à Rome avec les surintendants des bâtiments, 18 vols. Paris, Charavay Frères.Google Scholar
Montanari, T. (2000) La politica culturale di Giovan Pietro Bellori. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori, I: 3949. Rome, Edizioni De Luca.Google Scholar
[Nardini, F.] (1741) Roma antica distinta per regioni secondo l'esempio di Sesto Rufo, Vittore, e Nardini: ornata di rami delle più celebri fabbriche antiche diligentemente intagliate. Coll'aggiunta dello stato di Roma nel secolo XII., e delle memorie di varie antichità trovate in diversi luoghi della città di Roma scritte da Ulisse Aldrovandi, Flaminio Vacca, Francesco de' Ficoroni, Pietro Santi Bartoli, ed altri fino all'anno 1741. Tomo primo: 293369. Rome, Fausto Amidei.Google Scholar
Pace, C. (1979) Pietro Santi Bartoli: drawings in Glasgow University Library after Roman paintings and mosaics. Papers of the British School at Rome 47: 117–55.Google Scholar
Pace, C. (1996) Bartoli, Pietro Santi (Sante; 1635–1700). In de Grummond, N.T. (ed.), An Encyclopedia of the History of Classical Archaeology I, AK: 122–4. London/Chicago, Fitzroy Dearborn.Google Scholar
Pascoli, L. (1965) Vite de' pittori, scultori, ed architetti Perugini (reprint; first edition Rome, 1732). Amsterdam, B.M. Israel.Google Scholar
Pinot de Villechenon, M.N. (1990) Fortunes des fresques antiques de Rome au XVIIIe siècle. Pietro Santi Bartoli et le Comte de Caylus. Gazette des Beaux Arts 132 no. 1461: 105–15.Google Scholar
Pio, N. (1977) Le vite di pittori scultori et architetti (cod. ms. Capponi 257), ed. Enggass, C. and Enggass, R..Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana.Google Scholar
Pomponi, M. (1992) Alcune precisazioni sulla vita e la produzione artistica di Pietro Santi Bartoli. Storia dell'Arte 27: 195225.Google Scholar
Pomponi, M. (1994) Fonti per la storia dei monumenti antichi di Roma. I. Collezionisti inglesi e artisti romani nel primo Settecento. Una lettera di Francesco Fernando d'Imperiali a Richard Topham. Atti dell'Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rendiconti ser. 5, 9: 259–69.Google Scholar
Pomponi, M. (1996) La collezione del cardinale Massimo e l'inventario del 1677. In Buonocore, M., Cacciotti, B., di Carpegna Falconieri, T., de Angelis d'Ossat, M., Fusconi, G., Molinari, M.C., Pomponi, M. and Sproti, A., Camillo Massimo. Collezionista di antichità. Fonti e materiali (Xenia Antiqua Monografie 3): 91147. Rome, ‘L'Erma’ di Bretschneider.Google Scholar
Prandi, A. (1941) Un ‘academia de pintura’ della fine del Seicento. Rivista dell'Istituto Nazionale d'Archeologia e Storia dell'Arte 8: 201–16.Google Scholar
Prosperi Valenti Rodino, S. (2000) ll disegno per Bellori. In Borea, E. and Gasparro, C. (eds), L'idea del bello. Viaggio per Roma nel Seicento con Giovan Pietro Bellori, I: 131–40. Rome, De Luca.Google Scholar
Restout, J.-B. (1771) Galerie françoise: ou portraits des hommes et des femmes célébres qui ont paru en France. Paris, Hérissant et Fils.Google Scholar
Richardson, J. (1722) An Account of some of the Statues, Bas-reliefs, Drawings and Pictures in Italy, France &c with Remarks. London, J. Knapton.Google Scholar
Ridley, R.T. (1992) To protect the monuments: the papal antiquarian (1534–1870). Xenia Antiqua 1: 117–54.Google Scholar
Rudolph, S. (1990) Vincenzo Vittoria fra pitture, poesie e polemiche. Labyrinthos 13–16 (1988–9): 223–66.Google Scholar
Sandrart, J. von (1971) Joachim von Sandrarts Academie der Bau-, Bild- und Mahlerey-Künste von 1675: Leben der Berühmten Maler, Bildhauer und Baumeister (reprint, ed. Peltzer, R.A.). Farnborough, Gregg.Google Scholar
Sapelli, M. (2000) La basilica di Giunio Basso. In Ensoli, S. and La Rocca, E. (eds), Aurea Roma. Dalla città pagana alla città cristiana: 137–9, with catalogue entries pp. 534–6 nos. 176–8. Rome, ‘L'Erma’ di Bretschneider.Google Scholar
Stuffmann, M. (1968) Les tableaux de la collection de Pierre Crozat. Gazette des Beaux Arts ser. 6, 72: 11143.Google Scholar
Turnbull, G. (1740) A Treatise on Ancient Painting, Containing Observations on the Rise, Progress, and Decline of that Art. London, A. Millar.Google Scholar
Vall de Pla, M.A. (1961) Mosaicos romanos de Sagunto. Archivo de Prehistoria Levantina 9: 141–75.Google Scholar
Verrando, G.N. (1996) Topografia varia e sepolcrale del tratto suburbano delle due vie Aurelie. Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria 118: 546.Google Scholar
von Hesberg, H. (1987) Planung und Ausgestaltung der Necropolen Roms im 2. Jahrhundert nach Christ. In von Hesberg, H. and Zanker, P. (eds), Römische Gräberstrassen: Selbstdarstellung, Status, Standard: Kolloquium in München vom 28. bis 30. Oktober 1985: 4360. Munich, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Weston-Lewis, A. (1992) Annibale Carracci and the antique. Master Drawings 30: 287313.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, H. (1995) The rebirth of Adonis. Papers of the British School at Rome 63: 215–43.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, H. (2001) The Paper Museum of Cassiano dal Pozzo, Series A, Part I: Ancient Mosaics and Wallpaintings. London/Turnhout, Brepols.Google Scholar
Wood, J. (1996) Padre Resta as a collector of Carracci drawings. Master Drawings 34: 371.Google Scholar
Wright, D.H. (1993) The Vatican Vergil: a Masterpiece of Late Antique Art. Berkeley/Oxford, University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wright, E. (1730) Some Observations Made in Travelling through France, Italy, &c. in the Years 1720, 1721, and 1722, 2 vols. London, T. Ward and E. Wicksteed.Google Scholar
Zocca, E. (1976) Nota delli musei, librerie, gallerie, et ornamenti di statue e pitture ne' palazzi, nelle case, e ne' giardini di Roma (reprint with commentary). Rome, Istituto Nazionale di Archeologia e Storia dell'Arte.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Title-page of the Vittoria album, drawn by Cardinal Camillo Massimo and Pietro Santi Bartoli, and adapted by Vicente Victoria. Inscribed: (left-hand plinth) L'Architettura e inventione, e Disegno del EmmoSig. Cardl. Massimi. (right-hand plinth) Le Vittorie laterali sono disegnate da Pietro Santi Bartoli. Pen and ink and wash; Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RL 9566. (Reproduced courtesy of the Royal Collection Trust © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2014.)

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Detail of a wall-painting, with colour notes; possibly part of the same discovery as 23–32. Inscribed: Pittura nella facciata di una stanza nel orto delle sette sale scoperta l'anno 1683; in the upper right corner, m. Pen and ink with black chalk draughting; Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RL 9680. (Reproduced courtesy of the Royal Collection Trust © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2014.)

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Draught plan of the Villa Corsini cemetery, with annotations, on two sheets of paper with a horizontal join. Inscribed: (below the join, left-hand side, partly cut away) sepolcri scoperti il mese di Xbre 1689; (on the mount sheet, below the drawing) Queste piante con le seguenti pitture sino al No106 furono trovate nella villa Corsina fuori la porta di San Pancratio L'anno 1690. Pen and ink; Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RL 9644. (Reproduced courtesy of the Royal Collection Trust © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2014.)

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Quarter detail of the ceiling in tomb ‘Q’ of the Villa Corsini cemetery, with colour notes and details of the other three canephorae that support the central tondo (cf. 56). Inscribed: Pittura di una volta sepolcrale nella villa di MonsigreCorsini fuori Porta S. Pancratio / segnata nella pianta alla littera Q. Pen and ink with black chalk draughting; Library of Holkham Hall, vol. II. fol. 34 (85). (Reproduced by permission of Viscount Coke and the Trustees of the Holkham Estate.)

Figure 4

Fig. 5. A brick stamp and a cinerary urn with measurements in dita (inches), from the Villa Corsini cemetery (unpublished). Inscribed: (top right) Tevolone con il presente merco. trovato ne sepolcre della Villa Corsina; (bottom) Vasetto ove erano le cenerij di un picciolo putto. mede[si]mamente della Villa Corsina. Pen and ink with black chalk draughting; Library of Holkham Hall, vol. II. fol. 39 (106). (Reproduced by permission of Viscount Coke and the Trustees of the Holkham Estate.)

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Lunette in tomb ‘C’ of the Villa Corsini cemetery (cf. 47). Inscribed: pittura anticha; trovata in un sepolcro nella in una vignia fuori della porta di san Pancratio, posseduta dal illmoMoreCorsini: trovata ó scoperta lanno 1689 il mese decembre, largo pallmi [sic] .ii. longo 22 17. Colour notations with pointers; in the upper right-hand corner, m. Pen and ink with black chalk draughting; Vittoria album, Royal Library, Windsor Castle, RL 9650. (Reproduced courtesy of the Royal Collection Trust © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2014.)

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Elevation of the upper part of a wall in room V of the complex discovered in 1668, with the location of the details shown in drawings 11–18. After the coloured drawing, Glasgow Massimi album, Glasgow University Library MS Gen 1496, fols 54v–55. (Reproduced courtesy of the University of Glasgow Library. Special Collections.)