^{page 107 note 1} Amelung has shown (in Hoffmann, ,Raphael als Architekt, iv. Vatikanischer Palast, pp. 57sqq.Google Scholar) in how wide a field Raphael's pupils sought their models for the decoration of the Loggie in the Vatican, making use of coins and gems, as well as of reliefs and statues.

^{page 108 note 1} See Hülsen, , Römische Antikengärten des XVI. Jahrhunderts (Heidelberg, 1917),. v. sqq.Google Scholar

Hülsen's work deals with the garden of the Cesi family, near S. Peter's just inside the Porta Cavalleggieri, and with the gardens of Cardinal Rodolfo Pio di Carpi and Cardinal Ippolito d'Este, both on the Quirinal, the former entirely swept away, the latter surviving in part as the garden of the Royal Palace.

See also my article on ‘The Villa d'Este at Tivoli and the collection of classica sculptures which it contained,’ in Archaeologia, lxi (1908), 219sqq.Google Scholar

^{page 109 note 1} An attempt was made to deal with it by Hübner, , Le Statue di Roma (Grundlagen für eine Geschichte der antiken Monumente in der Renaissance) vol. i. Leipzig, 1912Google Scholar: but Hülsen's review, severe, though I cannot say unjust, in Göttingsche gelehrte Anzeigen 1914, 257 sqq. points how far this work is from being as fundamental as the subtitle would claim. I am much indebted to Prof. Hülsen for help and advice in regard to the first draft of the present paper.

^{page 109 note 2} A list of his works is given by Nagler, , Monogrammisten, ii. 243Google Scholar. Ozzola (in Becker, Thieme, Lexikon, vi. 217Google Scholar) unwisely omits the first edition (our I. 1) which Nagler had cited, and treats I. 2 as the first: and he follows Nagler in entirely omitting II.

^{page 109 note 3} See Ehrle, La Pianta di Roma Du Pérac-Lafrèry, 15 sqq.: Hülsen, in Röm. Mitt. xvi. (1901), 123sqq.Google Scholar

^{page 110 note 1} Ehrle, op. cit. p. 10, n. 9, makes him out to be a Frenchman; but cf. ibid. 59.

^{page 110 note 2} The same remark applies to Filippo Tomassini's Antiquarum Statuarum Urbis Romae Liber Primus (circa 1608). I intend to deal with both these works on another occasion.

^{page 110 note 3} See my article, ‘Il libro d'Antonio Labacco appartenente all' Architettura,’ in Bibliofilia, xvi. (1914), 302sqq.Google Scholar

^{page 112 note 1} Plates 1–37 are in the same order as in the next edition, except that 25 and 26 have been wrongly inverted, and that No. 8 represents the so-called Antinous in the Vatican, which is omitted in the next edition, and does not recur until the first enlarged edition (I. 2 (a)) appeared. Two leaves have been cut out between 24 and 25, and two more between 28 and 29; but only two statues from the collection of the Cardinal of Ferrara (Nos. 38, 39 of the next edition) have been left out, so that it looks as if the original order had not been preserved when the book was rebound in the eighteenth century. No. 38 is I. 2 (a) No. 91, and No. 41 is ib. No. 50 (neither of them occurs in the next edition), while Nos. 39, 40, 42 are respectively Table γ, Nos. 16, 30, 29. If this order is correct, we should have to suppose that Nos. 39–42 referred to the Carpi collection; but in any case No. 42 (statua incognita ibidem) should obviously precede Nos. 40 (statua alia incognita e marmore ibidem) and 41 (statua item incognita pulcherrima ibidem). Nos. 43–50 correspond in order with the plates of the next edition, but four leaves have been cut out between Nos. 46 and 47. These, together with the two remaining to be accounted for above, will just leave room for Nos. 8, 40, 41, 42, 51, 52 of the next edition, which are not present in this copy. Whether III. IV. No. 37 (which is in the style of the first edition) actually belonged to it, is doubtful. All these plates of Cavalieri are after original drawings, except Nos. 51, 52 (Marforio and Pasquino) which are copied from the Speculum of Lafrèry.

^{page 113 note 1} Jahrb. d. Inst. v. (1890), p. 41Google Scholar.

^{page 113 note 2} Op. cit. 272, cf. Ausonia vii. (1912), 10Google Scholar. In no ease in which Dosio has drawn a statue which occurs in the collection formed by Cavalieri, is there any ground for supposing that the drawing served as the original of the engraving. As Hülsen says, if the investigation were worth making, it should begin from the engravings of two statues which were in Dosio's possession (iii. iv. 70, 83).

^{page 113 note 3} It is mentioned in Cap. Cat. p. 11, and by Hülsen, op. cit. 271, n. 3, to whom I gave the information regarding it. At that time I believed it to be the first edition.

^{page 115 note 1} Cf. Ciacconius, , Historiae Pontificum et Cardinalium, iii. 692sqq.Google Scholar, Pastor, , Geschichle der Päpste, v. vi.Google Scholarpassim. He was protector of the Holy Roman Empire, and a man of great importance and learning. Michaelis, (Jahrbuch d. Inst. v. (1890) 43Google Scholar) notes that Pius V. did not refuse to him, as he did to other prelates of the Church, a gift of some of the statues which he was so anxious to expel from the Vatican: cf. Pelli, , Saggio istorico della R. Galleria di Firenze. i. 132Google Scholar.

^{page 115 note 2} He vacated the see on April 12th, 1570, on being translated to that of Sabina: he was once more translated to Palestrina on July 3rd of the same year. He died on 2nd April, 1573.

^{page 115 note 3} I have not been able to obtain further information in regard to Francesco Palumbo of Novara, who was obviously a publisher or bookseller; but the name of Petrus Paulus Palumbus, also of Novara, who was, no doubt, a relation, is given by Zani, (Enciclopedia, xiv. 242)Google Scholar and Nagler, (Monogrammisten, iv. 3221Google Scholar) as a publisher of engravings in the latter half of the sixteenth century (Zani gives the date of his activity as circa 1578, while. Michaelis, , Röm. Mitt. xiii. (1898), p. 264, n. 78Google Scholar, gives the period as 1560–1578). Nagler notes that his monogram occurs on several anonymous prints—a Holy Family after Raphael, a Birth of Christ, and a Crucifixion after Michaelangelo: and Ehrle. Roma prima, di Sisto V.; La pianta Du Pérac-Lafréry, 59, notes an engraving bearing the imprint Petrus Paulus Palumbus Novariensis curabat, Romae 1571. Bartsch, , Peintre-graveur, xv. 305Google Scholar, notes that later impressions of Enea Vico's engraving of the ‘Accademia di Baccio Bandinelli’ bear the legend Romae Petrus Paulus Palumbus formts; and still later copies are found with the imprint Gaspar Albertus successor Palumbi. Nagler is therefore wrong n speaking of his successor as C. Alberti: cf. Meyer, , Kunstlerexikons, i. 217Google Scholar. Ascanio Palombo (Nagler, i. 1102) was perhaps his brother.

^{page 116 note 1} Cicognara, (Catalogo, ii. No. 3543Google Scholar) is wrong in supposing that Porro had the use of the plates.

^{page 117 note 1} The printed catalogue wrongly gives the date as 1676.

^{page 118 note 1} There is a copy in the Gabinetto Nazionale delle Stampe in Rome (vol. 51, H. 17, Inv. 94430–94528) with additions at the end, and there is another in my own collection, bound with Dosio's Urbis Romae Aedificiorum Reliquiae (1569), and Porcacchi's Funerali Antichi (1574). On the back of the title page of the first copy are the arms of Cavalieri—a shield with an eagle in the upper part of it, and two clubs crossed in the lower: above the shield is a helmet. Below the shield is the legend IOANNES BAPTISTAE DE CAVALLERIIS. This enlarged edition must have appeared before 1584, when the collection of Vaccaria was published (infra, 123): we may also note that the statues in the Valle collection, almost all of which passed to the Villa Medici in 1584 (Michaelis, , Jahrbuch d. Inst. vi. (1891), 224Google Scholar), are still in their old place. Hülsen assigns it to about 1580. It can hardly be previous to the death of Pius V. in 1572 (Cap. Cat. p. 12).

^{page 119 note 1} Nineteen of them were copies of the older plates, slightly enlarged; while six others were from new drawings. The old plates, however, were not destroyed, but continued to exist (Hülsen, p. 272, cf. infra., 129).

^{page 119 note 2} They were slightly worked over (note the addition of the bowstring in No. 46).

^{page 120 note 1} The second collection is a good deal rarer than the first. Complete copies of both are to be found in the Vatican (Cicognara, v. 3492) at the Vittorio Emanuele library in Rome (Coll. Rom. 4, E. 35), in the Biblioteca Nazionale at Naples (203, A 6)—both the last two copies have Dosio's views of Rome bound up with them—in the Topham Library at Eton College (B. i. 5, 36), and in my own collection.

On the back of Pl. 100 of Books iii. iv. of the Topham copy are printed the arms of Cavalieri (supra, 118, n. 1)

It is certain that the drawings for Books iii. iv. were, in part at least, made many years before they were published. Apart from Pl. 37, which is in the style of the first edition, we find that the Venus which was in the possession of Giovanni Antonio Dosio before his return to Florence about 1576 (see Hülsen, in Ausonia, vii. (1912), 4Google Scholar) and which Vaccaria (Pl. 65) saw apud quemdam mercatorem Florentinum (cf. Table γ, 34) was drawn by or for Cavalieri (Pl. 70) before it had passed out of Dosio's hands, and indeed Hülsen (Gōttingsche gelehrte Anzeigen, 1914, 272) notes that this plate appears (as it does in a copy in the Biblioteca Angelica—L.L. 21, 15—together with Pls. 3, 81) without a number, in several copies of the first two books. The statue is lost—nor do we know what happened to the Bacchus (Cav. iii. iv. 83) which was also in his possession. Further, two of the statues which passed, with the bulk of the Della Valle collection, to Villa Medici in 1584 were drawn for Books iii. iv., while they were still in Palazzo Valle (Pl. 27, 41: Michaelis Jahrbuch d. Inst. vi. 1891, 229, Nos. 22, 31Google Scholar). We may also note that Girolamo Garimberti, Bishop of Gallese, from whose collection Cavalieri drew a number of objects, died in 1575 (Eubel, , op. cit. iii. 217Google Scholar, wrongly gives the date as 1565); though we do not know when his collection began to be dispersed. For the collection cf. Hülsen, cit. p. 298: also Cose Meravigliose di Roma, 1566, 45 (from which we learn that his house was at Monte Citorio).

^{page 121 note 1} Münchener Jahrbuch für bildende Kunst, 1912, ii. 113Google Scholar.

^{page 123 note 1} See my Topographical Study in Rome in 1581 (Roxburghe Club, 1916), 19 sqq. The original edition is mentioned by De Nolhac, La Bibliothèque de Fulvio Orsini, 65, n. 3. According to him, it has, at the end of the dedication, the words Excudebat Romae Laurentius della Vacherie. The form of the name Vaccaria or Vaccari adopted in this dedication has led Ehrle, as it led me, to suppose him a Frenchman, but incorrectly.

Villamena, though his name remained on the plate in the edition of Giovanni Giacomo de Rossi, died in 1626; and the date 1674, given to this edition by De Nolhac, is probably mistaken; for the two copies cited by Hülsen in his Bibliografia delle Piante di Roma, No. 58 (Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria, xxxviii. (1915), 1sqq.Google Scholar, and separately) are not dated. De Nolhac, however, must have seen another copy of the six strips with the index, which Hülsen had only seen in my collection: for it is from them that the fact of the collaboration of Orsini in the preparation of the plan is to be learnt. There was a copy with five of these strips in the Destailleur sale of 1885 (No. 610).

Hülsen, on the other hand, is in error in not recognising that the original edition of the plan (ibid. No. 56) must have borne the name of Vaccaria, and not that of Francesco Villamena, who, according to the general account, was born at Assisi in or about 1566, though Nagler, , Monogrammisten, i. No. 1390Google Scholar, gives t…e date of his birth as about 1556. Even if Nagler is right, he was only eighteen years old in 1574, and would hardly have been in the position to write under the dedication Excudebat Romae Franciscus Villamoena, which would make him out to be the printer or publisher. An examination made by Mr. Forsdyke of the only copy recorded of Villamena's edition (British Museum, 155, No. 7) shows this legend to be a later addition. It must be identical with that which figures in Vaccaria's catalogue (Hülsen, No. 57).

^{page 124 note 1} In this year he published the plan of Rome by Maggi, with the little views of the Seven Churches round it (Hülsen, op. cit. No. 91): but he must have already admitted his son, Andrea, to partnership and have very soon died or given up business: for we find Andrea's name as early as 1599 (Bartsch, , Peintre-graveur, xvii. 169, 1158Google Scholar) and again in 1600 (Ozzola, in Repertorium für Kunstwissenschaft, xxxiii. (1910), 405)Google Scholar, 1603 (Hülsen, No. 98), and 1605 (on the title-page of a reprint of Part 2 of the Venationes of Antonio Tempesta, dedicated by him to Giovanni Antonio Orsini, Duke of Sangemini in 1598; the name of the original publisher is erased: the set of engravings is not recorded by Bartsch), besides the later dates given by Ehrle, cit. 59, who also gives a reprint of the catalogue of engravings published by Andrea and Michelangelo Vaccari in 1614, from the only known copy at Mantua.

^{page 124 note 2} This is a plate representing an archer shooting downwards with a crossbow, and standing with his right foot in the space between the springing of two archivolts, one of which is represented as broken off at the extremity. Below is the inscription Regij. 1579. I have a copy of it without the lined background which was added to it when it took its place in the collection.

^{page 124 note 3} The purchase of the Delia Valle collection by Cardinal Ferdinando de' Medici took place on July 15th, 1584, and only a few pieces of sculpture remained in the possession of the Capranica family (Michaelis, , Jahrbuch d. Inst. vi. (1891), 224Google Scholar). Vaccaria has not indicated in all cases those that were transferred (Nos. 67, 71), which he still mentions as “in aedibus Vallensibus”)and, apart from one which actually bears a date anterior to 1584 (No. 69) which was in this collection, we may thus infer that the bulk of the drawings were made some years before the publication of this edition. This is further clear from the fact that No. 41, which bears the signature of Cherubino Alberti and the date 1577, also bears the legend In Viridario Cardinalis de Medids, which must have been added later. There are indeed some extra proofs before letters of a few of the engravings in vol. 51–H–23 in the Gabinetto delle Stampe in Rome (Inv. 94888 sqq.) which also contains a copy of the 1621. edition, broken up and mounted: but I know of no title-page before that of 1584 which I have described in the text.

^{page 125 note 1} Hübner, who gives a table to indicate this, has failed to notice that none of Vaccaria's plates are copied from the first edition, but all (except No. 27, which is duplicated by No. 33, infra, p. 154, n. 7) from the enlarged edition (2 (a)), of Cavalieri, which, as Hülsen points out, is not without importance, as it affects the question of the dating of both collections. Though we cannot fix the date of the first appearance of the enlarged edition of Cavalieri, we might say that Vaccaria's work would hardly have been likely to have appeared immediately after it, unless the fact that a lined background has been introduced is sufficient to protect Vaccaria from 3. charge of infringing the copyright: for as Hülsen points out, Hübner, in trying to maintain that Vaccaria's engravings are superior in quality, has entirely failed to see that they are exact copies, agreeing in dimensions and outline, of Cavalieri's plates. The legends, which were added later, and not by the engravers themselves (I have been able to distinguish three or four different styles of calligraphy in them, and one of them is common to all the signed plates cited above, except 69) are also unintelligently copied, as mistakes in the Latin show (e.g. Plates 36, 80).

Hübner notes, rightly, that in five cases the names of the owners of the statues have been left out in the earlier editions, and only inserted later (Nos. 27, 28, 35, 46, 75): and I may add that in No. 31 the locality looks as if it had been inserted later, and possibly in a few other cases as well. No. 75 indeed did not pass into the Borghese collection until after 1605.

^{page 125 note 2} They are noted by Meyer, , Künstlerlexikon, i. p. 213, No. 188Google Scholar. Among a large quantity of drawings by Alberti, recently acquired by the Galleria Nazionale delle Stampe in Rome, are two drawings (Nos. 2, 96) which correspond in subject with Nos. 25, 2 of Vaccaria's collection: but the size differs, both the drawings being larger, while in the first the arms are unrestored, and the pose is not identically represented.

^{page 125 note 3} For Orazio de Santis of Aquila see Bartsch, , op. cit. xvii, 5, sqq.Google Scholar (who does not mention these engravings).

^{page 125 note 4} Nagler, , Monogrammisten, ii. 1292Google Scholar: Künstlerlexikon. xx. 438. Another of his works (Brulliot, ii. 2630) bears this signature at the bottom on the seat. He engraved several of the plates in the Speculum—the Arch Of Constantine (Q. 86)—the reference is to the copy once in the possession of Mr. Quaritch (Bernard Quaritch's Rough List, No. 135 p. 119 sqq. No. 1530), and now in America—the Satyr and Dionysus at Naples (Q. 176) the Hercules and Telephus in the Museo Chiaramonti (Q. 225), the Diomede at Munich (Q. 227), and the Athamas and Lichas at Naples (Q. 229). The first impression of the Diomede (not mentioned by Quaritch, but in my collection, in a volume which came from the Seguier and Destailleurs collections, and contains a fairly early series of plates with nothing after 1581 in it, except at the very end) bears the signature Do. Vitus fe. (No. 76). The impression of the plate with the signature of Perret, cited by Hübner, p. 43 (Q. 227) is therefore the second, not the first, and cannot be used as evidence for dating Vaccaria's plates.

^{page 127 note 1} In the copies of which I have knowledge, the order seems to vary greatly, and there is no attempt at any system. For convenience I have therefore used the numbering of the 1621 edition even in speaking of those which preceded it.

I have examined a copy belonging to the bookseller Sig. Castagnari of Rome, containing sixty-two plates besides the title-page: none of the later plates were present, and Plates 27, 28, 46 were without the later indications of locality (Nos. 35, 75 were missing).

^{page 127 note 2} See my article ‘Le diverse edizioni dei Vestigi dell'Antichità di Roma di Stefano Du Pérac’ in Bibliofilia xvi. (1915), 416Google Scholar. The hypothesis that this edition was published for the jubilee of 1600 is due to Michaelis, (Röm. Mitt. xiii. (1898), 265, n. 83Google Scholar) and has been followed by others, including Hübner and Hülsen. I have a copy of the three parts in my own collection, and Hülsen (Gött. gel. Anz., cit. p. 275) mentions another, which like my own, is in an old binding, in the Kupferstichkabinett at Dresden (B, 819, 2), and there was another in the Destailleur sale of 1885 (No. 630). Other copies of this edition seem to have been issued with only one plate printed on a page, and with the words parts terza sometimes erased: there is one in the British Museum (786, K. 48) with the words left in containing sixty-one plates (wrongly entered in the catalogue as “mostly Cavalieri”) of which Nos. 3, 52, 56 are before all letters. It was acquired in June, 1905, and was ormerly in the library of the late Anton Springer. I have another containing sixty-three plates besides the title (with the words erased) inc uding No. 68 and the plates from Cavalieri: and there is another in the University Library at Göttingen with title and sixty-four plates.

^{page 128 note 1} They are Nos. 5, 44, 43, 34, 26, 63 of the 1621 edition. Hülsen has failed to notice, as Hübner also did, that No. 26 is Cavalieri, iii. iv. 34, and his hypothesis that these plates were added to make up an even number, fails.

^{page 129 note 1} There is a copy in the Gabinetto Nazionale delle Stampe in Rome (51, H. 23—Inv, 94888–94983), another in the Vatican (Cicognara, v. 3477), another in the Topham Library at Eton (B. i. 5, 38), a fourth at the British Museum (561*b. 12 (1) cf. Hübner, p. 44), with odd prints from Cavalieri; while a fifth was in the possession of the bookseller Sig. Luzzietti of Rome (Catalogue 247, No. 236). The Vatican copy has an impression of No. 80 (Pasquino) with a number of legends—one beginning Io non son, cf. Q. 219), and a cardinal's hat with the Orsini arms. The cardinal must be either Alessandro Orsini (created 1615, died 1626—Mas-Latrie, Col. 1226, No. 40), or Virginio Orsini (created 1641, died 1676, ib.1 Col. 1229, No. 56).

^{page 129 note 2} I do not know whether we should add iii. iv. No. 43, which is found in Hauser's copy. As Van Aelst had no more of Books iii. iv., and it does not appear later, I think it may have found its way in accidentally.

^{page 130 note 1} Nos. 2, 4, 5, 10, 15, 17, 25, 26, 27, 34 (?) (besides 16, 29, 30, which belong to Cav. i.) are all earlier plates: while those which pourtray statues in the Villa Borghese must date from after 1608 or thereabouts.

Of Books iii. iv, eighty-six plates are to be found in the possession of Marcucci, six, as we have seen, passed to Vaccaria, one (perhaps) to Van Aelst (No. 43), two (Nos. 8, 65) appear only in the 1668 edition, and five are lost (Nos. 15, 31, 58, 77, 86). For the details, see the Tables.

^{page 130 note 2} Marcucci used fifty-one of the plates of Books i. ii.; of these Nos. 51, 52, 55–59, 89, 90, 92 (these three last we also find in Van Aelst's possession), belonged to the original edition of Cavalieri: 85, 87, 96, 99, and 100 were also used by Van Aelst as well as by Marcucci. Of the remaining fourteen plates of Books i. ii., twelve were suppressed as duplicates of the original plates, and two cannot be traced (Nos. 13, 76). Nos. 18, 93 were not used until 1645.

^{page 133 note 1} Giovanni Battista Soria (1581–1651) was an architect of some merit, and was responsible for the façades of S. Maria della Vittoria, S. Gregorio, and S. Carlo ai Catenari in Rome. In 1624–36 he published four books of engravings after the architectural drawings of Giambattista Montano, who died in 1621; they were at that time in the library of Cassiano dal Pozzo, and are now in the Soane Museum. The work was originally intended to have been in seven books: and a reissue of it, published by Giovanni Giacomo de Rossi in 1684–1691, was somewhat enlarged, the book of sixty-six Tempietti (mostly ancient tombs) having been divided into two books of forty-eight plates each not including the title-page: while the other books remained as they were. I hope to give some account of this interesting collection on another occasion.

^{page 133 note 2} In the catalogue (Katalog der Bibliothek, i. p. 1246) it is stated that the name of J. B. De Rossi occurs on the title-page, but this is not in accordance with my notes.

^{page 134 note 1} The plates for the most part retain their original numbering: but the blanks have been filled up by the introduction of thirteen plates from Books i. ii. of which some have been renumbered, while others retain their old numbers. The title-pages are reckoned as Nos. 1 and 51 respectively in the Biblioteca Angelica copy: there are two plates (iii. iv. 2, 29) both bearing the number 2, but No. 29 should probably be regarded as No. 5 (indeed in the German Institute copy it is so numbered). In both the copies we are describing iii. iv. 1 figures as No. 8: but it should be noticed that in the Biblioteca Angelica copy a leaf has been cut out after it, and that iii. iv. 8 with its original number figures in the 1668 edition. No. 65 also occurs only in the 1668 edition.

In Column V. of Table a the plates which belong to the first two books are distinguished by an a preceding the number, and those belonging to the third book by a b.

There is a fragmentary copy of this edition, with the first two books complete, but only a few plates of the third and only one title-page, without any dedication or arms inserted, in the Gabinetto Nazionale delle Stampe in Rome (26, L. 8: Inv. 03238–03347).

^{page 135 note 1} The numbers are as follows: Cav. i. ii. 22 (wrongly), iii. iv. 23, 24 (wrongly), 25, 54, 69. 73. 75. 79. 88.

^{page 135 note 2} A copy in the possession of Prof. R. Lanciani had fifty plates (including title), printed two on a page and bound with Giovanni Battista de Rossi's 1653 edition of Du Pérac's Vestigi and other works, the latest being a plate relating to the conclave of 1655.

^{page 135 note 3} For this edition see my article in Bibliofilia cited p. 127, n. 2: the edition of 1680 is described, ibid., xvii (1915–6), 358.

^{page 136 note 1} Lang, Catalogo x. No. 39, cited by Ozzola, , Repertorium für Kunstwissenschaft, xxxiii. (1910), 400Google Scholar.

^{page 136 note 2} Matteo Gregorio seems to have been the publisher of the internal elevation of S. Peter's which Ehrle (op. cit. p. 23, n. 5) mentions as “Fatta misurare da M.G.R. 1682,” though he does not consider his first work to come before 1686 (the edition of the Nuovo Splendore delle Fabriche di Roma Moderna, which is simply a copy of the 1667 edition published by Giovanni Giacomo De Rossi, the plates being by far inferior). Ehrle has, however, omitted to notice the plan of 1668 (Hülsen, Arch. Soc. Rom. cit, Nos. 128, 129) which was drawn and engraved by Matteo Gregorio and published by his father, and was then republished by Matteo himself in 1680; and he has also omitted the Prospectus locorum Urbis Romae insig(nium) inventore Mattaeo Gregorio de Rubeis Romano delineati el aere incisi a Livinio Cruyl Gandavensi; Liber Primus, published by Giovanni Battista de Rossi in 1666 (cf. German Institute Library, Katalog, i. 617Google Scholar). Matteo Gregorio's name has been inserted at a later date over an erasure on the title-page of the Raccolta delle Principal Fontane dell' Inclita Città di Roma desegnate et intagliate da Domenico Parasacchi, published by Giovanni Battista de Rossi in 1647. Nor does he mention Giuseppe Giulio Rossi, who must have been the heir of Matteo Gregorio (of whom we hear no more after 1696) who published the ninth edition of the Vestigi in his shop in Piazza Navona in 1709.

^{page 138 note 1} This plan was first published in 1590, and again in 1593 (Hülsen, Nos. 62–64) and The 1597. The British Museum Catalogue of Maps is responsible for the error, the date being wrongly printed as 1583 (II. 3547) and the reference should be 23805(9) as Mr. Forsdyke informs me.

^{page 138 note 2} The terminus post quem is fixed by the fact that items belonging to the collection formed by Scipione Borghese (who became cardinal in that year) are included (Nos. 8, 23. 28. 33 in Table γ).

^{page 138 note 3} It includes both versions of the Farnese Flora (Cav. i. 12, i. ii. 33) which indeed are still in the Calcografia collection (Nos. 120, 109), and of the “horse-tamers” on the Quirinal.

^{page 139 note 1} There is a copy with eighty-five plates in the Biblioteca Nazionale at Naples (203, B. 24) another in the Gabinetto Nazionale delle Stampe at Rome with title and eighty-three plates (51, H. 24: Inv. 194986–195069) among which is Cav. i. ii. 8. Another, with sixty plates, is at Eton (Topham Library, B. i. V. 37) and a fourth, with title and forty-nine plates, in the library of the American Academy in Rome.

^{page 139 note 2} Bartsch. xvii. 170, 1165; 171, 1169 (both undated).

^{page 139 note 3} Bartsch cit. 165, 1075–1104: the name A pud Joseph de Rubeis has been added on the left below in place of Ioannes Orlandi formis; Romae remains, and the date has been altered. In Bartsch cit. 159, 861 I should suspect (without having seen it) that his name had been added later also, as it bears date 1598. Ozzola (op. cit. p. 406, n. 30) is not able to quote any print of his earlier than 1615 and noted one of 1636 (Bartsch, xx. 173. 8) which bears a dedication to Cassiano dal Pozzo. It is by Andrea Podestà, after a picture of Venus surrounded by Cupids, painted by Titian for the Duke of Ferrara.

^{page 139 note 4} Gallia (as it is now spelt) is a small village S.S.E. of Lomello, near the Po.

^{page 140 note 1} Of the two copies known to me, one lacks Cav. i. ii. 87, which is in the Calcografia collection: and both lack i. ii. 96, which does not occur again. Two representations of the same statue were twice included (Cavalieri i. 4 and i. ii. 24; and ibid. i. 12, and i. ii. 33).

^{page 140 note 2} P. 407, n. 35. Zani, , Enciclopedia, xvi. 216Google Scholar, says that he was living in 1660.

^{page 143 note 1} This was very likely one of his first publications, for it is noteworthy that the dedication bears the name of Giandomenico. Ozzola is certainly wrong in attributing to him the first edition of Perrier's Icones et Segtnenta (1638), for there are plenty of copies in existence without his imprint which is the sign of a later edition. He also cites a variety of Bartsch, xx. 173, 7 (a Bacchanalian scene by Andrea Podestà after Titian) which bears his name and the date 1640 (Dresden, Ital. Sch. 334 : 39702): I should like to be sure that the two are contemporary, as the next date he cites is 1651.

It is probable that Giovanni Antonio de Rossi, the architect of the conclave of 1676, was some relation of his, for the former dedicated to Cardinal Altieri a plan engraved by Giovanni Battista Falda, which he printed and published. As to the date of his death or retirement from business, we may note that the last engraving which bears his name is a print of the Conclave of 1691 (Ehrle, p. 22); and in 1693 Domenico was already (for example, on Ameti's map of Latium) calling himself son and heir of Giangiacomo, who must certainly have retired from business—and indeed one would have supposed that he was dead, had it not been for the entry, in the books of S. Maria dell' Anima, of a payment for rent of the shop by him in 1694. Taking into consideration, however, the fact that Domenico's name remained on the books as late as 1738, whereas we know that he died in 1724, it is clear that the books were kept so carelessly that we may disregard this entry.

Domenico was apparently the first of the family to issue a printed catalogue of his publications. The earliest edition known to Ehrle bears date 1705: but I possess one of 1700, the title of which is as follows: INDICE DELLE STAMPE Intagliate in Rame, al bulino ed all'acqua forte, con li loro prezzi secondo corrono al presente. Esistente nella Stamperia DI GIO. GIACOMO DE ROSSI, E DOMENICO DE ROSSI suo Erede appresso S. Maria della Pace. Nel quale si comprendono. Carte Geografiche, Città, Assedii diversi, Piante, Alzate, e Prospetto di Roma Antica, e Moderna con varie Vedute di essa, Chiese, Altari, Palazzi, Giardini, Statue, Bassi rilievi, Gulie, Colonne, con le Fontane dentro, e fuori nelle Ville di Frascati, e di Tivoli, ed altri monumenti, Ornamenti di Architectura, ed Opere de' piu celebri Pittori, Galerie, Cupole, ed altre de' piu insigni Artefici, Ritratti de' Sommi Pontefici, Imperatori, Rè di Francia, e di Spagna, e gran Signori Turchi, e delli Rè di Polonia, con le loro Cronologie, Ritratti di Cardinali, Principi, e di altri Personaggi Illustri, e Guerrieri, e diverse Opere Sagre, e profane. IN ROMA, MDCC. CON LICENZA DE' SUPERIORI. On p. 3 is an authorisation for reprinting (Reimprimatur) so that this is not the earliest edition. It is in 12mo. and has 92+4 pages: and it is followed by a smaller work of 24 pp., bearing the title INDICE SECONDO Disposto per Alfabeto, Nel quale si comprendono le Stampe ordinarie intagliate in rame, al bulino, & all' acqua forte. Esistenti nella Stamperia DI GIO. GIACOMO DE ROSSI In Roma alia Pace. IN ROMA MDC XCVI. Per Antonio de Rossi dietro à San Silvestro in Capite à strada della Vite. CON LICENZA DE SUPERIORI. There is no imprimatur, and we cannot therefore be sure if this is the first edition. It is curious that the name of Giovanni Giacomo de Rossi is found alone on the title-page of the second work: but it is also quite likely that Domenico may not have thought it good business to substitute his own name for his father's until he had become better known. The same is the case, indeed, with the Altro indice delle carte …, di diversi autori of 1699 (Cambridge, University Library, v. ii. 672).

I have another copy of the Indice (pp. 105 + 3), bearing date 1724, on the title-page of which the name of Domenico de Rossi, erede di Gio. Giacomo still appears. This was the very year of his death, for Ehrle cites an edition of the same date issued by Lorenzo Filippo de' Rossi, figlio del fu Domenico, erede di Gio. Giacomo (Gabinetto Nazionale delle Stampe, K. i. 46).

In 1738, as Ehrle tells us, the whole stock of the De Rossi family was bought by Clement XII. for 45,000 scudi, after an attempt to sell it to some Englishmen for 60,000 scudi had been frustrated, and the Pope thus founded the Calcografia Camerale: this was taken over in 1870 by the Italian Government, and became the Calcografia Reale. (Ovidi, La Calcografia Romana, pp. II sqq.)

^{page 144 note 1} The article which was announced in the Catalogue of the Museo Capitolino published by the School (p. 12) as about to appear in Bibliofilia, vol. xiv. (1912)Google Scholar, was never written, and its place has been taken by the present paper, which also supersedes the bibliography given in Cap. Cat. p. 11 sqq. I have not thought it necessary to mention all the errors and omissions which will be found there: though I may point out that the misquotation of the title of the Collectio XLIX Statuarum (supra, p. 136) and that of the 1668 edition of Marcucci (III. A. 4) are due to Michaelis and Schreiber respectively. I must also acknowledge the help received from Prof. H. Stuart Jones, in conjunction with whom I first worked through the collections of engravings I have described.