360 VENETIAN INDEX

fully estimated until he is seen at play among the fantastic chequers of the Venetian ceilings.

I have supplied somewhat copious notices of the pictures of Tintoret, because they are much injured, difficult to read, and entirely neglected by other writers on art. I cannot express the astonishment and indignation I felt on finding, in Kugler’s handbook, a paltry cenacolo, painted probably in a couple of hours for a couple of zecchins, for the monks of St. Trovaso, quoted as characteristic of this master;¹ just as foolish readers quote separate stanzas of Peter Bell or the Idiot Boy, as characteristic of Wordsworth. Finally, the reader is requested to observe, that the dates assigned to the various buildings named in the following index, are almost without exception conjectural; that is to say, founded exclusively on the internal evidence of which a portion has been given in the Final Appendix. It is likely, therefore, that here and there, in particular instances, farther inquiry may prove me to have been deceived; but such occasional errors are not of the smallest importance with respect to the general conclusions of the preceding pages, which will be found to rest on too broad a basis to be disturbed.

(1881. The delay in the publication of the second volume of the “Travellers’ Edition” was caused by my wish to complete this index into some more generally serviceable form. But I find that now-a-days, as soon as I begin to speak of anything anywhere, it is sure to be moved somewhere else; and now, at last, in desperation, I print the old index almost as it was, cutting out of it only the often-repeated statements that such and such churches or pictures were of “no importance.”² The modern traveller is but too likely to say so for himself. In my last edition of Murray’s Guide to Northern Italy, I find the visitor advised how to see all the remarkable objects in Venice in a single day.³

¹ [See the edition of 1851, vol. ii. pp. 460-461. In subsequent editions the passage was omitted; in still later editions an apologetic note was inserted, referring to the better understanding of Tintoret’s works which Ruskin had brought about: this note has already been cited, see Vol. IV. p. xlvi. For Ruskin’s notice of the picture referred to, see below, s. “Trovaso,” p. 435.]

² [The index is in this edition reprinted as it stood in the original and uncurtailed form; for the variations in the “Travellers’ Edition,” see above, Bibliographical Note, p. xxxiv.]

³ [So also in the current edition; but the less hurried visitor is given a week. Baedeker’s plan allows him “3-4 days.”

Ruskin originally intended to revise the index further by adding fresh notices of painters. This appears from the first MS. version of the note here:-

“1877. All the important works of Gentile Bellini and Carpaccio are now also noticed in this index, and I have revised it throughout; so that, with this in his hand, the traveller will sufficiently know what I esteem best worth his attention. For detailed criticism he must consult my recent Guides.”

“My recent Guides” are the Guide to the Principal Pictures in the Academy at Venice (1877) and the first supplement to St. Mark’s Rest (describing Carpaccio’s pictures) issued separately in the same year.]

[Version 0.04: March 2008]