Abstract

The argument set out here provides a new understanding of the methods followed by the Renaissance architect Andrea Palladio for depicting the monuments of classical antiquity—in both his drawings and the plates of his seminal architectural treatises, the Quattro libri dell’architettura. It accepts the now-established view that Palladio’s early studies were frequently copied from the drawings of previous practitioners, but it reasons that his later output was also heavily dependent on past achievements. This is contrary to the claims Palladio made in the Quattro libri, which contend that his drawings were based on surveys he had carried out himself, and to the confirmatory presumptions of modern-day scholars. The article first examines the ancient temples Palladio illustrated in the treatise, and observes that they have numerous features that are unsupported by the archaeological record but are also seen either in Palladio’s earlier copy drawings or in the graphic works of his predecessors or contemporaries. Secondly, it considers Palladio’s drawings of bath complexes, which remained unpublished only because of his death, noting that some of them are still reckoned to be invaluable and reliable records of then-accessible remains that Palladio was able to inspect but no longer exist. The conclusion here, however, is that his reconstructions were again based on earlier surveys that he judged dependable, but which he often then adapted and adjusted in line with his personal preferences. The article then continues with a discussion of his probable debts to older architects such as Michele Sanmicheli and Antonio da Sangallo the Younger, and his relationship with his contemporary Pirro Ligorio, whose drawings are often markedly similar to Palladio’s. It concludes by considering whether Palladio’s coverage of ancient architecture reveals the extent of such knowledge at the midpoint of the sixteenth century.