{96° ACSA ANNUAL MEETING AND TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE. Carlo Scarpa’s Re-design of Castelvecchio in Verona, Italy SAMIA RAB University of Hawaii at Manoa ‘This paperexaminesthe re-design of Castelveechio in Verona by the Italian architect Carlo Scarpa. An analysis of this project suggests that monuments may play an active role in the critical interpretation of regional history. ‘Scarpa’s re-designing of Castelvecchio adapts a monu- ‘ment tothe new use of a museum in which individual works ‘[Link] toenrich the visitor's experience from both an artistic and historical viewpoint. His interventions ereate deliberate breaks between different historical parts of the building, each of which is designed to create an “authentic historic experience. He rhythmically marks the different stages and layers that were added at different times in the history of Castelvecchio. It i in this way that he reveals the inherent discontinuity of time in his selective narration of Verona’s past As visitors to the museum, we are directed towards an understanding of the multiple moments and the infinite voices of history. As we walk through the museum, we listen to Scarpa’s narration of the diverse history of ‘Verona, as he reads this history from the physical elements of| Castelvecchio, A vital insight in Scarpa’s Castelvecchio Museum is that extending the life of monuments ean efface Justa much history from memory asis left recorded in them, ‘Monuments, in this scheme of thought, do not just represent and immortalize historical figures, political event, or archi- tectural styles: they havean active figural significance forthe present state of architecture, INTRODUCTION Unil very recently, architectural theorists and historians appraised Carlo Scarpa’s work as craft-intensive, low-tech, small-scale, andanachronistic” AccordingtoManftedoTafuri, ‘Scarpa's work s"aperverse dialectic between the celebration ofthe form andthe seattering fits parts.”*SergioLos wasthe fist to uncover the “poetic” dimension in Scarpa’sarchites- ture? In his latest publication, he vaguely links Giovanni YVico's maxim" verumipsumEactun” (he re isnterchange- able with the made) to Searpa’s fascination with reaching ‘ruth through manual construction.‘In this book, hecompares Searpatoa number of modemarchtects Frank Lloyd Wright, Louis Kahn, Mies van der Rohe. Unfortunately, Los! work mystified Scarpa's approach in such a way that most subse- ‘quent interpretation remains concerned with the architect's novelty rather than his originality.> ‘The idea of truth in manual construction motivated Bianei Albertini and Sandro Bagnolitoexplore how Scampaachieved "order and articulation in his architecture through a descend- ing sequence of details." Since then, theorists have estab- lished Scarpa’s reputation as the "master of detail." This aspect of his work has attracted Marco Frascari and Kenneth Frampton in recent years, but from different perspectives. Frascari focuses on Scarpa's design of details, which he definesas "the unit of architectural production." Heappreci- ates the conceptionof architectural space" in Scarpa’ projects and, from his interpretation of these projets, advances a perceptual definition of architecture.* Frampton, in contrast, notes that "spatial interpretation is largely absent in his (Scarpa's) work "Instead, Frampton maintains that through oot Scarpe's work "the joint is treated as a kind of tectonic condensation.”* The tectonic in architecture, according t0 Frampton, isthe at of oining,!ratherthan detailing. And, to him, "Scarpa’s work serves not only as a demonstration of | tectonic authenticity but also as a critique ofthe two main Uutopias of our time: the organic utopia of Wright and the technological uiopia of modem functionalism."" Through a study of Scarpa’s work, Frampton pursues a search forthe theory of makingarchitecture that is potentially separate from thinking about and perceiving architecture. Heclaimsto shed “cognitive and eritical discursive light” on Scarpa’ sarchi- tecture when, in fact, he is concemed with the process of| making in Scarpa's architecture. Together, Fraseari and Frampion present two distinctaspects of Scarpa’ sapproach to architecture: the perception of space by the five sensesand the construction of objects that constitutes the space. But, read alone, each advances a single-sided interpretation of Scarpa. The British architects, Richard Murphy, stands out for meticulously studying Scarpa's work to understand i, rather than use io justify his own approach to architecture. He 18 especially impressed by Scarpa'sre-design of Castelvecchio to a museum in Verona. His recent book gives a detailedPr Fig 1, Pala Abbatllis in Palermo, aly. Scarpa'se-planning of the main evel which emphasizes the north south axis othe cour. Thisis one of his early projectsin which he re-defined the reation- ship between the court and the room that are now used for museum | Aspley inventory of the project and includes over 500 drawings fom the Scarpa collection. “It isa document and guide indispens- able to anyone who wishes to understand and interpret the artistic approach of the Italian architect. It reconstructs the itinerary of Scarpa's work and interprets his design moves in the Castelveechio project It also illustrates the influence of | Venetian architecture on Scarpa’s design of details, specifi- cally, on the way in which the architect incorporates water ‘channels into his design These major publications document and interpret Scarpa’s ‘work and are successful in paving the way tostudy the critical position implicit in his work. However, no one has yet made serious attempt todiscuss Scarpa's workasa response tothe several artistic and urbanistic movements that surfaced in Italy between the years 1910's and 1960's, This paper discusses Scarpa’s attitude to history and the role ofthe monument in his architectural projeets within the context of post-World War II Italy. According to Murphy Scarpa’s aim is "to lead the visitor by the hand through the collection," tocommunicate between object and visitor by al available devices and not only todisplay the art object.'* This paper suggests that Scarpa, by selective exeavation and creative demolition, attempts to achieve more than just to "clarify and expose the layers of history" for the viewer.) He ‘composes the remnants of different historical petiods with his additions ina way thateach element retains its uniqueness yet forms part ofa harmonious whole, This paper concludes that ‘monuments may play’an active role inthe eritieal iterpr tion of regional history, and in the portrayal of cultural diversity ina region's past. CONSTRUCTING IDENTITY 2 Palazzo Abbutelisn Palermo, Italy. Searpa'sre-planning of the scxond level whch significantly changed the configuration of the orginal palace ‘THE RE-DES VERONA EN OF CASTELVE( PHIO OF In 1947,Carlo Scarpa gave a lecture at the Academy of Fine Arison the European Art Nouveaustyle and on theartisticand ‘moral valuesthat the nineteenthcentury theorist, John Ruskin, found in the medieval cities of the Veneto region. Ruskin’s writings and William Turner's paintings had focused new attention onthe historic cities of Venice and Verona. Searpa believed that the construction of new buildings in thecities of Veneto did not benetit from the celebrated works of Ruskin or from their passionatedepiction by Turner Therefore, he set goal for himself which he pursued with conviction through- to recognize the Venetian monuments a8 a © for most of his architectural projects, ‘Scarpare-designed several existing buildings inthe region (of Veneto and imposed his marks forcefully but ertically on these buildings. In these projects he attempted to revive the ancient splendor of thesecities through his own novelty. In his earlier work, for instance in the re-planning of Palazzo Abatells at Palermo, he kept the exteriors intact and only re ‘ordered the interiors according to the new function. But after the 1960's, he stared moving in a new direetion toward achieving balance of three distinet approaches: i) his inter- pretation of the history of the building, ii) highlighting the architectural value of its original components, and ili) satis- {ying the new requirements that initiated the entire pracess."” [Before Scarpa worked on Castelvecchio, the city fort of Verona had already undergone four major periods of con struction. The original construction, including the wall of theSS™ACSA ANNUAL MEETING AND TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE Fig. 3, Plan and cireulation system of Avena’s restoration of Castelveecio, Commune and the Republic of Verona, was built in the Twelfth Century. In 1354, the Lords of Verona incorporated the Commune wall into their compound, Castelvecchio: the ‘wall between the two compounds separated the residential and themilitary functions." In 1797, when Napoleon's troops occupied the Veneto region, they added the barracks to Castelvecchio, along the north and east walls of the military compound. They also constructed a grand staircase against the Commune wall. In 1799, as a penalty for the citizen's uprising against the French occupation, the troops demol- ished five medieval towers.”® In 1923-6, during the Imperial Regime, museum director Antonio Avenaand architect Ferdinando Foriati rehabilitated Castelvecchio. According to Coombs, nationalistic ideals “supporifed] the fascist myths of Italian cultural pre-emi- rence” and guided their rehabilitation.” This interpretation of their work is far from accurate. Avena and Foriti rebuilt the medieval towers and re-invented the utilitarian barracks They replaced the several small openings inthe Castelvecchio by Gothic doors and windows, which they salvaged from a local palazzo. Even though their modification did not oblitr- ate the taces of the French occupation, it did glorify the Gothic period far more than either the Roman or Renaissance periods Fig. 4, Castelvecchio of Verona, tly. Photograph showing the southeast side before Averais restoration. Napoleons troops, 1799, had removed te battlements an the top of the towers. Fig 5. View ofeourtyardlookingnortheastshowingthe Napoleonic bwtrack as left by the military Fig. 6. Courtyard facade, looking noes, showing Avena's restoration The Napoleonic airease stil existin the background, In 1957, Licisco Magagnato succeeded Avena as museum director and appointed Scarpa a architect for another reha- biltation of Castelvecchio, Scarpa persuaded Magagnato to «demolish the staircase and the barracks builtduring Napoleon's rule. Then, he proceeded by excavating the ancient moat discovered during the demolition. He re-ariculated the lawn paving and fountains in the great courtyard and added abridgeFig 7. Palazzo di Camerlenghiat San TommasoCantuariense tly This palace was demolished in 1882 bu the doar and windows were salvaged and later tse in the main court of Castelvecehio daring Aventis restoration Fig. 8. Scarpi's treatment of the facade ofthe great courtyard, showing the detal af the naw screens juxtaposed with older wins dows CONSTRUCTING IDENTITY Figs 9 and 10, Ruskin's drawing of the great equestrian statue of CCangrande which depicsthe Lordof Verona_ AL the time, the statue slood cn te spire a Santa Maria Antica across the moat, He also remodeled the ground floor gallery and installed new sereens, windows and doors ‘The statue of the Cangrande is one of the most significant objects in the museum collection. It depicts the most cel brated member of the Della Scala family, the fourteenth century Lord of Verona. During his visits to Verona, Ruskin drew the Cangrande statu, when it as on top of the spite of the church $, Maria Antica. This statue was placed in the CCastelvecchio during Avena's conversion ofthe fortress to ‘museum, Scarpacritcally relocated the Cangrandenext tothe new staircase that he introduced during his demolition ofthe Napoleon's stair and barracks, adjacent to the Commune wall Both Murphy and Coombs have commented on Scarpa’s critical relocation of the Cangrande and his re space around the moat, the courtyard and the commune wall According to Murphy, Scarpa "embarks on clarifying and exposing the layers of history by selective excavation and creative demolition.” Coombsclaimsthat by demolishi Napoleonic barracks and staiease, “Scarpa was offering... critique of the Fascist myth of Italy's past.” Mussolini had conducted a tial of Count Ciang, his son-in law, at the Napoleonic stairease. Count Ciano was a member of the Grand Fascist Council, which caused Mussolini's fall in 1943, The succeeding Italian government became a “CO bel ‘with the allies and soon held southern Italy under their control. However, the Germans rescued Mussolini and helped him recover his leadership of the "puppet govern- ment"? While these interpretationsare certainly valid, they do not explain Scatpa’s intentions completely. In relocating the ‘Cangrande statue Scarpa had four concerns in mind. First, to keep the statue outside the museum but in a semi-enclosed space, protected from rain and direct natural light. He cut the roof packinorder to introduce sun lightinto thisspace,as well as to separate the statue from the east wall of the court Second, he promoted multiple viewing points for the statue from below, fiom above, and at close quarters. While the iginal sculptor had visualized the work to be seen about filly feet above ground, Scarpa’ sdesign of the Cangrande design of the6 ACSA ANNUAL MEETING AND TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE. Fig 11. Tomi of Cangrande della Scala, S, Maria Antica, Verona. This ws the orginal location of the statue belore relocation fo the CCastelveechio Museum in 1923, space and the museum circulation provided! multiple viewing of the equestrian statue, making it the centerpiece of the collection. Third, the repeated presentation of the statue to visitors reinforced their focus on the symbol of Verona without being distracted by any other work of ar Fourth, and probably the most critical of all, Scarpa clearly intended to alorify the rule of the Lord of Verona much more than any other historic period. Itis this aim that guided Scarpa's decision to demolish Napoleon's starease which, in tur, led tothe discovery of the Roman moat and foundations that lay underneath these stairs. is only after this discovery that he could justify removing one layer of history and exposing an older strata The ctiteria for Scarpa’ demolition not only shed light on his attempt to create harmonic relationships between the eastern and western pars of the museum.* It also reflects 2 unique dimension of Scarpa’s attitude towards new architec ture as it relates to existing buildings. In redesigning Castelvecchio, he eritically composed select elements ofthe past with new ideas at three different levels. At a program- matic level, he maintained balance between existing spaces and their potential use, available floor area and the require- ‘ments of the program, the configuration ofthe building and its re-articulation, On a purely stylistic level, he composed the original appearance ofthe castle and ils new image. And, at actitical level, he experimented with the new urbanism that Fig. 12. Scarpa’sdsign ofthe Cangrande ace in which he creates multiple viewing of the equestrian statue \was grounded inthe notion of contextualism in architecture ‘ambientismo was, as Giovannoni explained, "the corre- lation between a work and its surrounding: the artistic har ‘mony between individual worksand the whole." Asearly as 1916, Piacentini had writen an article "On the Conservation of the Beauty of Rome and the Development of the Modern City.’ The conflict between the old and the new — progress and tradition — was an age-old issu in Italy Even earlier, in 1913, Giovannoni had published his fa- article on Diradamento, which meant the "thinning cout by selective "pruning." At an urban level, both these activities were essential 10 adapt the old city centers to modern lif. Therefore, "demolition hereand there ofahouse ‘or group of houses and ereating in thei stead asmall piazza witha garden, small lung in an old quarter...(would add)..a variety of movement, associating effects of contrast withthe original setting such that everything will be infused with a character of art and/or setting.”®” The concept of the piani regolaiorin Italy was adiect outcome of the philosophy of ntextualism, which expanded the concept of a monument fiom a building to "those essential conditions of context that consttueitssetting." And, [Link] Giovannon "one can say that the monument is the entire setting.”* Similarly, in defining the character ofthe Veneto region and in converting existing buildings to museums, Scarpa foundFig 13. Scarpa’s daw the design ofthe new pedestal forthe Cangrande the opportunity tocreate new forms that were inspired by the historic and artiste significance of existing structures. AtCastelvecchio, Scarpa provides a specific method ofr aticulating the existing space to provide a critical route for the visitor. The arrangement and grouping of exhibits and lighting assert this path. Moreover, he allowed the compo- nents of the original building to activate the sequence of spaces, Yet,onentering the Castlvecchio Museum, ones far more aware of Searpa's "touch" than the architectural signif cance ofthe original castle. Atthe threshold betweenentrance roomandthe sculpture gallery, Scarpadetals the pavingedge by separating the old wall by atiny cascade of levels formed from white Prun stone. Here, his intention is to simulta neously address wo factors: the old wall and the visitors route through the museum. He is both connecting” and Separating” them. Hismain aim was to create new formsina \way that brought attention to the existing structure, without impinging on itshistoricand aistic valu. In an interview he stated his intention as follows: "wo allow it (the old fragment) to maintain its own identity its own history. this Way), ‘you inerease the tension between the new and the old.”2 CONSTRUCTING IDENTITY Fig. 14, Scapa located the Cangrande statue in such a way that it ‘became the centerpiece of the museum's collection. Fig 15. Scarpa’ demolition of the final bay of the Napoleonic barrack and the excavation of the Roman moat.61" ACSA ANNUAL MEETING AND TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE Fi 16. Excavation th Scalige moat under the fith room of the ry. The arches carying the wall o the Napoleonic baracks ‘were constructed in the nineteenth century. Scarpa introduced the foundations. EXPLORING POLYPHONIC INTENTIONS IN THE RE-DESIGN OF MONUMENTS. Even though a metaphoric application of the tenm "po- Iyphony" to understand architectural activity might ensue certain problems, this particular intention in musical compo- sition can reveal the unfulfilled, but clearly stated,” dimen sion in Scarpa’ sdesign philosophy. Polyphony in music isthe simultaneous presentation of to or more voices that are perfectly bound together but still keep thei relative indepen- dence. Its the texture formed hy the interweaving of several ‘melodie lines, Fach line, melody or voice is independent but, together, sound harmonically. The contrasting approaches in ‘homophony,” wherein one part dominates while the others form a basically choral accompaniment, and monophony," wherein there is but a single melodic line. Polyphonic forms were given a most brilliant and sophisti- cated expression during the Baroque era in the works of J.S, Bach, (One ofthe fundamental principles ofthe great polyphonic composers was the equality of voices: "no one voice should dominate, none should serve as mere accompaniment.”™ Scerpa acknowledged that, in adapting monuments to new functions, the old fabric should be allowed to maintain its Fig. 17. View looking west from the fifth room o the galery, afer demoliionof the barracks and removal ofthe first floor. The root been the Commune wall and the Torre del Mastio, seen in this photograph, was aso demolished during Scazpa's re-design. identity. But, he did not elaborate, verbally or in writing, how tochoose or assess these elements. In the previous section, a critical reading of the re-design of Castelvecchiohas revealed Scarpa's preference in singling out some historical elements lover the other He retained the elements of two distinct historical eras: the fourteenth century statue belonging tothe Lord of Verona and the Roman foundations. And, he erased the barracks and the stairs constructed during Napoleon's regime, an act that resulted in his discovery of Roman ruins. Its here that he deviates from the polyphonic intentions, ‘hich he may have aspired to but did not achieve, a least in the historical aspect of his design In Scarpa’ hierarchy of architectural and historical valu, the Commune wall and the Statue eame first, To him, both these elements representa time during which Verona offered its inhabitants a measure of individual freedom. He viewed Napoleon as an outsider and his conquest of Taly as paving a \way for the later suppressive control by the Fascist Regime. Scarpa was convinced that those who were enfranchised during the rule of the Lords of Verona enjoyed individual {reedom. Therefore, he liberated the wal from the Napoleon's construction — thestaircase and barracks — and placed the Cangrande statue at this critical junction between the two sections of the museum.Fig. 18. The Porta del Morbio during Sc: original xteway iin the inner arch, The be pas excavation. The beyond the arch wes buried during the ninetenth conury bu expesed by Scarpa during his re-design: ss Fig_ 19 The ground floor o the Canarande space as between 1959. 1962, The paving and route wo the Poa del Morbio have been installed. The hole the ceiling indicates the exaet postion ef demolished Napoleonic staircase By making the Cangrande statue the most significant feature ofthe museum he didnot relegate tothe statuetherole ‘of mere "accompaniment " The statue, in fact, threatens the ‘other historical voices that were a partof the original building But, once selected, the manner in which he composed these elements and his additions reinforced the identity of each ‘component. Thisapproach to design allows conflicting elementstoco- exist — separated yet connected, To interpret that "his inter- ventions act as mere connectors the same way as & capital in the classical orders resolve the vertical and the horizontal clements"*reducesScarpa’ intention toonly one ofits many facets. Thisexplanation ignores Scarpa’ sattempl tocompose the original andthe novel ina way that each isan independent part of the monument SUMMARY Scarpa balances three approaches in re-designing the Castelvecchio: his interpretation of the history of the castle, highlighting the architectural value of its original compo- nents, and satisfying the new requirements of the museum, Approaching design in this way would vary from one project to another and would be naturally specifi wo existing build- ings, their architectural and historical settings. But this ap- proach relies ona critical selection ofthe building's existing ‘components and the history that is voiced in these elements. (Only then could one compose these elements and the creative additions. His re-design of Castelvecchio reflects his critical view that new design offers a reinterpretation of the value of @ monument. This approach points toa critical aspect in the ‘concept of monuments; the significance of a monument ean only be interpreted and never determined through fixed criteria, This is most obvious in Searpa's critical selection of the components he erased and those he retained. Selective demolition prepared the ground for his creative additions. The original components ofthe Castelvecchio servean active figural function, which he demonstrates by singling out and playing down certain features that represent specific histori cal events Interpreting Scarpa’s intention at Castelvecchio, 1 would rephrase Murphy’ observation withwhich hedefines Searpa’s altitude tobistory and museum design. According lo Murphy Scarpa‘clarfiesand exposes the layers of history by selective excavation and cteative demolition.”® At Castelves Searpa'sdemolitionisfar more selective than ereativeand his additions ate far more creative than critical. Therefore, Vital insight in Scarpa’s Castelvecchio Museum is that extending the life of monuments can efface just as much history from ‘memory as they recordin them, Monuments, in this scheme of thought, do not just represent and immortalize historical figures, political events, or architectural styles, they have an active figural significance forthe present,{46° ACSA ANNUAL. MEETING AND TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE NOTES * Leonardo Benevlo. The sory of Modern drhtecare (Cater, Bas 1971, M. Tai and, Dal Co rchtetara Contenporam (Milan Ect, 1976} Bruna evi, Panes bel XX set” L'Espreso 17 (December 1979), 2 Manfedo Tair "Lee'muses Inguiganes ce dssin une féoeralon de" Maines” Ldrhitesture &Aujourd al 181 {i9F8} pp. 33 3 Serio lias Carlo Scarpa: Architeo Poet. (Venice, 1967) + SergioLos, Carlo Scarpa, Benedikt Taschen. (Trevignano: Italy, 1983) + Wihtbeexeptionof Maria A. Crip who mentions, ips onl. Seats abi fo "assis bth ancient snd modem tras os hough a erative press pfs mies” inp, MA. Carlo Scarpa: Theory, Desi, Prete (Cae eigen 1985) # Bagnol Aberin Carlo Scarpa: Arehuecturen Deals Cam tradge MIT Press, 1988 > Maro Frasca" Teale Dei” ia 7 (Cambie: MIT Press 198), pp 28,4 « According to Psi Scarpssarchiestre,"fertingn and, ‘alin up tps between val, ing acomer, and nating testing eam aval are corned eementsf vs tnd tc sensatons Th lotion a those deta ves iho ie conventions tat ea meaning Uo a percep” asa (09894728 + Kemet Frampton “Carlo Scape and ie Adoration of he Joist Sues tn Tectone Cure. The Pooncs of Contraction in Ninctenth and Twentth Century Archtecare.(Cantbige MIT Press 1989) p29 ve Rene Famplon (1999, 4 4 Kemneth Empl, (1995) p. 322 © Kemah Frampun. (1998), p 332 © Richard Mm Calo Searpa & Caselecei. (London Bueronh Arcee, 190) ¥ Rlhard Mp. 1990.18 '5 Richad Map (0990) p 2 MA Copa (98O) pp -2 > Chigpn and Murpy hae piven detailed histoire tr coun of Scarp’s work a [Link] of ksi he poet deta, ths paper cies on Scarpa s Selective ado and ea demoiion. lusts the ‘lations teen Scarpa s interpretation of he ret and hstneal valve fens Bling nthe one is Proponent a ¥ Tamara Coombs. "Scarpa’s Castelvecchio: A Critical Rehabil tation.” Places 8 (Summer 1992), p.5 "© Henry Millon."The Role of History of Architecture in Fascist lily" Journal ofthe Soctery of drchitectural Historians 24 (March 1965), pS ® Coombs, Tamara (1992), p.6. 2% Murphy. Richard. (1990), . 4 ® Coombs, Tamara, (1992), 4 2 Feny Millon. 1968), p. 39 > Giuseppe Mazzarol."A Work of Cara Scape: The Restoration ‘fan Ancient Venetian Palace " Zodiac 13(1964),pp. 218-219, %G. Giovannoni. "Liambiente dei monument,” Questiont di architeanra (1925), p. 172. % MarcelloPiacentin’ Sullaconservazioe deli bellezza di Roma sulla suluppa della cita moderna, (Rome: Associazione ‘Artistiea fal Cuton i Arehitetura, 1916), p. 10 ¥ G Giovannon. "I 'diradamento.* (1913), Later published as *Nuovicontritut alsistemadel diadamentoedilizio.”Relasone tecniche al 1! Congresso Nacionale degli Ingegneri Haan April 815. (Rome, 1931), p.75, ™ In Giovannon's own words: “che i monumento sia tuto Finsieme "(1913 & 1931), p 57, ® Av suggested by Kenneth Frampton, (1995). 2 As suggested by Tamara Coombs (1992) 5 CarloScarpa."Anoerview with Martin Dominguez." Quaderss 158 (Milan, 1956) 3 According to Carlo Scarpa: ". you can renovate the old fag ‘ments without damaging them You ean allow it to maintain ts ‘ow identity om history. (1956) 2» Thedefinitionot "polyphony isfrom The Columbia Eneyclope- dia, Filla Edition, (1993) > Kundera "Dialogue on the Art of Composition" The Art ofthe Novel. (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1986), p75, 2S Kenneth Frampton, (1995). % Richard Murphy. (1990). p. 18, SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figs, | & 2: Pont, Gio, "L’opera di Carlo Searpa in Palazzo ‘Abbatelis, Palermo." Domus 388 (March, 1962), 3.17, Figs. 37, 9 & 10, 13-19. Murphy, Richard. Carlo Scarpa & Castelvecchia. (1990), p. 6. Figs 4-16: Bitdego, Guiseppe. Verona (Bergamo, Italy, 1914), p. 38 Figs 8, 12 & 14 Photographed by the author, Summer 1994,