Valentina Burgassi and Mauro Volpiano

Tradition and innovation: the construction of court palaces and the role of professional figures in eighteenth-century

Valentina Burgassi1 and Mauro Volpiano2 1. Dipartimento di Architettura e Design, Politecnico di Torino - École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris 2. Dipartimento di Architettura e Design, Politecnico di Torino

Introduction

The capital of the Savoyard state since 1563, offers a paradigmatic example of urban design in the Age of Absolutism, when the city was completely reorganized to accommodate the state and public buildings required for the functioning of a centralized court bureaucracy (archives, mint, government offices, etc.). The buildings and public spaces of the city were harnessed to reinforce the image and status of the ruling dynasty, not least by using the palaces and residences of the court to communicate the prestige of the sovereign.

This urban and regional system included properties and residences – large architectural complexes, with a range of residential and practical functions – that were scattered in and around the capital city, in keeping with the example of numerous contexts around Europe, such as Madrid, Vienna and Paris. Medieval, dynastic seats, hillside villas with wine-growing estates, hunting retreats and riverside residences joined urban palaces in a variegated collection that continued to expand and evolve up to the beginning of the Napoleonic age at end of the eighteenth century, before enjoying a final, if rather different, phase of development in the 1800s.

Although the individual buildings enjoyed differing fortunes in the twentieth century, many of them can be seen to have already suffered in the nineteenth century from misuse and neglect, if not the systematic looting of valuable materials and the repurposing of whole buildings for new functions (as in the case of the seventeenth-century palace of the Venaria Reale).

Towards the end of the twentieth century, the residences of the Savoy court began to attract renewed interest, particularly in regard to their historiography and architectural conservation: in 1979 restoration work was already underway at the with a view to housing a museum of . Since then, one restoration project has followed another. Great attention has been given, in particular, to communicating the architectural and art historical value of the buildings. However, a general evaluation of their technical and technological qualities is still lacking, despite the copious data that have emerged from the restoration initiatives, and the resulting literature which tends to focus on single buildings [1].

These building complexes constitute an encyclopedia of building from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries, providing us with a palimpsest, so to speak, of court in these years. However, more targeted comparative analysis is still required if we are to appreciate their qualities and features fully – whether these are

275 Tradition and innovation: the construction of court palaces and the role of professional figures in eighteenth-century Piedmont shared by many buildings or are unique to individual examples – and understand the interactions between local building traditions and international models.

It is against this background that our research group at the Politecnico di Torino undertook the study discussed in the present article. Comparative studies on this material are particularly fruitful, especially in light of the coherence that characterizes all the sites examined: the recurrent presence of workers not only from Piedmont but also, typically, from the area of the Lombard and Swiss lakes; the use of recurrent decorative models and techniques associated with particular families or workshops; the role of ducal and royal architects, who are actively involved in multiple projects at the same time; and – underpinning the process – the complex administrative apparatus by which the state exercised rigorous control over these projects – as can be understood from the archival data – which is a fundamental factor in our understanding of how construction actually worked in this context [2].

The organization of construction works between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries

The programmatic renewal of the capital city was initiated under Duke Emmanuel Philibert, and continued under his successors until it reached its apex with the transformation of the Duchy of Savoy into a kingdom during the reign of Victor Amadeus II. At the height of the Duchy’s standing, between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries, architecture became a direct expression of the power of the and a tool of political promotion. With the state organized along precise political schemata, the power of the ruler was affirmed more emphatically by giving the political order a representative, physical form [3]. To manage this process, it became necessary to exercise some degree of direct control over building works in the capital, including the division and organization of labor. Sure enough, in the buildings commissioned by the Savoy family, we find evidence of a rigid hierarchy and administrative apparatus, not to mention methodologies of construction that were consolidated over time and an established workforce of laborers, craftsmen and architects who found repeated employment in the construction of buildings for the Duke.

The Letters of Patent (16 May 1566) issued by the regent, Margherita of , forbade any “habitante nella città” (citizen) from engaging in the construction of buildings, while “mastri da muro” (master builders) and other construction workers were required to obtain a license from the Duke, under penalty of confiscation of any unlicensed works they had begun and a fine of a hundred lire [4]. Other legislative measures included controls over the prices of bricks and “carretti di sabia” (cartloads of sand), lime and plaster (30 September 1621) [5] and other building materials (4 July 1624) [6]. Duke Charles Emmanuel I issued an ordinance establishing a “Magistrato delle Fabbriche” (Magistracy of Buildings) to oversee not only the construction of the Duke’s own buildings, but also those of private citizens, with a view to coordinating the embellishment of the city (10 March 1621) [7]. With this, the Duke sought to resolve the issue of possible discrepancies between the building as planned and the actual result, but it also served to keep a tighter rein on royal spending. The Magistrato was given control of construction in the capital with the remit to ensure the “bellezza, ornamento, et comodità d’essa, et delli habitanti” (beauty, embellishment and the comfort of the city, for the citizens). It was made up of two state councilors, three “Mastri Auditori” (master auditors), two engineers (including ), an auditor, a comptroller of the household, a chief engineer, a controller of buildings, and a secretary selected from among the existing Crown employees.

The role of this original Magistrato was more a question of supervision and enforcement than the determination of decisions and policy. However, it prepared the way for a more complex administrative set-up with the creation of the Council of Buildings and Fortifications, which was established by Duke Victor Amadeus I on 30 August

276 Valentina Burgassi and Mauro Volpiano

1635, by merging the Delegation of Buildings of the Fortifications of Turin, (which oversaw military buildings) and the Council of Buildings (which had previously overseen work on the Duke’s own buildings) [8]. The Council of Buildings was separated from the Council of Fortifications in 1666 by Charles Emmanuel II, before the two offices were reunited in 1678 by the regent Marie Jeanne-Baptiste of Savoy-Nemours. In a provision issued on 28 March 28 1717, by King Victor Amadeus II, the Council of Buildings and Fortifications took its final form. It was the body responsible for monitoring construction activity in the city from then onwards. This included ensuring that the organization of the works themselves, including the coordination of labor, was in accordance with the various provisions issued by the organs of state and the strict instructions of the court architects. Under the firm direction of the “general intendent”, the buildings office was responsible for the management of supplies from the quarries, the sourcing and storage of building materials and producing quotes for the works themselves. It was also responsible for setting up and monitoring the tendering process, drafting budgets for civil and military construction and ensuring that the works were actually implemented to a satisfactory standard [9]. Another key body was the Council of Finances, an integral part of the administrative set-up that was able to influence decisions on all the matters relating to state finances, not least because construction represented one of the most significant expenses for the ducal purse.

Each phase of the construction process was overseen by a team of qualified professionals whose specific roles were coordinated and monitored by the “First Engineer” or “First Architect” [10]. Typically, military works were entrusted to the former, while the latter was given responsibility for civilian structures, including ephemeral works such as sets and decorations for public events and celebrations. The First Architect was assisted by at least two or three “dessinatori” (draughtsmen), who – under his supervision – executed the technical and architectural drawings [11]. There was also the “misuratore”, who was responsible for carrying out surveys, or producing the technical estimates or other information required by the contractors. The division of labor could vary considerably: where Juvarra would maintain control of every aspect of the design process, from the conceptual sketches to the finest technical detail, Alfieri preferred to delegate, devoting his own energies exclusively to the conceptual and creative elements of the design [12]. Measurement and survey operations were assisted by “trabuccanti” (whose title derives from “trabucco”, an archaic unit of measurement used in construction) [13]. In addition to the “misuratori,” there was also a “sovrastante” (chief) and the “direttore” (director), who exercised direct control of the works themselves, monitoring the quality and quantity of work carried out to ensure it satisfied the terms of the contract. Completing the hierarchy are various categories of craftsman (master bricklayers and carpenters, decorators, stonemasons), representatives of an established, highly professionalized industry which in Piedmont had generated an efficient working “machine”. Craftsmen in construction were highly specialized, and typically moved regularly from one location to another, the demand for their skills and financial pressures and incentives giving rise to a significant level of migration [14].

“Instructions”

Depending on the type of construction required by the sovereign, the First Architect or Engineer would see to the preparation of drawings and a scale model, complete with costings. Following this, the “Istruzioni” (plans or instructions) would be prepared containing all of the information required for the building or refurbishment of the structures in question, and a number of summary indications for the organization and management of the works. This took the form of a sort of official directive, which was issued to the various figures involved in the project depending on their specific roles and included instructions about how the various tasks were to be carried out [15].

277 Tradition and innovation: the construction of court palaces and the role of professional figures in eighteenth-century Piedmont

Fig. 1. This folio is representing the Istruzione drafted by Giacinto Baijs on behalf of the First Architect Benedetto Alfieri (1754) in ASTo, Miscellanea Quirinale, Minutari Contratti Fabbriche, busta 57, vol. 13, 1753 e 1754, f. 61 r.

The plans were not only the basic mechanism of the design process; they also formed the basis for the tendering process by which contracts for the project were assigned. Indeed, in a regolamento dated 28 June 1730, Duke Victor Amadeus II decreed that the plans should include “i piani, le piante ed i proffili necessarij per li rispettivi travaglij” (drawings, layouts and elevations required for the related operations) [16] such that that they might form the basis of the contracts negotiated with the bidding parties.

278 Valentina Burgassi and Mauro Volpiano

Fig. 02. Tommaso Prunotto, drawing of the carpentry for a roof of the Royal Palace (1753) in ASTo, Miscellanea Quirinale, Minutari Contratti Fabbriche, busta 57, vol. 13, 1753 e 1754, f. 72 v.

These plans, and the various other documents relating to the coordination and organization of the works themselves – masters’ reports, records of payments, etc. – allow us to form a precise picture of the building operations of the Savoy regime, and specifically the degree to which control of the site and the works themselves was dictated by the desire to direct the physical redevelopment of the capital in a particular direction. Documentary sources relating to plans of this sort are conserved in the Archivio di Stato in Turin, in the fonds “Contratti seguiti avanti il Consiglio delle Fabbriche e delle Fortificazioni” in the archive of the Camera dei Conti, in the “Ministero della Guerra, Contratti Fortificazioni’ (Sezioni Riunite), and the “Miscellanea Quirinale, Minutari Contratti Fabbriche” (Corte) [17].

The plans were also used on site: the “misuratori” and other inspectors monitored the progress of the works and their compliance with the agreed contracts. The designs covered a range of structural and decorative elements, the various phases in the implementation of which were set out in minute detail in the plans in the form of detailed instructions for the specialist workers [18]. The drawings included by Michelangelo Garove and as annexes to the plans are an invaluable resource in our understanding of the techniques and materials used, which were often noted in the margins along with the relevant measurements. The instructions proper would generally be organized in relation to at least three distinct areas of the project, namely the provision of raw materials (or materials processed off-site), the construction of the building itself and finishing operations. They would also discuss the physical set-up of the site itself, including the technologies to be employed.

279 Tradition and innovation: the construction of court palaces and the role of professional figures in eighteenth-century Piedmont

Fig. 03 Timber roof structure of the Citroniera, Venaria Reale, 18th Century: a) the current state (Photo, 2001), b) Filippo Juvarra’s drawing associated to the Instructions for the Scuderia Grande and Citroniera in ASTo, Riunite, Contratti Fabbriche e Fortificazioni, reg. n. 9, 1722 in 1723, cc. 168 r-172 v.

Accompanying these instructions were a number of technical documents including calculations performed by the “misuratori” (quantities of materials and costs of individual operations), technical calculations (quality of materials and other strictly technical information), instructions for auxiliary structures, and drawings (plans/sections, etc.) [19].

280 Valentina Burgassi and Mauro Volpiano

Fig. 04 Calculations accompanying the Istruzioni performed by Giacinto Baijs in 1754 for the stones of the terrace at Venaria Reale in ASTo, Miscellanea Quirinale, Minutari Contratti Fabbriche, busta 57, vol. 13, 1753 e 1754, ff. 131 r-132 v.

A particularly interesting example, insofar as it offers an insight into the techniques used in a project of significant status, is offered by Michelangelo Garove's drawings (dated 28 July 1700) for the construction of the new pavilion at the Venaria Reale, which include the contract signed by the contractors. The palace had suffered extensive damage during the Franco-Spanish War. The Duke, Victor Amadeus II, planned a series of substantial interventions to redevelop Castellamonte’s original construction using designs by Michelangelo Garove, which are preserved in the Robert de Cotte fond at the Bibliothèque Nationale de France in Paris [20]. These were strongly influenced by French architectural models, as can be seen in the Mansard roofs. Indeed, the Duke was hoping to emulate the effect of Louis XIV’s palace at Versailles.

281 Tradition and innovation: the construction of court palaces and the role of professional figures in eighteenth-century Piedmont

Fig. 05 A portion of the Reggia of Venaria Reale, as it resulted from the construction sites by (right, started 1660) and Michelangelo Garove (left, started 1700). (Photo, 2015).

The idea was to create a large courtyard on the side facing the town, adding two side pavilions to Castellamonte’s building and connecting these to two windowed galleries, which ended in pavilions incorporating a chapel and a theatre [21]. Work on the southwest pavilion ended in 1701 with the completion of the roof with gutters and “canali di tolla” (culverts) and Garove inspected the work personally in 1702. In the same year, the seventeenth-century Citronieria (citrus house) was demolished, along with a deer-shaped fountain in the cour d'honneur. The second, southeast, pavilion was begun and the foundations of a new Citroniera were laid in 1703 [22].

Garove’s drawing of 1700 for the southwest pavilion begin with a list of the members of the Council and the contractors involved in the works, followed by a summary of the works, with an outline of the operations involved. Next is the contract itself, complete with the signatures of the contractors. The operations are set out in minute detail in sections, from the digging of “cavi di terra” (excavations for the foundations) [23] to the different types of stone and brickwork for the walls: muraglia ordinaria”, “cinte di mattoni” (simple wall, brick wall…). Vertical elements were to be reinforced by “bolzoni” (bent iron braces fixed with wooden “nails”). Garove also gave details of the preparation of mortar for the masonry work (including the use of “calcina forte di Soperga,” i.e. strong Superga masonry mortar), the construction of “fornelli” (fireplaces and chimneys), the placement of pillars, and precise quantities for the rendering of the exterior using a combination of “calcina forte” (strong lime) and “calcina dolce” (literally “sweet” or “gentle” lime). In a specific instruction to the “mastri tollari” (lead workers), Garove further specified how components for the collection of water were to be installed, evidence of his extensive competence in every area of construction [24].

The drawings produced by Alfieri and his collaborators are very different: in general, they had a well-defined structure, with the type of structure involved indicated clearly in the title. The operation was then described

282 Valentina Burgassi and Mauro Volpiano comprehensively, from general indications to specific details. Alfieri’s instructions were organized in at least three sections, with one covering the provision of raw materials (or materials processed off-site), the construction of the building itself and decoration and finishing. Generally, the building project would end with a section describing how the finished building should be assessed in terms of both the standard of work and compliance with the contract.

For Alfieri, the talents of the First Architect were best employed in generating an overall concept of the building, with the production of a rough design that would be completed by his collaborators. Unlike Garove, he worked closely with a large team of professionals as can be seen in the documents relating from the relative projects. To give just a few examples, much of the paperwork from the works at the Venaria Reale, for instance, is signed by Giuseppe Giacinto Baijs, while from around the same time, we have instructions drafted by Antonio Maria Lampo for the Palazzo Reale, the and the Scuderie Reali, and by Luca Baretti for the Basilica di Superga and Monte dei Cappuccini.

In 1751, Alfieri began work on a new building at the Venaria, which would sit between the church of Sant’Umberto and Juvarra’s Pavilion. The project involved the demolition of the existing terrace that linked the palace and the chapel. The drawings (dated 19 February 1754) drafted by Baijs on behalf of Alfieri provide a list of the operations involved, including specific indications for the “Lozzoni necessarij per lo Sternito di d.a Terrazza” (the stones for the floor of the terrace), which were to be made of the local serizzo from Cumiana, or another stone of equal quality [25]. These specifications include the thickness of the stones, how they were to be cut, and how they should be positioned. The design of the marble balustrade is also attached. Baijs also drafted designs dated 24 January 1755 containing a number of indications for the construction of “zocoli, colonne, architrave e Lozoni” (socles, columns, lintels and stones) for the new building [26].

Fig. 06 Reggia di Venaria Reale, the octagonal hall created at the ground floor as part of the construction site coordinated by the architect Benedetto Alfieri (1754): on the left the accurate design of the polychrome floor signed by Alfieri's assistant, Giacinto Baijs (1754, ASTo, Carte Topografiche, serie III, Venaria Reale, cart. 3, n.2, 20 febbraio 1754). On the right the survey of the underlying vault made possible by the removal of the flooring during the restoration work (research group coordinated by M. Volpiano). The original floor, no longer existing, has been now replaced by one rebuilt with the same materials according to the eighteenth-century design.

283 Tradition and innovation: the construction of court palaces and the role of professional figures in eighteenth-century Piedmont Conclusions

The investigation of archival sources related to the building sites in Modern Age Piedmont is a useful approach for the historical study of construction techniques. However, the data provided by the archive must be integrated with the knowledge that continually emerges from restorations or maintenance activities. The research project, discussed here for the aspects concerning the administrative process, is proceeding with a comparative logic. The aim is to define the characteristics and development of construction techniques taking into account the skills of workers and craftsmen as organized in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

Another relevant aspect of this comparative research is the understanding of the specificities of the sites in Piedmont related with what happens in other Italian and international contexts: we hope that a dialogue with other research groups active internationally will help us in understanding relationships and differences.

Acknowledgements

A very special thanks goes to Stefano Benedetto, Director of the Archivio di Stato in Turin, for the concession of the images.

References [1] F. Pernice, O. Chantatore, M. Volpiano et al., ‘La struttura di monitoraggio scientifico dei cantieri della Venaria Reale. Un approccio multidisciplinare alla comprensione critica dell’architettura storica, pp. 320-329; in IGIIC Gruppo Italiano (Eds.), Proceedings of the National Congress Lo stato dell’arte. Conservazione e restauro confronto di esperienze, Padova 2004. Firenze: Nardini Editrice, 2004. [2] M. Volpiano, Il cantiere storico. Organizzazione, mestieri, tecniche costruttive, Savigliano: L’Artistica Editrice, 2012, pp. 355; M. Volpiano, U. Zich, ‘Scientific monitoring and documentation of the Venaria Reale restoration sites’, International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, vol. 1, 2005, pp. 982-985; M. Volpiano, ‘Indagini storico-critiche, documentazione e monitoraggio scientifico in progress nei cantieri di restauro della Reggia di Venaria Reale’, pp. 61-74 in M. Volpiano, (Ed.), Le residenze sabaude come cantieri di conoscenza. Ricerca storica, materiali e tecniche costruttive, vol. 1, Torino: Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Torino, 2005. [3] M. G. Cerri, ‘Costruire una città: note sulle fortificazioni di Torino tra il 1632 e il 1637’, pp.711-723 in G. Spagnesi, (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21th Congress on History of Architecture Esperienze di Storia dell’Architettura e di restauro, Roma 1983. Roma: Istituto dell’Enciclopedia Italiana, 1987, p. 711. [4] F. A. Duboin, ‘Raccolta per ordine di materie delle leggi, provvidenze, editti, manifesti, ecc. pubblicati dal principio dell’anno 1681 sino agli 8 dicembre 1798 sotto il felicissimo dominio della Real Casa di Savoia per servire a continuazione a quella del senatore Borelli, 16 libri in 29 tomi (31 voll.) e 2 indici’, Torino, Stamperie diverse, 1818-1869, tomo XIII, vol. XV, libro VII, titolo XXIII, p. 905. [5] ibid., pp. 919-921; p. 912. [6] ibid., p. 923. [7] ibid., p. 913. [8] C. Castiglioni, Michelangelo Garove 1648-1713. Ingegnere militare nella capitale sabauda, Torino: Celid, 2010, pp. 33-35. See also: E. Piccoli, C. Tocci, R. Caterino, E. Zanet, ‘Lo Stato entra in cantiere: sviluppo e utilità di una fonte seriale settecentesca’, pp. 217-218, in A. Marotta (Eds.), Proceedings of the international congress Defensive Architecture of the Mediterranean. International Conference on Modern Age

284 Valentina Burgassi and Mauro Volpiano

Fortification of the Mediterranean Coast, FORTMED 2018, Castello del Valentino, 2018, Torino: Politecnico di Torino, 2018, pp. 217-224. [9] A. Bellini, Benedetto Alfieri, Milano: Electa, 1978, pp. 14-15. [10] P. Carbone, ‘Il cantiere settecentesco: ruoli, burocrazia ed organizzazione del lavoro’, Studi Piemontesi, vol. XV, no.2, 1986, pp. 335-358, p. 336. [11] D. De Franco, ‘Burocrazia finanziaria del ducato sabaudo e cantiere di Venaria Reale nel XVII secolo’, pp. 305-316, in A. Merlotti (Eds), Proceedings of the international congress Carlo e Amedeo di Castellamonte. 1571-1683, ingegneri e architetti per i duchi di Savoia, Castello del Valentino, Reggia di Venaria Reale 2013, Roma: Campisano, 2016. See also: ASTo, Corte, Materie Militari, Fabbriche e Fortificazioni 1558-1851, mazzo 1, n. 7. [12] S. Beltramo, ‘Il cantiere storico di Benedetto Alfieri a Venaria Reale (1739-17679): tecniche costruttive, materiali e maestranze’, pp. 179-189, in P. Cornaglia, (Eds), Proceedings of the international congress B. Alfieri 1699-1767, architetto di Carlo Emanuele III, Venaria Reale 2010, Roma: Campisano, 2012, p. 180. [13] C. Brayda, L. Coli, D. Sesia, ‘Specializzazioni e vita professionale nel sei e settecento in Piemonte’, Atti e Rassegna Tecnica della Società Ingegneri e Architetti in Torino, vol. XVII, no.3, 1963, pp.73-82, pp. 76-77. [14] M.V. Cattaneo, N. Ostorero, ‘L’Archivio della Compagnia di Sant’Anna dei Luganesi in Torino’, Quaderni della Fondazione per l’Arte della Compagnia di San Paolo, Torino: Stargrafica, 2006, pp. 23-27. [15] C. Roggero Bardelli, ‘Juvarra Primo Architetto Regio: Le Istruzioni di cantiere’, pp. 215-225, in V. Comoli Mandracci, (Eds.), Filippo Juvarra. Architetto delle capitali da Torino a Madrid 1714-1736, Milano: Fabbri Editori, 1995, p. 216. [16] Duboin, (Note 2), tomo VIII, vol. X, titolo IX, pp. 670-676. [17] B. M. Fracchia, ‘L’architettura di Benedetto Alfieri attraverso le Istruzioni: indicazioni progettuali, metodologie di intervento e figure professionali’, pp. 190-211, in P. Cornaglia, (Eds.), (Note 10), p. 204. [18] M. G. Vinardi, ‘Architetti, cantieri, cultura architettonica’, pp. 87-117, in C. Roggero, (Eds.), ‘Ville Sabaude’, Milano: Rusconi, 1990, p. 95. [19] D. Foglizzo, L. Inglese, ‘Professioni, cantiere e committenze nel Settecento sabaudo. I contratti dell’Azienda delle Fabbriche e delle Fortificazioni relativi agli anni 1700-1773’ (Master thesis, Politecnico di Torino, 1990), p. 383-385. [20] M. Volpiano, ‘Precisazioni sull’attività di Michelangelo Garove alla Venaria Reale attraverso le indagini di cantiere’, pp. 295-303, in P. Cornaglia (Ed.), Michelangelo Garove. 1648-1713, un architetto per Vittorio Amedeo II, Roma: Campisano, 2010; P. Marcel, ‘Inventaire des papiers manuscrits du cabinet de Robert de Cotte premier architecte du roi’, Paris: Champion, 1906, p. 166; R. Pommer, ‘Eighteen-Century, Architecture in Piedmont, the open structure of Juvarra, Alfieri, Vittone’, New York: University Press, 1967, p. 146; G. Mezzalama, ‘Michelangelo Garove a Venaria Reale: il cantiere e i progetti (1699-1713)’ (Master thesis, Politecnico di Torino, 2002). [21] Castiglioni, (Note 6), p. 73. [22] G. Mezzalama, ‘Le fonti archivistiche nel processo di conoscenza del cantiere storico: l’Istruzione di Michelangelo Garove per il Padiglione di Levante della Venaria Reale (28 luglio 1700)’, pp. 81-90, in M. Volpiano (Ed.), ‘Le residenze sabaude come cantieri di conoscenza. Ricerca storica, materiali e tecniche costruttive’, vol. I, Torino: Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Torino, 2005, pp. 89-90.

[23] “Instruttione, e Capitoli da osservarsi dalli Capi Mastri da muro che intraprenderanno l’Edifficatione del novo Padiglione che S.A.R. ha ordinato dà construersi al Palazzo Reale della Veneria Reale […]” in ASTo, Camerale, Venaria Reale, art. 810, m. 15, cap. 38. [24] Mezzalama, (Note 20), p. 89-90. [25] ASTo, Miscellanea Quirinale, Minutari Contratti Fabbriche, busta 57, vol. 13, 1753 e 1754, f. 131r: “Istruzione per la Provisione de Lozzoni necessarij per il Sternito della Terrazza in longo della grande

285 Tradition and innovation: the construction of court palaces and the role of professional figures in eighteenth-century Piedmont Galleria verso il Parco del Real Palazzo della Venaria Per quello delle Terrazze sovra la nova Fabrica dalla parte di d.o Parco, et per la formazione della Balaustra sovra la mede.ma”. [26] ASTo, Miscellanea Quirinale, Minutari Contratti Fabbriche, 1755-1756, reg. 58, f. 11: “Istruzione da osservarsi per li zocoli, colonne, architravi e Lozoni da provedersi per la Fabbrica da erigersi da contro il Palazzo sino all’atrio della grande Scuderia alla Venaria R.le

286