“As certain great masters invented certain new corbels, scrolls and modilions, which were brought into use; so their followers animated by their example (but with much less judgment) have presumed to introduce sundry baubles and trifling decorations (as they fancy) in their works.... And therefore, tho’ such devices and inventions may seem pretty in cabinet-work, tables, frames and other joyners-work for variety, to place china dishes upon; one would by no means encourage or admit them in great and noble buildings.” The changes in domestic architecture are noticed by Du Bois, who issued a new and sumptuous edition of Palladio (the plates engraved by Picart) in 1715. Among other things he says: “We see so many bungled houses and so oddly contrived that they seem to have been made only to be admired by ignorant men and to raise the laughter of those who are sensible of such imperfections. Most of them are like bird cages, by reason of the largeness and too great number of windows; or like prisons, because of the darkness of the rooms, passages and stairs. Some want the most essential part, I mean the Entablature or cornice; and though it be the best fence against the injuries of the weather, it is left out to save charges. In some other houses, the rooms are so small and strait, that one knows not where to place the most necessary furniture. Others, through the oddness of some new and insignificant ornaments, seem to exceed the wildest Gothic. It were an endless thing to enumerate all the absurdities which many of our builders introduce every day into their way of building.” The changes in interior decoration that contributed to form the Queen Anne style were largely due to the requirements of the effective display and preservation of porcelain. The chimney-piece, especially, was affected. As early as 1691, D’Aviler says in his book on architecture: “The height of the cornice (of the chimney-pieces) should be raised six feet in order that the vases with which they are ornamented may not be knocked down.”