Wherefore is it then that in the published catalogues we meet with so very scanty a list of his pictures, nearly all esteemed excellent? It is because whatever does not appear superlatively beautiful has been doubted, denied, and cast aside as unworthy of him, or attributed to some of his school. Mengs himself, who investigated the relics of this great artist, and was very cautious of admitting any disputed productions, declares that he had only seen one specimen of his early style, that of his S. Antony, in the gallery of Dresden. This, as well as a S. Francis and the Virgin, he painted in 1512, in Carpi, when he was eighteen years of age.[16] From the stiffness apparent in this last, and the contrasted softness of the others, he was led to conjecture that Coreggio must have suddenly altered his manner, and attempted to penetrate into the unknown cause of it. He suspected, therefore, that what de Piles, followed by Resta, and some other writers, first advanced in his Dissertations, against the authority of Vasari, must be correct,[17] namely, that Coreggio visited Rome, and having observed the ancient style, and that of Raffaello and Michelangiolo, along with Melozio's pictures in the _sotto in su_, or foreshortening, he returned into Lombardy with a different taste acquired during his stay in the capital. Footnote 16: Thus conjectures Tiraboschi, with arguments that prove the fact rather than shew its probability. Footnote 17: Ortensio Landi, in his Observations, had put on record that Coreggio died young, without seeing Rome. Tiraboschi.