Dating La Veniex[ia]na:
The Venetian Patriciate and the Mainland Nobility at the End of the Wars of Cambrai,
with a Note on Titian
Linda L. Carroll,
One of a number of controversial plays generated in Venice and its mainland territories in the early sixteenth century, La Veniexiana provoked debate over even its title. Discovered by Emilio Lovarini in a manuscript miscellany of the Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana – It. IX. 288 [= 6072], the play was published by him as La Venexiana in 1928 in the series “Nuova scelta di curiosità letterarie inedite o rare” of the Commissione per i testi di lingua (Bologna, Romagnoli Dall’Acqua), and subsequently in several popular editions. A new transcription was produced by Giorgio Padoan, assisted in reading the severely-faded manuscript by a Wood’s lamp. Padoan discerned, for the title, ‘La Veniex’ followed by a superscript ‘na’, which he reconstructed as La Veniexiana. The feminine singular of the title has often been interpreted as ‘the Venetian woman’. However, a new English translation (The Venetian Comedy) privileges the classical custom of reference to the noun com(m)edia, preferable also because the play features two women and is intensely involved with its Venetian setting.
Less easily settled are the intertwined debates over the date, authorship, and interpretation of the play, which centers on the rivalry of two patrician women for the erotic attentions of a young Lombard. Valiera is the bride of an older man referred to (sarcastically?) as ‘Miser Grando’ (V, 78; ‘Messer Grande’) and is assisted by her servant, Oria. Anzola is a wealthy widow who employs both a maidservant and a gondolier. On the basis of various pieces of evidence, reviewed in detail below, Lovarini concluded that the play was written during the Wars of the League of Cambrai (1509-1517) by Girolamo Fracastoro. Interpreting the same evidence in the light of further research, Padoan dated the play to approximately 1536 and rejected the Fracastoro candidacy, as well as another popular one, that of Giovan Francesco Valier. The present article will provide a detailed account of the historical events to which the play refers, missing from Padoan’s largely generalized analysis, which will serve as the
basis for a new hypothesis of the play’s date and give some indications of its originating circle. Also elucidated will be the play’s commentary on relations within the Venetian patriciate and between it and the mainland knightly nobility upon whom the continued existence of the Venetian state depended.
Lovarini based his theory of Fracastoro’s authorship on the presence of two poems by him in the manuscript, the name “Hieronymus Zarellus” written at the end of the text, and his familiarity with influential Venetians. Fracastoro’s academic expertise in medicine, Lovarini believed, led him to cast the erotically-charged protagonists as “gran malate”. He dated the play to the Cambrai Wars because of the “fed gubelina” (II, par. 104) of Anzola’s Bergamasque boatman and Julio, the Lombard, reflecting the allegiance of many mainland cities to the empire during the war. Lovarini saw further evidence in the hand of the manuscript.
Padoan made an extensive analysis of the Veniexiana and of the other plays in its manuscript and a related manuscript (Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, It. IX. 71 [= 5938]), which included several written on the mainland during and after the Wars of Cambrai. He questioned the dates assigned to some of the plays, disassociating various details from the second decade of the sixteenth century. A reference in Ardelia (in IX, 288) to “la festa de le heberice noze” (“the festivities of the Iberian wedding”) was defined as possible only after the 1529 peace ending the Wars of Cognac against Charles V. For oxele (III, par. 6), he assumed a penultimate accent and accepted a post-1521 negative meaning found in Boerio. He did not consider that it could have been simply the feminine of oselo, in use at the time, possibly with a colloquial meaning, or a derivative of the verb oxelar ‘to seduce’ (said of women) or ‘to concentrate one’s efforts’. He questioned whether the term ghibellino could have been used by a “suddito del ducato di Milano” during the Wars of Cambrai, when France held formal investiture, but his confused answer detailed the affiliation of Milan and other Po Valley cities with the empire rather than France. He further undercut his argument in noting Venice’s concern for the “‘gibellini’” in its resident Bergamasque population in the late 1520s, when Milan and Venice were allied with France against the empire. Padoan’s review of Milanese history led him to conclude that even the most abstract understanding of ghibellino would have been permissible at only three points: in 1510 when Milan and Venice were opposed, in 1521 when Milan was back in Sforza’s hands, and after 1535, when Milan was officially in Charles’s hands. He excluded 1510 because of a reference to the University of Padua, which was then closed. A reference to new mocenigo coins resulted in his elimination of 1521, when coins were notoriously scarce. Julio’s carrying of arms (I, par. 20) eliminated the second and third decades of the century, when Venetians and foreigners alike were forbidden to do so. These and other considerations led to a proposed date of approximately 1536.
The contemporary references in the play may be more completely explicated
by the records of Marin Sanudo’s Diaries, which document a cluster of similar events in late 1517 and early 1518.
The poor state of Venetian coins was much on the minds of the city’s magistracies at the time. Years of war and the diversion of trade to Lisbon had shut off the flow of German silver and African gold into Venice, forcing its citizens to use foreign coins, many of which were counterfeit or clipped. To add insult to injury, they bore imperial eagles (contemptuously referred to as osiegi when Venice switched to an alliance with France in 1513) and papal tiaras. The Venetian government responded by banning a number of them and reducing the value of those permitted. In October 1517, the Council of Ten ordered the Mint to begin striking new Venetian coins to supplant the imported ones. A proposal to increase the value of the mocenigo was finally enacted in late February, 1518.
It was also in this period that the University of Padua reopened. Its long closure during the war explains the importance of Julio’s relatives’ arrival at that point (V, par. 145). Among the professors rehired was Anton Francesco dei Dottori, who had spent the war years confined to Venice, and even jailed, because of his imperial affiliation. His case was veined with irony: despite patricians’ objections to his political leanings, his reappointment was rendered imperative by his expertise in Roman law, which was vital to the Republic’s dealings with the mainland state and external powers, including the empire, that Roman law governed.
Milan at the time was held by the French, who, after recapturing it in 1515, sent Duke Massimiliano Sforza to a French prison. As Matteo Bandello wrote in novella I, 28, many Milanese of “la fazione Ghibellina” took refuge with the Gonzaga of Mantua, staying on after their hope that Maximilian I would regain the city proved vain. Indeed, the novella tells the story of a Mantuan gentlewoman who deceived her husband with one of the gallant refugees. The Venetian ambassador returning from Milan in 1516 reported the intense animosity of the Milanese for the Venetians, upon whom they blamed the French conquest.
On January 27, 1518, Lorenzo Orio, who held a university degree in law and was serving as avogador di comun or state attorney, married the daughter of Bortolo Valier. Shortly before, the bridegroom had lost the election for the coveted post of ambassador to England, a typical setback in a checkered career. After the outbreak of the Wars of Cambrai, having failed at an unrealistic youthful ambition of an ambassadorship, Orio obtain a slot on the traditional gateway to government service, the
maritime commission. His career stalled at that point, perhaps because of his and his kinsmen’s poor contribution to the defense effort. While many patricians personally participated at critical points, Lorenzo remained in Venice. His uncle Marco’s imprisonment by papal forces after the defeat at Agnadello prevented him from fulfilling the warrior potential demonstrated when he had served as adjutant to the great Spanish general Gonsalvo Hernandez in the capturing of Cephalonia, an episode that also had ended badly when a foolhardy foray resulted in Marco’s imprisonment by the Turks. His search for public office, impeded by debts, finally succeeded toward the end of the war. Shortly before his nephew’s wedding, he achieved the crowning honor of the Ten and its Headship. Marco’s brother Francesco, vicedomino of Ferrara at the time of Agnadello, was the only Venetian governor to voluntarily abandon his post, an act of cowardice accentuated by Ferrara’s distance from the rout. After a lengthy period without public office, he finally was elected state attorney and, after offering three men for the defense of Padua, tax assessor. He apparently increased his popularity by laxly enforcing the law. He was elected to the Ten and then its Headship shortly before the wedding, but died almost immediately.
Following in his uncle’s footsteps, Lorenzo sought to revitalize his career via the post of state attorney, which he achieved only after offering the state a large loan. He dutifully indicted several powerful patricians on charges of embezzling state funds while officeholders during the war years, meanwhile only partially paying his election loan and refusing the state further financial assistance. Shortly after his uncle Francesco became a Head of the Ten, Lorenzo and another state attorney were sent on a review of the fiscs and general legal situations of the mainland towns, in disarray after the years of fighting. They reported numerous problems, caused both by locals and by the Venetian governors. Among the points on which they cautioned the Signoria was the need to retain the fidelity of the wealthy city of Brescia. After his return, Orio failed to be elected to a number of offices, including the ambassadorship to England. Finally, by expanding the candidate pool to include himself, he was elected ambassador to Hungary, a post that many avoided because of increasing Turkish aggression against
the eastern borders of Europe. His delay of his departure and seeking of other offices, however, gives rise to the suspicion that he sought the ambassadorship to achieve sufficient prestige to ensure election to a more desirable position. The office to which he was named, however, embroiled him in more controversy: special prosecutor on the case of Contin Martinengo, a Brescian noble who served the Venetians as a condottiero and who had kidnapped a girl affianced to another. At first deprived of his condotta, Martinengo was eventually absolved because of his military value and the death of the injured party.
The father of the 1518 bride, Bortolo Valier qu. Vetor, shared some of his son-in-law’s inclinations. At critical points of the war he offered a substantial loan to gain admission to the Senate and provided money and men for the defense of Padua and Treviso. When the final exertion to conclude the war required great outlays, however, he offered piddling sums (e.g. 10 ducats to the doge’s 500) and paid only a fraction of those despite considerable personal wealth. The source of the family fortune appears to have been the mills of Treviso and grain and flour provisioning, the sector in which significant fortunes were made in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. The need becomes clear in light of David Herlihy’s work on the growing population of the period.
A few of the Valier assisted in mainland defense. Simon, a professional soldier, was imprisoned by the French after the capture of Brescia, along with Vetor Martinengo, father of Contin. Father and son Agustin and Bortolo protected Padua with their persons and ten men. Vicenzo had a role in the taking of Rimini from Cesare Borgia and the reconquest of Padua in the summer of 1509, although his efforts to turn these contributions into a government career failed. Other Valier gave little in funds or effort. Carlo even drew accusations of cowardice for his much-announced but spineless attempt to defend Treviso and its grain mills. He was, moreover, charged with selling grain to the enemy Germans, an offense whose seriousness was increased by the importance of fodder to the waging of war. A similar issue might also have played a role in the beheading of contrabander Gaspare Valier as punishment for killing
the employee of the Council of Ten who guarded contraband in Treviso. At his execution Gaspare wore the fur gown typical of mainland nobles and a scufia, a “large, loose” German fashion only recently introduced in the mainland areas close to the Alps and at odds with the “neat, Venetian bareta,” garb that Venetians might have taken as indicating imperial sympathies.
Eleven days after the Orio-Valier wedding, on the Wednesday before Marti di carlevar, a comedy was performed in the Giustinian home in the Procuratie Nuove. Sponsored by the Compagnia della Calza Ortolani, it celebrated the wedding of the Spaniard Gaspare Bexalù with a Roman woman. The Bexalù, a family of Sephardic Jewish background, served as papal financiers and had played an important role in papal loans to Venice during the Cambrai War, whose repayment was then being negotiated. The next day, 11 February 1518 Zuoba di la caza, the Heads of the Council of Ten forbade all, especially soldiers and maskers, from bearing arms and entering convents (belying Padoan’s contention that arms were not carried then). The Signoria had recently cashiered many of the capitani who had led its armed forces during the war, a large number of whom were spending Carnival in Venice, including Ortolano Marc’Antonio Martinengo.
At the conclusion of Carnival season, a performance of Plautus’s Amphytrion was sponsored in Treviso by the podestà-capitanio, followed by a joust between his company and the military company of condottiero Count Mercurio Bua. Bua was typical of the mainland knightly nobility who offered their defense and intelligence services to the Venetian Signoria after its conquest of mainland territory, in some cases their own feuds. They included the Martinengo of Brescia, the Manfron of the Romagna, the di la Volpe of Verona, the Sanseverino with holdings in Lombardy and the kingdom of Naples, and, at times, the Gonzaga of Mantua. A number of members of such families married Venetian patricians, especially during the Wars of Cambrai, and were admitted to the Maggior Consiglio, a phenomenon little noted by scholars and deserving of further research.
The Treviso festivities typified the contemporary connection between the cultural and military spheres, one feature of which was the strong link between Venetian Compagnie della Calza and the military. Though often regarded as purely festive societies, the Compagnie give much evidence of a dual origin. Pace Jaynie Anderson,
their parti-colored calze were identical to or a witty version of the unencumbering leggings worn by soldiers and rooted in peasant garb, as is easily seen in the works of Luca Signorelli, e.g. The Martyrdom of St. Sebastian. A large number of condottieri belonged to Compagnie della Calza, including members of all the families listed above except the Bua; since extant rolls are partial their number was perhaps even higher. Some Compagnia festivities had specific military links. When Federico II Gonzaga came to Venice in 1517 in search of a condotta, the young patricians greeting him grouped according to their Compagnie della Calza. Condottiero Marc’Antonio Martinengo sponsored a 1521 Ortolano party as a condition of his entrance into the group shortly after he had been rehired amidst preparations for a renewal of warfare.
In the early sixteenth century Compagnie della Calza provided a meeting ground on which noble condottieri and the patrician Venetians who employed them and occasionally joined them could work out intricate alliance manoeuvers. The Holy Roman Emperor was the traditional liege lord not only of various Lombard signori such as the Sforza, the Gonzaga, and the Este, but also of the landed nobility engulfed by the Venetian state. Faced with the Habsburg-Valois rivalry for Italian territory and with Venice’s mainland defense needs, the families and their individual members were often divided in decisions over military careers. Some remained with the empire; some chose service to France, which in the late fifteenth century had displayed greater military prowess; and some became condottieri and capitani for Venice. Some, subjected to pressures, tempted by better financing or simply preferring the winning side, varied their allegiance. The tension between the latter choices and continuing imperial claims upon loyalty was heightened during the frequent alliances between France and Venice. Venetian patricians faced similar choices, and specific political colorations have been discerned for some Compagnie della Calza.
What bearing do the preceding considerations have on the interpretation of the
play? In addition to providing a strong case for the location of its events in late 1517 and early 1518, they cast light on the circumstances of its origin and the nature of its commentary on social issues. It is clear that the play was written by an individual contemptuous of the weak elements in the Venetian patriciate that had withdrawn from the tradition of defense and governance. The author and his intended (readerly?) audience had a detailed familiarity with the city’s topography and language, beginning with the title’s vernacular rather than learned usage (vinitiana). That knowledge extended to Venetian types (the characters seem to be composites rather than specific individuals) and habits. For example, the lack of magnificence of Valiera’s husband’s home was easily understood to be the fruit of traditional Venetian sobriety, such as that of Bortolo Valier, rather than poverty. A familiarity with family fortunes was also assumed, the implied submission of the Orio to the Valier in the servant’s name Oria consonant with the subsuming of the former by the much wealthier latter with Lorenzo Orio’s wedding.
The author is no less critical of the growing courtier mentality among the mainland nobility. Julio is armed, is compared to St. George, declares that he would rather be a soldier, and lacks gainful employment, all of which might indicate that he is a cashiered capitano, possibly one who entered Venetian service after his Duke had lost his state. Yet his braided hair (I, par. 21), languor and servility to women bespeak the effeminateness (II, par. 76) that contemporaries disparaged as deriving from Spanish influence. He proclaims “fede da vero ghebelino” (II, 107), wears a scufia (II par. 117) and speaks the florid, courtly language in use among mainland nobility at the time, pace Giannetti and Ruggiero. Summed up, Julio resembles nobles such as Federico II Gonzaga at the time of his 1517 visit. He had lived the war years, his teenage years, at the papal court as a hostage. He was seeking a wealthy and geopolitically advantageous wife, was already manifesting imperial leanings, and his family was intimate with the Valier.
The author might have been a Venetian patrician or a member of the Gonzaga or Este court familiar with Venice, but was more likely a member of a mainland noble family (or its retinue) from a part of the Venetian state close to Milan, such as Brescia or Bergamo. The servant’s name Oria seems to indicate a special disparagement of the Orio, perhaps pointing to the Martinengo family. One thing is certain: he was unwilling to assimilate the paradox of holding on to power by exchanging a heroic stand for a courtly, effeminate one. If he was a mainlander and the play primarily for mainland
consumption, the address of the prologue to a Venetian audience is the most audacious sally of the play.
No records of performances remain, despite the hint at an all-male audience in the Prologue’s final sentence. The mockery of a Venetian patriciate so weak that it could not control the sexual activity of a bride would never have been tolerated within the Venetian state, and even outside of it any performance would have been kept secret. The play may well have been written for the 1519 Carnival season as a commentary on the events of the year before, when the vantage of hindsight would show some of them to have been ironic, such as the legislated striking of new mocenighi, which never materialized and thus gave further proof of Venetian patrician impotence. The time references (III, par. 127) accord with early February.
Seen through the lense of research on gendered figurations, the sexual conquest of both Venetian women by the effeminate Lombard and their passion for him embody the conversion of the formerly warlike Lombard nobles to satellites of the Spanish-influenced imperial court and the embracing of them by the Venetian patriciate in the interest of retaining their mainland state. Both groups were motivated by the subordinate status to which it was widely, and correctly, assumed they would be reduced when the empire would pass to Charles V from Maximilian.
One final note: it is impossible in this context not to think of two paintings by Titian, the Concert Champêtre and The Young Man in a Red Hat, which portray the same young mainlander wearing the same red scufia. The Fête, which depicts the irenic state of the mainland on the eve of the Cambrai wars, may also depict more literally than has hitherto been suspected the simultaneously cultured and erotic entertainments popular among some young nobles. For example, a certain Francesco Valier had a cathedral canon of Padua organize an excursion for several patricians and their prostitute companions in conjunction with the festivities for Francesco Pisani’s cardinalate in October 1517; other Venetian patricians indulged on Murano. The garments and sword of the The Young Man in a Red Hat, which dates to the early postwar years, virtually repeat those of Julio.
For this material, permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use.
Whether you intend to utilize it in scientific purposes, indicate the source: either this web address or the Annuario. Istituto Romeno di cultura e ricerca umanistica 5 (2003), edited by ªerban Marin, Rudolf Dinu, Ion Bulei and Cristian Luca, Bucharest, 2004
No permission is granted for commercial use.
© ªerban Marin, March 2004, Bucharest, Romania
 Anon., La Veniexiana. Commedia di anonimo veneziano del Cinquecento (ed. and trans. by Giorgio Padoan), Padua: Antenore, 1974: “Introduzione,” 1-38, Tav. I; rev. by Linda Carroll in Archivio Veneto 58 (1977): 166-69; Giorgio Padoan, “Sulla fortuna della Pastoral, della Veniexiana e di altri testi”, in Momenti del Rinascimento veneto [hereafter, Momenti] Padua: Antenore, 1978: 193-207; idem, “La Veniexiana: ‘Non fabula non comedia ma vera historia,”‘ in Momenti, 287. Padoan’s edition with its numbered paragraphs will be cited hereafter.
 Five Comedies from the Italian Renaissance (trans. and ed. by Laura Giannetti and Guido Ruggiero), Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003.
 Emilio Lovarini, “Prefazione,” in Anon., La Venexiana (ed. by E. Lovarini), Florence: Le Monnier, 1947: 7-38.
 For the following see Padoan, Momenti: 288-89, 295-99.
 Giuseppe Boerio, Dizionario del dialetto veneziano, 2nd ed., Venice: Cecchini, 1856: s.v.
 Frederic C. Lane, “Venetian Bankers, 1496-1533”, in Venice and History, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1966: 69-86; Marino Sanuto, I diarii [hereafter, Sanuto] (ed. by Rinaldo Fulin et al.), 58 vols., Venice: Visentini, 1879-1902, vol. 24: 114-15 (list of banned coins, all with eagle or tiara), 117, 311, 325; vol. 25: 32, 39-40, 46, 54, 55, 113, 129, 134, 135-36, 137, 138-39, 159-60, 253-54, 259; Anon., “Dialogo ala vilanesca”, in Antichi testi di letteratura pavana (ed. by Emilio Lovarini), Bologna: Romagnoli, 1894: 72.
 Sanuto, vol. 25: 66, 69, 78; on Roman law, James S. Grubb, Firstborn of Venice. Vicenza in the Early Renaissance State, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988: 28-46.
 Sanuto, vol. 23:169.
 Ibidem, vol. 6:183, 226, vol. 9:121, 469, vol. 10: 56.
 Ibidem, vol. 3: 614, 615, 619, 669, 723, 727, 814, 1068, 1078, 1108-10, 1127, 1140, 1142, 1221, 1272-1173, 1277, 1517, 1542, 1602, vol. 4: 7, 9, 10, 13-16, 17, 28, 33, 73, 790, vol. 5: 273, 452, 1003, vol. 6: 115, 292, 300, 519, 531, vol. 7: 7, 259, 569, 649, 655, 663, 701, 710, vol. 9: 299, vol. 10: 614-15.
 Ibidem, vol. 11: 31, 789, vol. 12: 265, 282, 294, 402, 462, 541, 588, vol. 14: 639, vol. 15: 78, 343, vol. 16: 257, 335, vol. 17:17.
 Ibidem, vol. 20: 235, 244, 343, 350, 585, vol. 21: 5, 43.
 Ibidem, vol. 8: 127, 296, 299, 303, 321, 326, 438, 442, 465, vol. 9: 199, 445, vol. 10: 18, 684, vol. 12: 272, 288, vol. 13: 83, 412, vol. 14: 44, 263, vol. 17: 250, vol. 18: 244.
 Ibidem, vol. 19: 323, 354, vol. 21: 215.
 Ibidem, vol. 22: 313, 522, 656, vol. 23: 5, 256, 264.
 Ibidem, vol. 22: 7, 67, 110, 125, 208, 215.
 Ibidem, vol. 22: 351, 352, 355-356, 363, 373, 513, vol. 23: 33, 52, 94, 99-101, 138, 214-215, 264-265, 289, 380.
 Ibidem, vol. 23: 289, vol. 24: 217-218, 353, 358-363.
 Ibidem, vol. 24: 648, vol. 25: 89, 221, 236, 307, 459, 498, 502, 504, 513-514, 526, 549 (attempt to drop the cases he started on last day of office), vol. 26: 76, 152, 177, 180, 284, 317-318, 322.
 Ibidem, vol. 25: 417, 420, 493, 495-496, 522, vol. 26: 40, 479, vol. 27: 266-267, 369, 509, vol. 28: 90, 91, 114, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 337.
 Ibidem, vol. 10: 725, vol. 17: 251, 295.
 Ibidem, vol. 19: 153, vol. 20: 459, vol. 22: 511, 675, vol. 23: 307.
 Ibidem, vol. 2: 219, vol. 8: 379, 380, 389, 394, 463-464, 481-482, 589, 590 and cf. vol. 10: 334, vol. 11: 185; Achille Olivieri, “Capitale mercantile e committenza nella Venezia del Sansovino”, in Investimenti e civiltà urbana (ed. by Annalisa Guarducci), Florence: Le Monnier, 1991: 531-69.
 David Herlihy, “Popolazione e strutture sociali dal XV al XVI secolo”, in Tiziano e Venezia, Vicenza: Neri Pozza, 1980: 71-74.
 Sanuto, vol. 14: 227, e.g. vol. 17: 250, 302, 335, vol. 20: 264, vol. 22: 514.
 Ibidem, vol. 12: 481-482.
 Ibidem, vol. 11: 211, vol. 12: 137, 139, 186, 188-190.
 Quotations from Stella Mary Newton, The Dress of the Venetians, 1495-1525, Aldershot: Gower Publishing, 1988: 43-44.
 Sanuto, vol. 25: 248.
 Felix Gilbert, The Pope, His Banker, and Venice, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1980; Linda L. Carroll, “Venetian Attitudes toward the Young Charles: Carnival, Commerce, and Compagnie della Calza”, in Young Charles V 1500-1531 (ed. by Alain Saint-Saëns) New Orleans: University Press of the South, 2000: 48-49.
 See e.g. Sanuto, vol. 24: 260-61, vol. 25: 306.
 Ibidem, vol. 25: 63, 140, 214, 253.
 See Ibidem, vol. 2: 1342, vol. 3: 29, vol. 4: 642, vol. 7: 693, vol. 8: 119, vol. 9: 326, vol. 14: 325, vol. 20: 373.
 Carroll, “Who’s on Top?: Gender as Societal Power Configuration in Italian Renaissance Drama”, Sixteenth Century Journal 20 (1989): 533-37; Jaynie Anderson, Giorgione: The Painter of ‘poetic brevity’, including Catalogue raisonné, Paris, New York: Flammarion, 1997: 165.
 Carroll, “Charles”; Sanuto, vol. 25: 306, vol. 28: 337, vol. 29: 194, 200, 429, 536; see also Carroll, “‘I have a good set of tools’: The Shared Interests of Peasants and Patricians in Ruzante’s Lettera giocosa”, in Theatre, Opera and Performance in Italy from the Fifteenth Century to the Present. Essays in Honour of Richard Andrews (ed. by Brian Richardson), forthcoming.
 Sanuto, vol. 2: 1031, vol. 3: 39, 187, 673, vol. 4: 278, vol. 5: 80-81, vol. 7: 756, vol. 9: 327, vol. 16: 49; some switching of sides below the top command at the end of a contract or when troops had gone unpaid for a long period was tolerated but too much or any appearance of passing military intelligence to the other side was condemned and some exemplary cases were dealt with harshly.
 Carroll, “Charles”; idem, “The Shepherd Meets the Cowherd: Ruzante’s Pastoral, the Empire and Venice”, Annuario. Istituto Romeno di cultura e ricerca umanistica 4 (2002): 288-297; idem, “‘Fools of the Dukes of Ferrara’: Dosso, Ruzante, and Changing Este Alliances”, MLN 18.1 (January, 2003; Italian Issue): 60-84.
 Benedetto Croce, La Spagna nella vita italiana durante la Rinascenza, 4th ed., Bari: Laterza, 1944: esp. 118-121.
 See e.g. Sanuto, vol. 8: 160 for Gian Francesco Gonzaga, vol. 15: 474 for Marc’Antonio Martinengo; Giannetti and Ruggiero, “Introduction”, in Five Comedies: xviii; the red stockings that the boatman asks for (II, par. 124) would have been less likely after the early 1520s, when fashions grew progressively more sober.
 For Federico, Carroll, “Charles”; for Valier and Gonzaga, A. Luzio and R. Renier, “La coltura e le relazioni letterarie di Isabella d’Este Gonzaga”, Giornale storico della letteratura italiana 37 (1901), 209-210, n. 2; Sanuto, vol. 7: 727, 737-738, 756, vol. 8: 34, 67, 160, vol. 9: 46, 265, vol. 11: 48, 330, 620.
 Sanuto, vol. 27: 455; Carroll, “Who’s on Top?”; Richard Helgerson, Dangerous Alliances. Home, State, and History in Early Modern Painting and Drama, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
 For the attribution of Fête to Titian, Charles Hope, “Titian’s Life and Times”, in Titian (ed. by Paul Holberton), London: National Gallery Company, 2003: 14; for the young men in Fête as mainlanders, Newton, op. cit.: 43-44.
 See Zuan Antonio Da Corte (Cortivo), Historia di Padova, 1509-1530 (Diario degli avvenimenti padovani dal 13 giugno 1509 al 12 ottobre 1529), Padua, Biblioteca Civica, B.P. 3159, fol. 109v; Sanuto, vol. 35: 375; on Titian and erotic subjects, see Hope, “Some problems of interpretation in Titian’s erotic paintings”, in Tiziano e Venezia, cit.: 111-24.