Le Droghe
d'Amore, e ad innestarvi un carattere apposito unicamente per fare
scherno e ridicolo dileggio dell'umilissima persona di me," &c.

[67] This interview is related at length by Gratarol (_Narr. Apol._,
vol. i. pp. 97-110). His account differs in several minor particulars
from Gozzi's. But one can see that Gozzi had it before him while writing
what follows above.

[68] Light is thrown on this paragraph by a passage in Gratarol's _Narr.
Apol._, i. 99. He there says that Signor Maffei had reported Gozzi's
great distress at the unexpected effect of his comedy, adding that
Sacchi professed his willingness to abandon the play if Gozzi wished it
and was able to arrange matters.

[69] In the _Narr. Apol._ Gratarol gives a different turn to this
incident. He does not represent himself as refusing the prologue; and
indeed he asserts that on the night of the 17th he was extremely
disgusted at not hearing it. See vol. i. p. 114.

[70] Gratarol intimates that Gozzi acted with bad faith in this
negotiation, "operando in modo che altri consigliassero a resistere." He
calls the meeting at Mme. Tron's "l'infernal conciliabolo [che] si tenne
in ora piu tarda nelle soglie della regnante Matrona." _Loc. cit._, p.
114.

[71] This letter is reported in the _Narr. Apol._, vol. i. p. 123.

[72] It is amusing to read Gozzi's _Memorie_ and Gratarol's _Narrazione_
side by side. Gratarol exclaims: "Conte, voi dovete la vita ad un
qualche angelo tutelare che benedimmi accio potessi frenare il cieco
impeto," &c. He meditates an _aperta vendetta_, and so forth. _Op.
cit._, pp. 115-117. And yet these two swelling turkey-cocks did not
think of fighting a duel.

[73] Though this is told to his own advantage, Gozzi must have known
that he was placing a new weapon in the hands of Gratarol's worst enemy
when he consigned to Mme. Tron the letter of defiance.

[74] Gozzi here alludes, I think, to the attack on the actor Vitalba at
Milan, which will be related farther on.

[75] Why did he not call Gratarol out? This is very comedian-like.

[76] Paolo Renier was one of the most striking figures in the last years
of the Republic. A man of brilliant and versatile abilities, widely read
and profoundly instructed by experience of the world, he possessed
eloquence so weighty and persuasive that one speech from his lips had
power to sway conflicting parties in the State and bring their heated
leaders to his lure. (See Romanin, vol. viii. chap.