Societ editrice il MulinoDuncker & HumblotBologna BerlinBeyond the Public SphereOpinions, Publics, Spaces in Early Modern Europeedited byMassimo RospocherOffprintCopyright 2012 by Societ editrice il Mulino, Bologna. In Kommission bei Duncker & Humblot, Berlin. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Il le pu essere utilizzato unicamente ad uso privato e personale, nei termini previsti dalla legge che tutela il diritto dautore e non pu essere caricato in siti internet.ISBN 978-88-15-24028-6ISBN 978-3-428-13914-9Composizioneeimpaginazione:FBK-Editoria Schedabibliograca:FBK-BibliotecaBEYOND the public sphere : opinions, publics, spaces in early modern Europe / edited by Massimo Rospocher. - Bologna : Il mulino ; Berlin : Duncker & Humblot, 2012. - 303 p., [8] c. di tav. ; 24 cm. - (AnnalidellIstitutostoricoitalo-germanicoinTrento.Contributi;27=Jahrbuchdesitalienisch-deutschen historischen Instituts in Trient. Beitrge ; 27)Scritti di vari. - Nellocch. : Fondazione Bruno Kessler. ISBN 978-88-15-24028-6 - ISBN 978-3-428-13914-9 1. Opinione pubblica - Europa - Secc.XVI-XVIIII. Rospocher, Massimo 303.380 940 903 (DDC 22.ed.)FBK - Istituto storico italo-germanico5INTRODUCTIONBeyondthePublicSphere:AHistoriographicalTransition, by Massimo RospocherTHEORY AND PRACTICESThe Early-Modern State and the Rise of the Public Sphere. A Systems-Theory Approach, by Andreas Gestrich AbsolutismandtheBirthofthePublicSphere.ACritical View of a Model, by Francesco Benigno The Richness of History and the Multiplicity of Experiences inEarlyModernSocieties.TheSelf-Descriptionof Alteuropa by Luhmann, by Angela De Benedictis SPACES, VOICES, HUMORSAn Evanescent Public Sphere. Voices, Spaces, and Publics in VeniceduringtheItalianWars,byMassimoRospocherand Rosa Salzberg Public Sphere or Communication Triangle? Information and Politics in Early Modern Europe, by Filippo De Vivo Fama, Humors, and Conicts. A Re-reading of Machiavellis Florentine Histories, by Sandro Landi PUBLICSConstructing Selves, Making Publics: Geometry and Poetry in Descartes and Sidney, by Shankar Raman Contentsp. 93153739311513716761514, 1516, 1517: The Public Space and its Limits, by SilvanaSeidel Menchi SocialNetworking.TheAlbumamicorumandEarly Modern Public Making, by Bronwen Wilson OPINIONS Therearelotsofpapersgoingaroundanditdbebetter iftherewerent.BroadsidesandPublicOpinioninthe SpanishMonarchyintheSeventeenthCentury,byAntonio Castillo GomezThe Making of a Public Issue in Early Modern Europe. The Spanish Inquisition and Public Opinion in the Netherlands, by Arjan van DixhoornPublicOpinionandFree-marketMoralityinOldRegime and Revolutionary France, by Charles WaltonPublic/Secret:Eighteenth-CenturyHesitationsabout Public Opinion, by Edoardo TortaroloAuthorsp. 191205227249271289303115PublicSphereorCommunicationTriangle?InformationandPoliticsinEarlyModernEuropebyFilippoDeVivo1 GIOVANNIMARIAMITELLI,Aglappasionatiperleguerre,1690,inP.BELLETTINI-R. CAMPIONI-Z.ZANARDI(eds),Unacittinpiazza.Comunicazioneevitaquotidianaa BolognatraCinqueeSeicento,Bologna2000,no.34(Bologna,Bibliotecacomunale dellArchiginnasio,Gabinettodisegniestampe,CartellaGozzadini1/III,no.107).1.IntroductionIn this 1690 print by the Bolognese artist Giovanni Maria Mitelli, a man reads out a sheet of periodical news (Avvisi) surrounded by a group of people1.Hewearsspectacles,asdoesanotherinthegroup,suggesting 116a certain diffusion of literacy: someone else, quite absent-mindedly, also holdsawrittensheet.Readingpromptsoraldiscussionwhich,asina moderncomicstrip,Mitelligraphicallyrenderedincaptionscoming outofthemouthsofparticipantsandsuggestingdisagreementand disbelief. Such feelings heat up easily and, on the right-hand side of the picture, two men ght: the one with long hair dressed alla francese, the otherwithalongmustache,allaspagnola.Theirclothesandhairstyles conveytheircontrastingopinions,justastheirwordsdo:thetwomen sidewiththetwomajorplayersincontinentalpoliticsatthetimeof thewaroftheleagueofAugsburg(1688-1697). Thereisnodoubtthatthisisanalluringimageforearlymodern historians.Atrstsight,itperfectlyillustratesadevelopmentwhich, followingJrgenHabermassbookontheStructuralTransformationof the Public Sphere, we have learned to view as central to this period2. In this account, between the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, politics inBritainandFrance(andtoalesserextentinGermany)becamein-creasinglypublicasitstoppedbeingconnedtomerelyrepresentative ritualscelebratingsovereignsandturnedinsteadintothesubjectof discussionofanincreasinglycriticalbourgeoisie.Ifanything,Mitellis image suggests that we should expand that model to include other areas, suchasBolognawhoseporticoesaresketchedinthebackground,and othersocialgroups,includingthehumbleportersdepictedherewith theirwaresontheirback.However,oncloserexaminationitisclearthatMitellisstereotyped realism serves a primarily satirical intention. Far from extolling rational publicdiscussion,thepointistocondemncuriosityasapassion(as inthepicturestitle)andafolly(asonebystandersaysturningaway fromthediscussion).Inthisview,peoplewhotalkaboutnewscannot agree because they do not really understand what they are talking about; theybeginwithwordsbut,likeanimals,invariablyendupwithblows: likethedogthatbarksnearthecenteroftheimage.Ratherthanas evidenceofcommunicativeself-empowermentfrombelow,then,Mi-tellisprintmaybeseenasadenial,fromabove,ofordinarypeoples capacitiestoexpressseriouspoliticaljudgment.Inthissense,another ofhisprints,entitledPoliticavera,wouldmoreaccuratelydescribe 2 J.HABERMAS,TheStructuralTransformationofthePublicSphere:AnInquiryintoa CategoryofBourgeoisSociety,CambridgeMA1989.117theartistsviewofearlymodernpoliticalcommunication.There,he describestruepoliticswithaseriesofverbsindicatingspeech,but speech only employed to express subjection: to praise the great, to fear thestrong,toappreciatetherich,andtoapplaudthewinners(Dir bendichigrande,temerdichiforte,stimarchipiricco,lodar quelchevince)3.ThisremindsusthatHabermassis,ofcourse,only onepossibleconceptualizationoftherelationsbetweenpowerand communication.Tosimplify,wecansummarizetheotherapproachby referring to Michel Foucaults view of language as invariably expressing andcreatingpowerrelations4. The study of political communication poses difcult historical questions, largelybecausewehavetorelyonthird-handaccountsofexchanges thatweremostlyoral.Thisisnotjustaproblemofhistoriographi-calinterpretation;ithasseriousmoralandpoliticalimplications.On theonehand,takingthosesourcesatfacevaluemeansmistakingthe condemnationoftheeliteforthevoiceoftheruled,thethoughtof thefewfortheopinionsofmany.Ontheother,intheabsenceof othersources,dismissingthemashavingnorelationswithsocialreal-itymeansrenouncingthepossibilityofstudyingthedissonantvoices that developed outside the world of high politics. As Sandro Landi has arguedrecently,earlymodernrepresentationsofpublicopinionserved the interests of rulers more than they represented those of the people5. Does this mean that we cannot account for opinions, and voices, outside those representations? Of course, authors and authorities misconstrued theopinionsoftheircontemporaries,butdoesthismeanthatpeople whodidnotleavebehindsourcesreallyhadnoopinionsabouttheir governments?Infact,weshouldprobablyreversethequestion,and askwhyauthoritieschosetocareaboutpopularcommunicationatall: haditnotmattered,whydidtheymisrepresentit?Toanswersuch questionswehavetosituateouranalysisatthecrossroadsbetween politicalhistoryandthehistoryofcommunication.3 TheprintisreproducedinProverbjguratidiG.M.Mitelli,s.i.,1967,no181. OnurbancommunicationinBolognaatthistime,seeP.BELLETTINI-R.CAMPIONI- Z.ZANARDI(eds),Unacittinpiazza.4 ForexampleM.FOUCAULT,Lordredudiscours,Paris1971.5 S.LANDI,NaissancedelopinionpubliquedanslItaliemoderne.Sagessedupeuple etsavoirdegouvernementdeMachiavelauxLumires,Rennes2006.1182.ThehistoryofcommunicationandthepublicspheremodelThehistoryofcommunicationderivesfromthehistoryofinformation, but differs from it, in so far as it is concerned with the ways in which a particular content is exchanged: the human and social activity arising fromtheexchange,andthematerialsetting,whichmadeitpossible. As a line of research, it draws from different elds. First, the history of thebookshowedtheimportanceoftheprintingpressintransforming the transmission and availability of texts6. More recently historians have movedawayfromthesoleinsistenceonprintastheagentofchange toshowtheimportanceofmanuscriptsasmeansofinformationwell intothesixteenth,seventeenth,andeventheeighteenthcenturies,in particular in connection with the production and distribution of political news7.InItaly,wehavenumerousstudiesaboutsuchdifferent,butall politicallyrelevantgenresasastrologicalprognostications,almanacsof largecirculation,epigraphy,posters,andgrafti8.Nearlytwentyyears ago,RobertDarntonexhortedhistorianstoviewbooksaselements ofalargermediasystem9.Anotherelementinthisshiftisthegreat interest for the history of reading, the extent of literacy, and the impact ofreceptiononthemeaningoftexts10.Whiletheclassichistoryofthe 6 L.FEBVRE-H.-J.MARTIN,Lapparitiondulivre,Paris1958;E.L.EISENSTEIN,The PrintingPressasanAgentofChange.CommunicationsandCulturalTransformationin Early-modernEurope,2vols,Cambridge1979;forItalyseeB.RICHARDSON,Printing, WritersandReadersinRenaissanceItaly,Cambridge1999.7 H.LOVE,ScribalPublicationinSeventeenth-CenturyEngland,Oxford1993; M.INFELISE,Primadeigiornali.Alleoriginidellapubblicainformazione(secoliXVIe XVII),Bari2002;B.RICHARDSON,ManuscriptCultureinRenaissanceItaly,Cambridge 2009; F. DE VIVO - B. RICHARDSON (eds), Scribal Culture in Italy, 1450-1700, in Italian Studies,66,2011,2.8 L.BRAIDA,Leguidedeltempo.Produzione,contenutieformedeglialmanacchi piemontesinelSettecento,Torino1989;F.BARBIERATO,Politicieateisti.Percorsidella miscredenzaaVeneziafraSeieSettecento,Milano2006;B.DOOLEY,MorandisLast ProphecyandtheEndofRenaissancePolitics,PrincetonNJ2002;A.PETRUCCI,La scrittura.Ideologiaerappresentazione,Torino1986.9 R.DARNTON,LaFrance,toncaffoutlecamp!Delhistoiredulivrelhistoirede la communication, in Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 100, 1993, pp. 16-26, alsoinR.DARNTON,TheForbiddenBest-SellersofPre-RevolutionaryFrance,London 1996,pp.169-180.10 C.GINZBURG,Ilformaggioeivermi.Ilcosmodiunmugnaiodel500,Torino1976; R. DARNTON, History of Reading, in P. BURKE (ed.), New Perspectives on Historical Writ-119bookwasconcernedwithproduction,theresearchpioneeredinthe eldofearlymodernItalybysuchworksasCarloGinzburgsThe CheeseandtheWormshasemphasizedconsumptionandthecreative interaction between readers and their texts. Separately, but concurrently, literary criticism emphasized the importance of reception in the creation ofmeaningandIamthinkinghereofboththeSchoolofConstance andofUmbertoEcoswork11.Finally,historianssuchasBobScribner (forGermany),ArletteFargeandRobertDarnton(forFrance),and AdamFox(forEngland)haveincreasinglyrecognizedthatpolitical communicationwasdominatedbyoralityandthattheoralexchange ofnewsandideaswasitselfpartofthemediasystem12. Thehistoryofthebooklonghadaninterestforconnectionsbetween publishing and politics. As is known, in 1910 Daniel Mornet was already tryingtorespondtotheoldquestionabouttherelationsbetweenthe Enlightenment and the French Revolution by establishing what French people read in the eighteenth century13. Two later, quite different, intel-lectual developments renewed and rened this enquiry. One, which I will not explore in this article, was the so-called linguistic turn, especially asitdevelopedintherevisionisthistoriographyofeighteenth-century France in the 1980s. This emphasized language as a prime determinant ofhistoricalevents,anelementthatshapedthewaysinwhichpolitical actorsconceivedoftheiractionand,therefore,thewaysinwhichthey couldact14.TheotherwastheinuenceofHabermasspublicsphere ing,Cambridge1991,pp.140-167;G.CAVALLO-R.CHARTIER(eds),Storiadellalettura nelmondooccidentale,Roma-Bari1995.11 OnWolfgangIserandHansRobertJauss,seeR.C.HOLUB(ed.),Teoriadella ricezione,Torino1989;U.ECO,Lectorinfabula,Milano1979. 12 R.W.SCRIBNER,MndlicheKommunikationundStrategienderMachtinDeutschland am Anfang des 16. Jahrhunderts, in H. KHNEL (ed.), Kommunikation und Alltag im Spt-mittelalter und in der frhen Neuzeit, Wien 1992, pp. 183-197; A. FARGE, Dire et mal dire. LopinionpubliqueauXVIIIesicle,Paris1992,andR.DARNTON,AnEarlyInformation Society: News and the Media in Eighteenth-Century Paris, in American Historical Review, 105, 2000, pp. 1-35; A. FOX, Oral and Literate Culture in England, 1500-1700, Oxford 2000.13 D. MORNET, Les enseignements des bibliothques prives au XVIIIe sicle, in Revue dhistoirelittrairedelaFrance,21,1910,pp.449-495.14 F.FURET,PenserlaRvolutionfranaise,Paris1979,andK.M.BAKER,Inventing theFrenchRevolution.EssaysonFrenchPoliticalCultureintheEighteenthCentury, Cambridge1990.120model,inparticularinEnglish-speakingcountries,especiallyinthe 1990s15.Withfewexceptions,historiansofpre-eighteenth-century EuropehaveembracedHabermassmodel,whichtheyhavewishedto pre-dateandtoenlargebothsociallyandgeographically16.Thereareseveralandsomewhatparadoxicalreasonsforthesuccessof Habermass model amongst historians of communication. One is that it correspondedtoaviewofthedevelopmentofmodernityasaprocess of political enfranchisement, a view that gained renewed strength at the time of the velvet (communicative rather than violent) revolutions of Eastern Europe. This coincidence, as Habermas himself acknowledged, explained the second life of his book (rst published as a doctoral thesis in1962,yetespeciallyinuentialoutsideGermanyinthe1990s)17.For the same reason, however, early modern historians have curiously tended toignorethesecondandarguablymostimportantpartofhiswork:a critiqueofthemodernsystemofpoliticalcommunication,dominated bymassmediaessentiallydeprivingindividualsofthepossibilityfor expressingtheircriticalreason.Secondly,thesuccessofthepublic spheremodelhasbeenproportionaltoitsambiguityaswitnessedby thedifferenttranslationsofHabermassffentlichkeitasopinione pubblica, vida pblica, espace public, public sphere. This shift in vocabulary reveals the risks of reifying what we know about physical spaces(intheplural)intosomethingmuchgranderaboutopinionsor, worse, public opinion (in the singular). Finally, in the more specic terms ofearlymodernhistoriography,Iwouldemphasizeaboveallthat Habermass model emphasized media, like newspapers and books, and spaces, like salons and coffeehouses, and so enabled early modern histo-rians to speak about the public and public opinion while studying objectswhichwereeasiertotracethaneitherofthoseconcepts18.In 15 C.CALHOUN(ed.),HabermasandthePublicSphere,CambridgeMA1992.16 See respectively, O. NICCOLI, Rinascimento anticlericale. Infamia, propaganda e satira inItaliatraQuattroeCinquecento,Roma-Bari2005;A.FARGE,Direetmaldire; M. WARNER, The Letters of the Republic: Publication and the Public Sphere in Eighteenth-CenturyAmerica,CambridgeMA1990.17 SeethePrefazioneallanuovaedizione,inStoriaecriticadellopinionepubblica, Roma-Bari2002,pp.VII-XLIII.18 J.VANHORNMELTON,TheRiseofthePublicinEnlightenmentEurope,Cambridge 2001.121thissense,hismodeldidnotonlyappealtohistoriansofthebook;it alsodrewfromtwofurtherhistoriographicaldevelopments:thestudy ofsociabilityandnotablyofpoliticalsociabilityasrstputforwardby Maurice Agulhon in the 1960s; and the more recent and growing aware-ness of the importance of space and spatiality in early modern history19. WearefamiliarwithsomeofthecriticismsofHabermassmodeltoo, especiallyhischoiceofgeographicalandchronologicalboundaries,his insistence on the bourgeois nature of the public sphere and his neglect ofitsgendereddimension.Here,Iwouldliketosuggestthreeother andmoreessentialweaknesses.First,despiteitsreferencetospaces andmedia,thenotionofthepublicsphereremainsessentiallyabstract and Habermas had little to say about the practical ways in which either functioned. Historians of political communication need to bear in mind theinsightsofthehistoryofthebook,whichthrivedontheoriginal studyoftextsasmaterialobjects,whoseproductionwasregulatedby economicforcesandwhoseunderstandingwasmediatedbythephysi-calandtypographicalfeaturesofbooks.Thephysicalityofspacealso hasahugeimportancehowintimateordistantwastheconversation incoffee-houses?Didsomepeoplesitandothersstandinsalons?As RichardSennetthasargued,thematerialityofcommunicationhasim-portant implications also for its politics20. While Habermas imagined an egalitariandiscourse,thesociallifeofsalonshasbeenrecentlyshown tohavebeenframedandregulatedbyprecisenotionsofetiquetteand socialhierarchy21.From this comes a second point. Habermass model rests on the separa-tionofprivateandpublicandsogivesnosenseofthepersonal,eco-nomic,orsocialmotivesofcommunication,otherthanadisinterested intellectualconcernforpublicaffairs.Onceagain,thisisappropriate toanidealizednotionofcommunicationasdrivenbyreasonalone, 19 M. AGULHON, La sociabilit mridionale. Confrries et associations dans la vie collective en Provence orientale la n du XVIIIe sicle, 2 vols, Aix-en-Provence 1966; A. TORRE, Untournantspatialenhistoire?Paysages,regards,ressources,inAnnalesHSS,63, 2008,pp.1127-1144andmoregenerallyB.WARF-S.ARIAS(eds),TheSpatialTurn: InterdisciplinaryPerspectives,London2008.20 R. SENNETT, Flesh and Stone. The Body and the City in Western Civilization, London -BostonMA1994.21 A.LILTI,Lemondedessalons.SociabilitetmondanitParisauXVIIIesicle, Paris2005.122andunsurprisinglyHabermasspublic,theeducatedbourgeoisie,is denedpreciselybyitslackofmaterialpreoccupations.Wemustask howrealisticanassessmentthisiseveninthecaseoftherichand fortheoverwhelmingmajorityofsocietyweneedtounderstandhow communicationinteractedwithpeoplesothersocial,professional,and economicpreoccupations.Onlyinthiswaycanweunderstandhow peoplewhohadpreciouslittleleisuretimeandoverwhelmingmaterial concerns could nd the time for worrying about political events distant fromtheirlivesand,inthisway,forgraspingtheimplicationsthose eventshadforthem.Finally,ashasbeenrecentlynoted,Habermasdescribedthepublic sphere as essentially separate from, and critical of, the statea distinc-tion drawn from the sociological opposition of state and civil society. To Habermas,thegoldenageofthepublicsphere,unlikethepreceding or following periods of representative publicness and mass culture, saw communicationinvariablyleadingtoliberation22.Thisisaclassicline alreadypowerfullyvoicedduringtheEnlightenment.Habermassdebt toKantiswellknownanditmaybeaddedthatDavidHumealready wrotethatthelibertyofthepressandthatofthepeoplemuststand orfalltogether23.Inthisrose-tintedview,itisasifallmeansofinfor-mation could really serve to enfranchise their usersforgetting that the mediahavealwaysbeenoperatedbyeliteswhohadprecisepolitical, social,andeconomicinterests.Weneedtobuildpoliticsbackintothe studyofcommunication,toseehowthepower-gamesofgovernment authoritiesandfaction-leadersmanifestedthemselvesbydisseminating andmanipulatinginformation. Behind these problems lies the most essential problem in history: source criticism. I have shown this with Mitellis image, but recent works have pointed out the interpretive shortcomings on Habermass own territory ofEnglishcoffeehousesandFrenchsalons,asthesourcesonbothare often partisan satires or ctions drawn by authors for their own agenda andmeanteithertodismisspoliticalcommunicationortosteeritin 22 P. LAKE - S. PINCUS, Rethinking the Public Sphere in Early Modern England, in The JournalofBritishStudies,45,2006,pp.270-292.23 Cf.A.ANDREWS,TheHistoryofBritishJournalism,fromtheFoundationofthe NewspaperPressinEngland,totheRepealoftheStampActin1855,2vols,London 1859,vol.1,p.4.123particulardirections24.Thisisawell-knownprobleminthehistoryof politicalcommunication,asisclearintheexampleofpamphleteering, oneofthemainchannelsforthewidecirculationofpoliticalandreli-gious ideas in early modern Europe. The traditional interpretation is to regard pamphlets as resulting from the public interest in those ideas; but, asChristianJouhaudhasargued,thisisacircularargumentwhereby publicopinionistakentoexplainthepublicationofpamphlets,which arethenusedtodemonstratetheexistenceofpublicopinion.Ashe demonstrated, the pamphlets of the long period of crisis in seventeenth-centuryFranceculminatingintheFrondeoriginatedmoreoftenthan notinpatron-clientrelationsbetweenauthorsandtheprotagonistsof thepoliticalstruggle25.Eveninthecaseofmanuscriptpasquinades, historiansarenotsurewhethertheyoriginatedinelitecontroversies insidethecourtorembodiedapopularandcriticalperceptionofthe courtfromoutside26. 3.Thetriangleofcommunication:analternativemodelRatherthanasamono-directionalmovement,fromthetopdown(as propaganda),orfromthebottomup(aspublicopinion),weshould thinkofpoliticalcommunicationinearlymodernEuropeancitiesas atense,attimescreative,interactionbetweenmultipleactorsloosely organizedaroundthreepoles,whichcanbeidentiedwiththreelev-elsofthepoliticalandsocialsystemandwiththreesitesintheurban space:theauthorities,thepoliticalarena,andtherestofthecity.In theremainderofthisessay,Iwouldliketoputforwardthissimpleandinmyexperiencehelpfulmodel.Idevelopeditwhilestudying Veniceinthesixteenthandseventeenthcenturies27,butitcanusefully beappliedtothemovementofinformationinothercities.Inabook 24 M.ELLIS,TheCoffeeHouse:ACulturalHistory,London2004,B.W.COWAN,The Social Life of Coffee: the Emergence of the British Coffeehouse, New Haven CT - London 2005;A.LILTI,Lemondedessalons.25 C.JOUHAUD,Mazarinades:laFrondedesmots,Paris1985.26 M. FIRPO, Pasquinate romane del Cinquecento, in Rivista Storica Italiana, 96, 1984, pp.600-621.27 F.DEVIVO,InformationandCommunicationinVenice:RethinkingEarlyModern Politics,Oxford2007.124published in 1994, Andreas Gestrich similarly argued for a three-tiered model for the analysis of public communication in late seventeenth- and earlyeighteenth-centuryGermany28.4.Theauthorities First,communicationplayedasubstantialroleinsidethegovernment structure at the level of so-called high politics. Historians of early mod-erninformationgenerallyneglectthis,butinthe1960sKarlDeutsch already described communication as the nerves of government29. On theonehand,thedecision-makingprocessinvolvedahighdegreeof deliberationinbothrepublicanassembliesandprincelycouncils,some ofwhichwerealsoquitelarge:inFrancetheConseilduRoicould countasmanyasahundredmembers,theEnglishPrivyCouncil, forty,andthevariousSpanishConsejoshadanaverageoffty30.In sixteenth-century Rome, the Sacred College gathered between forty and seventycardinals31.Debatingwasthearenaforshowingoffrhetorical prowess and the vocabulary dening government assemblies shows that decision-makingwasanessentiallycommunicative,anddistinctively oral,activity:colloquiandconsulte,inItaliancity-states,civiloquiaand Brgergesprche in German cities, and parliaments in both cities and monarchicalnations32.InrepublicanVenicesincethefourteenthcen-28 A.GESTRICH,Absolutismusundffentlichkeit:politischeKommunikationin Deutschland zu Beginn des 18. Jahrhunderts, Gttingen 1994. I was regretfully unaware ofthisbookuntilIpreparedthepresentpaperfortheconferencewhereitwasorigi-nallypresented.29 K.W.DEUTSCH,TheNervesofGovernment.ModelsofPoliticalCommunicationand Control,NewYork-London1963.30 V.R.MOUSNIER,Leconseilduroi,delamortdeHenriIVaugouvernementperson-neldeLouisXIV,intudesdhistoiremoderneetcontemporaine,1,1947-1948, pp. 29-67; G. ELTON, The Tudor Constitution, Cambridge 1982, pp. 87-115; F. BARRIOS, ElConsejodeEstadodelamonarquaespaola,Madrid1984,pp.29-172. 31 A. PARAVICINI BAGLIANI, Il senato della Chiesa, in Il senato nella storia, vol. 2, Roma 1997,pp.173-216.32 S. BERTELLI, Il potere nascosto: i consilia sapientium, in Forme e tecniche del potere nella citt (secoli XIV-XVII), Perugia 1979-1980, p. 21, and M. BERENGO, LEuropa delle citt.IlvoltodellasocieturbanaeuropeatraMedioevoedEtmoderna,Torino1999, p.177;cf.A.R.MYERS,ParliamentsandEstatesinEuropeto1789,London1975.125tury,anincreasinglycomplexseriesoflawsregulatedtheproceedings, length,andsubjectmatterofdebatesinsidetheducalpalacesoasto makedebateseffectiveinspiteofthesizeoftheassemblies.Similar regulations applied elsewhere, as in Florences consulte, and occasionally betraythedistrustoftheunfettereduseofcommunicationlikethe Venetiansenate,theFrenchparlementsalsohadastrongpreference fortheunourished,restrainedAtticiststyleofrhetoric33. Ontheotherhand,policieswereelaboratedonthebasisofinforma-tionthatwasretrieved,collected,andprocessedinsidethegovern-mentstructure.Again,inVenice,thecontrolofinformationinsidethe governmentmadeforacarefulprocessthroughwhichsomecouncils liketheCollegioandtheCouncilofTenreceivedallnews,censored it,andpassedonlysomeontothelargerassemblies.Interestingly,in theVenetianconstitutionalmachinery,thismechanismwasknown ascomunicazione,andfrom1582onwards,itgaveorigintospecially transcribedandboundseriesofrecordsentitledComunicate.Thecol-lection,elaboration,andmanagementofinformationresultedinlarge massesofpaperworkandrequiredtheattentionofgrowingbodiesof ofciallyemployedsecretaries34.Growingmilitarycommitmentsand scalpressureinthesixteenthandseventeenthcenturiesmeantthat bureaucratic apparatuses for retrieving information on a states subjects orneighborsalsohadtogrow35.Theguidingprincipleofcommunicationatthislevelwassecrecy. GoverninginstitutionsthroughoutEuropeclaimedamonopolyover politicalcommunication(whichisnottosaythattheyhadone,aswe shallseeinamoment).Secrecyhadbothpracticalandsymbolicfunc-tionsindeed, it might be said that the modern attention to propaganda ignorestheearlymodernrulerscultofmystery.Inarevealingtwistin 33 M.FUMAROLI,Lgedelloquence.RhtoriqueetresliterariadelaRenaissance auseuildelpoqueclassique,Paris1980,pp.427-475.34 Cfr. J.V. JENSEN, The Staff of the Jacobean Privy Council, in Huntington Library Quar-terly,40,1976,pp.11-44;F.LEVEROTTI(ed.),Cancelleriaeamministrazioneneglistati italiani del Rinascimento, in Ricerche storiche, 24, 1994, 2, and F. DE VIVO, Ordering the Archive in Early Modern Venice (1400-1650), in Archival Science, 10, 2010, pp. 231-248.35 Cfr.R.H.BAUTIER,LaPhasecrucialedelhistoiredesarchives:laconstitutiondes dptsdarchivesetlanaissancedelarchivistique(XVIe-dbutduXIXesicle),inAr-chivum,18,1968,pp.139-149,andE.HIGGS,TheInformationStateinEngland:the CentralCollectionofInformationonCitizens,1500-2000,Basingstoke2004.126thechapteronmaintainingthereputationoftheprince,Giovanni Boteros founding Della ragion di stato (1589) afrmed that it was better todissimulateweaknessesthantocelebratestrength36.Headdedthat Secrecyisalsoofgreatimportancetoaprince;notonlydoesitmake him like God, but men, ignorant of his intentions, are kept in suspense about his schemes37. However, such a stance was not unique to princely or monarchical governments: in republican Venice, secrecy was elevated tooneoftheconstituentelementsoftheRepublicscherishedimage. Governingsystemsmarkedbythepluralityofdecision-makingbodies needed secrecy to maintain the ction that decisions were taken unani-mously and/or in adherence with the single will of the sovereign. In this sense,secrecywasattheheartbothofpre-modernpoliticalpractices andofthepre-modernideaofsovereigntyitself.Forthisreasontoo, perhaps, many pre-modern governing councils refused to record discus-sions. But the restricted councils of kings were also often called secret or privy, and strict rules required their members to maintain secrecy onthebusinesstheydealtwith.Secrecyalsohadimportantsymbolic functions, as reason of state theorists knew well38. Neither the Venetian assembliesnortheparliamentsinParisandLondonnortheEnglish PrivyCouncilkeptminutesofthedebates:instead,theyallexplicitly prohibitedmembersfrommakingtheirownnotes39. 36 G. BOTERO, The Reason of State and the Greatness of Cities, ed. D.P. Waley, London 1956,p.54[Ital.Dellaragiondistatolibridieci.Revistidallautore,earricchitiinpi luoghididiscorsi,edicosememorabili,Venezia1606,p.73].37 Ibid., p. 56 [ anche di grande importanza la secretezza; perche oltre che lo rende simileDiofacheglihuomini,ignorandoipensieridelPrencipestianosospesi,&in aspettationegrandedesuoidissegni,p.77].38 M.STOLLEIS,ArcanaimperiiundRatiostatus:BemerkungenzurpolitischenTheorie des frhen 17. Jahrhunderts, Gttingen 1980 and R. VILLARI, Elogio della dissimulazione. LalottapoliticanelSeicento,Roma-Bari1987;seealsoM.GAUCHET,LEtataumiroir delaraisondEtat:LaFranceetlachrtient,inCh.Y.ZARKA(ed.),Raisonetdraison dEtat. Thoriciens et thories de la raison dEtat aux XVIe et XVIIe sicles, Paris 1993, pp.193-244.39 J.LEBOINDRE,DbatsduParlementdeParispendantlaminoritdeLouisXIV, ed.byR.DESCIMON-O.RANUM-P.M.RANUM,Paris1997;W.NOTESTEIN-F.H.RELF, Introduction,inCommonsDebatesfor1629,MinneapolisMN1921,p.XXIII,and G.ELTON,TheTudorConstitution,pp.102and253. 1275.ThepoliticalarenaDespitetheofcialinsistenceonsecrecy,inVenice(asinLondonor Paris)wehavelonganddetailedaccountsofthedebatesheldinside governingassemblies,writtenbyparticipantsfrommemoryoronthe basis of notes unlawfully scribbled during proceedings, then transcribed indiariesorprivatearchives,circulatedamongstassociates,andoc-casionallysoldtostrangers40.Reservedknowledgeleakedcontinually, asisshownbyoneofthemostimportantsourcesinearlymodern history,therelazioniofVenetianambassadors.Producedbydiplomats toinformtheirpeersintheSenateandstoredinanarchiveknown aslaSegreta,theywerereadandcollectedinwell-informedcircles everywhereinEurope.LeopoldvonRanketoo,whoclaimedtohave discoveredtherelazioni,startedoffbyinspectingcollectionsin GermanandAustrianlibraries:hadsecrecyworked,thosecollections oughtnottohavebeenthereatall41.Suchcasesarenotuniqueto Venice;forexample,theminutesofpapalconclavesalsoenjoyeddif-fusionandshedlightoftenincontrastwithoneanotheronthe internalmiseriesandfactionalalliancesofthemostsecretiveofassem-blies,wherecardinalsgatheredtodrawtheHolySpiritsinspirationin choosingPeterssuccessor42. Thepeoplebehindtheproductionandcirculationofthesedocuments did not belong to an undened public sphere of political debate outside the authorities, but to a second level of political communication that we canusefullyimagineasapoliticalarena:notahomogeneousclassbut aseriesofgroupslockedincompetitionforpowerandinformation, separated between feudal and robe nobilities, older and newer families, richerandpoorer.Together,theyconstitutedanelitethatwaspoliti-cally,notsocially,dened,distinguishednotbybirthbutbyaccessto 40 Cf.H.LOVE,ScribalPublication,pp.9-22,andF.DEVIVO,InformationandCom-munication,pp.48-70.41 U. TUCCI, Ranke and the Venetian Document Market, in G.G. IGGERS - J.M. POWELL (eds),LeopoldvonRankeandtheShapingoftheHistoricalDiscipline,SyracuseNY 1990,pp.99-107;A.GRAFTON,TheFootnote:ACuriousHistory,London1997.42 M.A.VISCEGLIA,FazionielottapoliticanelSacroCollegionellaprimametdel Seicento,inG.SIGNOROTTO-M.A.VISCEGLIA(eds),LacortediRomatraCinquee Seicento teatro della politica europea, Roma 1998, pp. 37-91, and S. TABACCHI, Cardinali zelantiefazionicardinalizietraneSeicentoeinizioSettecento,ibid.,pp.139-165.128information,notbyformalmembershipbutbyinformalpersonaland socialcontacts.Theytranscendedtherulinggroupswhohadaccessto the institutions. Unlike governmental assemblies, the political arena also made space for women, in important if gender-specic roles as mothers, wivesandsisters,fosteringalliancesbetweendifferentfamilies,oras hostesses,openingtheirhousestopoliticallysignicantgatheringsof men43. Moreover, foreign ambassadorswhose missions abroad became permanent in the sixteenth centuryknew their job included investigat-ingandreportinginformation,whichtheirhostswouldhavewanted tokeepsecret44.Finally,politicalleadershadcontinuousrecourseto secretaries,menofletters,jurists,andnews-writers:peoplewhowere excludedbybirthfrompoliticsbutmadepoliticalinformationinto their profession. Cultural historians have studied the role of such intel-ligencers in retrieving and elaborating knowledge, from current affairs to classical culture45. The sociology of literature and science has shown theimportanceofnetworksofpatron-clientrelationsinshapingthe workofauthorsandscholarsthroughoutEurope46.Whatwedoknow suggests that it would be worthwhile to study their political work, too47. 43 R.AGO,Giochidisquadra:uominiedonnenellefamiglienobilidelXVIIsecolo, inM.A.VISCEGLIA(ed.),Signori,patrizi,cavalieriinItaliacentro-meridionalenellet moderna, Bari 1992, pp. 256-264, and A. BELLAVITIS - I. CHABOT (eds), Famiglie e poteri inItaliatraMedioevoedEtmoderna,Roma2009.44 D. FRIGO, Politics and Diplomacy in Early Modern Italy: The Structure of Diplomatic Practice,1450-1800,Cambridge1999,andM.J.LEVIN,AgentsofEmpire:SpanishAm-bassadorsinSixteenth-CenturyItaly,IthacaNY2005.45 L.JARDINE-W.SHERMAN,PragmaticReaders:KnowledgeTransactionsandScholarly Services in Late Elizabethan England, in A. FLETCHER - P. ROBERTS (eds), Religion, Culture and Society in Early Modern Britain: Essays in Honour of Patrick Collinson, Cambridge 1994, pp. 102-124, and J. RAYMOND (ed.), News Networks in Seventeenth-Century Britain andEurope,London2006.46 Cf. P. BURKE, A Social History of Knowledge From Gutenberg to Diderot, Cambridge 2000; A. VIALA, Naissance de lcrivain. Sociologie de la littrature lge classique, Paris 1985, and C. JOUHAUD, Les Pouvoirs de la littrature. Histoire dun paradoxe, Paris 2000.47Cf. A.E. BALDINI, Puntigli spagnoleschi e intrighi politici nella Roma di Clemente VIII: Girolamo Frachetta e la sua relazione del 1603 sui cardinali, Milano 1981; G. FRAGNITO, Latrattatisticacinqueeseicentescasullacortecardinalizia.Ilveroritrattodunabellis-simaebengovernatacorte,inAnnalidellistitutostoricoitalo-germanicoinTrento, 17,1991,pp.135-185,andE.FASANOGUARINI-M.ROSA(eds),Informazionepolitica inItalia,Pisa2001.129Informationwascentraltothepoliticalstruggle,asinsiderswhohad access to reserved information circulated it against the law for political motives among networks of temporary or permanent outsiders with whom they had personal, social, or political connections. In 1619, the Venetian OttavianoBongothisfamilyandassociatestotranscribeandcirculate copies of his relazione in order to vindicate his conduct while ambassador and to raise support for a particular line in Venices foreign policy. The report circulated in private homes and was discussed at dinner parties, duringpausesfromGreatCouncilproceedingsbycommonersaswell as patricians48. The communication of the political arena took place not insidegoverningcouncilsbutjustoutside,inantechambers,corridors, andinthehomesandsalonsofthepowerfulandthewell-connected, where the exchange of political information informed conversation and sociability.Greaterstudyisneededbeforewecanndoutmoreabout these circles, their meeting places, and habits. In Venice, patricians met inthebroglio,awordstillresonatingwithpoliticalmaneuvering,and intheearlymodernageindicatingthesmallersquarebetweenSan MarcoandtheDucalPalace.Theyrecognizedtheimportanceofthis practice,asrecommendedinaneducationmanualauthoredbyatypi-calmemberofthepoliticalarena,AldoManuzioilGiovane,manof letters,publisher,secretary,andlecturer,rstinVenicetheninRome. Apatricianneglectingthepiazze,hesaid,wouldgivetheimpression ofbeingamanwhodoesnottakepublicaffairsseriously49.Although no institution, the broglio was fully part of the political system because itledtothecreationofusefulnetworksofsupporters.Andwhatwas true of Venice, a state that famously repressed factionalism in the name of unanimitas, was even truer of republics like Genoa or of royal courts likeWhitehallorVersailles50.48 F.DEVIVO,InformationandCommunication,pp.63-70. 49 Non parlo del sollecitare le Piazze publiche di S. Marco et di Rialto, che questo necessario a chi nato qui nobile: perche, altrimenti facendo, d a credere di esseruomo, chesiprendalecosepublicheperischerzo;A.MANUZIO,Ilperfettogentilhuomo, Venice1584,pp.48-49.50 E.GRENDI,Larepubblicaaristocraticadeigenovesi.Politica,caritecommerciofra CinqueeSeicento,Bologna1987,pp.49-102.1306.ThecityInprinciple,allthisinformationwasbarredtothemajorityofthe population;thesociallyandculturallydishomogenousgroupsofor-dinarypeopledenedbythedoublefactthattheywereallexcluded from the institutions and had to work for a living. Their exclusion was particularlymarkedinVenice,wherethegovernmentrecognizedno politicalroletotradeguilds51.Butevencorporativerepublicswhich did, such as Renaissance Florence or the German city-states, only admit-tedtherichestandleastnumerousones,andthesameistrueoflocal governmentbodiesinmonarchies,suchastheCityofLondon,which wasinthehandsofasmallcircleofaldermen52.Intermsofpolitical communication,thepopulacewasregardedasincapableofexpressing reasonableopinions,andtheonlyfunctionofitsrepresentativeswas tobeoneofacclamation,forexampleduringtheparticipationincivic rituals.Inpractice,however,thepossibilitiesforexposureto,acquisi-tionandre-elaborationofpoliticalinformationweremanifold.Even themostreserveddocumentstravelledinthebagofhumblecouriers, exposedtothedifcultiesofthejourney,theriskofrobbing,orthe betrayalofthecouriersthemselves53. Ofcourse,itisdifculttotracecommunicationatthislevelbecauseit took place mostly in the oral mode. Some sources do help us, however. Someoriginateintheauthoritiessurveillanceoverthepoliticalarena, beitcounter-intelligenceinseventeenth-centuryVenice,orpolicingof the literary milieu in eighteenth-century Paris54. Government informers werenotparticularlyinterestedinpopularopinion,buttheirreports helpreconstructthemeansandplacesforcommunicationthroughout thecity.Here,forexample,isatypicalreportconcerningoneofthe 51 R.MACKENNEY,TradesmenandTraders:TheWorldoftheGuildsinVeniceand Europe,c.1250-c.1650,London-Sidney1987.52 C.R. FRIEDRICHS, Urban Politics in Early Modern Europe, London - New York 2000, pp.11-24,andF.F.FOSTER,ThePoliticsofStability:APortraitoftheRulersofEliza-bethanLondon,London1977.53 Cf. on England, A. FOX, Oral and Literate Culture, pp. 343, 373-374, and F. DE VIVO, InformationandCommunication,p.52onItaly.54 Cf.F.DEVIVO,InformationandCommunication,ch.3,andR.DARNTON,Early InformationSociety.131chiefspiesoftheSpanishambassadorinVeniceinthe1610s,Antonio Meschita: In the morning, he came late to San Marco, because he rst went to the ambassadors house.HethenwenttotheCourt[oftheDucalPalace],wherehespentagooddeal oftimetalkingtotheFlorentinesecretaryandtoVerdelli[anotheragentobservedby theInquisitorsatthetime].HethenleftandwenttoRialtoonhisown,andtherehe remained in the Calle della Sicurt, talking to newswriters whom I dont know. And when heleft,hewenttothestallofSignorFrancescoZordan,thenotary,andtherewrote aletter;andthenheleft,andwenttoSanCassian,toabarbershopwherehestayed agooddeal;andthenhewenthomeandafterdinnerreturnedtotheambassador55.Asthisandotherdocumentsshow,Meschitadividedhisdaybetween thecentersofthepoliticalarenaandthecrossroadsofurbantrade;he and other information professionals met in public or semipublic places aroundthemarketareatoexchangeinformationwithpeoplewhohad no professional or social ties to the world of politics. As the name sug-gests,forexample,theCalledellaSicurthostedthestallsofbrokers who specialized in maritime insurance and no doubt had precious news aboutVenicesnavaloperationsandthemovementofforeigneets. Anotherexample,whichIfoundparticularlystrikingforVenice,are the apothecary shops (spezierie)56. They constantly welcomed the minor agentsofforeignambassadorsaswellasordinarypeople,andthey customarily hosted the collective reading of avvisi and printed material relatingtocurrentaffairsbothinthecityandoutside.Itislikelythat, inaercelycompetitivemarket,apothecariestriedtoattractcustom-ersnotonlybybeautifyingtheirshopsbutalsobyinvitingusefulor interestinginformation.Visitorsincludednotjustprominentmembers ofthepatriciateandtheSpanishembassy,butalsoapprentices,shop boysandfemaleservantssentfrompatricianhouseholdsinother words,representativesofallthreelevelsofpoliticalcommunication. Anothersetofsourcesisthatofchronicles,diaries,andletterswritten by merchants and traders. They are often full of political information57. 55 Report dated 4 November 1614, in Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Inquisitori di Stato, b.606,fasc.10,cc.nn.56 F.DEVIVO,PharmaciesasCentresofCommunicationinEarlyModernVenice,in RenaissanceStudies,21,2007,pp.505-521.57 Cf. G. DORIA, Conoscenza del mercato e sistema informativo: il know-how dei mercanti-nanzierigenovesineisecoliXVIeXVII,inA.DEMADDALENA-H.KELLENBENZ(eds), 132Whattosomewasprimarilypoliticalnews,toothershadaneconomic rationale. In a pioneering study written on the basis of Marin Sanudos diaries,PierreSardellashowedthatthearrivalofnewsinVeniceinu-enced the price of commodities. In real life, as in Shakespeares Merchant ofVenice,thenewsoftheRialtocouldspellfortuneordisaster58. WehavelongknownabouttheFuggersgreatinformationnetwork; buttheirlessfamouscolleaguesalsosharedaprofessionalinterestfor militaryandothernews,fromalliancesandwarstoepidemics.Ashas beennotedrecently,theseeconomicactorscombinationofpersonal, commercial, and political information makes it difcult to embrace the classicpublicspheresseparationbetweenprivateandpublic59. Economicandculturalhistorianscanfruitfullyco-operateinstudying the exchange of information in early modern cities. For example, some studies have begun to shed light on marketplaces and fairs, but we still needtoestablishtheimpactoftheinformationexchangeontrading habits and more generally on the experience of the marketplace60. Credit, forexample,wasacrucialinstrumentofbothlong-distancetradeand face-to-faceretail:yettogivecreditoneneededinformationonthe peopleonetradedwith,ontheirbackgroundsandconnections,and on the events back in their homes; and, vice versa, being well informed gave one credit61. Such insights make for a fundamental departure from La repubblica internazionale del denaro tra XV e XVII secolo (Annali dellIstituto storico italo-germanicoinTrento.Quaderni,20),Bologna1986,pp.57-121.58 P. SARDELLA, Nouvelles et spculations Venise au dbuts du XVIe sicle, Paris 1947.59 Forarecentdiscussion,seeF.TRIVELLATO,MerchantsLettersAcrossGeographi-calandSocialBoundaries,inF.BETHENCOURT-F.EGMOND(eds),Correspondenceand CulturalExchangeinEurope1400-1700,Cambridge2007,pp.80-103.60 P.JEANNIN,Ladiffusiondelinformation,inS.CAVACIOCCHI(ed.),Fiereemer-catinellintegrazioneeuropea,secc.XIII-XVIII,Firenze2001,pp.231-262;E.WELCH, ShoppingintheRenaissance:ConsumerCulturesinItaly,1400-1600,NewHavenCT- London2005,andA.GROHMANN,FairsasSitesofEconomicandCulturalExchange,in D. CALABI - S.T. CHRISTENSEN (eds), Cities and Cultural Exchange in Europe, Cambridge 2007,pp.207-226.61 SeerespectivelyF.TRIVELLATO,TheFamiliarityofStrangers:TheSephardicDias-pora,Livorno,andCross-CulturalTradeintheEarlyModernPeriod,NewHavenCT- London2009;C.MULDREW,TheEconomyofObligation:TheCultureofCreditand SocialRelationsinEarlyModernEngland,London1998,andL.FONTAINE,Lconomie morale,pauvret,crditetconancedanslEuropeprindustrielle,Paris2008. 133Habermas, because they show both that wide social groups participated inpoliticalcommunicationwithouttheinvitationnecessaryforsalons orthemoneyrequiredincoffeehouses,andthatinformationhada precisematerialandprofessionalvalueforthosewhoexchangedit. Informationhadausenotjustfortheauthoritiesandthemembersof thepoliticalarena,butforscoresofpeopleoutsideboth.Andeven whenitdidnothaveadirectprofessionalvalue,politicalinformation couldbeloadedwithaneconomicone,asinthecaseofthebets(yes, bets)thatwerecommonlyplacedonbothVenetianpatricianelections andpapalconclaves62.7.InteractionsandconclusionsThe people grouped around these three poles of communication clearly had different degrees of access to information, just as they had different aimsinusingthatinformation.Onthewhole,whileitwasthegovern-mentsbusinesstocontrolinformation,informationwasthebusiness ofprofessionalsinthepoliticalarena;meanwhile,bothoperatedina context full of people who were supposed to have no interest in politics and yet discovered that information was their business too, because they foundthenewstoberelevanttotheireconomicactivitiesandsocial life.Understandingpoliticalcommunicationinthiswayforcesusto seetheconnectionsbetweenprivateandpublicaffairs,personaland collective interest for news on all the three levels just discussed. On the whole,thisaccountseemstomesignicantlymorerealisticthanthe public sphere model. It also helps us account for the relations between differentpolesofcommunicationinmoreconvincingwaysthanthe oppositionstate-civilsociety. Differentiatingbetweenthreelevelsofcommunicationdoesnotmean positingwatertightseparations.Urbanspacesandsocialgroupslargely overlapped.InVenice,patricianssatintheDucalPalaceyetalsofre-quentedsalonsandregularlyvisitedapothecaryshops;news-writers collected information in patrician households, foreign embassies, and at Rialto. The same was true elsewhere. For example, countless people had 62 J.WALKER,GamblingandVenetianNoblemen,c.1500-1700,inPastandPresent, 162,1999,pp.28-69,andA.PARAVICINIBAGLIANI,IlSenato,p.187.134regularcontactswiththecourtforpersonalorprofessionalreasons,as servants, providers of manufacts or other services63. Contacts had, above all,todowiththephysicaldensityofthepopulationinearlymodern cities,especiallywherethecourtwasnotseparatefromtheurbanfab-ric.Buteverywhereinformationfounditswaytothesquaresandinto theshops:atRialtoasinRomesBanchiquarter,inParisPalaisRoyal orLondonsStPaulsYard64.ContrarytoHabermassinsistenceon egalitarianism,whatmadetheseplacesintocentersofcommunication waspreciselytheirsocialandpoliticalheterogeneity. Thetriangularmodelputforwardhere,therefore,accountsforboth differentiationandconnection.Todividepoliticalcommunicationinto three levels allows us to see the different uses of the means of informa-tionandsotoovercomesomeoftheproblemsofinterpretationwith whichIbegan.Taketheexampleofavvisi,whicharefeaturedatthe center of Mitellis print. There is no doubt that they were the rst form ofperiodicalinformationcirculatingamongstnetworksofsubscribers. Butweretheyinstrumentsofthepublicsphere?Sofarasweknow, theirauthors(likeAntonioMeschita,theSpanishambassadorsagent weencounteredearlier)werewellconnectedwithprominentmembers ofthepoliticalarena.Theysoldtheirnewslettersforafee,true,but onlyrichsubscriberscouldaffordtopayit;aboveall,thelittlewe knowabouttheeconomicsofthebusinessshowsthatitwasunsus-tainablewithoutthehelpofapatron65.Avvisiaboundwithreferences topopularrumors(vocidipiazza),butbriefenquiriesshowthatthose accountswereinvariablyinstrumentaltotheinterestsofthenews-writerspatrons.Unlesswerecognizethis,wewillfailtodistinguish between information and manipulation, between the disclosure and the plantingofinformation.Ratherthanviewingavvisiassimplemeansof 63 SeethecomparativequantitativedatainD.ROMANO,HousecraftandStatecraft: DomesticServiceinRenaissanceVenice,1400-1600,BaltimoreMD-London,1996, pp.233-234,andcf.S.C.MAZA,ServantsandMastersinEighteenth-CenturyFrance: TheUsesofLoyalty,PrincetonNJ1983;oncourtsasemployersseeM.AYMARD- M.A.ROMANI(eds),Lacourcommeinstitutionconomique,Paris1998.64 L.NUSSDORFER,ThePoliticsofSpaceinEarlyModernRome,inMemoirsofthe AmericanAcademyinRome,42,1997,pp.161-186;R.DARNTON,EarlyInformation Society,andD.HARKNESS-J.E.HOWARD(eds),ThePlacesandSpacesofEarlyModern London,inHuntingtonLibraryQuarterly,71,2008.65 F.DEVIVO,InformationandCommunication,pp.82-83.135propaganda, it is important to stress how they interacted with different formsofcommunication,astheywerereadbypeoplebeyondtheir immediateaddressees66. Asimilarpointcanbemadeaboutpamphlets.Byanalyzingtheiruses forthethreepolesofcommunication,wecanunderstandtheirpoliti-calfunction.First,weneedtodiscovertheattitudeoftheauthorities towardstheirpublication,theregulationsconcerningcensorship, oralternativelythepositiveuseoftheprintingpresses.Inearly seventeenth-centuryVenice,forexample,theauthoritieshesitatedat lengthbeforeallowingthepublicationofpamphletsevenattheheight ofaveryseriousconictwiththepapacy67.Secondly,weneedtodraw from the sociology of literature to pinpoint the social prole and connec-tions of authors of pamphlets. In most cases, they were members of the politicalarenaandwroteoutofallegiancetopatronswhowereactive protagonistsinthepoliticalstruggle68.Finally,weneedtoreconstruct thepamphletsengagementwithreadersbeyondboththeauthorities andthepoliticalarena:adifcult,butnotanimpossibletask. Bycomparingpamphletswithothermeansofcommunicationofthe time and reconstructing the precise chronology of each publication, we canappreciatetheechoesofpamphletsandviceversatheechoesof otherformsofcommunicationinthepamphlets.Inthecaseofearly seventeenth-century Venice, it is clear that the Republic only consented totheprintedpolemicwhenthemultiplicationofnewsletters,grafti, and rumors in the city became unbearable69. Furthermore, we can draw from the history of the book, paying close attention to the mechanisms ofthebookindustry.Themultiplicationofsomepamphletseditions (whichcanbereconstructedthroughmaterialbibliography)shows that they were directed at a public that went beyond the political arena. Inthesecases,unlesswendsomeevidencethatthosepatronsalso commissionedtheprintingofpamphlets,wemustimaginethatthey wereprintedbybusinessmeninterestedintheopportunitiesforprot 66 Ibid.,pp.124-125;cf.FOX,OralandLiterateCulture,pp.375-382.67 Ibid.,pp.160-176.68 C.JOUHAUD,Pouvoirsdelalittrature.69 F.DEVIVO,InformationandCommunication,pp.176-199.136enshrinedinthepamphletssale70.Finally,wecandrawfromrecep-tiontheorytostudythelanguageofpamphlets.Theirauthorsutilized imagesandexpressionswhichtheythoughtwouldmakesensetotheir readers. When they aimed at a wide public, it is likely that those images involvedadegreeofcircularitybetweenthewrittenandtheoralword asspokeninthecitiesstreets.Ofcourse,circularitydoesnotimply theabsenceofconict.Onthecontrary,asIhaveshowninthecase ofVenicespamphletsof1606/7,authorsfashionedtheircriticismof the adversary with themes drawn from a widespread culture of derision oftheauthorities71.Themodelofferedinthisessaymakesitpossibletounderstandcom-munication in terms of both circularity and conict. It allows for resis-tanceinaway,whichisinconceivableinFoucaultspower-dominated view of communication yet underproblematized in Habermass idealized publicsphereapproach.Bothinterpretationsexaggeratetheextentto whichcommunicationcouldbemanoeuvredbyasingleagent,beit theauthoritiesorthepublic.Aswehaveseen,evenatthelevelofthe authorities,communicationmaywellhaveconstitutedthenervesof government,butitmadeforrawnervesindeed,asshownbytheten-sionattheheartofitsregulationinsidedebatingassemblies,andby the contrast between the preservation and the diffusion of documentary information.Communication,inotherwords,wasitselfpartofthe politicalsystem,itwasaninstrumentofbothpowerandcriticism. Themeansandspacesofcommunicationweretheobjectofopposite claimsbydifferentsocialandpoliticalagents.WhenIsuggestsubsti-tutingaspherewithatriangleIdonotwishtoforceamodelonto arealitythatwasextremelycomplex,butIdohopetoofferauseful tool of analysis. Much better than a monolithic sphere, the spikiness of atrianglesthreepointsdoessuggesttheideaofconict,competition andexclusion:theideathatcommunicationreallywaspartofpolitics. Ialsothinkthatitaffectedtherealmofpolitics,butthatwillbethe subjectforanotherpaper. 70 Ibid.,pp.215-227;cf.J.RAYMOND,PamphletsandPamphleteeringinEarlyModern Britain,Cambridge2003,andJ.PEACEY,PoliticiansandPamphleteers:Propagandadur-ingtheEnglishCivilWarsandInterregnum,Aldershot2004.71 F.DEVIVO,InformationandCommunication,pp.227-246.