First of all, I think the significance of Filippo being noted as a youth or young, has to be understood in terms of the "seven ages of man" related to the seven planets. This astrological commonplace of the time, sometimes even depicted as large scale frescos such as the roundels above the planets in the Trinci palace in Foligno or the apse of the Eremitanni church in Padua (and numerous manuscripts) - employed the following schema, as noted from a description of the Padua fresco cycle:
Mercury - pueritia
Venus - adolescentia
Sol - iuventus – youth
(not sure if the years were uniformly set, but I've seen contemporary astrological sources give 23-42 years of age for Sol)
Mars – senectus
Jupiter - senilitas
Saturn - decrepitas
(old age unto death)
(source: Art and the Augustinian Order in Early Renaissance Italy
, eds, Anne Dunlop, Louise Bourdua, 2007: 128)
Although Marziano's work generally does not touch on the astrological nature of the relevant gods, he does lead with "morning star" for Venus, the progenitor of the Aeneid-based Visconti line. At all events, as noted, such a schema was a commonplace, and thus it would be a societal norm to refer to Filippo as a "youth", even at the age of 26 in 1418 (and if Daphne in Marziano is significant for Filippo, then his "Apollonine" age would be especially appropriate).
Additional information possibly tilting matters towards a 1418 date for Marziano's project...
The general nature of of the political problem facing Filippo, that existed after the death of Giangaleazzo in 1402:
Plentitude of power, meaning authority above the law, was a prerogative the Visconti needed if they were to secure their regime and fulfill the task for which they had been appointed by the communes, namely that of bringing an end to factionalism. Recalling exiles and implementing amnesties meant ignoring court judgements and the rights of injured parties; friends had to be rewarded and enemies crushed, which led to the overturning of established property rights, the granting of immunities and exemptions involved contravening laws of every kind.
…The difficulty was that in appropriating plentitude of power, the Visconti were embracing the law and language of the pope and the emperor, for since the end of the twelfth century plentitude of power had come to embody imperial and papal supremacy and majesty….The claim was complicated by the fact that the Milanese regime underwent a series of transformations: Azzone and his immediate successors were signori (domini generales), appointed by the individual communes; from the mid-fourteenth century the imperial vicariate gave the government a new complexion; but the status was undermined when, in the coup’d’etat of 1385, Giangaleazzo seized all of Bernabo’s lands without any imperial authorization. With the establishment of the duchy in 1395 a new era began, but the ducal title brought its own problems: the Visconti’s authority was now dependent on imperial policy, and yet the emperor’s goodwill was mostly denied to the rulers of Milan. This circumstance led the Sforza temporarily to return to the principle pf communal authority as the basis of their rule. (Jane Black, Absolutism in Renaissance Milan: Plenitude of Power under the Visconti and Sforza, 1329–1535. 2010: 2-3)
Sforza of course does not concern us here (for his related imperial problems see Gary Ianziti, Humanistic Historiography under the Sforzas: Politics and Propaganda in Fifteenth-Century Milan
Instead we are concerned with Filippo, 1412-1418 (the range of dates presently under discussion):
[Following the collapse of the regime under Giovanni Maria....]
Filippo Maria’s requests were initially denied, Sigismund continuing to refer to Milan as a civitas, and to Filippo Maria himself simply as illustris, or as Count of Pavia. In the discussions a distinction was made between the lands and the title: in 1413 Sigismund promised to confirm that Filippo Maria ‘could and should hold [these lands] and govern them as he has hitherto’, but he would not recognize him as duke without the consent of the electors.
The presence of both sides at the opening of the Council of Constance in 1415 provided an opportunity for Filippo Maria to gave an oath of fealty in exchange for the reception of territories without a renewal of the title. By 1418 Filippo Maria had so far strengthened his own position that Sigismund gave a promise subject to the approval of the electors, that he would at some future point confirm the title. Confirmation was finally granted in 1426. There are two versions of the crucial document. The first, dated 1 July, was a fake. With its emphasis on Filippo Maria’s hereditary rights and its confirmation of Wencelas’s original investitures, the instrument represented what Filippo Maria would have liked to have had from Sigismund. The genuine act, dated 6 July 1426, was a paltry affair by comparison: not a confirmation of Filippo Maria’s title as such, it merely endorsed the agreement of 1418 by which Sigismund had promised Filippo Maria the privileges and territories which had been granted to his father, provided the electors consented…..
In response to circumstances, [Giovanni Maria and Filippo Maria] dropped Giangaleazzo’s practice, following the 1396 diploma, of referring to plentitude of power as having been conceded a Caesarea dignitate. Now there was a new phrase, ‘from the plentitude of his ducal power (de eius ducalis plenitudine potestatis)’, signifying a homegrown authority. The phrase appears in Giovanni Maria’s sale in 1411 of all rights over Abbiategrasso. Similarly, Filippo Maria’s most important acts in this period employed the new formula: it crops up in the grant of the governorship of Monza to his wife Beatrice and in the investiture of the fiefs of Melegnano, Bescape’, and Belgioioso to members of the family in 1414, besides in the act establishing Cremona as a Visconti feud under Gabrino Fondulo in 1415 and in the confirmation of the Independence of Abbitaegrasso of 1418. The nearest Filippo Maria came to referring to an imperial connection was the phrase ‘from his ducal absolute power and also from the authority granted to him by his imperial majesty’ used in Gabrino Fondulo's investiture, drawn up after the initial rapprochement with Sigismund in 1413. (ibid, 76-77)
A lot to unpack here, and I'll do so by mainly ticking off the bolded points above:
1. The emperor made a distinction between the lands and the ducal title, only officially recognizing Filippo as Count of Pavia in this regard, ignoring the lands regained via Facino Cano's army, by way of marriage with his widow (the widow herself invested with Monza...which is odd given she was Duchess, yet it did guarantee a source of personal income...but hardly reassuring of prospects of a long marriage together, but more of a "partnership"). Most importantly here, the imperial insult placed a premium on Filippo's desire to join title with the lands, which brings us to point #2....
2. Following the Council of Constance when Filippo had consolidated power in the Duchy in 1418, the Emperor promises the ducal title at a future date. But Filippo, following his brother's precedent, had already been using an alternate means of proclaiming the basis of his power: "homegrown authority " of the plenitude of power ceded from the individual communes within the Duchy, to the degree that when the official 1426 recognition came out - and was found lacking - Filippo's court had already concocted one issued in place of the official imperial one that legitimated their actions, based on "hereditary rights"; that is the popular acclaim of the communes to Filippo's ducal ancestors, and from whom he was obtaining once again.
3. A minor point, but Cabrino Fondulo receiving Cremona during this anxious time of imperial relations does point to the three-ringed device, inherited by Sforza, as originally created with the emperor (and pope) in mind, this being the only time Filippo actually invoked the emperor ("authority granted to him by his imperial majesty", albeit it was a lie on Filippo's part).
Point #2 concerns us the most here: Filippo's emphasis on hereditary rights
in lieu of full imperial investiture for himself. Seen in that light, a renewed interest in the ethnogenic claims of descent from Aeneas, encompassing all of his ancestors, suddenly take on a political aspect, stemming from a position that was odds with the Empire - a problem for a duchy that was an imperial fief. The Visconti Hour leaf showing his portrait in light of an abridged genealogy betray's this anxiety of his imperial standing and the alternate means of legitimization.
If Marziano's use of Aeolus points towards a pivotal moment in the Aeneid, then the genealogy project is arguably in Marziano's mind. If in the context of 1418 and the promised imperial title, to be granted in an unknown future, a turn towards the expedient of some form of legitimation in the present (hereditary) . Furthermore, the date of 1418 would explain the significance of Aeolus pushing Aeneas off course to the love interest that would not unfold in the line of Visconti - Dido - arguably a symbol for the actual wife Beatrice executed by Filippo in this very year.
But what was Marziano doing in this time period? Per the documents and timeline you put together:
1417 12 October Milan: Transfer of fief by donation of certain possessions of some of the Del Maino family made by the most illustrious lord the lord duke of Milan, etc., in favour of Sperone Pietrasanta: Filippo Maria, having granted as a fief to Sperone Pietrasanta, of the late Antonio, a Milanese citizen, now a privy councillor, some properties and assets formerly owned by Lancino, Taddeo and Givoanni Del Maino of the late Gasparolo, and by Marco and Luchino Del Maino of the late Francescolo, Pietrasanta now petitions the Duke to revoke the enfeoffment regarding the Del Maino's assets, to grant it to him as a donation and to make exempt an inn or tavern at Affori, parish of Bruzzano, formerly owned by Marco and Luchino Del Maino, on the way to Como. The Duke revokes, as requested, the enfeoffment limited to these assets, and restores the said asset outside the nature of the said fief, donating them to Pietrasanta; he also exempts the tavern from the duties of bread, wine and meat. Witnesses: the distinguished Giovanni Corvini of Arezzo of the late Gregorio, Marziano da Sant'Alosio and Zanino Riccio di Stefano, secretaries. Notary of the act: Giovanni Francesco Gallina of the late Pietro.
1417 12 October Milan: Investiture of Sperone Pietrasanta with the fief of the castle of Morengo, made by the most illustrious lord, the lord duke of Milan etc
1418 29 July Abbiategrasso: Praesentibus Egregiis prudentibus quoque viris domino Martiano de Sancto Aroxio Conradino de Vicomercato Secretariis to: Truce agreed between the Marquis d'Este and the Duke of Milan
1418 2 September Milan: : Giovanni Manfredo di Rozonalio of Piacenza takes the oath of allegiance before the members of the Privy Council Antonio Bossi, Tadiolo di Vimercate, Giovanni Corvini and Marziano da Sant'Alosio, for the castle of Centenario in the diocese of Piacenza which he was invested together with Giovangiacomo his brother.
1419 23 January Milan: Duke Filippo Maria Visconti successfully appeals to Pope Martin V to replace the abbot of Santa Maria di Rivalta [Tortona area abbey] with Martianus de Sancto Alosio, whose qualifications he describes as Cleric of the Apostolic Chamber
1419 21 February Monza: The Duke of Milan writes to the esteemed podestà of Milan to have it published the following day, 22 February, that he has signed the peace with the magnificent lord Pandolfo Malatesta by intervention of the Pope. - The proclamation was made on the 22nd by Giovanni de Rolandis, signed, Martianus.
The truces with Niccolo d'Este and Pandolfo Malatesta speak to the tying up of loose ends in regard to re-consolidation of the duchy; again: "by 1418 Filippo Maria had so far strengthened his own position." That Marziano played a role here in these treaties speaks not just to his importance in the court but his awareness of Milan's relative strengths....and needs. What is also obvious is the relationship of these acts to the concerns of the "plentitude of power" regarding the internal politics of the duchy - in some of these cases Marziano is witnessing the confirmation of fiefs with oaths of fealty to the person being infeuded, or in turn, of the elite being assigned the fief to promise loyalty to Filippo. To the point: Marziano, was a member of the privy council specifically dealing with the management and disposition of the fiefs within the duchy, and thus he must have been well-versed on the problematic nature of the relationship of Milan to the Empire, the former a fief of the latter. My theory here, aware of the alternate claims to legitimation based on "hereditary rights", could have been mirrored in Marziano's game, especially if created in c.1418. As such Marziano's game wasn't just a prodding of a young man to pursue a proper child-bearing lover, but such an endeavor was poetically lionized as fulfilling Filippo's destiny, like Aeneas, both obligated by the euhemeristic gods themselves.
Finally, I should explain why I posted the first Marziano entry above in full, October 1417 - it notes the the transfer ("donation") of some property from the del Maino - Agnese's family - to a Sperone Pietrasanta, a fellow privy council member. Was this a forced conveyance of property or perhaps part of a dowry? There is also the possibility Filippo himself was present in Abbiategrasso, one of his favorite castles was there (albeit a small one), with his court in tow - and perhaps members of both families there to sign the documents. Whatever the exact context, the del Maino and Pietrasanta, both old Milanese families, were allied with one another:
Bianca Maria's private relations also extended to numerous noble families - both urban and noble - with whom she had developed solid friendships by frequenting her palaces and castles, participating with Agnese and her children
in parties, receptions, hunting parties ; inviting gentlemen and ladies to court, organizing meetings and ceremonies. Members of various families of the eminent Milanese, Pavia and Cremonese classes were co-opted in the ranks of the court and in the education of the Sforza youth, remunerated by offices and honors, awarded variously by the patronage of the Duchess. In Milan the Bossi, the Crivelli, the Meravigli, 46 the Taverna, 47 the Della Croce, the Toscani, the Caimi48, the Pietrasanta
and the Landriani, 49 in Pavia the Astolfi, 50 the Giorgi, 51 the Beccaria, 52
(machine translation of Maria Nadia Covini, "Tra patronage e ruolo politico: Bianca Maria Visconti (1450-1468)", in Donne di potere nel Rinascimento, a cura di L. Arcangeli e S. Peyronel, Viella (“I libri di Viella”, 85), Roma 2008, pp. 247-280, 261)
Link to full article: https://www.academia.edu/27493723/Tra_p ... p._247-280
Regarding Pietrasanta himself, he was a member of the insiders who made the transition from Facino/Beatrice Cano's staff to Filippo proper (the piece below is about an associate, but provides contextualization of the men Filippo surrounded himself initially):
Another Facino partisan destined for a brilliant career at the ducal court was Zanino Ricci, who, according to what Billia writes, was chancellor and scribe of the captain and then of the widow Beatrice, then moving to the services of Filippo Maria Visconti in 1412. Examining the acts of the early years of this duke, it is seen that the governance of the duchy, for some years, was firmly in the hands of Ricci, who attended important state affairs and gave much listened consultations Visconti, together with Oldrado Lampugnani, Sperone da Pietrasanta
and a few other trusted men. Ricci remained on the command bridge until his death in 1428, exercising such strong and pervasive authority that almost inevitably aroused many hostilities and enmities. Historians speak badly of him, equally Andrea Billia and Pier Candido Decembrio: they accuse him of having shaped the will of the young duke and attribute heavy responsibilities, including that of having sown tiff between Filippo Maria and Carmagnola (accusation resumed by Flavio Biondo) and having procured, with his adventurous policy, the war against the Venetian and Florentine republics; and by extreme denigration they also accuse him of having practiced astrology54. Beyond these judgments, which may have been ruthless and exaggerated, the events narrated leave no doubt about the great authority he had achieved at the Visconti court. His achievements include the brilliant ecclesiastical career of his brother Antonio, who, without too many merits, was appointed abbot of Sant'Ambrogio, and the beginning of the fifteenth-century fortune of the Ricci family between Pavia, Milan and Castel d'Agogna, not a feud but allodial possession. (machine translation of M.N. Covini, "La compagnia di Facino: formazione, crescita, successi in Facino Cane: predone, condottiero e politico", a cura di B. Del Bo, A.A. Settia, Franco Angeli, Milano 2014 (Storia; 432), pp. 105-121, 116-117)
Link to full article here: https://www.academia.edu/19750030/La_co ... p._105-121
So the del Maino were connected to Facino Cano's elites who formed Filippo's administrative structure after Cano died, and were retained even after he jettisoned Beatrice. The interesting possibility here is that Marziano was directly involved with a transaction between the two families at a time right before Beatrice was executed - perhaps it is in that Maino-Pietrasanta transactional context, handled by the court, in which Filippo met Agnese (he certainly liked young boys, per Decembrio, so would not be surprising if the pedophile also preferred a young girl for his next female love interest, as Agnese may have been as young as 8 or so in 1418, and 16 when she gave birth to Bianca in 1425).
To my mind, everything seems to be pointing to 1418, especially if Filippo's own youth is no longer a serious factor for when Marziano penned his work.
PS This is not what I wanted to present today - which involves Petrarch and Capella - that I mentioned in my email note to you, but stumbled upon the above in old notes of mine. Maybe Petrarch tomorrow....