XXV.  That this sonnet should have been written by a Dominican monk in a Neapolitan prison in the first half of the seventeenth century, is truly note-worthy.  It expresses the essence of democracy in a critique of the then existing social order.

XXVI.  A very obscure piece of writing.  The first quatrain lays down the principle that ill-doing brings its own inevitable punishment.  The second distinguishes between the unblessed suffering which plagues the soul, and that which we welcome as a process of purgation.  The first terzet makes heaven and hell respectively consist of a clean and a burdened conscience.  The second, referring to a legend of S. Peter’s controversy with Simon Magus, finds a proof of immortality in this condition of conscience.

XXVII.  A bold and perilous image of the Machiavellian Prince, who drains the commonwealth for his own selfish pleasures.  The play upon the words mentola and mente in the first line is hardly capable of reproduction.

XXVIII.  Adami says in a note:  Questo sonetto e fatto perche l’intendano pochi; ne io voglio dichiararlo.  Under these circumstances it is dangerous to attempt an explanation.  Yet something may be hazarded.  Line 1:  the lady is Italy.  Line 3:  the stranger races are Rome’s vassals.  Line 7:  Dinah is again Italy(?).  Line 8:  Simeon and Levi are the Princes of Italy and the Papacy.  Line 9:  Jerusalem probably stands for Rome.  Line 10:  Nazareth is the Gospel of Christ, and Athens is philosophy.  Here again Adami warns us:  qui legit intelligat.  Line 13:  a critique of the ruinous policy of calling strangers in to interfere in Italian affairs.

XXIX.  Line 2:  Attila is meant.  The Venetian Lagoons were the refuge of the last and best Italians of the Roman age, when the incursions of the barbarians destroyed the classical civility.  Line 12:  alludes to the fixity of the Venetian Constitution and the deliberate caution of Venetian policy.

XXX.  The quatrains describe the old power of Genoa, who conquered Pisa, abased Venice, planted colonies in the East, and discovered America.  Line 10:  throws the blame of Genoese decrepitude upon the nobles.

XXXI.  Campanella praises the Poles for their elective monarchy, but blames them for choosing the scions of royal houses, instead of seeking out the real kings of men, such as he described in No.  XVI.

XXXII.  A similar criticism of the Swiss, who played so important and yet so contemptible a part in the Italian wars of the sixteenth century.  With the terzets compare No.  XXV.  Line 11:  stands thus in the original—­La croce bianca e’l prato si contende.

XXXIII.  A clever adaptation of the parable of the Samaritan, conceived and executed in the spirit of a modern poet like A.H.  Clough.

XXXIV.  Line 4:  the hypocritical priest makes profit by preaching for holiness what is really hurtful to the soul.  Lines 5-11 contrast the acknowledged sinners with the covert and crafty pretenders to virtue.  Line 8:  I have ventured to correct the punctuation.  D’Ancona reads: