‘It will be assumed that whoever is the main speaker in the dialogue will be expressing the views of the author.’ This statement of Sigonio's, with its calm assumption that every dialogue will be ruled by a princeps, is a good indication of how far the dialogue of the later sixteenth century had travelled since the relatively ‘democratic’ model of Castiglione's day. The chapters which follow will be an attempt to account for this change, in the light of contemporary developments in cultural politics and intellectual practice.

Before embarking on this more specific task, however, it may be useful first to trace a brief history of the dialogue form in the Italian Cinquecento. That such a history is needed cannot be in doubt. Despite a recent revival of critical interest in the theory and practice of the Cinquecento dialogue, there has been no very convincing attempt, to date, to trace the history of the genre throughout the century. Trajectories have been tentatively proposed, changes and turning-points identified; but no single study so far has taken account of a sufficiently broad and representative range of examples of the genre to produce much more than summary and partial conclusions.

What follows is by no means intended as an attempt at a comprehensive survey of Italian Cinquecento dialogue production.