The present scene was captured a few months following Charles’ departure to Venice, which had been in the winter of 1697. His mission was partially to negotiate the release of detained seamen, but no doubt he would have also been prepared to ensure the upkeep of Anglo-Venetian relations in general. Unfortunately, his negotiationswould fail, and Charles soon returned from Venice and took up a position of Ambassador to France, instead (in 1699). Later, in 1707, Charles would return to Venice as Ambassador, and this occasion was also recorded by Luca

Carlevarijs .

This journey has been recorded in a series of letters from and to Charles, published in Memoirs of affairs of state: containing letters written by Ministers employed in Christian Cole’s Memoirs of affairs of state: containing letters written by Ministers employed in foreign negotiations from the year 1697, to the latter end of 1708 (1733). In some of these, it is revealed that the first audience of the Earl of Manchester was not in fact on January 25th, but on February 5th, as bad weather and organisational issues had caused a delay. Charles goes into great depth about how the audience progressed, and how he was taken to the Island of St Spirito before returning to the mainland (a procession that Carlevarijs’ 1707 painting depicts). In the painting, Charles himself can be seen to the Doge’s right, identified by the fact that he is wearing a hat as was customary for ambassadors at such audiences. It can be assumed that those who are not wearing either red or blue gowns, largely in the foreground of the composition, are figures involved with Charles, and not members of the council.

The Doge at this time was Silvestro Valier (1630-1700). Valier was known for his love of celebration, something that he had demonstrated when he first became the Doge four years before this audience (1694). Though the ceremony for appointing a dogaressa had been abolished in 1645, he had brought this back for his own wife, Elisabetta Querini (1628-1709). Such a nature may explain why this particular depiction of an audience seems to have more characters than others, which can be much emptier, more serious, and true to the fact that this event was something of a political nicety.