I noticed a couple of people on the Web have translated the first word on the last line as gratiam and gratias, but the scribe doesn't write "t" like that. The "t" in "...talia..." has a distinctively long top bar, as does the one in "teneba".
So it looks to me like this says g ra [ligature] ci [ligature] a s (gracias) with Spanish spelling (I learned yesterday that there are many Spanish words in the Veneto dialect so perhaps this also happened in old Italian), rather than gratiam/gratias.
I know the next word has been interpreted as "tibi" which is what it would be in Latin, but this isn't strictly Latin, it's transitional between Italian and Latin and whatever dialects were used at the time. Is it possible this is also "c"? I'm not certain, but it's strange that a scribe would change a "t" that much, even if it's a ligature. The "e" ligature with the big swooped loop is not uncommon (they were still doing that in the 17th century), but that style of "t" usually retains the top bar even if combined with other letters.
It would be nice to see a larger block of text to see how the "c" shape was written by this scribe.
So it looks to me like this says g ra [ligature] ci [ligature] a s (gracias) with Spanish spelling (I learned yesterday that there are many Spanish words in the Veneto dialect so perhaps this also happened in old Italian), rather than gratiam/gratias.
I know the next word has been interpreted as "tibi" which is what it would be in Latin, but this isn't strictly Latin, it's transitional between Italian and Latin and whatever dialects were used at the time. Is it possible this is also "c"? I'm not certain, but it's strange that a scribe would change a "t" that much, even if it's a ligature. The "e" ligature with the big swooped loop is not uncommon (they were still doing that in the 17th century), but that style of "t" usually retains the top bar even if combined with other letters.
It would be nice to see a larger block of text to see how the "c" shape was written by this scribe.