When_did_Machiavelli_Write_Mandragola.pdf

7/17/2019 When_did_Machiavelli_Write_Mandragola.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/whendidmachiavelliwritemandragolapdf 1/11

When Did Machiavelli Write Mandragola?Author(s): Sergio Bertelli

Reviewed work(s):Source: Renaissance Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 3 (Autumn, 1971), pp. 317-326Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Renaissance Society of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2859587 .

Accessed: 11/09/2012 14:28

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press and Renaissance Society of America are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,

preserve and extend access to Renaissance Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rsa

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2859587?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2859587?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rsa

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress



WhenDid Machiavelli

Write

Mandragola?*

by

SERGIO BERTELLI

T

HE

datingof La

Mandragola

soneof themostdifficultroblemsn

Machiavelli

cholarship.

oberto

Ridolfi,

irst

n

his

biography

f

Machiavelli

(I954)

and

more

recently

n an

essay

n La

Bibliofilia

(i962),'

proposed

a new

and

apparently

definitive

solution;

the

comedy

must

have been written between

January

and

February

518,

for

the

marriage

of

Lorenzo

de' Medici the

younger,

in

the short

space

of one

month,

and

performed

soon

after,

on

February

I6,

1518.

Infact,we havevery few andvery late recordsabout theperformance

of La

Mandragola

nd

the text

of

the

comedy

has

come

down to us

only

through

an

anonymous

edition

and

one

manuscript.

A firstreference

to La

Mandragola

ccurred

in a

letter

of

April

26,

1520,

written

by

Battistadella

Palla

to Machiavelli

rom

Rome:

'A

S. ta

Maria

in

Porticu

[i.e.,

Cardinal

BernardoDovizi

da

Bibbiena]

feci

la

imbasciatadel

suo

Calandroet vostro Messer

Nicia.'2

A

second

reference

s that

by

Marin

Sanudo.

In his

Diari,

under the

dateFebruary13,

1522,

he writes: 'Inquestasera,a li Crosechieri o re-

citata

una

altracomedia

in

prosa,per

Cherca

uchese

e

compagni,

di

un

certo

vechio

dotor fiorentino che

havea

una

moglie,

non

potea

far

fioli

etc.

Vi fu

assaissima

ente

con

intermedii

di Zuan

Pollo

e

altri

bufoni,

e la

scena

era si

piena

di

zente,

che

non fu

fato

il

quinto

atto,

perche

non

si

pote

farlo,

tanto era

il

gran

numero

di

le

persone.'3

A

third reference

can be

found

in

Giorgio

Vasari'sVita di Bastiano

chiamato

Aristotele

da

San

Gallo.4

Aristotele,

Vasari

says, painted

the

scenery

or

a

comedy

in

a

year

he

does

not

specify

and

adds:

non molto

tempo

dopo

alla

porta

San

Friano

ece

Aristoteleun'altra

prospettiva

n

*

This is the text

of

a

lecture delivered

at

the Renaissance

Seminar,

Chicago,

Ill.,

Octo-

ber

21,

I970.

I must

thank

Mrs.

Ruth Rubinstein

who

revised

my English

text,

in that

peaceful

place

that

is

the Institute

for

Advanced

Study,

Princeton,

N.J.

1

Vita di Niccolo

Machiavelli

Roma,

I954);

'Composizione,

rappresentazione prima

edizione

della

Mandragola,'

in

La

Bibliofilia,

64

(I962),

285-300:

reprinted

in

Studi sulle

commedieelMachiavelliPisa,I968).

2

Epistolario,

ed.

by

S.

Bertelli

(Milan,

I969),

no.

234,

p.

337.

There is no reason

to con-

nect those

words

with

the statement

by

Paolo

Giovio,

in

his

E

ogia

illustrium

virorum,

hat

a

performance

was

prepared

for

Pope

Leo

X

in

an

indeterminate

year.

3

Diari,

xxxn

(Venice, I892),

col.

458.

4

Le vite

.

,

ed.

by

Della

Pergola-Grassi-Previtali

(Milan,

I964),

p.

297.

317



RENAISSANCE

QUARTERLY

casa

diJacopo

Fornaciaio

per

un'altra

ommedia

el

medesimo

utore,'

i.e.,

for La

Clizia,

hemostrecent

omedyby

Machiavelli,

hich

was

performed

njacopo

Falconetti's

illa

outside

Florence,

ear he

gate

of

San Frediano, onJuly I3, I525.5 Since La Clizia was written at the re-

quest

of

Falconetti,

we must

assume that

La

Mandragola

ot

only

was

written

earlier,6

but also that the

performance

Vasariremembered

must

fall

in

the

period

between

I524

and

1525.

Another Venetian

performance

s

recorded

in a

letter sent

by

Gio-

vanni

Manetti

to

Machiavelli,

on

February

28,

1525/26

(Florentine

style):

'Per

adempiere

el desideriode

Vostra

Signoria

de l'intendere

del

recitarede la sua comedia

de

Calimaco,

fo

intenderea Vostra

Signoria

quella

eser recitata

con tanto hordine

et buon modo'

that it

prevailed

over another

performance

of

the same

evening,

an

Italian

ranslation f

Plautus'

Menaechmi.7

In

the same

year,

1526,

Francesco

Guicciardini

rganized

a

perform-

ance

of La

Mandragola

n Faenza

and

for

that occasionMachiavelli

wrote

the

songs

that are

inserted

n

the

comedy.8

All these

references

belong

to the

period

after

1520,

and all

concern

theperformanceof thecomedy, but that does not determine hedate of

its

composition.

The

way

in

which Roberto Ridolfi arrives

at

a

precise

date for the

composition

of

La

Mandragola

s not

easy

to

accept,

how-

ever. The text

of the

comedy

comes

to us

only

through

a

single

manu-

script

and a

small

book,

printed

anonymously,

without

indications

of

where, when,

and

by

whom

it was

published.

The

type,

as Ridolfi

shows,

is

Roman,

I I

Q/u,

'probabilmente

disegnati

nel

penultimo

decennio

del

secolo

XV'9

and,

in

fact,

the

book was listed

by

L.

Hain in

his

Repertoriumibliographicum.10

he

frontispiece

shows Chiron

play-

ing

a

viola.

Below,

in

the

space

eft

empty

by

the ornamental

rame,

the

title: Comedia i Callimaco: t di Lucretia

asbeen inserted.

On

the

top,

in

the middle

of

the ornamental

rame,

six small

and

rough

blots

ap-

5

For this

performance

see also D.

Giannotti,

Della

repubblicaiorentina,

n

Opere,

a

(Pisa,

I819),

I89-I90.

6

The

problem

arose n

the

chronologypresented

y

GuidoMazzoni n

editing

Machia-

velli's works

(Florence,

930).

Mazzoni did not

see

that

in La

Clizia there

s a

very

clear

reference

o

La

Mandragola

7

Epistolario,

no.

278,

p.

434.

8

See in

Epistolario,

Machiavelli

to

Guicciardini,

August

17, 1525,

no.

270,

p.

418;

Oc-

tober

I6-20,

1525,

no.

273,

p.

424;

Guicciardini

to

Machiavelli,

December

26,

1525,

no.

276,

pp.

430-43I;

Machiavelli

to

Guicciardini,

January

3,

1525/26,

no.

277,

p.

432.

9

Ridolfi, Studi,

p.

28.

10

Stuttgart

and

Paris,

1826-32,

no.

104I6.

318



WHEN

DID

MACHIAVELLI

WRITE

MANDRAGOLA?

319

pear.

Ridolfi

hought

hat

theseblots

attempted

o

represent

he

Me-

dicean

arms,

he

six

balls.

f

so,

the

printing

musthave

beendoneafter

the

fall

of

the

Republic

nd

he

return f

the

Medici,

n

1512.

We

would

have then a terminus ost quem

(September

1512)

and a terminusantequem

in

the letter of Battista

della Palla

(April

I520).

But,

according

to

Ri-

dolfi,

it

is

possible

to

determinemore

exactly

the

year

of

composition.

In

Act

iii,

scene

3,

an old

woman

asksFra

Timoteo:

'Credetevoi che

il

Turco

passiquest'anno

n

Italia?'

Ridolfi

quotes

Guicciardini nd

Cambi,

in

order

to

prove

that in

1518

the Turks

resumed heir raidson

the

Ital-

ian

peninsula

and

one

might

also

add

Bartolomeo

Cerretani's

eference

in

his

Dialogo opra

e

mutationi

igovernoeguite

n Firenzeabout the fear

of Turkish

naval

attacks

n

that

year).11

But Kenneth M.

Setton,

in a

recently

published

article,

has

shown

that

'during

the

reign

of

Leo

X

there were few

periods

when

one was

allowed to

forget

the

Turkish

threat.'12The

question

could

be

posed

at

any

moment,

in Leo's time.

Nevertheless,

Ridolfi-because

in

the same

year

of

I518

the

marriage

of

Lorenzo

de' Medicithe

younger

was

celebrated-argues

that

the

ac-

tion

of

the

comedy

took

place

in

a

winter

period,

more

precisely

in

January-February.Lorenzo'smarriagewas announcedon January

25

and

he left

Florence

or

France

n

the

middle

of

February.

f La Mandra-

gola,

like

II

Principe,

was

written

by

Machiavelli

n

orderto invite

Me-

dicean

patronage,

the

comedy

would

have been

written,

and

instantly

performed,

between

January

25

and

at

least

February

10

(if

we allow

the

actors

to

learn

their

parts ).

This

complicated

hypothesis

about

the

origin

of such a

masterpiece

was

presented

by

Ridolfi

on

two

different

occasions,

first

in

I954

and

again

n

I962.

Beforethe

publication

of this

last

essay,

T.

A.

Sumberg

n

The

Journal

f

Politics

and

A. Parronchin

La

Bibliofilia13

nterpreted

he

comedy

in

political

terms.

According

to

both

Sumberg

and

Parronchi,

Callimaco

was Lorenzo

de'

Medici the

younger,

Nicia

was Soderini

(on

the

grounds

of

his

political

sterility),

Lucrezia

was

identified

as

Florence.

In

fact,

Machiavelli

proved

himself to be a

perfect

courtier

Parronchi,

or

his

part,

quotes

Alfonsina

Orsini,

mother

of

Lorenzo,

on the festivities n honor of her son'swedding. In a letter to the papal

11

Manuscript

in

Florence,

Biblioteca

Nazionale,

MS.II.I.io6,

f.

44.

12

'Pope

Leo

X

and the

TurkishPeril,'

Penrose

Memorial

Lecture,

Proceedingsf

the

American

Philosophical

Society,

I

I3 (1969),

377.

13

'La

Mandragola.

An

Interpretation,'Journal

of

Politics,

23

(I96I),

320-340;

Parronchi,

'La

prima

rappresentazione

ella

Mandragola.

l modello

dell'apparato.

L'allegoria,'

n

La

Bibliofilia,

64

(I962),

37-86.



RENAISSANCE

QUARTERLY

secretary,

Ser

Giovanni

Lapucci,

Alfonsina wrote that on the second

day

of the festivities

a

comedy,

Falargo,

was

performed;

this

comedy

is

unknown

to

us,

and

its

title

has

no

recognizablemeaning.

But Parron-

chi, without any evidence,identified t with the Comedian versiwhich

was once attributedto Machiavelli, but is

ascribed

now

to

Leonardo

Strozzi.14

There were

three

days

of

festivities

and Alfonsina

tellsus that

on

the

third

day

another

comedy

was to

be

performed;

Parronchi

ashly

concluded

that

this

comedy

must have

been

La

Pisana,

written

by

the

same

Strozzi,

and

that there must

have been

another

comedy,

on

the

first of

the three

days

as well.

This

comedy

must

have been

(and

he

affirms his againwithout any evidence)

La

Mandragola.

t this

point

Parronchidiscovers he

sceneries

of

all the three comedies:

for

LaMan-

dragola

n

idealized

square

(now

in

the

ducal

palace

of

Urbino),

which

he

assigns

o

Franciabigio

?),

but

which

has

generally

been

attributed

o

Piero della Francescaor to Luciano Laurana

for

its

unearthly

tran-

quility;15

or the two comedies

of Lorenzo

Strozzi two studies

n

per-

spective

attributed

o

Rodolfo

Ghirlandaio,

ne

in

Berlin

for

the

scenery

of La

Pisana,

the

other

in

the Walter's

Gallery

in

Baltimore

for

the

sceneryof Falargo a comedy not only unknown, but whose title does

not

indicate ts

subject ).

According

to

Parronchi,

he

perspective

own-

scape

now in

Berlin

provides

the

scenery

for La

Pisana

because

t shows

a

square acing

the

sea,

and so

the

two islands

on

the line

of

the

horizon

cannot be

anything

else,

but

...

Capraia

and

Gorgona,

in

accordance

with Dante

There is little

or

no substance

n

Parronchi's

proposals:

no

producer

could utilize

for

Machiavelli's

omedy

a

perspective

ike

that

in

Urbino,

which is

quite

alien

to

the

action

of

La

Mandragola.

ut

Parronchi's

ar-

guments

are

interesting

because the

author,

in

his desire

to

support

Ridolfi's

theory

arrives,

n

fact,

at

a

different

date

for

the

first

perform-

ance.

In

his

reply

to

Parronchi,

Ridolfi

(who

was the

publisher

of

Par-

14

The Strozzi's

autograph

is in

Florence,

Biblioteca

Mediceo-Laurenziana,

MS. Ash-

burnham

579.

A

copy

in Machiavelli's

hand,

with the

final words:

'Ego

Barlachia

re-

censui,'

is

in

the same

manuscript

as

Arte

della

guerra,

Florence,

Biblioteca

Nazionale,

Magliabechi

vmiii.

45

bis.

15

The

attribution to

Francesco

di

Cristofano

called

'il

Franciabigio'

(Florence,

I482-

1525)

is essential for Parronchi's

purpose,

but

is

quite unacceptable,

since

Franciabigio

was a

mannerist

painter

and

the

Urbino

painting

shows a

rationalist

perspective typical

of

the

humanist

Quattrocento.

Against

Parronchi see H.

Saalman,

'Baltimore

and Urbino

panels:

Carlo

Rosselli,'

Burlington

Magazine,July

I968,

pp.

376-38i.

Rosselli,

whom Saal-

man

proves

to

have

done

these perspectives,

was

born in

Florence,

in

I439,

and

died in

1507.

320



WHEN

DID

MACHIAVELLI WRITE MANDRAGOLA?

321

ronchi's

ssay),

estated is

view

that

the

comedy

was

performed and

written)

in

the middle

of

February

I518.

But

Parronchi's

argument

shows

how

the

hypothesis

of

a

comedy

written

for Lorenzo

de' Medici

the younger can be utilized differently.

In

any

case,

two different

opinions concerning

the

day

when the

comedy

was

first

performed

are

possible.

Both

are

supportedby

two

strongly

connected

elements:

(i)

the Medicean balls

on

the

top

of

the

ornament,

in

the

printed

book;

(2)

the

old woman

speaking

about

Turkishraids.

I

emphasize

(as

Fredi

Chiappelli

before

me

did)16

hat

the

fear

of

Turkish

raidswas constant

n

Italythroughout

the

Middle

Ages

andthe Renaissance.

Admittedly,

it

may

be

right

to

say (as

Ridolfi

did)

that 'mai

il

Turco

dette

tanta

poca preoccupazione'

as at the

age

of

Bayazi'd

II

(May

20,

I48I-April

1512),

but the old

woman's

question

may

refer

to

the active

reign

of

Leo

X

(March

II,

1513-December

I,

152I)

as Kenneth

M.

Setton has

proved,

and

even to different

imes,

as

I

shall

suggest

presently.

A

few

years

after

Ridolfi had

established he

chronology

of

La

Man-

dragola,

is

attention

was

drawn

to

a

note

in

A.

Simioni's

description

of

manuscriptshat have a connection with Lorenzoil Magnificoand are

preserved

in

the Biblioteca Mediceo-Laurenziana.17

ManuscriptLau-

renziano-Rediano

129

contains

La

Mandragola.

On

the

top

of

the

first

page

of

the

copy

of

the

comedy,

there are the

words:

'Jhesus,

I519.

Commedia

facta

per

Niccholo

Machiavegli.'

It is

impossible, argued

Ridolfi,

that

in

Florence,

one

year

after the

supposed

edition,

anyone

would

copy

a

comedy

he

could

easily buy:

'Una

volta

messa

a

stampa,

cioe

subito

dopo composta

o

subito

dopo

recitata,

non

c'era

ragione

di

fame

copie

a

penna:

chi la

volle

non

ebbe

a durar

fatica ne

a

fame

durare,

per

averla,

potendola

avere

con

quei

pochi spiccioli

che sl fatte

edizioni

popolari

allora costavano.'18Ridolfi

suggests

that

the

edition

was

printed

afterthe Redi

copy

was

made.

But,

in

this

way,

he

destroys

what he

had

proposed

previously,

.e.,

that

the

comedy

was written and

printed

for

the

marriage

of

Lorenzo. Since the

reference

to the

Turk

can

be used

only

to

support

the

hypothetical

performance

in

1518,

it

seemsto have lost its value.

The

printed

edition

of

the

comedy

has,

in

fact,

some

curious

features.

16

F.

Chiapelli,

'Sulla

composizione

della

Mandragola,'

L'Approdo

Letterario

(I965),

pp.

84-97.

17

Lorenzo il

Magnifico,

Opere,

ed.

by

A.

Simioni,

ii

(Bari,

I914),

333.

18

Studi,

p.

92.



RENAISSANCE

QUARTERLY

Not

only

does

it

present

so

many

mistakes

as to confirm to

us its inde-

pendence

of the

manuscript

Laurenziano-Rediano,

ut

the book was

published

anonymouslyduring,

we must

suppose,

he author's

ife.

This

is odd. We mustrememberhow angryMachiavelliandVespucciwere

when

they

discovered he

piratic

printing

of

the first

Decennale,

ot be-

cause

the

unauthorizedbook

could

damage

the

sale

of

the Decennale

printed

by

Agostino

Vespucci

da

Terranova,

but because

of

the

errors

due

to

the

usage

of bad

type:

'..

. non vi

staro

a

dire,'

wrote

Agostino

to

Machiavelli

on

March

I4,

15o5/06,

'la

ribaldacosa

che

le sono: al tutto

alla

giuntesca,

sanza

spatio,

e

quinternucci

piccin

piccini,

sanza

bianco

dinanzi

o

drieto,

lettera

caduca,

scorrecta

n

piu

luoghi,

come

in

questa

mettero

una notula19

et notativi dentro tutti

gli

errori....'2

Could

these

men have

approved

an edition

of La

Mandragola

hich was erro-

neous

if not

corrupt?

Could

they

have

permitted

the

edition without

the

author's

name,

just

when

the author intended

to

offer

his

work

to

Lorenzo?

It

seems

more

probable

that the

copy

offeredto

Lorenzo

was

that

of

the

Redi

manuscript,

n

which

the

works

of

his

grandfather

could

be

found

together

with the

comedy

of

Machiavelli,

whose name

isclearlystated.We mustremember hatLorenzodiedon May 4, 1519.

The

manuscript

could have been

prepared

n

the first

four

months

of

that

year.

In

any

event,

in

my opinion,

it

would

be

necessary

o

study

the

whole

manuscript,

and

the ties

between the

copy

of La

Mandragola

and the

other sheets

on which

works

of Lorenzo

l

Magnifico

are

copied.

Ridolfi,

in

his

essay

of

I965,

speaks

about

'quella

rozza armamedicea

inclusa

estemporaneamente

a mano

inesperta

nel

fregio

del frontes-

pizio,'21but

can we be sure that

the

fontispiece

was

engraved

for the

edition

of La

Mandragola?

he

attempt

to

design

the Medicean

balls

(if

the blots

are

those)

was made

by

an

unskilled

hand,

but was it made

on

the

occasion

of

the

Mandragola

dition?

Ridolfi is unable

to

prove

this.

If

the

edition

was

a

pirated

one,

following, perhaps,

a

manuscript

used

for

a

performance,

printing

could

have taken

placeany

time.

I am dubious

about

the identification

of

the blots with the Medicean

balls.

But it

is

Ridolfi who contradicts

himself,when,

on

the

one

hand,

he

asserts hat

Machiavellidid not supervisethe edition ('Un indizio che l'edizione

non fu

promossa

dall'autore

che forse

egli

la

vide soltanto

a cose

fatte,

19

This notula

s now in

the

manuscriptBargagli,

Florence,

Biblioteca

Nazionale,

N.A.

I004.

20

Epistolario,

no.

93,

p.

I25.

21

Studi,

pp.

68-69.

322



WHEN

DID MACHIAVELLI

WRITE MANDRAGOLA?

323

ci

sembra

l

titolo

impresso

n

fronte

alla commedia.

.

.')22

and,

on the

other

hand,

suggests

that

the edition

was

a

presentation

opy

to a

mem-

ber of

the

Medici

family.

All these questionsare furthercomplicatedby the contents of the

Prologue.

There

we read:

'Non

e

il

compositor

di

molta

fama

/

Pur

se

voi

non riderete

Egli

e contento

di

pagarvi

l

vino....

It seems

to me

difficult to

accept

that Machiavelli,

in

I518,

could call

himself

an un-

known writer.

Can

Machiavelli

be

admitting

to the

audience,

n

1518,

that

he is not

famous?

A

few

months

earlier,

on December

I7,

15

I7,

he

wrote

to

Lodovico

Alamanni,

protesting

against

Lodovico

Ariosto

who

forgot

him

in

his

Orlando

urioso:

Io

ho

letto

a

questi

di

Orlando

urioso

dello Ariosto

et

veramente

l

poema

e

bello

tutto,

et

in

di

molti

luoghi

e mirabile. Se

si truova costi

raccomandatemi

lui,

et

ditegli

che

io

mi

dolgo

solo

che,

havendo

ricordatotanti

poeti,

che m'habbi

lasciato

n-

dietro

come

un

cazzo,

et

ch'egli

ha

fatto

a

me

quello

in

sul suo

Orlando,

che

io non faro

a

lui

in

sul

mio

Asino.. . '23

On

the

otherhand,

in

the

same

Prologue,

Machiavelli

begs

the

audi-

ence's

pardon:

'E

se

questa

materia

non

e

degna

/

Per esser

pur

leg-

gieri / D'uom che voglia parersaggio e grave / Scusatelocon questo,

che

s'ingegna

/

Con

questi

vani

pensieri

Fareel suo

tristo

tempo piu

soave

/

Perche

altrove

non have

/

Dove voltare el viso.... .'; this decla-

ration

refersus to the times

of

Machiavelli's

mission to

the

'Repubblica

degli

zoccoli' and of

that

famous and

touching

letter

of

Francesco

Guicciardini,

of

May

I8,

1521: 'Machiavello

carissimo.

Quando

io

leggo

i

vostri

titoli

di

oratore

di

Repubblica

et

di

fratiet conside ro con

quanti

re,

duchi

et

principi

voi

havete

altre volte

negociato,

io

mi

ri-

cordo

di

Lysandro,

a chi

doppo

tante

victorie

fu

dato la

cura di

dis-

tribuire

a

carne

a

quelli

medesimi soldati

a chi

si

gloriosamente

haveva

comandato....'24

We

might

assume

hat the

Prologue,

like an archaeo-

logical

excavation,

shows us two different

periods

n which

it

was writ-

ten:

and

that

Machiavellirewrote the introduction

of

the

comedy

for

a

later

performance,

perhaps

n

the

same

way

as

he

wrote the

songs

for

his friend

Guicciardini,

or the

performance

of

Faenza,

n

1526.

Guido

Mazzoni, in his absurdchronology of Machiavelli'scomedies,25sug-

gested

that

the entire

Prologue

of

La

Mandragola

as

written

in

a later

22

Studi,

p.

7I.

23

Epistolario,

o.

229,

pp.

371-372.

24

Epistolario,

o.

246,

p.

39I.

25

Opere complete,

ed.

by

Mazzoni-Casella

(Florence,

I930),

p.

xlvi.



WHEN

DID

MACHIAVELLI

WRITE

MANDRAGOLA? 325

Against

the thesis

of

such an

early dating

of

La

Mandragola

ne

could

observe that

no

mention

ot

it can

be found

in

I'vacnhaveli's

correspond-

ence

or

in other

records,

until

April

I52o-carnival

I52I/22

(cf. supra).

But thisargument s equallyvalid againstthe hypothesisof a perform-

ance

in

Florence

n

the winterof

1518.

It remains

strange

hat

a

report

of

a Venetian

performance,

or

example,

reaches

us

only

through

Sanudo

and not

through

Machiavelli's

correspondence.

Since Machiavelli

was

in

Venice

in

August-September

1525

for

the first

and

last

time,

we

do

not

know

whether the

comedy

was

performed

with

permission

of

the

author

or

without

it. The

first

hypothesis

would

imply

that

many

letters

were sent to and

from

Florence,

to

arrange

he

performance,

and that

not one of these has survived.The second

implies

that the

comedy

was

so well known

that

it

was

easy

to

possess

a

copy

of

it,

in

print

or manu-

script,

even outside

Florence.

But,

yet

again,

no

evidence

of such

wide-

spread

renown

exists.

At

this

point,

I

would

like

to draw

attentionto

another

passage

which

might suggest

still another

dating.

In

the first

act,

scene

2,

we

have

the

following

dialogue:

NICIA:... io

sono

statoa Pisae a

Livorno,

oh va'

LIGURIO: Voi

dovete aver veduto la carrucola

di

Pisa.

NICIA:

Tu

vuo'

dire

a

Verrucola.

LIGURIO:

Ah

si,

la

Verrucola.

A Livorno

vedesti

voi

el mare?

We have here

a

pun

on

the

word

'carrucola,'

a

pulley,

and the name

of

the fortress

on the summit of

the Verrucano

mountain,

two

or

three

miles from Pisa.

But,

as

it

is

easy

to

understand,

he

fortress,

built

on

the

highestpointof themountain, s so farfrom Pisa that it would be strange

to ask a man

referring

o

ajourney

to Pisa

if

he

has seen the Verrucola-

whereas two

fortresses,

Cittadella

and

Stampace,

were

in

Pisa and

easy

to

see

on a

visit to

Pisa.

The

question

is without connection with

the

following,

i.e.,

if

it

is

possible

to see the sea at

Leghorn.

Of

course,

the

answer

s

positive

because

Leghorn

s on

the

coast;

but it

is

quite impos-

sible

to

see from Pisa the

fortress

of

the Verrucola.The fortress

ell into

Florentinehands

n

June

1503.

We have

a

description

of a

visit

of

Leo-

nardo

da

Vinci

to

it,

in

an

unpublished

etter

by

Pier Francesco

Tosin-

ghi,

Ex

castrisfelicibus,

nJune

21

of

that

year,

to

inspect

the fortress

by

request

of

the

Florentine

Republic:

Lionardoda

Vinci venne

lui

e

compagni

et

li

facemo vedere

tutto,

al

quale

ci

pare

che

la

Verrucola

li sia

piaciuta

assai: et che l'habbi bene

ghustata:

et

apresso

dice haver

When_did_Machiavelli_Write_Mandragola.pdf

Documents

Transcript of When_did_Machiavelli_Write_Mandragola.pdf