The Prince and Mandragola: Machiavellian Principles in Literature and Drama
However, his career soon took a turn for the worse: when the Medici returned to power in 1512, he was dismissed. A year later, he was imprisoned and tortured for his alleged involvement in a plot against the Medici. He retired to his country home, where he wrote most of his major works, and humbled himself before the Medici in a desperate attempt to regain office. When the republic was reestablished in 1527, he was restored to some degree of favor, but was deeply mistrusted by many of the republicans. He died later that year, disenchanted and bitter.
While Machiavelli’s story is not a happy one, he used his experiences (both positive and negative) to his advantage through his writings. The Prince, written in 1513, observes the political scene surrounding him and describes an idealistic vision of an Italian leader who would drive out all foreign forces who were competing for power in . He teaches that the lessons of the past (particularly Roman history) should be applied to the present, and that the attainment and effective use of power may necessitate unethical and undesirable methods – hence the phrase “the ends justify the means.”
Machiavelli’s play Mandragola (written sometime between 1504 and 1518) is the quintessential classical comedy. The plot centers around a wealthy doctor of law, Nicia, and his beautiful wife Lucrezia. Callimaco, a young man, hears about Lucrezia’s beauty, and decides that he wants to become her lover. He learns of the couple’s inability to produce a child, so (with the help of his servant Ligurio), he disguises himself as a doctor and informs Nicia that he can produce a potion from the mandrake plant that, if taken by Lucrezia, will enable her to conceive. However, as Callimaco warns Nicia, the first man to have sexual intercourse with her will die from the effects of the potion. Luckily, Callimaco knows a man who will consent to have sex with her and bear the punishment of death. Nicia consents, and (along with Frate Timoteo) persuades Lucrezia to do the same. Callimaco disguises himself yet again, and is able to have his way with her.
It would not seem readily apparent that these two Machiavellian works, The Prince and Mandragola, would be closely linked. However, much of the terminology that Machiavelli uses in The Prince recurs in Mandragola. Many of these terms can be applied to Callimaco, not only showing how Callimaco is a good “prince,” but how Machiavelli’s expressions can apply to comedy.
Two terms comprise much of the force of The Prince: Fortuna and Virtu. Virtu is translated in many different ways; “power” and “strength of character” are the most common, but can refer to the strength of a nation as well as an individual’s strength of body or mind. Machiavelli’s Fortuna is not the stereotypical goddess who controls human affairs, but rather a creator of opportunity who allows for joint control: “I think it may be true that Fortune governs half more or less of our actions, but that even so she leaves the other half more or less in our power to control.”[1] With this pair of governing principles, Machiavelli gives us a way of describing the human world that allows for freedom and personal choice.
In the opening scene of Mandragola, we already see Fortuna at work. Callimaco describes to his servant Siro why they moved from Paris to his native Florence: “But fortune, deeming no doubt that things were going too well for me, saw to it that a certain Cammillo Calfucci came to Paris.”[2] Calfucci told Callimaco of a woman, Lucrezia, who is so virtuous and beautiful that Callimaco is instantly infatuated and can’t help but return to Florence.
Machiavelli inserts the idea of Virtu in the same scene, when Callimaco says that, against the odds, he will try to fulfill his desire:
Nothing is ever so desperate that there is no ground for hope. Even if the hope is vain and foolish, a man’s will and desire to achieve what he wants will make it seem not to be. [3]
Demonstrating the Machiavellian principle of “do or die,” this is reminiscent of the second-to-last chapter of The Prince, where he explains how human affairs are ruled by both Fortuna and Virtu. If Fortuna seems not to be favorable, a man has to create his own destiny – that is, if his Virtu will let him. So, the question for Callimaco is: will he have enough Virtu to overcome Lucrezia’s virtue (not to mention any other problems that Fortuna may provide him with)?
Another term used throughout The Prince is Occasione, opportunity. In the final chapter of the book, Machiavelli states the importance of Occasione, saying that the time has come for a prince to stand up and rescue from the barbarians. He also comments on how an Occasione, the more difficult the better, can bring out a character’s Virtu. In Mandragola, this is the first problem, since Lucrezia sees very few people and rarely leaves the house. An Occasione needs to be created. For this purpose Callimaco has the support of an important character to any Prince: the advisor. His advisor is Ligurio, about whom we shall hear more later.
The way to Lucrezia is through Nicia, and Nicia’s weakness is his desire to have children. He fully blames his wife’s sterility; any mention of impotence is immediately denied. Callimaco is to pose as a doctor who can help in this matter, and in order to do so, Ligurio and Callimaco take The Prince’s advice: appearance can be more important than reality, and sometimes one must stretch the truth in order to achieve their goals. The Prince
�need not necessarily have all the good qualities�, but he should certainly appear to have them� He should appear to be compassionate, faithful to his word, guileless, and devout. And, indeed, he should be. But his disposition should be such that, if he needs to be the opposite, he knows how.[4]
Callimaco, who is educated, appears to Nicia to have a doctor’s credentials based entirely on the fact that he rattles off some Latin phrases. Nicia is all the more beguiled, because his recognition of Callimaco’s credentials implies also that he is qualified to judge such credentials:
CALLIMACO: In order to gratify your desire, I have to know the cause of your wife’s sterility. There are several possible causes. causae sterilitatis sunt: aut in semine, aut in matrice, aut in instrumentis seminariis, aut in virga, aut in causa extrinseca.
NICIA (aside): This is the most worthy man I have ever met![5]
As if this wasn’t enough, Callimaco has yet another Machiavellian trick up his sleeve: the exemplum.
Act II of Mandragola features what we see throughout The Prince: the use of the example, of experience. In the dedication to Lorenzo de Medici, Machiavelli tells of his “knowledge of the actions of great men, acquired through long experience of contemporary affairs and extended reading in antiquity.” This plays a large part in gaining Nicia’s trust:
CALLIMACO: You must understand this: there is nothing more certain to make a woman conceive than to give her a potion made with mandrake root. That is something I have tested half a dozen times, and always found true. If it were not for that, the Queen of France and countless other Princesses of that realm would be barren.
NICIA: You don’t say![6]
Callimaco uses the “famous example,” thereby establishing his authority, and a little later on Nicia himself uses the same exemplum as a way to convince himself to follow through with the plan even after Callimaco explains the catch: that the first one to sleep with Lucrezia after she takes the potion will die.
In much the same way that Machiavelli demonstrates in The Prince that he believes that corrupt means are justified by a successful end, in Mandragola he indicates that fraud is acceptable as long as it furthers a worthwhile cause. Almost every character in the play uses fraud. The most obvious example is Nicia, since throughout the entire play, down to the very last scene, someone is tricking him at all times. Even his wife, who at the beginning seems like the only virtuous character, at the end takes advantage of his stupidity and plans on fooling him with her affair with Callimaco. However, Lucrezia is also a victim of fraud. She is led to believe, along with Nicia, that the mandrake root potion is the sure way to be able to conceive. Against her own moral objections, she agrees, but only as the result of intense persuasion by her mother Sostrata and Frate Timoteo.
It’s arguable whether Sostrata is personally guilty of fraud; it can instead be said that she isn’t very concerned as to whether the arrangement is fraudulent or not. She is willing to overlook whatever is necessary in order to get Lucrezia to do what she wants, which is classically Machiavellian. Ironically, Frate Timoteo is guilty of fraud as well: Ligurio and Callimaco think they’re fooling him, but Timoteo is smart enough to see through their plan and make sure he benefits as well. He is also a willing co-conspirator in the fraud over Lucrezia. He knows what he’s convincing her to do (to commit adultery), and relies on her trust in him as her confessor to persuade her. As he is so interested in financial gains for himself, he ignores any moral obligations he might have to end the deception. As he says to Lucrezia:
�As to the conscience, you have to take this general principle: that where there is a certain good and an uncertain evil, one should never leave that good for fear of that evil�Besides this, the end has to be looked to in all things�[7]
As all of this shows, the entire plot revolves around which character is shrewder than the next. Each person is driven by their desires: Nicia by his desire to have an heir, Ligurio to get some money out of the deal, Callimaco to get the girl, Sostrata to have a grandchild, Lucrezia to have a child and follow God’s will (and, later, to have a new lover), and Timoteo to make a profit by being smarter than everyone else. And, indeed, at the end of the play everyone gets what they want: Callimaco has the object of his desire whenever he wants, Ligurio has a place to stay and eat, Nicia will undoubtedly have an heir, Lucrezia has a new love, Sostrata will have her grandchild, and Timoteo has his money and the satisfaction of knowing that he outsmarted the others. Everyone achieves their own personal goals by taking advantage of each other’s desires. This says that fraud is valid and acceptable when it attains positive ends.
In Carnes Lord’s book Prince, Lord draws parallels between the characters in Mandragola and political figures of the period. He points out that, in several instances, Lucrezia is linked with the audience. In the prologue, Machiavelli writes that: “A girl, young and clever, was loved very much by him, and was for this reason deceived in the manner that you will hear, and I would wish you as deceived as was she.” Later in the play, Timoteo says that Callimaco and Lucrezia would be up all night “âÂ?¦because I know that, if I were he and you were she, we would not be sleeping either.” (pg. 48). Machiavelli also notes in the prologue that the intended audience is Florence. So, Lord states that it makes sense that Lucrezia represents the Florentine people.
It then follows accordingly that Nicia would represent Piero Soderini. A member of a prominent Florentine family, Soderini came to power during the period of the Medici exile from the city in 1494. Under his rule Florence recaptured Pisa, but that victory couldn’t stop the rising opposition to his increasingly oligarchic rule. In 1512 the opposition of Medici supporters within the city, the withdrawal of his French allies from , and the threatened attack on Florence by the Spanish papal army forced Soderini to resign, and he went into permanent exile.
Nicia is the ineffectual master of Lucrezia; he is a master who is dominated by his wife. This can be compared to Soderini’s ineffectual government, in which he was unable to provide Florence with its desires and needs. Lord points out that, like Soderini, Nicia is a rich, childless, doctor of law. He is the character with the fewest positive attributes, and when Ligurio says to Nicia that “someone like you, who remains all day in his study, understands those books but is unable to discuss the things of the world” (pg. 29), Lord suggests that this may be Machiavelli’s true feelings towards Soderini.
Continuing along those lines, if Nicia is Soderini, then Ligurio could be Machiavelli. Ligurio successfully makes his way into Nicia’s house, mirroring Machiavelli’s close political and personal friendship with Soderini. Despite this friendship, Ligurio never gives his loyalty to Nicia, as Machiavelli never quite puts his trust and loyalty in Soderini. This reflects Machiavelli’s general dissatisfaction with Soderini’s governing, and his hope for the “regeneration of a new Florence at the hands of a new and genuine prince.” Machiavelli and Ligurio are both perceptive counselors of princes, both are content to serve the fame of others, and both believe that they are superior to the men they serve.
Lord also suggests that Timoteo represents Pope Julius II, who is mentioned in The Prince. He is described as having an abnormal interest in political and military affairs, just as Timoteo has an abnormal interest in the outcome of Lucrezia’s affairs. In The Prince, Machiavelli notes that Pope Julius acted “impetuously in all his affairs; and he found the times and conditions so apt to this course of action that he always achieved successful results.”
Clearly, then, Callimaco represents the new prince. Lord says that the popular choice, Lorenzo de Medici, should be discounted because if the play was indeed written in 1504, Lorenzo would only have been twelve. His choice is Bernardo Rucellai, a Florentine aristocrat and opponent of Soderini.
Regardless of whom he actually represents, Callimaco is Machiavelli’s Prince of comedy. He creates his Occasione, possesses enough Virtu to carry through his plans, and certainly has what it takes to convince Lucrezia that his offer is a good one. It’s worth noting that, to a great extent, he owes his success to Ligurio. But then, as Machiavelli says in The Prince, “the first notion one gets of a prince’s intelligence comes from the men around him; when they are able and loyal, you may be sure he is wise.”
In The Prince, Machiavelli uses specific terminology and rhetorical strategies for the most worthy cause: the unification of . In Mandragola, the same terminology and strategies serve a very different purpose – tricking a lawyer and seducing his wife. This would seem to indicate that, while a prince and a mischievous young Florentine may have completely objectives, they may as well use the same means to achieve their respective ends.
[1] Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Chapter 25.
[2] Machiavelli, Niccolo. Mandragola. Pg. 13.
[3]Mandragola. Pg. 14.
[4]The Prince. Chapter 18.
[5]Mandragola. Pg. 21
[6]Mandragola. Pg. 25
[7]Mandragola. Pg. 35-36
