Il Quarto Libro Dell‟Eneide in Scena: Studio Filologico E Critico Della Dido in Cartagine (1524) Di Alessandro Pazzi De‟ Medici
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Il quarto libro dell‟Eneide in scena: studio filologico e critico della Dido in Cartagine (1524) di Alessandro Pazzi de‟ Medici by Matteo Ugolini A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Italian Studies University of Toronto © Copyright by Matteo Ugolini (2014) Il quarto libro dell‟Eneide in scena: studio filologico e critico della Dido in Cartagine (1524) di Alessandro Pazzi de‟ Medici Matteo Ugolini Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Italian Studies University of Toronto 2014 Abstract This thesis is a commented critical edition of Alessandro Pazzi de‟ Medici‟s Dido in Cartagine (1524). It is based on the premise that there still exists a significant lacuna in the field of Italian Renaissance tragedy. Notwithstanding the importance attributed by many critics to Italian Cinquecento tragedy, we nonetheless do not have reliable editions of many of these works. Italian Renaissance tragedy has been for the greater part perceived as a minor literary genre, particularly when compared with comic theatre or with contemporary English and French drama. Pazzi was a Florentine scholar, educated both in Latin and Greek. Most of the tragedies written in the early sixteenth century were translations or rewritings of Greek tragedies, while Dido in Cartagine is a play that deals with a Roman subject. It is an original dramatization of Dido‟s suicide after Aeneas abandons her. The main source is therefore the fourth book of Virgil‟s Aeneid. ii iii The dissertation is comprised of an introduction, four chapters, the text of Dido in Cartagine, the critical apparatus, an appendix, and a bibliography. Chapter 1 introduces Pazzi and his works. Chapter 2. a. deals with the issue of representing death on Italian Renaissance stages. Chapter 2. b. is a study of Dido‟s theatrical dimension. Chapter 3 opens the philological section of the thesis: it provides the description of the original manuscript and of its printed editions, the transcription criteria according to modern methods in textual criticism, and a table of linguistic sources used for the philological footnotes of the text. Chapter 4 presents the fourth book of the Aeneid in Latin with the first full translation in vernacular on parallel page. The text of the tragedy follows, annotated with philological and critical footnotes, and accompanied by the critical apparatus, which provides the readings, accepted as original and correct, and the variants of the 16th-century proofreader as well as the ones of the Solerti printed edition of 1887. In the appendix, readers can analyze Andrea Lancia‟s compendium of the fourth book of the Aeneid. The thesis closes with a works cited section. Supplementary Abstract This thesis presents, according to the modern methods in textual criticism, the tragedy Dido in Cartagine written by Alessandro Pazzi de‟ Medici (1483-1530) in 1524. Dido in Cartagine dramatizes the episode drawn from the fourth book of Virgil‟s Aeneid, in which Aeneas abandons Dido, and the subsequent suicide of the Carthaginian queen. Pazzi‟s tragedy represents one of the first experiments of a 16th-century Italian playwright to transpose a work written in the Greek tragic style into the vernacular language, without limiting himself to a simple translation of the text. Similar to Greek tragic literature, Pazzi‟s tragedy is not divided in acts and the chorus is practically always represented on stage. According to Aristotle‟s rules, the action lasts twenty- four hours and it is set in one specific space: the area in front of the royal palace and the temple of Juno. The tragedy opens with the appearance of Dido‟s first husband‟s (Sychaeus) shadow, who recites the lines of the prologue. Sychaeus, murdered by Dido‟s brother Pygmalion, appears on stage, but he is just a dream in Dido‟s mind. Sychaeus foresees Dido‟s and Pygmalion‟s death, before the coming of a new day. Upset by the horrifying vision, Dido wakes up; she decides to soothe the gods with a sacrifice. Meanwhile, her sister Anna is much more worried by the armies of Pygmalion and Iarbas who together are trying to conquer Carthage. However, Anna reassures Dido, telling her that, with Aeneas and his Trojans, Carthage is safe. When Aeneas enters the stage, the story takes a sudden turn. The Trojan hero informs his loyal servant Achates that the previous night Mercury entered through the walls of his room and urged him to leave Carthage so that he could fulfill his destiny as founder of Rome. Aeneas asks his men to get the ships ready. He meets Dido, who has already heard about his decision to leave, and sadly tells her the reasons of his departure. The queen is devastated by the news: she worries about her iv v town, which could be at risk of being overtaken by enemies, but most of all, she is desperate because her lover wants to leave her. Anna tries to convince Aeneas to stay but all her efforts are useless. Dido asks Anna and the women of the chorus to appeal to an old sorceress who, through magical rites, would keep Aeneas in Carthage or set her free from her mad love for the Trojan hero. In the meantime, Mercury enters the stage escorting Iarbas, the enemy king of Gaetulia, within the city walls. Iarbas loves the queen and, in a meeting with her, promises to kill her tyrant brother Pygmalion if she accepts to marry him. The queen, who has already decided to end her life, accepts his proposal. When Iarbas‟ messenger enters the stage with Pygmalion‟s head and hands, Dido decides that her time has come: her husband Sychaeus has finally been avenged. She sees the Trojan fleet leaving her shores and asks everybody to leave her alone. Once in her room, Dido takes the sword left behind by Aeneas and kills herself. Anna and the other women run to help her but it is too late. Juno, watching Dido‟s suffering, sends Iris to untie her soul from her body. This critical commented edition is justified by the evident void in the field of the Italian Renaissance tragedy. Italian playwrights brought back a genre that had been forgotten for centuries and paved the way for an era of great playwrights such as Racine and Shakespeare. However, scholars have generally perceived the Italian tragedy as a minor literary genre, particularly when compared with the Italian comedy or with the French and English tragedy. Italian tragedies have been accused of being mere translations from Greek and Latin, but Renaissance playwrights knew that in order to draw the audience into their stories, in order to reach catharsis, their plays had to stimulate their spectators with modern concerns and interests. This accounts, at least in part, for the relatively few critical studies devoted to 16th-century Italian tragedy and for the unsatisfactory philological aspect of many editions of texts that, to this day, present omissions, mistakes, and outdated methods of transcription. vi In the 20th century, few critical works focus on Italian Renaissance tragedy. The main scholars who dealt with this subject were Ferdinando Neri, Marvin T. Herrick, and Carmelo Musumarra. Federico Doglio, Marco Ariani, and Renzo Cremante edited three important anthologies of Renaissance tragedies. In recent years, the genre has been the object of critical re- appraisal thanks to scholars such as Salvatore Di Maria, Paola Mastrocola, Valentina Gallo, Alessandro Bianchi, and Paola Cosentino. However, it is important to note that interest and research in this field can only be fostered if we have at our disposal works edited with the utmost critical accuracy. Alessandro Pazzi de‟ Medici was a Florentine scholar, educated both in Latin and Greek. He was one of the first scholars to translate Aristotle‟s Poetics from Greek into Latin, a book which greatly influenced the theatre of subsequent centuries. His work, however, was view unfavorably by both his contemporaries and 20th-century scholars. Paolo Giovio and Benedetto Varchi highly criticized his tragedies and his dodecasyllable. In the last century, Neri only, though he stated that Pazzi lacked artistic quality, nonetheless recognized Pazzi‟s experimentation in converting the iambic trimester into verses of twelve and thirteen syllables. Herrick, on the other hand, while praising Pazzi‟s introduction of Senecan elements in his Dido, considered his tragedy a mere translation of Virgil‟s work, and judged his dialogues as tedious. Finally, Doglio, Ariani, and Cremante decided not to include any of Pazzi‟s tragedies in their anthologies. However, in his book Tra classicismo e manierismo, Marco Ariani was the first to notice that Pazzi filtered Virgil‟s poem through the horror and macabre sensibility of early 1520s Florence. Paola Mastrocola justly recognized that Pazzi‟s preface to Dido in Cartagine and Ifigenia in Tauris, dedicated to Pope Clement VII, was more a theoretical essay on tragedy than an encomiastic praise of the pope. Corinne Lucas carefully studied and compared Pazzi‟s, Giraldi‟s, and Dolce‟s Didos. With regard to Pazzi‟s work, Lucas underscored the Catholic vii values of the tragedy, the author‟s influence on future theatrical practice, and pointed out that Pazzi‟s Iarbas is more chivalrous than the average mythic hero. The definite re-evaluation of Pazzi came with Salvatore Di Maria. The American scholar understood that Pazzi wrote his tragedy in order to be staged, rather than read. In the script of the tragedy there are elements whose purpose is to assist the staging. This kind of theatrical language, composed of lights, sounds and even odors, supports the spoken language in order to draw the audience into the events that are being staged.