Abstract
Aromatario is first extensive critical analysis of More’s Utopia to be ever written. In this dialogue, Zuccolo does not systematically examine all aspects of Utopia but comments selectively on some of its features. He alternates observations about the text’s broader philosophical views and assumptions with discussions of its more specific ideas. Zuccolo does not aim to reject Utopia, whose merits he occasionally acknowledges; he wants to explore the challenges of imagining an ideal society. He reflects on how detailed the description of the mechanisms of a utopian society should be whilst investigating the implications of Utopia’s seemingly virtuous customs and rules. Zuccolo also questions the theoretical underpinning of Utopia. Is a peaceful society better than one which is familiar with some degree of conflict?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Some scholars (e.g., Baldissone , “Teoria e storia,” 166) contend that he is probably the Italian humanist and botanist Giuseppe degli Aromatari (1587–1660) who was a contemporary of Zuccolo. However, this identification poses two problems. One is that if Aromatario mentioned here were Giuseppe degli Aromatari, the dialogue would lose any kind of historical plausibility since it would involve characters who lived more than a century apart—in the next note, we show that the other character, Donato, can be plausibly identified with a sixteenth-century Venetian Doge. Another difficulty is that the title-character of the dialogue is, as we learn in the initial lines, a medical doctor , while the Giuseppe degli Aromatari was a humanist. Thus, we are inclined to conclude that the character of The Republic of Utopia is not Giuseppe degli Aromatari. In this case, the surname “Aromatario” merely refer to the profession of the character–a practice that was common in the Renaissance- since an aromatario (in Italian) is someone who prepares and sells medicines. Giuseppe Aromatario also appears in another of Zuccolo’s works, i.e., Discorso delle ragioni del numero del verso italiano (1623), but in this case, the Aromatario he mentions is unequivocally Giuseppe degli Aromatari. For a study of Giuseppe degli Aromatari, see: See Asor-Rosa, Giuseppe degli Aromatari.
- 2.
It is very likely that Zuccolo identifies this character with Francesco Donato or Donà (1468–1553) who was the Doge of Venice from 1545 to 1553. The dialogue does not tell us much about him, except that he is Venetian, and a man of uncommon learning , eloquence, and refined manners. These brief comments, however, are congruent with the historical information we possess about Doge Donato. The sources describe him as a prudent ruler; a man of profound erudition who was an excellent speaker, and a close friend of great humanists such as Pietro Bembo (see Gullino, Donà Francesco). A further element that supports our identification of Donato with Doge Donà is chronological: he lived while the Academy of Count Martinengo, mentioned in the dialogue, was active.
- 3.
The identity of this character is not clear. Unfortunately, the dialogue does not tell us anything about Numidio; we do not know his background, personal qualities, place of origin, profession, or surname. By contrast, in the dialogues contained in this collection, Zuccolo does offer some information about the protagonists of his dialogues.
- 4.
Academies were the quintessential cultural institutions of the Renaissance. Typically, they consisted of a group of individuals who were interested in a variety of intellectual matters including arts, natural sciences, philology, philosophy, etc. Although the specific aim, intellectual goals, and philosophical outlook of Academies varied considerably, they shared the intention to promote new ideas, methodological approaches, and disciplines. More specially, they reacted against the intellectual tradition that had gone unchallenged since the Middle Ages and, at that time, dominated universities throughout Europe, i.e., scholasticism. The Academies meanwhile favored a less rigid and conservative approach to knowledge. They welcomed topics and disciplines that were not studied at universities; they also promoted vernacular languages, whereas the scholastics only used Latin. From the Renaissance onwards, the Academies became centers of learning which directly contested the intellectual authority of universities and produced the most cutting-edge knowledge. Academies organized various types of activities (e.g., dramatic performances, public lectures, regular meetings, scientific investigations, etc.) and disseminated the knowledge they produced through a vigorous program of publications. The model of Renaissance academies was Plato’s Academy in Athens and, just like their Greek predecessor, they were not only places of learning , but also communities where like-minded individuals could come together to share a similar approach to life.
- 5.
Perhaps, Zuccolo is referring to Count Fortunato Martinengo (1512–1552) who established the “Accademia dei Dubbiosi” (Academy of those who Doubt) either in Brescia or in Venice . The goal of the Academy, as its name suggests, was to promote doubt as a way of life as well as a conceptual attitude towards any form of knowledge. The topic of Mister Numidio’s lecture, that is, a critical analysis of a very influential recently published text, seems to align well with the aims and practices of the Academy. There is a possible chronological difficulty with the identification of the Count Martinengo mentioned by Zuccolo with Count Fortunato Martinengo. The Count died in 1552, and the Academy folded around 1554; this implies that the dialogue here reported occurred many years before not only the publications of the Dialogues (1625), but also Zuccolo’s birth (1568). This is, however, not a major difficulty since, as Zuccolo points out in the initial section of the Dialogues entitled “To the Readers,” the setting and the content of the conversations he reports are fictional. Two quite decisive factors support the identification of Count Fortunato Martinengo with the character of Aromatario. One is that the Count knew well Anton Francesco Doni and Ortensio Land, who were responsible for translating More’s Utopia into Italian in 1548. The second is that the dialogue takes place, as we gather in its final lines, in Venice —one of the possible locations of the “Accademia dei Dubbiosi.” For an excellent study on Count Fortunato Martinengo and the “Accademia dei Dubbiosi”, see: Faini , “A Ghost Academy between Venice and Brescia”.
- 6.
Literally, “possessive of his graces (grazie).” The context suggests that the “graces” of which Mister Numidio is parsimonious are the outcomes of his intellectual efforts.
- 7.
Zuccolo uses a type of future tense (futuro anteriore) that can be employed to denote ambiguity about a past or a future action.
- 8.
These words offer a brief, but very poignant portrait of the Renaissance ideal of the perfect gentleman. The essential qualities that such individual was expected to embody were vast literary erudition, intelligence, and the ability to act gracefully in social settings, especially at court. The most important and famous text which discusses the features of the ideal Renaissance gentlemen in an in depth manner is The Book of the Courtier by Baldassare Castiglione.
- 9.
Aromatario suggests that his act of stealing of the lecture makes him somewhat similar to Donato, who steals the hearts of his friends and servants with his charm and erudition.
- 10.
Aromatario repeats, almost verbatim, the praise of Donato he had pronounced in his previous line.
- 11.
Tantalus is a figure from Greek mythology. He is mostly famous for his eternal punishment. He was condemned to stand in a pool of water beneath a fruit tree whose branches were forever just out of his reach. Moreover, whenever he tried to drink from the pool, the water would recede.
- 12.
Here begins Mister Numidio’s speech which comprises of a critical examination of More’s Utopia; the lecture takes up most of this dialogue. Numidio’s analysis, which we shall attribute to Zuccolo for the sake of simplicity, focuses exclusively on book two of Utopia and ignores book one completely. During the Renaissance, it was not uncommon to concentrate only on book two, which was often the only portion of the text that was translated into vernacular languages. In these lines, Zuccolo introduces one his fundamental objections against the utopian society devised by More , that is, his utopia is premised on the erroneous assumption that all human beings possess moral and intellectual qualities that, in fact, only a few, exceptional individuals have.
- 13.
Zuccolo holds that More has imagined an ideal society without taking into due consideration, the fundamental characteristics of human nature. As we explain in chapter six, this is a serious mistake for someone, such as the Italian humanist, who evaluates Utopia against the ideal states described by Plato and Aristotle. The starting point of both Greek thinkers was their specific accounts of human nature—the societies they designed were meant to offer human beings ideal environments to express their nature in entirety. Upon this analysis, the problem of More’s Utopia is that it ignores a fundamental aspect that any depiction of the ideal commonwealth must consider.
- 14.
Zuccolo begins his assessment with general criticisms which address what he regards to be the central assumptions of More’s Utopia. Later on in the dialogue, he rejects specific features of the utopian society.
- 15.
In the notes to this chapter, we follow Zuccolo’ practice of attributing to More , the description of the customs and institutions of the Utopians. In Aromatario, “More ” refers to the author and not the character of the dialogue since in Utopia, it is Hythloday who depicts the features of the ideal commonwealth.
- 16.
Although Zuccolo focuses on what he considers the defects of Utopia, he does not reject it entirely but admits that it contains many positive characteristics—even if he does not mention them. In this respect, Manuel and Manuel’s (Utopian Thought, 151) remark that Zuccolo’s Aromatario is an outright rejection of Utopia is factually incorrect. Zuccolo’s appreciation of several features of Utopia is easily detectable in Evandria where he depicts an ideal society, which borrows some of the customs and institutions that we find in More’s text. Aromatario and The Republic of Evandria are twin-dialogues that need to be studied together since they shed light on one another. They both offer an assessment of Utopia: Aromatario examines some of its flaws, whereas The Republic o f Evandria indirectly points to its strengths. It is only when we examine both of them that we can gain an accurate picture of Zuccolo’s overall evaluation of More’s imaginary commonwealth.
- 17.
Here, Zuccolo formulates one of his broadest criticisms against More’s Utopia, that is, the description of the ideal commonwealth is far too general and does not consider many crucial details. Zuccolo anticipates a criticism that is popular amongst contemporary critics of utopia. We may question the legitimacy of this objection since utopias aim to convey a general sense of how a society operates, not to account for all its features (Tower Sargent, Utopianism, 105–107)—a goal that is not feasible. However, a sympathetic reading of Zuccolo would suggest that his objection is not that More leaves out some details per se, but that he did not analyze some of them that are essential to understand the mechanism and structure of Utopia. If this interpretation is correct, Zuccolo’s criticism identifies a difficulty that concerns many utopias. In the next five notes, we will discuss the various specific issues that, Zuccolo argues, More should have included in his depiction of the ideal city.
- 18.
Zuccolo contends that More’s analysis of the role of the Senate in Utopia is wanting since it lacks important details. The criticism of the Italian humanist is justified since in the ideal commonwealth of the English chancellor the Senate plays a crucial role, yet, although it is often mentioned, its composition and operation are not explained. In Utopia, the Senate has great powers in many domains of the society. It (1) assesses whether importing certain goods should be allowed (Utopia, 144.31–146.6), (2) manages all the “important business of state,” presumably major issues in foreign and domestic politics (Utopia, 112.6–7), (3) rules over divorces (Utopia, 190.19–26), and (4) decides the nature of punishment for specific crimes which, given the lack of a penal code in Utopia, constitutes an immense power (Utopia, 192.6–10). In other words, the Senate is the linchpin of the social and political life of Utopia. However, More gives no information as to how the people who wield this immense power are selected. He only remarks that the senators are “old and experienced” (Utopia, 112.6), which is the very meaning of the Latin word senex. One may feel that the Senate ends up being a rag-bag institution which is attributed many functions that More did not accurately sort out. On this analysis, Zuccolo is correct in observing that More should have explained the composition and role of the Senate in greater detail since without this information, we have difficulties in understanding an essential part of the political and social life of Utopia.
- 19.
Zuccolo’s list contains a two-fold criticism of the English chancellor’s treatment of legal matters. One of the peculiarities of Utopia is that there are no fixed penalties for crimes, except for adultery (Utopia, 112.7–9)—the consequence of this system is that those who administrate justice are bestowed with enormous power. Zuccolo’s first and more overt criticism is that More’s failure to indicate the limits of the judges’ authority gives readers the impression that the system is quite arbitrary. Moreover, given that they wield such great power, More should have elucidated the manner in which they are selected. Zuccolo’s second criticism is less obvious and becomes apparent only when we examine his treatment of the laws of his utopia (i.e., The Republic of Evandria); although it is more serious. Zuccolo shares with More —as with other Italian Renaissance utopists (except for Agostini )—a distrust of lawyers and complex laws. However, in his utopia, he dedicates a fair amount of attention to the republic’s legal system —especially, to procedural law. He notes that the procedural laws established by the Evandrians ensure that justice is managed in an efficient and fair way. Zuccolo’s reflections on the laws of Evandria, together with his criticism of More’s approach in Aromatario to justice , seems to point to a fundamental flaw in the manner in which many Renaissance utopists deal with legal issues. Zuccolo appears to imply that it is a mistake to yield to the temptation of proposing a simplistic and unsophisticated dismissal of laws and law-enforcement because any society, even a utopian one, needs a legal system. The critical thing is, thus, to determine how to design an efficient and fair legal system . On this analysis, the details More fails to provide on how justice is administered in Utopia reveal, as per Zuccolo’s analysis, his inability to (1) recognize the need for laws and (2) resist the easy temptation of almost doing away with a legal system altogether. For a debate of the legal systems of Renaissance utopias, see : Eliav-Feldon, Realistic Utopias, 107–28.
- 20.
Upon an initial investigation, Zuccolo’s criticism seems completely unfair since More devoted an entire section of Utopia to military practices (Utopia, 200.18–217.27), as De Mattei observed (De Mattei , La Repubblica, 152–153). However, a careful examination reveals a different picture. More does not discuss military and strategic matters; his analysis is mostly a contribution to the debate on the “just war theory,” that is, the study of the cases in which a state may be justified to go to war against another. More also examines the Utopians’ practice of using mercenaries in much detail, but he does not address any issue concerning the composition, training, and equipment of the military. His occasional, superficial remarks on how the military functions betray his disinterest for the topic: he casually mentions that the Utopians “train very intensely” (Utopia, 200.20–22) and “invent war machines” (Utopia, 21.26–28). By contrast, in Italian Renaissance political philosophy, the analysis of military matters is of critical importance. Throughout his works, Machiavelli argued very vehemently that the study of the rules and discipline of war is an integral and essential part of politics—he went as far as to claim that war is the “sole” art that a ruler needs to master. It is, thus, not surprising that the discussion of military issues plays a pivotal role in many Italian utopias. In The Happy City (ch. IX), Patrizi formulates a thorough examination of military equipment, strategies, weapons, and tactics. In the COS, Campanella offers a detailed and very imaginative catalog of the war machines and weapons invented by the Solarians (COS, 29.608–31.656). In The Republic of Evandria, Zuccolo dedicates much attention to the organization of the military of his utopian state. A contemporary reader could contend that Zuccolo’s criticism is not justified since a utopia does not necessarily need to examine military matters in advanced ways; however, an Italian Renaissance political thinker such as Zuccolo was bound to find More’s analysis insufficient.
- 21.
These two questions belong to Zuccolo’s assessment of the legal system of Utopia; we examined this issue in note 20.
- 22.
Zuccolo’s first two questions on the priests are very perplexing since More addresses both in considerable detail in the extended section that he devotes to the religious life of the Utopians (Utopia, 218.1–240.14). However, the last and more decisive question (i.e., who rules the priests ?) poses a serious difficulty—albeit only implicitly. Zuccolo’s primary concern does not seem to be that More fails to indicate the qualities the high priest should have—More mentions of his existence in passing (Utopia, 230.4–6)—but that he does not describe the kinds of powers he holds. Possibly, this criticism is a part of a broader concern the Italian humanist has towards the function of priests , and not just the high priest , in Utopia. That is, the way they are supposed to interact with political leaders remains unexplained. In Utopia, priests are in charge of the education of children , can excommunicate, and act as the censors of public morality. Their vast power naturally raises the problem of the possible conflict between them and the politicians. Zuccolo does not directly state that More does not address this issue; nevertheless, it is unlikely that an intellectual who lived during the Counter-reformation was not sensible about the complex relationship between political and religious power. Zuccolo’s reticence is, perhaps, an indication that he does not want to tackle this delicate issue but, at the same time, he wants to voice his disapproval against More . In this respect, it is illuminating that in The Republic of Evandria he does even mention the role of religion and religious leaders in his utopia.
- 23.
Here, Zuccolo formulates an argument that would recur throughout the dialogue: More intended to describe an ideal city but he failed. It is tempting to discard this argument as arbitrary since we may point out that what is a perfect society for Zuccolo is not necessarily so for More . However, Zuccolo’s comment hints at a criticism of Utopia that is more consequential than it may initially seem to be. The Italian humanist seems to imply that More is fundamentally unclear as what the essential aim of his society is—an issue that, as we explain in chapter six, goes at the heart crux of the difference between Classical accounts of ideal societies (e.g., Plato and Aristotle) and Renaissance utopias.
- 24.
That is, the assessment will focus not on the details, but on the fundamental principles upon which Utopia is based. Zuccolo’s comments make it clear that although he did raise many questions concerning specific aspects of Utopia’s social and political system, his primary interest is in examining the validity of the core principles of the society depicted by More.
- 25.
In The Happy City , Zuccolo argues in favor of the counterintuitive idea that it is better to locate a republic in an area where the soil is not fertile. He contends that the barren terrain would prevent the state from attaining great wealth and, therefore, the citizens from becoming obsessed with riches. Zuccolo is not the first author to discuss this view; Machiavelli had already considered this idea, but eventually rejected it. (Discourses, I. 1).
- 26.
Machiavelli outlines the virtues of this system; apart from the Achaeans and Swiss , mentioned by Zuccolo as well, he also considers the case of the Etruscans. (Discourses, II.4).
- 27.
More, Utopia, 112.1–14. Here , as in other instances in this dialogue, Zuccolo uses More’s text as a springboard for considerations that are close to his interests but are not of great significance for the English chancellor. Contemporary scholars tend to agree that, most likely, More arranged Utopia as a confederation of equally powerful cities since he was merely following his classical models. By contrast, Zuccolo’s question of whether a federation of cities has more merits than a system in which one dominates was particularly relevant for him due to the political situation in the Italian peninsula during the Renaissance. At that time, Italy consisted of a series of city-states (e.g., Milan, Florence, Venice ), kingdoms (e.g., Kingdom of Naples), and states (e.g., Papal State). One of the leading causes of the chronic instability of the peninsula was that these political players were relatively evenly matched in strength, and no one could completely dominate the others. In light of this context, a confederation of cities having the same power or system in which a city rules over others constituted attractive and possible ways of resolving Italy’s continuous political turmoil for Italian Renaissance thinkers. Here, Zuccolo claims that he does not intend to assess which solution is preferable. However, later on in the text, as we discuss in note 37, he points out that the way in which More arranges the confederation of cities in Utopia may pose some difficulties.
- 28.
“Achaeans” is one of the names Homer uses in The Iliad to describe the Greeks. Throughout most of their history, the Greeks were never a nation or a kingdom, but a series of city-states often united in different federations.
- 29.
It seems indeed quite odd on the part of More to locate his ideal society in an unhealthy place (Utopia, 178.20–22). Perhaps, his choice is rooted in the Christian monastic ideal of the mortification of the flesh. Western monks deliberately lived in very inhospitable environments (e.g., deserts, high mountains, wild forests, etc.) and adopted a harsh life-style (e.g., extreme fasting, sleeping on the floor, using stones as pillows, etc.). Somewhat similarly, the citizens of Utopia reside in an unhealthy place that taxes their bodies throughout their existence. By contrast, Zuccolo (and other Italian utopists) adopted a more holistic approach wherein the well-being of the body is fundamental to human happiness . It is likely that Italian utopists’ concern for the health of the body was due to the influence of the Greco-Roman heritage and, more specifically, Aristotle, who is one the main sources of both Patrizi’s The Happy City and Zuccolo’s utopias.
- 30.
It is the Roman thinker Claudius Aelianus (Varia Historia, IX. 1) who tells us that Plato established his school in an unhealthy area and was urged by doctors to relocate it somewhere else.
- 31.
Plato intended to establish a school outside Athens but was constrained by the environment of the Greek city; More aimed to depict an ideal society and could have selected any location.
- 32.
Zuccolo introduces a type of criticism that occurs throughout the dialogue. He rejects some features of More’s utopia by saying that although they may be acceptable or even feasible in real life, they do not befit an ideal society. In other words, Zuccolo’s yardstick in judging Utopia is not whether the model proposed can be realized, but whether it successfully depicts the best possible society—regardless of whether it is a realistic one.
- 33.
Zuccolo argues that More deliberately locates Utopia in an unhealthy place in order to stress its citizens’ virtue . Their attainments are attributed entirely to their efforts since their environment hinders their success.
- 34.
More, Utopia, 116.1–4.
- 35.
In his utopian society of Evandria, Zuccolo also has the citizens gathering to discuss matters of state always in the same city: Agathia. In this case, however, Agathia’s prominent role is justified not only by its convenient location, but also since it surpasses all other cities in beauty, size of its population, wealth, and the valor of its citizens.
- 36.
Zuccolo does not only point out that all cities of Utopia should have equal dignity; he also hints at an apparent inconsistency within More’s analysis. That is, More mentions that Utopia comprises several cities, yet he does not devote much attention to their political roles. Perhaps, More struggled to adapt to the English context—which is, to a significant extent, his primary target—the political system of some of his main sources (e.g., Plato’s Republic): the Greek city-state. It seems as though he may have described his ideal society as constituted by several cities rather than just one since the city-state system was not applicable to his political context. However, the problem with More’s approach is that he does not explain how the cities of Utopia are supposed to interact, and that his entire discussion revolves around Amaurot alone. Most Italian utopists did not face the same problem since the Greek city-states were, in various ways, quite similar to the Italian city-states in which they lived. In this respect, it is unsurprising that several Italian Renaissance utopias (e.g., Campanella’s COS, Patrizi HC, Zuccolo, HC) describe a single city-state and not a state comprising many of them.
- 37.
A Diet is an assembly where people representing different states or cities convene on a regular basis for legislative and political purposes. The word “Dieta” is derived from the Medieval Latin dieta, which means the “the assembly day.”
- 38.
Switzerland was, and still is, divided into several “cantons.” The term “canton” is derived from the French and, in this context, indicates a state which is part of a confederation.
- 39.
It is a city on the Western coast of the Netherlands. In Zuccolo’s time, it was the political hub of the country.
- 40.
In 1358, The Hague became the primary residence of the Counts of Holland, and it maintained this prominent role throughout the Renaissance.
- 41.
Zuccolo repeats the same argument he formulated before: we should judge More’s utopia by assessing whether he describes a society that is indeed the best possible one, and not by considering if some of its features can be realized or were common during his time.
- 42.
More, Utopia, 126.19–26; 130.16–25.
- 43.
More, Utopia, 130.11–15. Zuccolo’s calculation seems to be correct. More does not explicitly say how many scholars there are in Utopia; however, we can indirectly calculate an approximate number by considering how many people, including scholars, are exempt from work. More tells us that the people who do not need to work are about five hundred; two hundred of them are Syphogrants , twenty are Tranibors, thirteen are priests , while the remaining two hundred and sixty-seven are scholars.
- 44.
Literally, Zuccolo says: “citizens , who are, in a confused manner (confusamente), sometimes workers in the fields, sometimes construction workers, sometimes smiths, sometimes carpenters.” He seems to suggest that if a person does not have a stable professional identity, he can be neither happy nor morally good.
- 45.
Zuccolo’s criticism reports almost verbatim Plato’s words in the Republic where, on two occasions, Socrates argues that in the ideal city the lower class of citizens (e.g., farmers, artisans, etc.) can pursue only one profession (Plato, Republic, II.370 B–C; II.374 B–C). However, the focus of the Italian humanist’s argument is, to some extent, different from that of the Greek philosopher. Plato contends that a man performs a craft effectively only if he engages exclusively in the one for which he has a natural disposition. Zuccolo’s emphasis is not on a man’s ability to be a capable worker, but on his ability to attain moral goodness and happiness . Moreover, he omits the crucial point, stressed by Socrates, that a person should choose the profession for which he has talent—though he may be taking this idea for granted. Zuccolo’s modification of Plato’s argument, however, renders his analysis somewhat confusing. Although it is apparent that the ability to do something well can make one happy, it is unclear why it would make us morally good as well. Perhaps, Zuccolo is slightly conflating two different arguments here. One is that people can be truly happy only when they engage in political and scholarly pursuits—a view that is central to Aristotle’s philosophy, but which is also the bedrock of the Greco-Roman notions of scholé and otium. This argument fits into the overall context of the discussion since Zuccolo has just complained that in too few individuals can spend their lives in the pursuit of learning Utopia. The other separate argument is the one Plato formulates in the Republic that a skilled worker can pursue only one occupation.
- 46.
More, Utopia, 124.5–126.2. In Utopia, all citizens have two occupations: farming and a craft of their choice. However, they do not practice them at the same time. Each man is required to work in agricultural fields over the course of his whole life but only for two years at a time, in the next two, before returning to working in the fields, he can devote himself to the craft of his choice.
- 47.
In The Happy City, Zuccolo argues that one of the main factors responsible for the virtue of the citizens of San Marino is that the harsh condition of the terrain requires all of them to work in the fields.
- 48.
Aristotle, Politics , VI.4, 1318b, 5–11. In this dialogue, Zuccolo quotes the Latin translation of Aristotle’s Politics completed around 1437 by Leonardo Bruni.
- 49.
Silius Italicus (c. 28–c. 103) was a Roman statesman and intellectual. He was the author of an epic poem about the Second Punic War (Punica).
- 50.
Ceres refers to the Roman goodness of agriculture.
- 51.
Silius Italicus, Punica XIII, 535.
- 52.
In The Republic of Evandria, Zuccolo adopts this Aristotelian preference for farmers over craftsmen in full. In his utopia, the former are allowed to partake in political life while the latter are not.
- 53.
Aristotle, Politics, VI.4, 1319a, 25–29. Aristotle’s lines quoted by Zuccolo are, possibly, also the source of those sections (ch. XII) of Patrizi’s The Happy City wherein he explains why only the highest three classes can attain happiness .
- 54.
In Patrizi’s The Happy City (ch. XI), the members of the lowers classes are considered citizens only in a secondary and inferior sense.
- 55.
Zuccolo proposes an argument that features prominently also in Patrizi (HC, ch. XI–XII), that is, only people belonging to the highest social classes can attain happiness . This idea was widespread in the classical world; it was believed that only those who have the means to devote themselves to higher pursuits such as philosophy and politics can ultimately attain happiness . Aristotle is one of the strongest proponents of this view; it is not surprising that Zuccolo quotes him in the next lines.
- 56.
Here Zuccolo rejects the idea, common to several Renaissance utopists, according to which all labors are equally noble. See Campanella, COS, 33, 709–722; More, Utopia, 124.5–126.14.
- 57.
Aristotle, Politics, VIII.2, 1337b, 10.
- 58.
Zuccolo clearly adopts Aristotle’s view according to which happiness is not a state—as we may ordinary believe—but an activity or a set of activities. The activities in question are political or scholarly pursuits.
- 59.
Titus Manlius Imperiosus Torquatus was a prominent Roman politician in the fourth century B.C.E.; he was elected consul and dictator of the Republic several times.
- 60.
Gaius Atilius Regulus Serranus was a Roman consul during the third century B.C.E. Virgil mentions him in the Aeneid (VI, 845) and indicates that he got his name (Saranus) from the activity in which he was engaging when he was summoned to become consul, that is, sowing (serentem).
- 61.
Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus (c. 519–c. 430 B.C.E.) was a Roman statesman. Roman historians (e.g., Livy) often describe him as the very symbol of Roman virtue and disdain of wealth. He owned a small farm where he worked with his own hands. The emissary of the Senate found him busy ploughing his land when they notified him that he had been elected to the dictatorship. He left his field to lead the Roman army, but, went back to his simple life as a farmer after he defeated the Aequii and saved the consul Minicius. In Discourses III.25, Machiavelli mentions Cincinnatus to illustrate that the Romans of the republican period understood that keeping the citizens poor is necessary to maintain a society free.
- 62.
“A single swallow does not make spring” is an old Greek proverb which is also mentioned by Aristotle (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, I 1098a, 20). It means that an isolated case cannot be used to draw a general conclusion.
- 63.
Zuccolo’s extended criticism of the Utopians’ custom of having most citizens working as farmers at regular intervals throughout their lives is another example of how he explores some of the ramifications of several features of More’s society. This Utopian rule constitutes a clever way of addressing the characteristic Medieval and Renaissance problem of ensuring harmony between the city and the countryside. However, Zuccolo’s analysis revels that More’s solution fails to consider that the training people require to become competent craftsmen and politicians does not leave them with any time to work as farmers . In other words, Zuccolo implies that in order to fix a specific issue (i.e., the relations between the city and countryside) More overlooked a fundamental feature of any effective society, that is, the division of labor. The implication of this criticism assumes significance because the idea that citizens should have different professions had featured prominently during the course of political theory since its vigorous defense in Plato’s Republic.
- 64.
More, Utopia, 112.18–20. We may wonder why Zuccolo devotes so much attention to a comment that in Utopia takes only two lines and is almost made as a passing reference. Perhaps, he means to indirectly show that More often adopts a top-down approach that disregards people’s needs. Zuccolo seems to stress how unwittingly coldhearted More’s system ends up being. Interestingly, such concerns constitute the very essence of dystopian novels in which the determination of those in power to maintain a rigid and abstractly construed system generally tramples over people’s emotional and psychological needs. On this reading, Zuccolo’s analysis intends to illustrate a fundamental flaw that can be detected in many facets of More’s utopian society. Zuccolo is not a dystopian author; yet, some of his criticisms anticipate those we find in dystopian literature.
- 65.
More, Utopia, 122.6–9.
- 66.
Zuccolo argues that it is preferable that the highest offices last for a limited period and the lesser ones for a lifetime.
- 67.
Zuccolo is possibly alluding to the office of the Doge in Venice who stayed in power for life and was chosen, at least in principle, on account of his integrity and character.
- 68.
The scenario is very unlikely to occur in Utopia since, as More points out explicitly, whenever the Tranibors meet with the Prince, they are required to be in the presence of two Syphogrants, who should never be the same, in order to make sure that the highest officers of the state do not conspire against the people (More, Utopia, 122.10–19). It is indicative that More does offer a very compelling solution to Zuccolo’s concern; yet, the latter ignores it.
- 69.
In this dialogue, as well as in The Republic of Evandria and The Happy City, the Roman Republic is one of Zuccolo’s main political models.
- 70.
The “Ten Man” (decemviri) was a committee of people elected in order to reform and codify the laws of the Republic. A first committee was elected in 451 B.C.E. They drafted ten laws which were approved by a popular assembly, but the people felt that two more laws were necessary. Thus, another committee comprising of ten new members was elected. However, the second committee did not resign at the completion of their task, but assumed dictatorial powers. It was only due to the turmoil caused by the war against the Sabines that the Senate eventually managed to regain power.
- 71.
Zuccolo follows Machiavelli who in the Discourses (I. 35) shows how the office of the Ten Men endangered the freedom of the Roman republic.
- 72.
Zuccolo’s observation that the Prince and the Tranibors should be replaced regularly follows the well-established idea that making constant changes of people in office is the best way to maintain the freedom of the state. Aristotle is a vocal supporter of this view ( Politics , II.1, 1261a; VI.1, 1317a–b) which also features prominently in Patrizi (Rep., 1.6, fol. 11).
- 73.
Zuccolo’s criticism seems, in part, unwarranted since More gives no indication that the Syphogrants are anything close to ringleaders. Utopia says very little about the Syphogrants’ identity; most of the discussion about them concerns their responsibilities (More, Utopia, 120.17–122.10; 126.3–6; 130.15–18). However, it must be conceded to Zuccolo that the Syphogrants’ close involvement in people’s everyday life and their considerable (and somewhat arbitrary) power over people’s life choices do create the risk of them becoming something close to a neighborhood’s boss. For they (1) elect and can remove the governor, (2) decide whether someone should be allowed to purse literary studies, (3) make sure that everyone works hard enough, (4) grant people’s permission to travel, etc. It may be argued that although Zuccolo’s criticism is not true to the literal meaning of More’s text, his exploration of the potentially dangerous implications of the Syphogrants’ role is not entirely unjustified. Once again, it seems that Zuccolo is interested in exploring the possible consequences of the system More invented.
- 74.
Porcia Catonis (c. 70 B.C.E.-43 B.C.E) was the daughter of the Roman statesman Cato the Younger and the wife of Marcus Junius Brutus, one of Julius Caesar’s assassins. In the Roman world, she was considered to be a symbol of female courage. Her husband did not reveal to her his plan to assassinate Caesar since he did not believe she would have had the strength to endure torture had she been captured. Suspecting that her husband was concealing an important secret from her because he did not trust her strength, she deliberately inflicted a terrible wound on herself in order to prove her capacity to withstand pain.
- 75.
According to a Roman legend, the boy Papirius accompanied his father to a meeting of the Senate and was sworn not to reveal the content of the discussion. Thus, when his mother forced him to disclose what he had heard, he lied. He claimed that the Senators debated whether it would be better for a man to have two wives or for a woman to have two husbands. The next day, Papirius’ mother rallied other women and demanded that the Senate should allow Roman women to have two husbands. It was only when this lie was uncovered that the unrest was resolved. Traditionally, this story was used to praise Papirius’ determination to keep the word he had given to his father. This story was sometimes represented in Renaissance art—a famous version is Domenico Beccafumi’s painting (c. 1520) entitled “The Story of Papirius.”
- 76.
In these lines, Zuccolo makes it even more apparent than anywhere else in the dialogue that one of the models against which he is judging More’s Utopia is Republican Rome or, perhaps more accurately, his idealized image of it. He implies that during this period, Rome was much closer to an ideal society than More’s republic.
- 77.
Zuccolo is alluding to the practice in Utopia of having women working outside the home—a practice that, in his time, most people would have regarded as imprudent and unadvisable.
- 78.
Zuccolo’s objection seems to be unfair. The communal life advocated by More is designed to strengthen the bond between citizens , and not to encourage promiscuity. Moreover, the central role of family life and family values in Utopia makes Zuccolo’s criticism unfounded. Nonetheless, as Zuccolo mentions in the subsequent line, More’s arrangement may appear to be reasonable in principle, but is unlikely to work in real life. Of course, the contemporary reader has to keep in mind that these arguments about the promiscuous consequences of men and women living and working in close proximity to each other reflect the historical and social context in which they were written.
- 79.
She is a figure from early Roman history. According to Livy’s account in the History of Rome (I. 58–59), Lucretia was a Roman noblewoman famous for her modesty who was raped by Sextus Tarquinius, the son of Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, the last king of Rome . Unable to bear the shame of this terrible crime, Lucretia took her own life and became a symbol of virtue throughout Roman history and beyond. In the Italian Renaissance, artists often celebrated her character; a well-known example is Botticelli’s painting The Tragedy of Lucretia (1496–1504).
- 80.
Artemisia of Caria was a Greek queen who lived in the fifth century B.C.E. She became the ruler of the Greek city-state of the Halicarnassus after the demise of her husband. She took part in the second Persian invasion of Greece on the side of the Xerses, the King of Persia. She personally led her fleet in some of the major battles of the war (e.g., Artemisium, Salamis) and became renowned for her valor.
- 81.
She was a third century C.E. Syrian queen. She became the regent of the Palmyrene Empire after the assassination of her husband. She distinguished herself as a capable ruler and a brilliant strategist. She was able to bring a significant portion of the Eastern part of the Roman Empire under her control, though she was eventually defeated by the Roman Emperor Aurelianus. Later Ancient historians (e.g., Augustan History) and Medieval authors (e.g., Boccaccio) idealized and romanticized Zenobia; they portrayed her as a formidable and manly ruler.
- 82.
Some scholars have pointed out the paradoxical nature of the Utopists’ attitude towards war: they detest it, yet they often engage in it (Avineri , “War and Slavery”, 289). However, Zuccolo does not seem to be very aware of the paradoxical or ironic dimension of Utopia—he takes, almost invariably, the depiction of the ideal city at face value.
- 83.
More, Utopia, 200.18–19. In The Republic of Evandria, Zuccolo departs quite sharply from More . Unlike the Utopians, the Evandrians engage in wars often and with much enthusiasm.
- 84.
Zuccolo’s charge against the Utopians is uncalled for since More makes it very clear that they undergo a very rigorous military training, which makes them skillful in the art of war as well as brave in battle (More, Utopia, 212.5–18).
- 85.
Zuccolo here is referring to the passage in which More reports that some Utopians believe in the theory of the transmigration of the soul and that animals have souls (More, Utopia, 225.22–25). However, Zuccolo is not entirely correct since he attributes to all Utopians a belief that, as More tells us, is held only by a few individuals.
- 86.
Ovid, Metamorphoses, XV, 165–168. Zuccolo does not report the Latin text, but the translation by Giovanni Andrea dell’Anguillara (Le Metamorfosi, 527). Although the translation does convey the basic point of Ovid’s words, it does not follow the original meaning very closely. We have translated the Italian version to stay as close to Zuccolo’s text as possible; we have also kept the same meter (ottava rima) employed by the Italian translator.
- 87.
Zuccolo is referring to the blood that pours out when a lamb is slaughtered.
- 88.
Zuccolo reports something that he most probably witnessed in person. He served at the court of Urbino for nine years (1608–17) as he mentions in The Happy City.
- 89.
It is somewhat puzzling that Zuccolo engages in such an extensive discussion of the Utopians’ alleged inability to face violence when the text offers no real justification for this criticism. Here, as well as in other sections of Aromatario, Zuccolo uses the text of Utopia as a peg on which to hang discussions that are of interest to him. In these lines, he specifically seems to hint at the value of the martial education of the Spartans and the Romans of the Republican era, which he also celebrates in The Happy City and The Republic of Evandria.
- 90.
The connection between this argument and the preceding one is not immediately clear. A closer examination suggests that, in this case, Zuccolo is connecting the Utopians’ reluctance towards violence with their custom of advising people who are incurably sick to terminate their life in order to avoid unnecessary pain (More, Utopia, 186.6–20). He regards both acts as evidence that Utopians lack courage—an accusation that seems unfounded, given More’s reports of the feats of courage the Utopians display in wars (More, Utopia, 213.19–24). It appears that Zuccolo regards the Utopians’ custom of allowing euthanasia to be somewhat indicative of a mindset which lacks the fortitude that he admires in the Romans. Zuccolo does not entertain More’s idea that euthanasia is a charitable act which allows a person who is in excruciating pain and has no hope for recovery to end his life more peacefully (More, Utopia, 186.10–20); he simply regards it as an act of cowardice. Interestingly, Zuccolo does not consider one of the most troubling aspects—at least in the eyes of a contemporary reader—of the manner in which the Utopians manage and conceptualize euthanasia . In Utopia, although a terminally ill person is free to decide whether he wants to live or not, he is urged to end his life by the priests and public officials who try to persuade the sick that he has become a burden to society (More, Utopia, 186.13–20).
- 91.
He was a Roman historian who lived between the first century B.C.E. and the first century C.E.
- 92.
It is a city located in the south of France within the region of Provence. It was funded by the Greeks around 600 B.C.E. and was then conquered by the Romans.
- 93.
It is a Greek island located in the Cyclades archipelago in the Aegean Sea. According to an Ancient Greek legend reported by several ancient sources (Claudius Aelianus , Herakleides Pontikos, Strabo, and Valerius Maximus), the inhabitants of the island voluntarily killed themselves upon attaining the age of sixty.
- 94.
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, III.7, 1116a, 12–15.
- 95.
This is the closest English correspondent to the Italian proverb used by Zuccolo which is: “to buy a cat in a sack” (comprare la gatta nel sacco).
- 96.
Zuccolo reports More’s words almost verbatim. (More, Utopia, 188.15–18).
- 97.
Zuccolo reports More’s words almost verbatim. (More, Utopia, 188.18–19).
- 98.
The strange custom that requires the bride and the groom to show themselves naked to one another before getting married is not an entirely new invention of More . In the Laws (VI.771 E-772 A), Plato argues that when people get married they should disclose as much information about themselves as possible to the potential spouse.
- 99.
Zuccolo criticizes one of Utopia’s most bizarre practices. Before a man and a woman get married, the potential spouses have to see each other naked to ensure that they like one another and do not have deformities that can be off-putting. Hythloday stresses that this custom may appear foolish and laughable to non-Utopians (Utopia, 188.14–15; 188.18–20). However, he defends it by arguing that the marriage may be doomed if one spouse finds the other physically unattractive (More, Utopia, 188.23–190.8). Notably, Zuccolo agrees with the idea behind More’s peculiar custom; he only disapproves the method. He proposes an alternative system. He suggests that close friends or family members, rather than the spouses themselves, should see the potential spouse naked to make sure that his or her body is free of deformities.
- 100.
Plutarch, Life of Lycurgus, 14.4–7; 15.1.
- 101.
More, Utopia, 148.30–34.
- 102.
Interestingly, the Renaissance explorers Pietro Martire d’Anghira (De Orbe Novo, I. 221) and Amerigo Vespucci (Quatuor navigatones, i, sig. c1v) prove Zuccolo wrong by reporting that some native American tribes were indifferent to gold and used it to make kitchen utensils exactly as the Utopians do in More’s fictional account. Somewhat similarly, in Roman literature, Tacitus reports that Germanic populations had no regard for silver and treated it like any other material (Tacitus, Germania, 5).
- 103.
In a famous passage (More, Utopia, 150.31–152.20), More narrates of foreign ambassadors who, during their visit to Utopia, wore gold rings and expensive clothes embroiled with gold . The disdain with which the Utopians looked at the ambassadors seems to present a counter argument against Zuccolo’s concern. The tale suggests that the indifference towards gold is so deeply entrenched in the Utopians that its ostentatious display only makes them more averse towards it. However, More also adds a potentially ambiguous consideration. He notes that the few Utopians who travelled to other lands and were habituated to the practice of flaunting gold and riches did not regard the ambassadors’ behavior disgraceful (More, Utopia, 152.11–12). One wonders whether familiarity with the foreigners’ attitude towards gold only made these Utopians less surprised or caused them to begin to appreciate gold’s value. Perhaps, Zuccolo’s criticism alludes to this potential problem in More’s account.
- 104.
Zuccolo’s attitude towards gold is, in spite of his comments here, similar to More’s one. In The Republic of Evandria, he notes that any display of gold or any use of it for adornment is not allowed since all gold (and silver) must be used only to mint coins. Once again, Zuccolo seems to depart from More in that the rules of his utopia are dictated not by idealism or moral considerations, but by practical concerns.
- 105.
Zuccolo does not raise any objection against the institution of slavery which is practiced also in his utopian society of Evandria. In this respect, it is telling that the Italian humanist has no problem with the Utopians’ custom of enslaving people; he only objects to them (1) not enslaving prisoners of war and children of slaves and (2) reducing into slavery those who committed heinous crimes. By contrast, humanists such as Patrizi (Rep. 4.2, fol. 48) condemned at least the enslavement of Christians during the Renaissance.
- 106.
More, Utopia, 184.19–184.20. More’s section on servants (de servis) contains an ambiguity which has been long noted by scholars. In Utopia, there is no private property and, thus, there cannot be, strictly speaking, the institution of slavery which consists in a person owning another. It is, thus, more appropriate to speak of “servants” rather than “slaves”—a translation of the Latin servis which, though not as common, is correct. Interestingly, Zuccolo seems to be aware of the ambiguity in More’s account of servants since he prefers the Italian word servo, which means “servant,” to the one for slave (schiavo). Nonetheless, we should be wary of reading too much into Zuccolo’s word choices since although he typically translates servus with servo, he occasionally renders it with schiavo as well. In our translation, we have reproduced Zuccolo’s waving between using schiavo and servo. For a detailed analysis of More’s section on servitude see McCutcheon , “Puns, Paradoxes, and Heuristic Inquiry.”
- 107.
More, Utopia, 184.21–184.24.
- 108.
More, Utopia, 190.27–192.10. Zuccolo shares with other Renaissance utopists (e.g., Doni, WCW), including More , the belief that a complex legal system severely impedes justice . In his utopian society of Evandria, the laws are few, and lawyers and legal counselors are forbidden, just as it is Utopia (More, Utopia, 100.23–33; 194.21–196.14). However, Zuccolo raises the convincing objection that the lack of fixed penalties for crimes in Utopia confers extraordinary powers on the judges to decide how to punish an offender in the way they deem fit—a power which may end up making them unfair and creating an overall situation wherein there is no clear sense of right and wrong.
- 109.
More, Utopia, 196.29–200.16.
- 110.
We may consider Zuccolo’s curt and brief criticism of the Utopians’ custom as an indication that he regards More’s position to lack sophistication. Alliances were a topic of intense political debate in the Renaissance, and the Italian humanist was aware of Machiavelli’s incisive analysis of this issue in both the Discourses (II. 4) and The Histories of Florence (IV.3; V. 13). Zuccolo’s argument in favor of alliances seems to be congruent with the views of Florentine humanists, that is, alliances are an imperfect and limited way to manage, to some degree, the deep-seated uncertainty and instability of the world of foreign relations. In other words, Zuccolo appears to adopt Machiavelli’s commonsensical position that alliances per se are neither good nor bad; their outcomes depend on how they are managed. For a recent examination of Machiavelli’s analysis of alliances , see: Cesa, Machiavelli on International Relations.
- 111.
Zuccolo’s criticism offers an effective indication of the difference between his perspective and that of More . The English chancellor’s idea that the common practice, in his time, of breaking alliances makes the very institution of treatises pointless is both extreme and idealistic. By contrast, Zuccolo’s pragmatism leads him to conclude that alliances are necessary, albeit limited and imperfect, ways of regulating foreign relationships. Zuccolo’s position may also allude to the risk of not making alliances examined by Machiavelli in The Prince (ch. XXI). Taking no sides is likely to leave a country, the Florentine contends, exposed to the whims of other states.
- 112.
Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus (236–183 B.C.E.) was a Roman general and statesman. He was given the nickname Africanus for having defeated Hannibal in the battle of Zama (202 B.C.E.), located in North Africa, during the Second Punic War.
- 113.
More, Utopia, 206.26–212.6. The rejection of mercenary armies is a common theme amongst Italian Renaissance political thinkers. Machiavelli formulates one of the most famous criticisms on the use of mercenaries ( The Prince, XII).
- 114.
Zuccolo’s criticism is not fair. More explains in detail that the Utopians are formidable soldiers and undergo rigorous training in the art of war—they are perfectly capable of fighting and resort to mercenaries only to limit the loss of their citizenry in war . See More, Utopia, 212.6–18.
- 115.
Scipio Africanus’ father was Publius Cornelius Scipio (260 B.C.E.–212/211 B.C.E.), his uncle was Gnaeus Cornelius Scipio Calvus (265–212/211 B.C.E.). They were both generals and statesmen and died in Spain during the Second Punic War.
- 116.
Carthage was one of the greatest empires of the Ancient Mediterranean world. It reached its maximum expansion in the third century B.C.E. when it dominated a substantial part of the coast of North Africa, several Mediterranean islands, as well as a portion of the southern part of Spain. It eventually clashed with Rome against which it fought three major wars , the “Punic Wars.” It was finally defeated and destroyed in 146 B.C.E.
- 117.
Zuccolo is probably alluding to the crucial role the Numidian cavalry played in the battle of Zama (202 B.C.E.), which ended the Second Punic War with the victory of the Romans. The Numidians were a population who lived in the area of North Africa that is now part of Algeria; they served as mercenaries sometimes in the Roman army , and sometimes in the Carthaginian. In the early part of the Second Punic war , the Carthaginians enjoyed great success thanks to the support of the Numidian cavalry. However, during the last and decisive battle at Zama, the Numidians switched sides and contributed decisively to the Roman victory.
- 118.
Zuccolo uses the very same example Machiavelli employs in chapter twelve of The Prince.
- 119.
The idea that one of the causes of Rome’s fall was its increasing reliance on mercenaries is a recurrent theme in Machiavelli . See The Prince (ch. XII); Art of War (book I).
- 120.
These are some of the most influential and well-established patrician families of Ancient Rome.
- 121.
Zuccolo seems to have misunderstood the role of mercenaries in Utopia. Utopians do not turn to mercenaries to shy away from fighting or to avoid the rigors of military training, but to minimize the loss of their citizens . Given the Utopians’ disciplined and strict lifestyle, there is no risk that they may become idle and unable to defend themselves as, according to Zuccolo’s account, the Romans of the Imperial period had done. However, Zuccolo’s criticism is not completely unfounded because one may legitimately wonder how plausible More’s solution is. If the Utopians do rely on mercenaries to avoid losses, would not this custom eventually lead them to become reluctant to engage in wars or, more simply, inexperienced in real-life fighting situations? More notes that the Utopians tend to send some mercenaries (i.e., the Zapoletes) rather than their own citizens to the most dangerous situations in a battle (More, Utopia, 208.32–210.1-7), although they have no hesitation to get into the thick of the fight, if necessary (More, Utopia, 212.15–17). One may observe that this attitude could lead to the failure to develop the courage necessary to fight to which Zuccolo refers.
- 122.
More, Utopia, 210.24–212.4. The practice of taking one’s own family to the battlefield is not More’s invention, but is found already in Plato’s Republic (V.466e–467a) which is, most likely, his source. Tacitus reports that the Germans adopted a very similar custom (Germania, 7).
- 123.
Aristotle, Politics, II.9, 1269b 35–40.
- 124.
Zuccolo explicitly states that Plato’s Republic is More’s primary source. A contemporary reader is well-aware that Utopia is an expression of a literary genre whose features and goals are different, though not unrelated, from Greco-Roman accounts of ideal states such as Plato’s Republic, book VII of Aristotle’s Politics, and Cicero’s Republic. However, this difference was most probably not as apparent to Renaissance thinkers as it is to us today. In the case of Zuccolo, it appears that his exegesis of Utopia is guided by the belief that More was writing in the tradition of the Classical depictions of the ideal state while his aim was, in fact, quite different.
- 125.
Plato, Republic, 451c–532a.
- 126.
Zuccolo is skeptical of More’s idea that training can overcome many limitations of human nature.
- 127.
In Greek mythology, the Amazons were a legendary tribe; they constituted a state consisting exclusively of women warriors led by a queen. Men were excluded from the tribe; the Amazons ensured the survival of their race by mating with foreigners or slaves who were solely kept for reproductive purposes. The Amazons are often mentioned in Greek literature starting with Homer.
- 128.
The reader may wonder why Zuccolo devotes such extraordinary attention to the rejection of the Utopians’ practice of allowing the presence of women in the army . He points to the reason why he finds this issue significant, albeit in an indirect way. He argues that the viewpoint that women can be as effective as men in war is based on a mistaken belief that training and discipline can, in most cases, overcome natural conditions and limitations. On this analysis, the rejection of women from the army is part a broader criticism against one of More’s fundamental philosophical assumptions, that is, the notion that the essential factor in the success of both people and nations is a well-designed and effectively implemented system. By contrast, Zuccolo indicates that reason and training, though important, are very much constrained by natural circumstances. In The Happy City, Zuccolo conveys his “naturalism” more explicitly. He demonstrates that the natural environment in which the citizens of San Marino find themselves is as decisive for the extraordinary success of their city as the customs they devise and eventually implement.
- 129.
More, Utopia, 216.5–6. In The Republic of Evandria, Zuccolo remarks that the citizens of his utopia—just like the Utopians—do not sack the city they conquer.
- 130.
More, Utopia, 216.6–8.
- 131.
Zuccolo’s criticism reveals yet another significant difference between his mindset and that of More . The main concern of Utopia’s author is the integration of those who have been defeated; from this standpoint, it is understandable that the people who opposed the Utopians more strenuously represent a possible risk as they may plot to rebel in the future. In this case, More’s idea of killing the more valiant amongst the enemies is justified and pragmatic, despite being quite ruthless. By contrast, Zuccolo takes the high moral ground and argues that people of noble character should always be respected and valued, even if they are enemies. In this specific instance, the roles are surprisingly reversed: More is the pragmatist, and Zuccolo the idealist. In the next lines, however, Zuccolo formulates also a pragmatic reason to reject the Utopists’ practice of killing the most courageous enemy soldiers, that is, the fear of death would push the enemies to fight more fiercely.
- 132.
Zuccolo attributes this quote to the Italian Renaissance humanist Lelio Gregorio Giraldo (1479–1552).
- 133.
They were the citizens of Numantia, a city in the North of Spain in what is currently the province of Soria. During the first century B.C.E., the Romans tried to conquer the city unsuccessfully for almost twenty years. It was only in 134 B.C.E. that Scipio Aemilianus managed to capture Numantia.
- 134.
Zuccolo’s remark points to a legitimate issue. Although the Utopians base their entire society on very strict moral principles, sometimes they have no hesitation in behaving in dishonest and cruel ways—especially, towards their enemies. In the case discussed in these lines, the Utopians go as far as trying to bankrupt the moral fabric the people they are fighting by promoting betrayals and bribes. Perhaps, Zuccolo implies that the Utopians are not sincerely moral and compassionate since, in the final analysis, they seem to care only for the well-being of the members of their society and not for the happiness of all human beings. If we extend the spirit of Zuccolo’s remark, we may speculate whether the Utopians’ practice of corrupting their enemies illuminates their true character. One may even wonder if the schizophrenic behavior of the Utopists (i.e., moral with their own, immoral towards others) is actually sustainable. If our reading of Zuccolo is accurate, this type of concern will make him a forerunner of the criticism formulated by some writers of dystopias. A recurrent theme in dystopian novels is how quickly seemingly goodhearted people act cruelly and ruthlessly towards those who threatened the status quo of their society.
- 135.
Petrarch, Trionfi, Triumphus temporis, v. 69
- 136.
Titus Livius, History of Rome, V.27.6.1.
- 137.
Tiberius (42 B.C.E. 37 C.E.) was the second emperor of Rome . His negative reputation as a depraved ruler is mainly due to the accounts of the historians Tacitus and Suetonius.
- 138.
He was the leader of the Germanic tribe of the Chatti. He lived in the first century C.E.
- 139.
Zuccolo’s examples, here as well as in other sections of Aromatario, reveal that the civic ideals of Republican Rome are one of his main moral and political models. In chapter eight, we discuss the influence of the myth of Republican Rome on Zuccolo’s utopian thought.
- 140.
Tacitus, Annales, II.88. Zuccolo outrightly rejects the Utopians’ attitude as per which only a victory obtained through slyness is to be celebrated because winning through mere physical strength befits beasts more than men (More, Utopia, 204.10–19). Although More uses the words “intelligence” (ingenium) and “reason” (ratio) to describe what the Utopians value most when fighting a war , the context makes quite apparent that what he has in mind in the ability to deceive the enemies. For a detailed examination of the Utopists’ attitude towards war see: McCutcheon , War Games in Utopia, 79–89.
- 141.
Louis XI (1423–1483) was the king of France from 1461 to 1483. He features prominently in chapter thirteen of The Prince where Machiavelli criticizes him for replacing his own infantry with Swiss mercenaries.
- 142.
Zuccolo seems to refer to Fabius Maximus (c. 280 B.C.E–203 B.C.E), the Roman politician famous for his role during Hannibal’s invasion of Italy in the Second Punic War . Unable to stop Hannibal, the Romans appointed Fabius Maximus as a dictator in order to address the emergency. He realized that the Carthaginian general was undefeatable on the battlefield and thus adopted guerrilla warfare that whittled down the enemy’s strength. Fabius Maximus was nicknamed the cunctator (the delayer) for his refusal to meet Hannibal in open battle, a strategy that proved successful in compelling the Carthaginians to leave Italy. In Roman history, he became a model of astuteness and patience. Fabius Maximus’ virtues were celebrated by Plutarch in the Life of Fabius—a text with which Zuccolo was well acquainted.
- 143.
Charles the Bold (1433–1477) was one of the major political figures of his time. From 1467 until 1477, he was the Duke of Burgundy—a region comprising of territories which today belong to Belgium, France, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands.
- 144.
The Count of Campobasso was Cola di Monforte (1422–1478), an Italian condottiero (military leader) who fought against the French on the side of the Charles the Bold.
- 145.
More, Utopia, 158.14–16-162.9. More devotes substantial attention to the Utopians’ “Epicurean” notion of happiness . The philosophy of Epicurus and, especially his notion of pleasure as the measure of happiness , received considerable attention in the Renaissance, especially amongst thinkers within More’s circle, such as Erasmus (Cf. Allan, The Rehabilitation of Epicurus; Surtz , Epicurus in Utopia). Zuccolo shows no interest in exploring the Utopians’ Epicureanism since he is predominantly focused on examining Utopia’s political structure.
- 146.
An Ancient Greek school of philosophy that was founded in the fourth-century B.C.E. by Aristippus of Cyrene. It was one of the minor Socratic schools. The Cyrenaics professed a form of hedonism as per which pleasure is the highest good. They did not consider pleasure to be only a matter of physical sensation; they also regarded intellectual pursuits and virtuous moral behaviors to be pleasurable. However, they favoured sensual pleasures over mental ones and rejected the idea of deferring immediate satisfaction in favor of long-term gains. Later on in the history of Greek thought, Epicurus formulated a “moderate” version of hedonism in which the pleasure to be sought is the absence of pain.
- 147.
More, Utopia, 218.1–27; 220.15–17; 222.5–224.3.
- 148.
Zuccolo is critical of one of the most innovative and progressive aspects of Utopia, that is, religious tolerance. However, his criticism is purely based on practical considerations. He notes that (1) religion is an effective way to unify the citizens and (2) true peaceful communion among them is impossible in its absence. Zuccolo’s remarks may appear to be unsubstantiated to an inexperienced reader, but anyone familiar with the Discourses can easily recognize the fact that he is alluding to Machiavelli’s analysis of religion. In chapters eleven to fifteen of book one of the Discourses, we find a detailed examination of the political utility religion had in Ancient Rome . In I.11, Machiavelli argues that Numa Pompilius is, perhaps, the King who performed the greatest service to Rome since he introduced religion and used it as a civilizing force. In I.12–15, the Florentine humanist offers several examples of how the Romans employed religion instrumentally to motivate soldiers to face great dangers, overcome civic unrest, and peacefully reorganize the political and legal system . In a nutshell, Machiavelli believes that religion has an unparalleled ability to persuade people to carry out virtually any enterprises—a power that is rendered necessary due to the difficulty of convincing people exclusively with rational arguments. Although Zuccolo clearly subscribes to Machiavelli’s view in Aromatario, his utopias (i.e., The Happy City and The Republic of Evandria) do not offer any considerations of religion’s ability to promote and maintain a civilized society. He does not discuss the role of religion even in those other works (e.g., Molino) where he examines the elements essential for a harmonious society. When assessing the validity of Zuccolo’s criticism of the Utopians’ religious tolerance, we may be inclined to think that he misses the point. More is not interested in the political utility of religion, but in avoiding conflicts between the followers of different faiths. Nonetheless, a sympathetic reader of Aromatario would be able to observe that Zuccolo is correct in pointing out that any consideration of the role of religion in a society cannot undermine its political significance. For a recent study of Machiavelli’s examination of religion, see Tarcov , Machiavelli’s Critique of Religion.
- 149.
Socrates was famously condemned to death by the Athenians on several charges of which, Zuccolo reports only the one that is relevant for the discussion at hand—the other allegation was that he corrupted the Athenian youths.
- 150.
The Twelve Tables constituted the basis of Roman laws. They were instituted around 450 B.C.E. by the Ten Men which Zuccolo had mentioned earlier on in the dialogue.
- 151.
The law is reported by Cicero in De legibus, II.19.
- 152.
Zuccolo is referring to the cynic philosopher Zolius of Amphipolis who lived in the fourth century B.C.E. His most famous work is the Homeric Questions in which he bitterly criticizes the Greek poet for his portrayal of the gods as immoral beings. Zolius came to be known as the “scourge of Homer” and was regarded as the very model of a harsh and nasty critic.
- 153.
This is one of the few passages where Zuccolo presents some of the general criteria he adopts in his criticism of More’s Utopia. He claims that his goal is only to alert his readers to some of the defects of the English Chancellor’s utopia so that people would take his ideas with a healthy dose of skepticism. On the whole, Zuccolo’s criticism is quite benign, which is not surprising, given that in Evandria he adopts more than a few of the Utopians’ customs.
- 154.
Zuccolo points out something that scholars have long noted, that is, many of the Utopians’ habits (e.g., communal meals , uniform dress, ascetic practices etc.) and values (e.g., recognizing the dignity of all kind of jobs, including manual labor) recall those of Christian monks. Hythloday observes that one of the main reasons why the Utopians approve of Christianity is that their communal way of life resembles that of the early Christian communities as well as monastic orders (Utopia, 220.2–4). The hypothesis that Utopia reflects the monastic model is further corroborated by More’s admiration of monasticism . As a young man, he contemplated becoming a monk and lived in a Carthusian monastery for four years. Later in his life, he regularly engaged in acts of penance typically performed by monks, such as wearing a hair shirt and whipping himself. He also adopted monastic practices in his household; for example, he began every meal with a reading on an edifying topic (Stapleton , More, 9; 97).
- 155.
Zuccolo refers to the fact that in Utopia, there is no absolute leader whose power extends over all the cites that make up the commonwealth.
- 156.
Zuccolo once again formulates the objection he had introduced at the very beginning of the dialogue: the diversity of the people who inhabits Utopia renders More’s idea of a society in which everybody adopts a communal way of life unconvincing. The rationale of Zuccolo’s objection is now more apparent: he thinks that More wants to extend the monastic model to an entire nation without considering the fact that monastic orders are constituted of highly homogenous and self-selected people.
- 157.
Zuccolo’s comment assumes significance since it shows that he is aware of the internal criticisms that More inserts in book two of Utopia—an aspect that was not fully appreciated by Renaissance readers.
- 158.
Zuccolo seems utterly unaware of Utopia’s ironic dimension.
- 159.
In the Renaissance, as well as in the Classical and Medieval world, reading a text aloud was a widespread practice. About the importance of orality in the Renaissance world see: Degl’Innocenti, Richardson , Sbordoni , Interactions between Orality and Writing.
- 160.
It is a small island situated in the northern part of the Venetian lagoon.
- 161.
Horace , The Art of Poetry, 21–22.
- 162.
Torquato Tasso, Jerusalem Delivered, II.69.
- 163.
Virgilio Malvezzi (1595–1654) was an Italian writer, military leader, and politician. His works were written in Italian and Spanish and were quite influential during the Renaissance; they were translated into Latin and several other European languages.
- 164.
Virgilio Malvezzi , Discorsi sopra Cornelio Tacito, 61–63. In these lines, Malvezzi formulates the view, which often recurs also in Machiavelli’s Discourse (e.g., I.4), according to which political tension not only plays a positive role, but also a necessary one in the life of a city or a state since it makes political and social reforms possible. Malvezzi distinguishes between two types of strife: a negative one that brings destruction and a positive one that creates a greater harmony. The latter type of strife is the one which also characterizes the universe in which tension between the movements of the different planets constitutes the overall balance of the cosmos.
- 165.
Most likely, Zuccolo is referring to the account of the Spartan king offered by Plutarch in his Life of Lycurgus.
- 166.
Archidamus was a common name amongst Spartan kings. Zuccolo is probably referring to Archidamus I who reigned during the seventh-century B.C.E.
- 167.
In The Happy City, Zuccolo examines in greater detail the idea, which he mentions briefly in these lines, as per which intelligent people often pose a challenge to civic harmony. He argues that clever people tend to be more ambitious and less inclined to conform to the views and decisions of others.
- 168.
Somewhat similarly to More’s Utopia, Zuccolo’s dialogue ends with a series of objections that remain unaddressed. See More, Utopia, 246.25–32.
- 169.
Petrarch, Il Canzoniere, CCCLX, 157. The last exchange between Donato and Aromatario may be considered as little more than scene setting, especially when considering the fact they do not reach a conclusion. We may think that Zuccolo added this section since he did not want to conclude the dialogue too abruptly at the end of Mr. Numidio’s speech. However, the comments mentioned in these lines are of critical importance, and there is good reason why they appear here and could not have been included in the speech. Mr. Numidio’s criticism of Utopia is not a dismissal of utopia per se or an outright rejection of More’s commonwealth, but only a critical evaluation of some features of the English chancellor’s ideal society. In a nutshell, Mr. Numidio approves utopian projects; he only has some doubts about More’s proposal. By contrast, the final remarks of Donato and Aromatario examine a potential objection to any utopian project, including that of Zuccolo. Donato adopts the view Machiavelli presents in the Discourses (e.g., I.4) whereby the right type of conflict amongst the citizens is not undesirable but necessary for a state to be just, free, and powerful. On this viewpoint, the fundamental problem of any utopia is that by eliminating conflict and creating a perfectly harmonious society, the utopists remove the very fuel that propels the citizens to build and maintain a great nation. This kind of criticism, which is the cornerstone of many dystopian novels, adds a new dimension to Aromatario: it reveals this dialogue to be a criticism not merely of Utopia, but of all utopias. However, Zuccolo does not embrace Donato’s implicit rejection of utopia in entirety; Aromatario’s rebuttal and further comments alert the reader that while the role of conflict in a society is a serious issue, it is not something that can be settled easily. In other words, the attack against utopia is launched but then deflected immediately.
- 170.
Zuccolo adopts a literary trope common to Renaissance utopias that he himself employs in The Republic of Evandria: he promises to continue the discussion on the ideal society at some point in the future. See Doni, WMW, Campanella, COS, 58.1299, 59.1315–1317; More, Utopia, 248.6–9.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Aelian. 1914. Historical Miscellany. Edited and Translated by Nigel G. Wilson. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Agostini, Ludovico. 1957. La Repubblica Immaginaria. Torino: Ramella.
Aristotle. 1963. Politica. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
———. 1997. Politics: Books VII and VIII. Ed. Richard Kraut. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Campanella, Tommaso. 1637. Politica. In Philosophia realis. Paris.
———. 1997. La città del Sole. Milano: Laterza.
Machiavelli, Niccolò. 1961. Il Principe. Torino: Einaudi.
———. 1971. Dell’arte della Guerra. Sansoni: Firenze.
———. 2000. Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio. Torino: Einaudi.
Malvezzi, Virgilio. 1653. Discorsi sopra Cornelio Tacito. Venice.
More, Thomas. 1995. Utopia: Latin Text and English Translation. Edited and Translated by George M. Logan, Robert M. Adams and Clarence H. Miller. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Patrizi, Francesco. 1534. De institutione reipublicae, Paris.
———. 1553. La città Felice. Venezia.
———. 1941. In La città Felice. In Utopisti e riformatori sociali del Cinquecento, ed. Carlo Curcio, 119–142. Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli Editore.
Petrarca, Francesco. 2005. Il Canzoniere. Torino: Einaudi.
Plutarch. 1914. Lives, Volume I: Theseus and Romulus. Lycurgus and Numa. Solon and Publicola. Edited and Translated by Bernadotte Perrin. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Zuccolo, Lodovico. 1622. Considerazioni politiche, e morali sopra cento oracoli d’illustri personaggi antichi. Venezia.
———. 1625. Dialoghi. Venezia.
———. 1629. Il Secolo dell’oro: rinascente nella amicitia fra Nicolò Barbarigo e Marco Trivisano, Nobili Venetiani gli Amici Heroi. Venezia.
———. 1631. Discorso dello Amore verso la Patria. Venezia.
———. 1927. Della Ragione di stato. La Critica 25: 117–128.
———. 1929. Il Belluzzi ovvero “La Città felice”. Ed. Amy A. Bernardy. Bologna: Zanichelli.
———. 1944. La Repubblica di Evandria e altri dialoghi politici. Ed. Rodolfo De Mattei. Roma: Colombo Editore.
Secondary Sources
Allen, Don Cameron. 1944. The Rehabilitation of Epicurus and His Theory of Pleasure in the Early Renaissance. Studies in Philology 41 (1): 1–15.
Avineri, Shlomo. 1962. War And Slavery in More’s Utopia. International Review of Social History 7 (2): 260–290.
Baldissone, Giusi. 1990. Teoria e storia dei generi letterari. I mondi impossibili: l’utopia. Torino: Tirrenia Stampatori.
Degl’Innocenti, Luca, Brian Richardson, and Chiara Sbordoni, eds. 2016. Interactions Between Orality and Writing in Early Modern Italian Culture. New York: Routledge.
Eliav-Feldon, Miriam. 1982. Realistic Utopias. The Ideal Imaginary Societies of the Renaissance 1516–1630. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Faini, Marco. 2016. A Ghost Academy between Venice and Brescia: Philosophical Scepticism and Religious Heterodoxy in the Accademia dei Dubbiosi. In The Italian Academies 1525–1700: Networks of Culture, Knowledge and Dissent, ed. Sampson Lisa, Jane E. Everson, and Denis V. Reidy, 120–135. Oxford: Legenda.
Gullino, Giuseppe. 1991. Donà Francesco. In Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, vol. 40, 724–728. Roma: Istituto della enciclopedia italiana.
Manuel, Frank Edward, and Fritzie Prigohzy Manuel. 1979. Utopian Thought in the Western World. Cambridge: Belknap Press.
McCutcheon, Elizabeth. 2015. Puns, Paradoxes, and Heuristic Inquiry. The De Servis Section of More’s Utopia. Moreana 52 (3–4): 91–100.
Stapleton, Thomas. 1984. The Life and Illustrious Martyrdom of Sir Thomas More. New York: Fordham University.
Surtz, Edward L. 1949. Epicurus in utopia. ELH 16 (2): 89–103.
Tarcov, Nathan. 2014. Machiavelli’s Critique of Religion. Social Research: An International Quarterly 81 (1): 193–216.
Tower Sargent, Lyman. 2010. Utopianism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Donato, A. (2019). Translation of Aromatario or The Republic of Utopia by Lodovico Zuccolo. In: Italian Renaissance Utopias. Palgrave Studies in Utopianism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03611-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03611-9_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03610-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03611-9
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)