Part of my work is guided by the assumption that Machiavelli bestowed his names carefully such that their signification is important for interpreting the works in which they feature. This is in line with a certain tradition[2] including, for example, Ovid and Boccaccio, both of which authors Machiavelli avidly read.
For example, in his Amores, Ovid tells us about the bawd Dipsa and her name in H. T. Riley’s translation from 1885: “From fact does she derive her name” (ex re nomen habet), thus linking the figure’s name and character (as it were).[1]
Again, Boccaccio, in his Decameron, explicitly links the names of his figures with that which they will represent further on when he says in the introduction to Day 1, and right before listing the members of his brigata : “Wherefore, that what each says may be apprehended without confusion, I intend to give them names more or less appropriate to the character of each.” (Cited after J. J. Rigg’s translation, 1921)
Concerning Machiavelli, and given that his Clizia is closely modelled on Plautus’ Casina,consider, for example, his renaming of Cleostrata, the wife of the elderly lover, “Sofronia.”He himself implies the significance of this particular change when he has Nicomaco say to his wife in II.3: “Sofronia, Sofronia, whoever bestowed that name on you was utterly lucid!” [my translation] (Sofronia, Sofronia, chi ti pose questo nome non sognava!)
Also, concerning the same play, A. R. Ascoli argued that Machiavelli’s choice of “Nicomaco” and “Pirro” is derived from the figures Nicostrato and Pirro in Boccaccio’s Decameron VII.9, including their signification.[3]
In a forthcoming text, I propose that Machiavelli’s choice of renaming Plautus’ Casina “Clizia” implies not only that the respective passage from Ovid’s Metamorphoses (Book IV)can help to elucidate Clizia, the play, but also that Ovid in general plays a more important role than perhaps previously thought.
————————————–
[1] For general remarks on the link between ethymology and names in literature, see “Etymologie als Denkform” in E. R. Curtius, Europäische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter, 5. Auflage Bern und München: Francke Verlag, 1965), 486-490.
[2] For more on the figure, see K. Sara Myers, “The Poet and the Procuress: The Lena in Latin Love Elegy,” The Journal of Roman Studies 86 (1996): 1-21.
[3] A. R. Ascoli, “Pyrrhus’ Rules: Playing with Power from Boccaccio to Machiavelli,” MLN 114, no. 1 (1999): 14-57, esp. 48-54 on Machiavelli.