The methodological debate on the process of eliminatio codicum descriptorum that developed during the 20th century has revealed its full complexity. While the discussion is still open, and often divides between formalist and historicist approaches, certain practices that characterised 19th-century publishing customs have now been wholly rejected in theoretical terms. Consequently, the employment of the expression ‘codex deterior’ for defining the value of a manuscript witness on the basis of its intrinsic characteristics has been superseded by formulations such as ‘codex inutilis’ or ‘dependent witness’, which are based on demonstrable relationships between witnesses. Nevertheless, some obsolete methods persist in recent editions of medieval Latin texts. This is due to the challenges posed by particularly complex textual traditions, as well as a reluctance to implement innovative solutions. Reflection on this topic is informed by two case studies that reveal certain shortcomings in the interpretation of the manuscript tradition and in the application of effective and correct editorial criteria. The works under consideration are Walafrid Strabo’s Visio Wettini and Petrarch’s Variae.

When a work is based on faulty sources, its edition poses complex questions for the philologist, who has to reconstruct the history of the text and of its auctoritas. This article gives examples from the Latin Middle Ages: specifically, with regard to the tradition of the Moralia in Iob by Gregory the Great. This exegetical work was used by Iohannes of Cluny for his Sententiae morales in Iob and by Adalbertus of Metz for his Speculum Gregorii, but studies dedicated to these latter works have not examined in depth their relationships with the codices of the Moralia, which still lack a reliable edition. An appropriate methodological approach (exemplified by Gamberini’s edition of Rabanus Maurus’ Expositio on the Lamentationes of Jeremiah) would integrate analysis of linguistic usus with analysis of the manuscript traditions of the work and of its sources, in order to clarify the interrelation between textus and auctoritates, to decide whether to amend, and to define what can be considered the original text.

This paper outlines the multifaceted intellectual profile of Nina Kaucisvili (1919–2000), from her cosmopolitan education to the development of her distinguished career as a scholar and professor of Russian literature. Her research and teaching primarily focused on the works of Dostoevskij and Gogol’ from the nineteenth century, and Andrej Belyj from the twentieth, applying the theories of the Russian formalists—particularly those of Jurij Lotman—to the analysis of their writings. A significant phase of her scholarly activity centered on the philosophical and aesthetic works of Pavel Florenskij.Thanks to her exceptional ability to identify innovative research directions and to foster opportunities for scholarly debate with leading international experts, the Slavic Department at the University of Bergamo became a major hub for Russian studies. The international academic community recognized not only her original approach to Russian-Italian cultural relations, but also her efforts to broaden cultural discourse to include twentieth-century Russian spirituality, both within Russia and in emigration.

Book Review

Book Review

Book Review

Book Review

Book Review

Book Review

Professors from Poland have always been relatively numerous at Italian universities. The time-span 1990–2020 has seen some significant changes owing not only to a natural generational turnover, but also to processes that affect the reasons and ways that lead them to the Peninsula. The article deals primarily with researchers who managed to become faculty members at Italian universities. These scholars have created a wide range of materials for teaching and popularising Polish language and literature, thus continuing the trend initiated in the previous years. Most of them were active as specialists in Polish studies (mainly in the field of literature), but this is by far not a general rule. Some of the fields which were frequently investigated by these scholars are the following ones: the relations between Poland and Italy, the circulation of texts, writers, and motifs, Polish diaspora in Italy, and the history of translations and translation studies.