Dantean Dialogues: Engaging with the Legacy of Amilcare Iannucci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seminar regularly featured seasoned scholars from the United States and abroad, from Maristella Lorch to Cesare Segre, but Della Terza also ensured that younger scholars-including his own protégés-enjoyed the opportunity to present.It was in that context that I first met and heard fellow Harvard alumnus Amilcare Iannucci speak.Born in 1946, the Canadian-Italian scholar was barely past thirty years of age when he returned to Cambridge, Massachusetts, and confidently held forth at the seminar in Boylston Hall.Following his remarks, our mutual professor Nicolae Iliescu intoned that I would do well to follow Iannucci's example.From that moment I paid close attention to Amilcare's career and publications, and doing so influenced the direction of my professional life and likewise enriched it.Two decades later, in a 1996 Speculum book review of Dante e la "bella scola" della poesia: Autorità e sfida poetica, one of the most influential volumes that Iannucci edited, I wrote that "Amilcare Iannucci possesses a trait rare among North American Dante scholars -an altruistic interest in editing and promoting collaborative efforts that draw from both sides of the Atlantic."The magnificently edited, in memoriam volume now under review follows that same collaborative pattern and stands as a fitting tribute to a scholar who relished editing and collaborating with colleagues around the globe.Indeed, I am humbled to review a volume so lovingly and painstakingly produced in his memory.Dantean Dialogues gathers eight essays by distinguished contributors who "worked closely with Amilcare in one way or another, and their essays take up questions or episodes that he had influentially examined and reflect the variety of his interests" (x).In addition, the volume contains an informative preface; a concise section on the contributors; a useful "Bibliography of Works by Amilcare Iannucci," including 11 books (10 of which he edited), 64 peer-reviewed articles, and two videocassettes; and a note clarifying the editions and translations of Dante drawn upon.The essays themselves are intentionally paired.The first two, by Zygmunt Barański and Teodolinda Barolini, treat Dante's earliest works, the Vita nova and the Rime.The second pair, by Robert Hollander and Elena Lombardi, take
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".