• Publicationsclose
• Research dataclose
• 2013-2022close
• Part of book or chapter of book close
• Flore (Florence Research Repository) close
• GNOSIS Institutional Repository close
• Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage close

Considering the built environment as the most enduring receiver of human behaviour, one can easily assume vernacular heritage as an objective consequence of the essential features of specific local communities. [...]

Starting from the example of San Miniato al Monte, the essay dwells on the relationship existing between Florentine aristocracy and religious institutions. These were indispensable elements for the occupation of the urban ‘political space’, thanks to the social networks they controlled. Their political role – until now poorly investigated – was clearly recognised by the new ruling groups (Popolo). For this reason, the Florentine Popolo’s regime at the end of the thirteenth century tried to break the connection between aristocratic families and religious institutions, also through the use of precise rules that had become part of the Ordinamenti di Giustizia.

In this article, the author analyzes how the broad theme of the reception of Humanism and Renaissance is treated in two important histories of Ukrainian literature, respectively Muza Roksolans’ka. Ukrajins’ka literatura XVI-XVIII stolit’ by Valerij Ševčuk (Kyiv, “Lybid'”, 2004-2005), in two volumes, and Istorija ukrajins’koji literatury in twelve volumes (2014-) published by the publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine Naukova Dumka. The disappearance of Soviet ideological constraints has brought about the emergence of various aspects of this theme: the multilingualism (especially as regards literature written in Latin), the multiple identity of writers of the so-called Pohranyččja, the literature written in Latin, are just a few. However, some aspects still need to be addressed: among then the supranational approach should be adequately considered when dealing with the spread of Humanism-Renaissance.

Although still in a provisional form, as befits a field of study still undergoing consolidation, the text tries to summarize the results that emerged from the contributions collected in the volume and from their comparison; outlining, even before real conclusions, a series of clues, cues and problematic issues with which scientific reflection will have to face in the near future. Therefore, they are to be read as many beginnings of research paths, to be followed towards a plausible way of including ecosystem services in the bioregional planning of the territory.