My paper focuses on the profound influence that Leopardi’s works had on Nietzsche, who considered him as a pessimist in the same manner as Schopenhauer. In particular, I will analyze the concept of the “Overhistorical” (das Überhistorische) in the second Unzeitgemässe Betrachtung and the concept of the “eternal recurrence” in Also sprach Zarathustra. Furthermore, I will dwell on Nietzsche’s encounter with Leopardi’s poetry.

The theory of the great man (grand homme) was born in relation to the possibility of a radical change in the social history of a specific era. The grand homme shows himself as a sort of higher interpreter of the best qualities of the average man, the one who synthesizes and exalts these qualities, with an empathetic approach of sharing them with the whole mass of average men. Starting from here, Antonio Di Meo addresses the subject of the relationship between the average man and the charismatic leader in the analysis by Gramsci.

The subtitle of my essay – Nietzsche e Leopardi. «Il filosofo della conoscenza tragica» – resumes a phrase that appears at the incipit of fragment 35 of the 19th Group of Friedrich Nietzsche’s Posthumous Fragments, dating from summer 1872 – early 1873. This is a fragment that, in my opinion, can be an effective start point to establish a line of Nietzsche’s confrontation with Giacomo Leopardi, without requiring a full discussion of the widely studied relationship. The phrase defines the philosopher, in his Greek excellence, but also in his timelessness. I will try to demonstrate how this fragment can be read together as a self-definition of the philosopher in Nietzsche and as an indicator of the philosophical specificity of Leopardi’s work. Nietzsche’s tension over the passage of the human being and his figuration of the last philosopher finds a possible similarity to what leads Leopardi to deal with the ‘ultra-philosophy’. But Leopardi, more and differently than Nietzsche, remains a «philosopher of tragic knowledge»: he survives with the poetic word to the «arido vero», that, «conoscendo l’intiero intimo delle cose», never permanently breaks the bonds with the «misterio grande» of the nature.

Even though in the last fifteen years, the research on Scaravelli has clarified some aspects of his life which were not know to Mario Corsi, the editor of Scaravelli’s writings, at the time of the interview, his answers keep the memory of some small facts, some judgments and circumstances that contribute to the realness of his narration. This interview, within the limits and the richness of a personal narration, may also enrich the biography of the author of the Criticism of understanding, which still awaits its publication.

In the following interview, released in April 2016, Alberto Gajano describes his student experience at the University of Pisa in the 1950s when he used to attend classes of Luigi Scaravelli and Giorgio Colli. In relating some moments about his personal story with Scaravelli and Colli, the testimony of Gajano contributes to enrich the biography of the two Italian thinkers.

In the following interview, Francesca Menegoni addresses the subject of the legacy of Hegelian studies in Italy, starting with the report held during the XXIII Deutscher Kongress für Philosophie and now published in the volume Geschichte – Gesellschaft – Geltung (Meiner 2016) edited by Michael Quante. According to Menegoni, today’s Italian philosophy shows the same articulated and fragmented framework that marks contemporary philosophy. In this context, although Hegelian studies are still relevant, they appear to be a small part of the Italian philosophical research as a whole. From her ideal journey through several Italian universities, Menegoni infers the impression – to be verified and studied in depth – that Hegelian studies are based on theoretical lines rooted in the specific philosophical traditions that belong to each of these academic realities.