The Liturgy of Knowledge in the Heaven of the Sun

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

On p. 1.35-36 and elsewhere, the author makes claims about contentiousness and a lack of peace in intellectual circles of Dante's time, but none of these claims are supported with evidence. The author should provide more bibliographic references to support these generalizations, especially since this special issue is themed around the academic world. It would be especially compelling if the author could show that medieval thinkers explicitly used vocabulary of "peace" (or lack thereof) to talk about intellectual debates.

The author makes various references to a first-person plural: how "we" view the poem, how "we" interpret Dante's words, and so on (e.g. pages 2.90-91, 3.151, 4.166). This becomes most problematic at the end of p. 6 when the author begins making claims about how "we" perceive reality and faith; these claims are surely not generalizable to everyone. The author should consider what is actually meant by "we" or "us" and use more precision to discuss Dante's audience.

On p. 6 the author asserts that "liturgical hermeneutics" is exemplified by Catholic Mass, and this seems to be a key point. However, the introduction and earlier part of the essay do not prepare readers for the essay's later focus on Mass. The introduction should be revised to frame the argument that will actually be made. The term "liturgical hermeneutics" should be clearly defined towards the start of the essay.

To support the idea that Mass is Dante's model for the peace of the heaven of the sun, it would be very helpful to include more liturgical material in the body of the essay. Footnotes 9, 10, 20, 24 contain interesting material that could be expanded on; it is currently difficult to assess the relevance of the author's thesis without some more tangible evidence of how Mass was conducted/perceived in the Middle Ages. The author tends to appeal to general notions of how "we" feel or how "we" experience science/reality/the celebration of Mass, but since nobody reading this essay is a medieval Christian, "our" feelings are irrelevant. I strongly recommend that the author move away from first-person language and instead concentrate on textual evidence to support the analogy between Mass and the heaven of the sun.

The relevance of the discussion of marriage on p. 10 was not entirely clear to me.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The article has many run-on sentences that should be streamlined or broken into shorter sentences for clarity. The very first sentence is an example of this.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for taking the time to read and make helpful comments on my article.

I have added some more specific bibliographical references in support of my claims regarding the contentiousness of the intellectual environment of the time. I have not provided an overview of the use of vocabulary related to peace in the debates of the times, mainly because this is an element peculiar to Dante's conception of theology and was not popular at the time - Baranski has dealt with this problem, and I have provided the references to his work where he discusses this key point.

I have revised the language and the rhetoric of the article, simplifying the structure of long sentences and avoiding the use of "we" and "us", as suggested, and I have provided some more evidence instead. I have therefore added some more material from the liturgical sources, even though it was difficult to use direct quotations (because of the nature of such texts). I have quoted some example for the text where possible, but I have provided more explanations mostly paraphrasing the sources.

I have anticipated the idea of using the Mass as the environment able to shape Dante's idea of 'theology as peace', and I have clarified and expanded section two, in which I outline the features of this liturgical hermeneutics. However, I have chosen not to introduce the term liturgical hermeneutics right at the beginning of the article. I deemed as necessary to highlight the ongoing discussions within the scholarship regarding the themes touched upon in the article, in order to show the compelling way in which my approach deals with those problems, offering possible answers.

I have also clarified the connection between Dante's use of spousal imagery and his way to frame the intellectual act of knowledge performed in the practice of theology and philosophy.

I hope this sounds all clear. Thank you again for your time.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper proposes a liturgical hermeneutical approach to reading Dante, which "necessarily involve[s] the interplay between textual definitions and embodied performances."  The author uses this approach to understand what Dante means by theology as peace and arrives at a definition through the hermeneutical liturgical reading of key passages from the Convivio and the Paradiso. I am sympathetic to what the author is attempting.  Although it might seem so from this submission, the author is not alone in proposing liturgical and/or performative approaches to reading Dante.  There is a whole group of Dantists who more or less share the perspective and premises of this author (Treherne, Montemaggi, Phillips-Robins, even Heather Webb).  I am not sure why they are not referenced explicitly. In any case, the article gives an example of this approach which, after revision, merits publication.I found the essay's rhetoric somewhat overblown and the writing often unfocused.  I recommend thoroughly revising language and style for a more succinct and perspicacious presentation.  Numerous passages require revision for syntax, style, and diction. Many sentences and paragraphs require adjustment from these perspectives; for example, lines  113-141; 144-145 is not a sentence; 153-156, like many sentences and passages, are not very clearly expressed.   The whole piece needs thorough editing.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The essay needs thorough revision for language and style.  I would suggest seeking editorial assistance.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for taking the time to review my manuscript and provide helpful suggestions.

The reason why in this article I had only referenced Treherne is because there are no specific works of Phillips-Robins, Montemaggi, or even Martinez on the canti of the Heaven of the Sun. Most of the works are on Purgatorio or the Heaven of the Fixed Stars. However, I realise the importance of contextualising my approach, therefore I added a brief reference to the ongoing discussions on the importance of liturgy for the reading of the poem and I provided a few important bibliographical references.

I have revised the rhetoric the article, making it more plain and focussed. In terms of the structure, I have streamlined and/or broken into shorter sentences the long ones, especially those in which some complex key point were expressed. I checked diction and spelling, and I had the article proofread.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Much improved. Nihil obstat.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Much improved. Nihil obstat.