In the last episode of this podcast, we've looked at Count Ugolino's speech as a narrative arc, taking apart and looking at the ways both the poet Dante has changed the historical record and the details that may be too removed by time for us to see clearly.

Join me, Mark Scarbrough, as we now situate the last great sinner of hell, Count Ugolino, inside the larger framework of Dante's INFERNO. Ugolino gets the longest speech in INFERNO. What's it doing here? How does it echo other parts of INFERNO? How does it sum up INFERNO?

Giant questions with attempted answers--as always on this podcast. Here are the segments of this episode:

[01:42] Once again, my English translation of this passage: INFERNO, Canto XXXIII, lines 1 - 78. If you'd like to read along, print it off, or drop a comment, please go to my website, markscarbrough.com.

[06:52] Here's a list of the seven great sinners of INFERNO: Francesca da Rimini, Farinata degli Uberti, Pier della Vigne, Brunetto Latini, Ulysses, Guido da Montefeltro, and Count Ugolino.

[13:04] The great sinners convey dramatic stories, provoke profound ambivalences, and offer a deeper understanding of the human condition.

[19:16] Count Ugolino and Archbishop Ruggieri as one of the three great pairs in INFERNO.

[20:23] Echoes between Francesca da Rimini and Count Ugolino: the beginnings and endings of INFERNO.

[23:15] Echoes among Francesca, Ugolino, and Aeneas: heroism or irony?

[26:15] Echoes between Ciacco the glutton and Ugolino: the insanity of the damned, the trustworthiness of the damned.

[29:40] Echoes between Filippo Argenti and Ugolino: the uses of rage.

[30:56] Echoes between Farinata and Ugolino: the possibilities of peace.

[34:54] Echoes between Cavalcante and Ugolino: where is my son?

[36:31] The schismatics and Ugolino: the body in pain, the body in political strife.

[38:46] Four possible reasons for Ugolino's placement in INFERNO: 1) as a test for the reader, 2) as a tragic figure of fallen humanity, 3) as a ravenous wolf who blocks the way (as in Canto 1), and 4) as a repeated strategy of moving from narrative clarity to interpretive murk.