John Freccero

682 citations
33 papers · 239 · h-index 7

Impact in

  • Classics top 5%
    • Medieval Literature and History
    • Renaissance Literature and Culture
    • Byzantine Studies and History
  • History top 1%
    • Renaissance and Early Modern Studies
    • Reformation and Early Modern Christianity

Papers in

John Freccero

22 papers receiving 88 citations

Peers

John Freccero
Comparison fields: 5 of 26
  • Classics 125
  • History 136
  • Literature and Literary Theory 78
  • General Arts and Humanities 6
  • Anthropology 25
Replace Robert M. Durling with:
Robert M. Durling
Conor Fahy
Albert Russell Ascoli United States
Robert J. Clements United States
Aldo S. Bernardo United States
E. Michael Gerli United States
Robert W. Hanning United States
N. D. Shergold United Kingdom
Torquato Tasso
Larry Scanlon United States
John Freccero relative to Robert M. Durling Robert M. Durling's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2×
Robert M. Durling · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by John Freccero

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of John Freccero's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by John Freccero with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites John Freccero more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by John Freccero

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by John Freccero. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by John Freccero. The network helps show where John Freccero may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 5 scholars most cited alongside John Freccero, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with John Freccero Line = papers co-authored together John Freccero links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 33 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 197580
2 198640
3 198927
4
Dante: A Collection of Critical Essays
196515
5 198714
6 19638
7 19727
8 19656
9 19875
10 19595
11 19844
12 19654
13 19613
14 19593
15 19652
16 19622
17 20072
18 19612
19 19642
20 20181

About John Freccero

John Freccero is a scholar working on History, Literature and Literary Theory, Philosophy, Classics and Religious studies, having authored 33 papers that have together received 239 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Renaissance and Early Modern Studies (14 papers), French Literature and Criticism (2 papers), Renaissance Literature and Culture (2 papers), Phytochemistry and biological activities of Ficus species (2 papers), Historical and Linguistic Studies (2 papers), Biblical Studies and Interpretation (2 papers), Violence, Religion, and Philosophy (1 paper) and Modernist Literature and Criticism (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Classics (125 citations), History (136 citations), Literature and Literary Theory (78 citations), General Arts and Humanities (6 citations) and Anthropology (25 citations). John Freccero has collaborated with scholars based in United States. Frequent co-authors include María Rosa Menocal, Deborah K. Parker, Erich Auerbach, Joseph T. Gallagher and Peter Armour. Their work appears in journals such as MLN, diacritics, The Modern Language Review, ELH and PMLA/Publications of the Modern Language Association of America.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact