Any approach to the legacy of Antonio Gramsci represents a substantial challenge. Today, the thinking of this Italian intellectual is not only acknowledged as one of the most significant contributions to 20th century social theory, but has also been one of the most frequently employed frameworks for different disciplines and approaches. His categories, and especially his further development of the concept of hegemony, have provided the basis for new approaches in fields that include international relations, political theory, critical geography, literary criticism, media studies, and feminism, and for entirely new fields such as cultural and postcolonial studies. 1 The international success of Gramsci's work, now considered essential reading in political theory, derived from the political and cultural atmosphere of Cold War Europe as well as from its very favorable reception within the emancipation movements in the United States.While this first phase of the international spread of Gramsci's thinking was characterized by the explicitly political use of his writing within the context of Marxist internationalism (Liguori, 2012), a second phase, coinciding with the new century and reaching almost all corners of the globe, has been characterized by a shift in the application of Gramscian theoretical instruments which has sometimes resulted in the detachment, often unintentional, of his concepts from the Marxist spheres in which they were forged (Filippini, 2017;Frosini, 2008).The "globalization" of Gramsci, or, to paraphrase Dipesh Chakrabarty (2000), the provincialization of Gramsci (meaning the fragmentation and weakening of Gramsci's concepts as a way of giving them new life in different contexts; see also Harootunian, 2020) is not incompatible with a philological reading of his work, as Joseph Buttigieg (1990) and Italian scholarship have abundantly demonstrated (