It is not easy to analyse a complex figure like Silvio Palazzi (1892-1979). Without a doubt, he was one of the most prominent figures in the Italian odontostomatology scene for about fifty years and one of the absolute protagonists of the transition of Italian dentistry from the pioneering era to the scientific. He was certainly a precursor and a man with an open mind, endowed with a broad vision. Palazzi had an eclectic, versatile personality, from certain points of view even brilliant but also unpredictable and difficult to understand. He was at the centre of Italian dentistry's academic and professional life; few can boast of a didactic, clinical, scientific activity like his. Having become, at a young age, the director of a clinic that was still little more than a dental practice, he was able to make it grow, revitalise it, bring it to a level of excellence that had no comparison in Italy but that could be compared to that of the great European dental clinics. He was the author of a "Treaty of Odontology" (which had seven editions) on which entire generations of dentists were formed, and he wrote over five hundred scientific publications in all the fields of Odontostomatology. He particularly favoured histological and histochemical investigations, as he often recalled, for having been trained in this sense by his attendance at the Institute of General Pathology of Pavia directed by Camillo Golgi (1843-1926, Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1906). In the clinical field, every sector of the dental discipline saw him as an attentive and passionate scholar, in particular of Endodontics and Period ontology. Furthermore, he was a pioneer of implantology when this branch received more criticism than success and began research on the prophylactic action of fluoride when many were against it. He fought assiduously for a different Italian dental legislation: he was a convinced supporter of a special Degree Course for the preparation of the future dentists, already in the Fifties. Since this project seemed difficult to carry out, he proposed, if nothing else, the requirement of a post-graduate specialisation to guarantee suitable training to dental practitioners. Despite this, due to his often aggressive and argumentative attitude, he lost the friendship of many colleagues and created numerous enemies. Certainly, he was a character who cannot go unnoticed and who, forty years after his death, deserves a careful historical evaluation.
