Abstract
Before launching into the discussions and debates at the heart of this volume, a number of disclaimers and caveats are in order. First of all, this is not primarily a book on Ibn Rushd, the renowned judge, physician and commentator of Aristotle who lived in twelfth-century al-Andalus, but on a cultural phenomenon known since the thirteenth century as Averroism. This is no terminological hair-splitting on our part: keeping this difference in mind while reading the book is crucial. That the commentator Ibn Rushd was also a thinker in his own right adds to the difficulties in disentangling the nature of the authorial intention in his work. Some initial terminological qualifications, we hope, will shed light on the linguistic and cultural complexities of the matter: in this volume, the name ‘Ibn Rushd’ denotes the actual historical figure, whereas his literary incarnation in translations and philosophical treatises of the Latin West will be referred to as ‘Averroes’. We have taken special care in distinguishing between ‘Averroan’, ‘Averroist’ and ‘Averroistic’ every time we thought it necessary to alert the reader to the constantly intersecting levels of history and historiography.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See Jean-Baptiste Brenet, Transferts du sujet: La noétique d’Averroès selon Jean de Jandun (Paris: Vrin, 2003), p. 16, n. 1: ‘“Rushdien” désigne ce qui ressortit à Averroès (et non à son interprétation latine), ou à Ibn Rushd (lorsqu’on fait référence à des oeuvres que les Latins n’avaient pas).’ On the many cultural and linguistic complexities involving Averroes’s reception in the Latin West, see Alain de Libera, ‘Introduction’, in Averroès, L’intelligence et la pensée. Sur le De anima, ed. by A. de Libera (Paris: Flammarion, 1998), pp. 7–45.
- 2.
As pointed out by Massimo Campanini, ‘an aura of militant intellectualism’ has always surrounded the many incarnations of Averroism in European culture. See his Averroè (Bologna: il Mulino, 2007), p. 8.
- 3.
See, for instance, P. O. Kristeller, ‘Paduan Averroism and Alexandrism in the Light of Recent Studies’, in Id., Renaissance Thought and the Arts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990 [1964, 1980]), pp. 111–118 (113).
- 4.
Jacopo Zabarella, Liber de mente humana, in De rebus naturalibus libri XXX (Frankfurt: Lazar Zetzner, 1607; repr. Frankfurt: Minerva, 1966), c. 963CDE. See also Tommaso Campanella, Del senso delle cose e della magia, ed. by Germana Ernst (Rome and Bari: Laterza, 2007), p. 84: ‘seguirà che, uno intendendo una cosa, tutti l’intenderiano per l’unità dell’intelletto.’
- 5.
Averroes, Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis De anima libros, ed. F. Stuart Crawford (Cambridge, MA: The Medieval Academy of America, 1953) p. 485; Long Commentary on the De anima of Aristotle, ed. and trans. Richard C. Taylor (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009), p. 387.
- 6.
Dominique Urvoy, Ibn Rushd (Averroes)(London: Routledge, 1991), p. 75.
- 7.
Campanini, Averroè, p. 42.
- 8.
See infra in this volume, John Marenbon, ‘Ernest Renan and Averroism: The Story of a Misinterpretation’; James E. Montgomery, ‘Leo Strauss and the Alethiometer’; Anna Akasoy, ‘Was Ibn Rushd an Averroist? The Problem, the Debate, and its Philosophical Implications’.
- 9.
Brian Copenhaver, ‘Ten Arguments in Search of a Philosopher: Averroes and Aquinas in Ficino’s Platonic Theology’, Vivarium, 47 (2009), pp. 444–479.
- 10.
See infra in this volume, Michael J. B. Allen, ‘Marsilio Ficino on Saturn, the Plotinian Mind, and the Monster of Averroes’; Craig Martin, ‘Humanism and the Assessment of Averroes in the Renaissance’.
- 11.
In this sense, Renaissance authors such as Tiberio Bacilieri and Girolamo Cardano did not find the presence of Themistian themes in Averroes particularly surprising. After all, ironic as they seem to us, eclectic accretions are the stuff of the history of human thought; ‘it is more than a little ironic’, writes Richard C. Taylor, that ‘the foundational consideration that motivated this famous Aristotelian commentator is primarily derived from the Neoplatonic analysis of intellect provided by Themistius in his Paraphrase of the De Anima’. See Taylor, ‘Intelligibles in Act in Averroes’, in Averroès et les averroïsmes juif et latin, ed. Jean-Baptiste Brenet (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007), pp. 111–140 (140).
- 12.
See infra in this volume Marco Sgarbi, ‘Immanuel Kant, Universal Understanding, and the Meaning of Averroism in the German Enlightenment’.
- 13.
Ambrogio Leone, ‘Lector optime’, in Castigationes adversus Averroem (Venice: Bernardino and Matteo Vitali, 1517) [no page number]. On Leone, see Leen Spruit, ‘Leone, Ambrogio’, in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani (Istituto dell’Enciclopedia Italiana: Rome, 1960-), LXIV, pp. 560–562.
- 14.
Ambrogio Leone to Pope Leo X, in Leone, Castigationes adversus Averroem [no page number].
- 15.
Gregorio Piaia, ‘Averroes and Arabic Philosophy in the Modern Historia Philosophica: Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’.
- 16.
Sgarbi, ‘Immanuel Kant, Universal Understanding, and the Meaning of Averroism in the German Enlightenment’, in this volume, pp. 255–269.
- 17.
Anna Akasoy, ‘Was Ibn Rushd an Averroist?’, in this volume.
- 18.
Charles B. Schmitt, ‘Renaissance Averroism Studied through the Venetian Editions of Aristotle-Averroes (with Particular Reference to the Giunta Edition of 1550–2)’, originally in L’averroismo in Italia (Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1979), pp. 121–142; repr. in Charles B. Schmitt, The Aristotelian Tradition and Renaissance Universities (London: Variorum Reprints, 1984), pp. 121–142; Copenhaver, ‘Ten Arguments’, p. 479.
- 19.
In 1676, in his Les réflexions sur l’éloquence, la poëtique, l’histoire et la philosophie, the Jesuit René Rapin (1621–1687) wrote that Bagolino, Mantino and Zimara went to excruciatingly great lengths to fix Averroes’s Latin text because he had been unable to understand the original meaning of Aristotle’s ideas. See Gregorio Piaia’s chapter in this volume.
- 20.
Charles Burnett, ‘Revisiting the 1552–1550 and 1562 Aristotle-Averroes Edition’.
- 21.
Fernand van Steenberghen, Les ouvres et la doctrine de Siger de Brabant (Brussels: Palais des Académies, 1938); Id., Introduction à l’étude de la philosophie médiévale (Louvain and Paris: Publications Universitaires; Béatrice Nauwelaerts, 1974), pp. 531–554; Id., Maître Siger de Brabant (Louvain and Paris: Publications Universitaires; Vander Oyez, 1977).
- 22.
Dag Nikolaus Hasse, ‘Averroica secta: Notes on the Formation of Averroist Movements in Fourteenth-Century Bologna and Renaissance Italy’, in Averroès et les averroïsmes juif et latin, pp. 307–331 (308).
- 23.
John Marenbon, ‘Dante’s Averroism’, in Poetry and Philosophy in the Middle Ages: A Festschrift for Peter Dronke, ed. John Marenbon (Leiden, Boston and Cologne: Brill, 2001), pp. 349–374.
- 24.
Anneliese Maier, ‘Wilhelm von Alnwicks Bologneser Quaestionen gegen den Averroismus’, in Ausgehendes Mittelalter: Gesammelte Aufsätze geistesgeschichte des 14. Jahrhunderts, 3 vols (Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1964–1977), I, pp. 1–40; Ead., ‘Ein unbeachteter “Averroist” des 14. Jahrhunderts: Walter Burley’, in Ibid., pp. 101–121; Ead., ‘Die Bologneser Philosophen des 14. Jahrhunderts’, Ibid., II pp. 335–349; Zdzisław Kuksewicz, Averroïsme bolonais au XIV e siècle (Wrocław, Warsaw and Krakow: Ossolineum, 1965); Id., De Siger de Brabant à Jacques de Plaisance: La théorie de l’intellect chez les Averroïstes latins des XIIIe et XIVe siècles (Wrocław, Warsaw and Krakow: Ossolineum, 1968); Id., ‘La découverte d’une école averroïste inconnue: Erfurt’, in Averroès et les averroïsmes juif et latin, pp. 299–306; René-Antoine Gauthier, ‘Notes sur les débuts (1225–1240) du premier “averroïsme”, Revue des Sciences Philosophiques et Théologiques, 66 (1982), pp. 321–374; Luca Bianchi, ‘“Reducing Aristotle’s Doctrine to Simple Truth”: Cesare Crivellati and His Struggle against the Averroists’, in Christian Readings of Aristotle from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance, ed. by Luca Bianchi (Turnhout: Brepols, 2011), pp. 397–424.
- 25.
P. O. Kristeller, ‘Paduan Averroism and Alexandrism in the Light of Recent Studies’, pp. 114–115.
- 26.
Bruno Nardi, Sigieri di Brabante nel pensiero del Rinascimento italiano (Rome: Edizioni Italiane, 1945); Id., Saggi sull’aristotelismo padovano dal secolo XIV al XVI (Florence: Sansoni, 1958); Zdzisław Kuksewicz, ‘The Latin Averroism of the Late Thirteenth Century’, in Averroismus in Mittelalter und in der Renaissance, ed. Friedrich Niewöhner and Loris Sturlese (Zürich: Spur, 1994), pp. 101–113.
- 27.
Paul of Venice, Summa philosophie naturalis (Venice: Heirs of Ottaviano Scoto, 1503), f. 88, quoted in Nardi, Sigieri di Brabante nel pensiero del Rinascimento italiano, p. 125.
- 28.
Paul of Venice, In libros de anima explanatio (Venice: Heirs of Ottaviano Scoto, 1504), fol. 46, quoted in Nardi, Sigieri di Brabante nel pensiero del Rinascimento italiano, p. 118.
- 29.
Agostino Nifo, De immortalitate anime libellus (Venice: Ottaviano Scoto, 1518), c. 4, quoted in Nardi, Sigieri di Brabante nel pensiero del Rinascimento italiano, p. 13.
- 30.
Nardi, Sigieri di Brabante nel pensiero del Rinascimento italiano, pp. 13–20, 125.
- 31.
Alessandro Achillini, De elementis (Venice: Giovanni Antonio de Benedetti, 1505), f. 127rb, quoted in Nardi, Saggi sull’aristotelismo padovano, p. 245.
- 32.
Ibid., pp. 245–246.
- 33.
Marsilio Ficino, Platonic Theology, eds and trans. Michael J. B. Allen and James Hankins, with W. Bowen, 6 vols (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001–2006), V, p. 86.
- 34.
Zabarella, Liber de mente humana, c. 965A.
- 35.
Ibid., cc. 919–920.
- 36.
Ficino, Platonic Theology, V, pp. 113, 115.
- 37.
Ibid., p. 117.
- 38.
Ibid., p. 121.
- 39.
On Averroes’s noetics, see Miguel Cruz Hernández, Historia del pensamiento en el Andalus, 2 vols (Sevilla: Editoriales Andaluzas Unidas, 1985), II, pp. 71ff; Alain de Libera, ‘Existe-il une noétique “averroiste”? Note sur la réception latine d’Averroès au XIIIe et XIVe siècle’, in Averroismus in Mittelalter und in der Renaissance, eds Friedrich Niewöhner and Loris Sturlese (Zurich: Spur, 1994), pp. 51–80; Luca Bianchi, ‘Filosofi, uomini e bruti: Note per la storia di un’antropologia averroista’, in Id., Studi sull’aristotelismo del Rinascimento (Padua: Il Poligrafo, 2003), pp. 41–61; Antonio Petagine, Aristotelismo difficile: L’intelletto umano nella prospettiva di Alberto Magno, Tommaso d’Aquino e Sigieri di Brabante (Milan: Vita e Pensiero, 2004); Richard C. Taylor, ‘The Agent Intellect as “Form for Us” and Averroes’s Critique of al-Fârâbî’, Proceedings of the Society for Medieval Logic and Metaphysics, 5 (2005), pp. 18–32; Campanini, Averroè, pp. 47–57.
- 40.
Averroes, Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis De anima libros, p. 409; Long Commentary on the De anima of Aristotle, p. 326.
- 41.
See Thomas Aquinas, De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas, in Aquinas against the Averroists: On There Being Only One Intellect, ed. Ralph McInerny (West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1993), p. 87; Zabarella, Liber de mente humana, c. 928B.
- 42.
Campanella, Del senso delle cose e della magia, p. 84: ‘s’egli intende, non intendemo noi; ma le spezie del nostro senso servono a lui per intenderle da sé, e noi saremo oggetto, non soggetto d’intendimento.’
- 43.
Ernst Cassirer, Individuum und Kosmos in der Philosophie der Renaissance (Leipzig and Berlin: Teubner, 1927), pp. 133–149; Id. The Individual and the Cosmos in Renaissance Philosophy, trans. Mario Domandi (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1963), pp. 126–141.
- 44.
An Arabic Translation of Themistius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s De Anima, ed. M. C. Lyons (Oxford: Cassirer, 1973), pp. 188–189; quoted by Richard C. Taylor, in his ‘Intelligibles in Act in Averroes’, p. 128.
- 45.
Zabarella, Liber de mente humana, c. 963CDE. See also Alessandro Achillini, Quolibeta de intelligentiis (Bologna: Benedetto Faelli, 1494), fol. 10, quoted in Nardi, Saggi sull’aristotelismo padovano, p. 204; Campanella, Del senso delle cose e della magia, p. 84: ‘seguirà che, uno intendendo una cosa, tutti l’intenderiano per l’unità dell’intelletto.’
- 46.
Zabarella, Liber de mente humana, c. 965D: ‘unus sit intellectus in pluribus hominum … phantasmata in iis diversa sunt.’
- 47.
Ficino, Platonic Theology, V, pp. 19–21.
- 48.
Ibid., p. 22.
- 49.
Ibid., p. 25.
- 50.
Luca Bianchi and Eugenio Randi, Le verità dissonanti (Rome and Bari: Laterza, 1990), p. 5.
- 51.
Cranz, ‘Two Debates about the Intellect’, pp. 1, 12.
- 52.
Ficino, Platonic Theology, V, p. 121.
- 53.
In this volume, James Montgomery provides an intriguing discussion of contemporary Straussian varieties of Averroistic inquiry. See infra ‘Leo Strauss and the Alethiometer’.
- 54.
Girolamo Cardano, De utilitate ex adversis capienda, in Opera omnia, ed. Charles Spon, 10 vols (Lyon: Jean-Antoine Huguetan and Marc-Antoine Ravaud, 1663; repr.: Stuttgart and Bad Cannstatt: Frommann, 1966), II, 24b.
- 55.
Averroes, Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis De anima libros, p. 500; Long Commentary on the De anima of Aristotle, p. 399.
- 56.
Paul of Venice, Summa philosophie naturalis, f. 91, quoted in Nardi, Sigieri di Brabante nel pensiero del Rinascimento italiano, p. 130.
- 57.
Averroes, Colliget, in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, 12 vols (Venice: Giunta, 1562; repr. Frankfurt: Minerva, 1962), X, f. 17vG: ‘perfectio virtutis rationalis est apprehensio rerum universalium.’
- 58.
Averroes, Commentary on Plato’s Republic, ed. Ralph Lerner (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1974), pp. 86–89.
- 59.
Marc Geoffroy, ‘Averroès sur l’intellect comme cause agente et cause formelle, et la question de la “jonction” – I’, in Averroès et les averroïsmes juif et latin, pp. 77–110; Maria Corti, La felicità mentale: Nuove prospettive per Cavalcanti e Dante (Turin: Einaudi, 1983); Orlando Todisco, Averroè nel dibattito medievale: Verità o bontà? (Milan: Angeli, 1999).
- 60.
Nardi, Saggi sull’aristotelismo padovano, p. 218.
- 61.
Ibid., p. 275.
- 62.
See infra in this volume Leen Spruit, ‘Intellectual Beatitude in the Averroist Tradition: The Case of Agostino Nifo’.
- 63.
Zabarella, Liber de mente humana, c. 940BD. On the presence of strains of Averroistic mysticism in various examples of Renaissance thought, see: B. Nardi, ‘La mistica averroistica e Pico della Mirandola’, in Id., Saggi sull’aristotelismo padovano, pp. 127–146. See Ibid., pp. 213, 217.
- 64.
J. Zabarella, Liber de mente agente, in De rebus naturalibus, c. 1013.
- 65.
Tommaso Campanella, Legazioni ai Maomettani (Quod reminiscentur, libro IV), ed. Romano Amerio (Florence: Olschki, 1960) p. 99: ‘tres Arabes machomettani, videlicet Averroes, Avicenna et Alfarabius putant intellectum copulari homini composito ex animali et cogitativa in unitatem personalem et toties incarnari intellectum abstractum, quoties concipitur homo.’
- 66.
Girolamo Cardano, De utilitate ex adversis capienda, in Opera omnia, II, p. 24a.
- 67.
Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, IV, f. 338vHI: ‘Principium enim motus de omnibus mobilibus est sicut anima de rebus vivis’.’
- 68.
Nicholas Holland, ‘The Transmutations of a Young Averroist: The Account of Celestial Influences in Agostino Nifo’s Commentary on Averroes’s Destructio Destructionum’.
- 69.
Averroes, Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis de anima libros, p. 219: ‘Opinatur enim quod prima perfectio sensus fit ab intelligentia agenti, ut declaratur in libro Animalium; secunda autem perfectio fit a sensibilibus.’
- 70.
André-François Boureau Deslandes, Histoire critique de la philosophie, où l’on traite de son origine, de ses progrez, et des diverses révolutions qui lui sont arrivées jusqu’à notre tems, par Mr D*** (Amsterdam: Changuion, 1737), III, p. 258.
- 71.
See Robert Pasnau, Metaphysical Themes: 1274–1671 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2011), pp. 60–66 (62).
- 72.
Ibid., p. 64.
- 73.
Benito Pereira, De communibus omnium rerum principiis libri quindecim (Paris: Thomas Brumen, 1585), pp. 322–326, quoted in Pasnau, Metaphysical Themes, p. 69. For a recent assessment of Averroes’s view on matter, see Matteo Di Giovanni, ‘Substantial Form in Averroes’s Long Commentary on the Metaphysics’, in In the Age of Averroes: Arabic Philosophy in the Sixth/Twelfth Century, ed. Peter Adamson (London and Turin: The Warburg Institute, 2011), pp. 175–194.
- 74.
Tommaso Campanella, Universalis philosophiae, seu metaphysicarum rerum, iuxta propria dogmata, partes tres, libri 18, 3 vols (Paris: Denis Langlois, 1638; repr. Turin: Bottega d’Erasmo, 1961), I, p. 178a.
- 75.
Ibid.: ‘nisi dicat Averroes corporeitatem idem esse, quod materietas, ergo substantia non accidens, ipsa nimirum materia.’
- 76.
Campanini, Averroè, pp. 59–82. See also Ovey N. Mohammed, Averroes’ Doctrine of Immortality: A Matter of Controversy (Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press, 1984); Richard C. Taylor, ‘Averroes: Religious Dialectic and Aristotelian Philosophical Thought’, in The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy, ed. Peter Adamson and R. C. Taylor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 181–200.
- 77.
Salim Kemal, The Philosophical Poetics of Alfarabi, Avicenna and Averroës: The Aristotelian Reception (Richmond: Curzon, 2003).
- 78.
Averroes, Long Commentary on Metaphysica, in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, VIII, ff. 305rF-305v GH. See Harry A. Wolfson, ‘The Twice-Revealed Averroes’, Speculum, 36 (1961), pp. 373–392.
- 79.
See infra in this volume Guido Giglioni, ‘Phantasms of Reason and Shadows of Matter: Averroes’s Notion of the Imagination and Its Renaissance Interpreters’.
- 80.
Averroes, Compendia librorum Aristotelis qui parva naturalia vocantur, ed. by E. Ledyard Shileds and H. Blumberg (Cambridge, MA: The Mediaeval Academy of America, 1949), p. 111: ‘Quare vero homo non comprehendit ex istis particularibus nisi illud quod est proprium suo tempori et suo loco et corpori et suis hominibus absque aliis particularibus communicantibus eis in illa natura universali; quare hoc est, quia necesse est ut homo habeat in hac comprehensione alterum duorum generum cognitionis que antecedit fidem, scilicet cognitio preparans, id est cognitio ymaginationis ymaginem informans, et debet antecedere fidem; et homo non potest acquirere istam cognitionem, nisi in individuis que iam prescivit, et maxime illa individua circa que habuit magnam sollicitudinem.’ Averroes, Epitome of Parva Naturalia, translated from the original Arabic and the Hebrew and Latin versions by Harry Blumberg (Cambridge, MA: The Mediaeval Academy of America, 1961), p. 47.
- 81.
See infra in this volume Carlos Fraenkel, ‘Reconsidering the Case of Elijah Delmedigo’s Averroism and Its Impact on Spinoza’.
- 82.
Aristotle, Metaphysica, in Opera cum Averrois commentariis, VIII, f. 34v: ‘Et tu potes scire quantum facit consuetudo in hoc consyderando in legibus. invenies nam apologos et fabulas propter consuetudinem plus applicabiles quam scientiae veritates.’
- 83.
Cardano, Contradicentia medica, in Opera omnia, VI, p. 412b.
- 84.
Michael Blaustein, Averroes on the Imagination and the Intellect (PhD thesis, Harvard University, 1984), p. 114; H. A. Wolfson, ‘The Terms Tasawwur and Tasdîq in Arabic Philosophy and their Greek, Latin and Hebrew Equivalents’, in Id., Studies in the History of Philosophy and Religion, ed. by I. Twersky and G. H. Williams, 2 vols (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973–1977), I, pp. 478–492.
- 85.
Averroes, Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis de anima libros, p. 368.
- 86.
Ibid., p. 363; Long Commentary on the De anima of Aristotle, p. 278.
- 87.
Ibid.
- 88.
Averroes, Commentarium magnum in Aristotelis de anima libros, pp. 368–369; Long Commentary on the De anima of Aristotle, p. 282.
- 89.
Averroes, Colliget, in Aristotle, Opera cum Averrois commentariis, X, f. 55rAC. On the reversal of the ordinary path of perception in cases of dreams and illusions, see Blaustein, Averroes on the Imagination and the Intellect, p. 33.
- 90.
Cardano, Contradicentia medica, in Opera omnia, VI, p. 478b.
- 91.
Averroes, Colliget, in Aristotelis opera cum Averrois commentariis, X, f. 55rBC.
- 92.
Cardano, De subtilitate, in Opera omnia, III, p. 652ab.
- 93.
Pietro Pomponazzi, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, MS lat. 6533, f. 568r; quoted in Nardi, Saggi sull’aristotelismo padovano dal secolo XIV al XVI, pp. 96, n. 4; 276.
- 94.
Pietro Pomponazzi, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, MS lat. 6535, f. 120rv; quoted in Nardi, Saggi sull’aristotelismo padovano, p. 257.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Giglioni, G. (2013). Introduction. In: Akasoy, A., Giglioni, G. (eds) Renaissance Averroism and Its Aftermath: Arabic Philosophy in Early Modern Europe. International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées, vol 211. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5240-5_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5240-5_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5239-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5240-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)