Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Diffusion Controversy

  • Chapter
The Building of British Social Anthropology

Part of the book series: Studies in the History of Modern Science ((SHMS,volume 8))

  • 125 Accesses

Abstract

On 15th June 1922, Elliot Smith wrote: “Rivers’s death is a real catastrophe and compels me to make a new orientation in life, for it has upset so many plans that we were developing in common . . . ”1 The passing of Rivers was indeed a watershed in the history of British anthropology, and we shall now consider its relation to a protracted and bitter debate between the supporters of extreme diffusionism and the opponents of that creed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. Warren R. Dawson (ed.), Sir Grafton Elliot Smith. A Biographical Record by His Colleagues (London, 1938), pp. 79, 80.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letter from Elliot Smith to Pitt-Rivers dated 30th August 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58.

    Google Scholar 

  3. R.A.I. Archives, A3, Part 2. See also J. Roy. Anthrop. Inst., Miscellanea, 1922–27.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Letter from Elliot Smith to John L. Myres dated 13 Dec. 1922, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Letter from E. N. Fallaize to John L. Myres dated 18 Dec. 1922, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Minutes of first meeting of “Joint Committee for Anthropological Research and Teaching”, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Letter from E. N. Fallaize to John L. Myres dated 30 May 1923, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  10. John L. Myres, memorandum entitled “The Relation of Anthropology to Other Subjects, With Special Reference to History, Geography and Economics”, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. C. Haddon, “Migrations of Culture”, The Observer, 22 June 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dawson, op. cit. (note 1), p. 214.

    Google Scholar 

  13. A. C. Haddon, “Pearls as Givers of Life”, Man 24 131 (1924).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Haddon Collection, Envelope 5274.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Letter from Elliot Smith to Haddon dated 16 Nov. 1924, Haddon Collection, Envelope 5274.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Letter from Elliot Smith to Haddon dated 18 Nov. 1924, Haddon Collection, Envelope 5274.

    Google Scholar 

  17. H. J. Fleure, obituary for Haddon in Obituary Notices of Fellows of the Royal Society 9,451 (Jan. 1941).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Letter from William Ridgeway to Haddon dated 10 Dec. 1924, Haddon Collection, Envelope 4.

    Google Scholar 

  19. W. J. Perry, “Pearls and Pearl Shell in the Pacific”, Man 25 22 (1925).

    Google Scholar 

  20. A. C. Haddon, “Pearls as Givers of Life”, Man 25 32 (1925).

    Google Scholar 

  21. The Times, 17 Jan. 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Letter from E. N. Fallaize to John L. Myres dated 19 Jan. 1925, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  24. The Times, 30 Jan. 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Undated letter from Balfour to Fallaize, to which Fallaize replied on 11 Feb. 1925, R.A.I.Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  26. The Times, 23 Jan. 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Letter from E. N. Fallaize to O. G. S. Crawford dated 11 Feb. 1925, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Edinburgh Review, Jan. 1924 and Apr. 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Letter from O. G. S. Crawford to E. N. Fallaize dated 12 Feb. 1925, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  30. The Times Literary Supplement, 11 June 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  32. The Times Literary Supplement, 18 June 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  34. The Times Literary Supplement, 25 June 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  35. In an interview with the author given in New Zealand in May 1976, C. E. Fox threw a little further light on the nature of his attitudes towards Rivers and Elliot Smith. After paying tribute to the personal and intellectual qualities of Rivers, Fox went on to indicate that he had some reservations about Elliot Smith, and said that, in his opinion, Rivers too was “not so sure” about the Australian anatomist.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Transcribed copy of letter from C. E. Fox to “The Reviewer of The Threshold of the Pacific”, dated 25 Nov. 1925, Haddon Collection, Envelope 5363.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Letter of 13 Mar. 1980 from Paul Jorion to the author, following communications between Jorion and Mr. G. Phillips of The Times archives. In the doctoral dissertation upon which the present work is based, I wrongly inferred, from an ambiguous annotation by Haddon on a transcribed copy of the letter from Fox to his reviewer, that the reviewer was Colonel T. C. Hodson, who was shortly thereafter appointed to succeed Haddon as Reader in Ethnology at Cambridge. This led me, in the dissertation, to argue that Hodson’s appointment was primarily motivated by the desire to stop the extreme diffusionists getting any sort of foothold in Cambridge Ethnology. Since, however, Jorion’s industry and persistence has proved that Hodson was not the reviewer, and since, as will be argued shortly, it appears that Hodson was appointed to strengthen the Cambridge Department’s claim to being an aid to imperialism, I have decided to drop this line of argument.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Letter from Elliot Smith to Haddon dated 5 Oct. 1926, Haddon Collection, Envelope 5274.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rough draft of letter from Haddon to Radcliffe-Brown dated 26 Mar. 1927, Haddon Collection, Envelope 16002.

    Google Scholar 

  40. M. Mead, Blackberry Winter (New York, 1972), p. 159. See also Dawson op. cit. (note 1), pp. 77, 78.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Review of John Mathew’s Two Representative Tribe of Queensland, Man 10, 82 (1910).

    Google Scholar 

  42. B. Malinowski, A Diary in the Strict Sense of the Term (London, 1967), pp. 64, 65. The entry is actually dated 17 Jan. 1914, but this is obviously incorrect by a margin of one year.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Ibid., pp. 65, 66.

    Google Scholar 

  44. James Urry, “Notes and Queries on Anthropology and the Development of Field Methods in British Anthropology 1870–1920”, Proc. Roy. Anthrop. Inst. (1972), p. 52.

    Google Scholar 

  45. B. Malinowski, Coral Gardens and Their Magic (London, 1935), p. 326.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Letter from Malinowski to Haddon dated 25 May 1916, Haddon Collection, Envelope 7.

    Google Scholar 

  47. B. Malinowski, “Ethnology and the Study of Society”, Economica 2, 218 (1922).

    Google Scholar 

  48. B. Malinowski, Argonauts of the Western Pacific (New York, 1961, original edn., 1922), p. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ibid., p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  50. B. Malinowski, Myth in Primitive Psychology (New York, 1926), pp. 92, 93.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Raymond Firth, Man and Culture (New York, 1957), p. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Ibid. For a review of Malinowski’s field diaries which draws some interesting parallels between Malinowski and Joseph Conrad, see George W. Stocking Jr., “Empathy and Antipathy in the Heart of Darkness”, J. Hist. Behay. Sci. 4 189–194 (1968).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Meyer Fortes, Kinship and the Social Order (Chicago, 1969), p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  54. B. Malinowski, “Kinship”,Man 30 17 (1930).

    Google Scholar 

  55. A. C. Haddon (ed.), Reports of the Cambridge Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits 5 (1904). See Rivers’s partly hypothetical sketch of the way a member of the Mabuiag community becomes familiar with the kinship system (pp. 140–142).

    Google Scholar 

  56. B. Freire-Marreco and J. L. Myres (eds.), Notes and Queries on Anthropology (4th edn., London, 1912). See for example the section on “Social Organization”.

    Google Scholar 

  57. In A. C. Seward (ed.), Science and the Nation (Cambridge, 1917).

    Google Scholar 

  58. From the Special Foreword to the third edition of The Sexual Life of Savages (London, 1932).

    Google Scholar 

  59. John L. Myres, “A Geographical View of the Historical Method in Ethnology”, The Geographical Teacher 13 (1925–1926).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  62. W. J. Perry, “Professor Myres and the Historical Method”, The Geographical Teacher (1925).

    Google Scholar 

  63. John L. Myres, “Reply to Mr Perry”, The Geographical Teacher (1925).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Letter from L. H. Dudley Buxton to Haddon dated 15 Mar. 1925, Haddon Collection, Envelope 5274.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Letter from Mrs. Winifred Hoernle to Haddon dated 28 Apr. 1926, Haddon Collection, Envelope 9. In the same letter Mrs Hoernle talks about a well-known physical anthropologist who for our purposes had better remain nameless: “Professor [X] is a great trial in many ways, for he is a keen Elliot Smith man and is more keen than thorough. He starts all sorts of hair-brained [sic] theories without any basis or practically none, and of course he captures the popular imagination with the result that one is kept busy trying to check students from doing the same thing.”

    Google Scholar 

  66. Cambridge University Archives, “General Board of Studies”, p. 36.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Ibid., (“Private Uncorrected Minutes for Members of the General Board of Studies Only”, 12 May 1926).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Cambridge University Archives (“Private Uncorrected Minutes for Members of the General Board of Studies”, p. 40, 21 July 1926). One of the two candidates interviewed was presumably Hodson. The identity of the second interviewee is not recorded.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Personal communication with W. E. Armstrong, 19 Apr. 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Op. cit. (note 66), p. 20.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Envelope 4019 in the Haddon Collection contains information regarding a special course of lectures for Indian Civil Service probationers given by Haddon in 1910 and 1911.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Rep. Brit. Assoc. Adv. Sci. (1911), pp. 509, 510.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Annotation in Haddon’s handwriting on Fox, op. cit. (note 36).

    Google Scholar 

  74. The Times Literary Supplement, 30 Sept. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  75. The Times Literary Supplement, 7 Oct. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Letter from Elliot Smith to Haddon dated 1 Oct. 1926, Haddon Collection, Envelope 5274.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Rough draft of a letter from Haddon to Elliot Smith dated 3 Oct. 1926, Haddon Collection, Envelope 5274.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Letter from Elliot Smith to Haddon dated 5 Oct. 1926, Haddon Collection, Envelope 5274.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Letter from Elliot Smith to E. E. Embree dated 31 Jan. 1927, Rockefeller Foundation Archives 401D.

    Google Scholar 

  80. The year of publication of Tylor’s Primitive Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Letter from Elliot Smith to C. J. Herrick dated 13 Feb. 1927, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, “401AD University College”. Herrick, an eminent neurologist, was apparently acting for the Rockefeller Foundation during a visit to London.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Letter from Elliot Smith to Embree dated 19 Feb. 1927, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, “401AD University College — Anthropology 1924, 1926–27 (No funds granted)”.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Elliot Smith to Herrick, op. cit. (note 81).

    Google Scholar 

  85. Elliot Smith to Embree, op. cit. (note 82). It was in fact on the basis of this policy that University College had created a Readership in Cultural Anthropology in 1922, which position Elliot Smith had originally tried to persuade Rivers to accept. (See Chapter IV, p. 146).

    Google Scholar 

  86. Letter from E. E. Embree to Elliot Smith dated 23 Feb. 1927, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, “401AD”.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Letter from Elliot Smith to E. E. Embree dated 14 Mar. 1927, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, “401 AD”. I could find no record in these archives of any Rockefeller grant earmarked for Malinowski at this time. Nonetheless he did benefit from a general grant which the Memorial provided for the London School of Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Letter from Elliot Smith to Embree dated 18 June 1927, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, “401AD”.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Letter from Dr Alan Gregg to Elliot Smith dated 20 June 1927, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, “401AD’.

    Google Scholar 

  90. G. Elliot Smith, Bronislaw Malinowski, Herbert J. Spinden and A. Goldenweiser, Culture: The Diffusion Controversy (London, Psyche Miniatures, 1928), p. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Ibid., p. 29.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Ibid., p. 42.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Ibid., p. 45.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Ibid., p. 54.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Ibid., p. 50, 51.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Ibid., p. 92.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Ibid., p. 94.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Ibid., pp. 95–98.

    Google Scholar 

  99. R.A.I. Archives, A24 (Rivers Memorial Fund Proceedings).

    Google Scholar 

  100. R.A.I. Archives, A10, Part 4.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Op. Cit. (note 99).

    Google Scholar 

  102. Minutes of the R.A.I. “Appeal and Research Committee”, 25 Oct. 1927, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3. The “Appeal and Research Committee” was a subsidiary of the Joint Committee.

    Google Scholar 

  103. This correspondence consisted of a letter from officials of the Melanesian Mission in the 8 June issue of The Times and a letter by Keith, Westermarck and Pitt-Rivers in the 16 June issue.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Letter from Fallai7e to Myres date 26 June 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Minutes of the R.A.I. Appeal Committee Meeting, 3 July 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Letter from Fallaize to Myres dated 13 Aug. 1928 and letter from Myres to Fallaize 18 Aug. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Letter from Elliot Smith to Pitt-Rivers dated 30 Aug. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Letter from Keith to Fallaize dated 28 Aug. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Letter from Fallaize to Keith dated 30 Aug. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Letter from Fallaize to Myres dated 30 Aug. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Letter from Fallaize to Perry dated 19 Sept. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Letter from Perry to Fallaize dated 23 Sept. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  117. Letter from Fallaize to Elliot Smith dated 25 Sept. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Letter from Fallai7e to Myres dated 8 Nov. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Screed headed “Royal Anthropological Institute Appeal”, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Letter from C. G. Seligman to Fallaize dated 7 Jan. 1929, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3. The “highly qualified man” working in the Sudan was presumably E. E. Evans-Pritchard, then engaged upon his investigations of the Azande.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Letter from Elliot Smith to Fallaize dated 9 Jan. 1929, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  122. Screed headed “Draft of Anthropological Research Fund Appeal”, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Screed headed “Suggestion as the Basis for Discussion of an Appeal for Funds for Anthropological Research”, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  124. Letter from Fallaize to Elliot Smith dated 31 Jan. 1929, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  125. Letter from Elliot Smith to Fallaize dated 1 Feb. 1929, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Letter from Myres to Fallaize dated 6 Mar. 1929, letter from Fallaize to Myres dated 8 Mar. 1929, and letter from Ormsby Gore to Fallaize dated 11 Apr. 1929, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  127. Index to The Times 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Circular letter by Fallaize dated 1 May 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  129. Sheet of paper headed “Replies to Enquiries as to the Establishment of Anthropological Union under the International Research Council”, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  130. Letter from Elliot Smith to Fallaize dated 10 May 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Letter from Perry to Fallaize dated 14 May 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  132. Lothian Collection, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  133. Letter from C. G. Seligman to the Trustees of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial dated 1 July 1925, letter from C. G. Seligman to Dr B. Ruml dated 3 July 1925, letter from Dr B. Ruml to C. G. Seligman dated 31 July 1925, letter from C. G. Seligman to Dr B. Ruml dated 23 Oct. 1925, and letter from E. N. Fallaize to Dr B. Ruml dated 6 Nov. 1925, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, “Royal Anthropological Institute 1924–30”.

    Google Scholar 

  134. Letter from Fallaize to George E. Vincent, President of the Rockefeller Foundation, dated 30 Jan. 1929, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, “Royal Anthropological Institute 1924–30”.

    Google Scholar 

  135. Inter-office correspondence between E. E. Day and G. E. Vincent dated 27 Feb. 1929, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, “Royal Anthropological Institute 1924–30”.

    Google Scholar 

  136. Annotation on letter from E. E. Day to Elton Mayo dated 8 Mar. 1929, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, “Royal Anthropological Institute 1924–30”.

    Google Scholar 

  137. Letter from E. E. Day to Fallaize dated 3 Apr. 1929, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, “Royal Anthropological Institute 1924–30”.

    Google Scholar 

  138. Letter from G. E. Vincent to Fallaize dated 23 May 1929, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, _“Royal Anthropological Institute 1924–30”.

    Google Scholar 

  139. Letter from Hocart to Haddon dated 23 June, Haddon Collection, Envelope 4. Although the year is not given in the date on the letter, one can be reasonably confident from a knowledge of the dates of Hocart’s fieldwork that the year was indeed 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  140. Excerpt from dairy of J. Van Sickle headed “Paris, October 6th 1930”, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, “Royal Anthropological Institute 1924–30”.

    Google Scholar 

  141. The suggestion that Elliot Smith should represent the Royal Anthropological Institute at this Congress was made by Pitt-Rivers, who seems to have been more favourably inclined to Elliot Smith than most other members of the Institute. See letter from Pitt-Rivers to Myres dated 27 Aug. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

  142. R.A.I. Archives, A24, Judging from the handwriting, the author of these retrospective “Proceedings” was J. L. Myres.

    Google Scholar 

  143. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  144. Letter from E. E. Day to J. Van Sickle dated 17 July 1931, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, “401S Royal Anthropological Institute 1931–33, 1937–38”.

    Google Scholar 

  145. In addition to his apparently negative reaction to Keith’s version of the Institute’s appeal for funds, Elliot Smith had earlier crossed swords with Keith over the evidence relating to the so-called “Piltdown Man”. See the correspondence in Nature 92 (Sept. 1913 — Feb. 1914).

    Google Scholar 

  146. R.A.I. Archives, A23.

    Google Scholar 

  147. Dawson op. cit. (note 1), p. 85. This source states that, on Elliot Smith’s recollection, the term “human biology” emerged in the course of discussion with E. E. Embree following Elliot Smith’s trip to Australia in 1932. However, this date must be wrong, since the term was in currency before 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  148. Rockefeller Foundation Archives, “401S Royal Anthropological Institute 1931–33, 1937–38”.

    Google Scholar 

  149. Fortes, “Discussion” of Glyn Daniel’s paper on “Elliot Smith, Egypt and Diffusion-ism”, in Lord S. Zuckerman (ed.), The Concepts of Human Evolution (Academic Press, 1973), p. 431.

    Google Scholar 

  150. Young, in Zuckerman, ibid., p. 167.

    Google Scholar 

  151. This article appears in James Hasting’s Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics (Edinburgh, 1913). In the 1930 volume of Man (p. 20 fn), Malinowski described the article as “excellent”.

    Google Scholar 

  152. Letter from Myres to Fallaize dated 25 Sept. 1928, R.A.I. Archives, A58, Part 3.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. History Department, University of Sydney, Australia

    Ian Langham

Authors
  1. Ian Langham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1981 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Langham, I. (1981). The Diffusion Controversy. In: The Building of British Social Anthropology. Studies in the History of Modern Science, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8464-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8464-6_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-009-8466-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-8464-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation