Anselm. By Sandra Visser and Thomas Williams
It is always a puzzle to know how a book has been written by two authors without separate attribution of its parts. This one has a determined ‘we’ throughout its preface, though the epilogue explains that two scholars in complementary disciplines have been involved. This is a refreshing book, writte...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Review |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press
2009
|
| In: |
The journal of theological studies
Year: 2009, Volume: 60, Issue: 2, Pages: 731-732 |
| Review of: | Anselm (Oxford : Oxford Univ. Press, 2009) (Evans, Gillian)
|
| Further subjects: | B
Book review
|
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | It is always a puzzle to know how a book has been written by two authors without separate attribution of its parts. This one has a determined ‘we’ throughout its preface, though the epilogue explains that two scholars in complementary disciplines have been involved. This is a refreshing book, written to be accessible and readable, and generally successful in the attempt. It has begun from what Anselm wrote and not from the now extensive secondary literature., This is a philosophers’ book rather than a historians’ or a theologians’ book. These are classifications Anselm himself would have understood only in part. He knew a great deal about the difference between philosophy and theology, as it had appeared to thinkers in the ancient world and as he himself could read about it in Boethius. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1477-4607 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The journal of theological studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1093/jts/flp049 |