Tales of saints, whether told by their adherents or detractors, frequently featured the holy persons dealings with members of other religions or cultures, or the stories themselves were appropriated by different religious or cultural groups. As such narratives moved from one social, cultural, religious or chronological milieu to another, the representation and meaning of the given holy person and the manner of his/her dealing with the religious other also often changed. As basic storylines remained recognizable, the transformations of specific details (...) often provide important clues about shifts in attitudes over time and between communities. This volume provides a varied array of case studies of this process, ranging from early China to various Christian, Muslim and Jewish cultural contexts in the late antique, medieval and early modern periods. (shrink)

Scholars have considered that Spinoza’s difficulties in dealing with the objections raised by Tschirnhaus against his physical approaches were the spur that led the latter to dissociate himself from the former in the field of natural philosophy. The aim of this paper is, on the one hand, to refute this misjudgment and, on the other, to show that the cause of it lies in having dismissed a significant post-Cartesian current of thought, buried in oblivion by the triumph of Newtonian mechanics, (...) which intended to develop a physics in purely relational terms. In turn, this will allow us to read the physical proposals of Spinoza and Tschirnhaus as paradigmatic examples of this relational physics. (shrink)

Gravity was a major theme in the seventeenth century scientific discussion. Trendsetters in the renewal of natural science were Galilei and Descartes. The first required a unified theory of all phenomena of gravity ; the second provided one with his vortex-hypothesis, which explained gravity by the mechanical push of subtile bodies of the vortex. This conception was tested and generally followed by Christiaan Huygens, whereas Newton presented the laws of the so called 'attraction' by which he did not at all (...) indicate the causes of those laws of motion. Spinoza comes on the scene of polemics as a critical Cartesian. Motion (of which downward motion of heavy bodies is only one instance) was explained by Descartes, but not so the rest of bodies or the equilibrium in the power relation between opposite forces, neither the reason why in some cases the particles form a hard body. Full fledged mechanism and consistent determinism lead Spinoza to account for rest and solidity in the same way, namely by means of the pressure of small and mostly unvisible bodies in the whirling environment. This paradoxical law was acknowledged as a real and important contribution to physical science by the Dutch spinozistic Cartesians Cuffeler and Overkamp, by the mathematician De Volder, by Spinoza's younger friend Tschirnhaus and in France by Malebranche. By the end of the century it was quite normal to speak about „the gravity of the air” and to consider the gravity of gross bodies as an illusion. (shrink)