Defining Religious Cultural Heritage in Europe

Tsivolas, Theodosios

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07932-5_4

Theodosios Tsivolas²

704 Accesses

Abstract

As Hannah Arendt, following the French poet René Char said of our cultural heritage in globo, “Our inheritance was left to us by no testament”. The idea of inheritance as a valuable resource, which European societies preserve in order to pass it on to future generations, is central in the case of religious cultural heritage. However, even if the respective religious communities bequeath it from generation to generation under specific, in most cases written, canonical provisions that define its sacred content, its proper usage and its functional purposes, the religious cultural heritage “can be as much about forgetting as remembering the past” (Ashworth et al. 2007, p. 6). This becomes quite obvious in cases where sacred buildings, e.g. historic churches, are threatened with demolition and the local communities argue about “how much of their common memory resides, both directly and indirectly, in what they are about to lose” (Davie 2000, p. 163). A recent example in this respect could be found in the historic parish of St. Marguerite in Sainte Gemmes d’Andigné (France). The latter was scheduled for demolition in 2012 by the local authorities. According to the municipal council’s decision:

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)

eBook: USD 84.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Arendt H. (1993) Between Past and Future: Six Exercises in Political Thought, New York: Penguin Books, p. 7. Cf. Borgman E. (2009) Religion and Heritage: a Brief Introductory Essay, in: Borgman E., Scatena S. & Susin L. (eds.) Which Religious Heritages for the Future? [=International Review of Theology, Concilium 2009/2], London: SCM Press, p. 11.
2.
Deutsche Welle, Article available online at: http://www.dw.de/historic-french-churches-face-demolition/a-16122874. Accessed on March 31, 2014.
3.
Ibid.
4.
Halbwachs M. (1941) La topographie légendaire des Évangiles en Terre Sainte: étude de mémoire collective. Presses universitaires de France.
5.
In relation to the notion of ‘collective memory’ within culture in general, you can see Halbwachs M. (1980) The Collective Memory, London: Harper and Row; Connerton P. (1989) How Societies Remember, Cambridge University; Levinson S. (1990) Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies, Durham: Duke University; Ben Amos D. & Weissberg L. (1992) Cultural Memory and the Construction of Identity, Detroit: Wayne State University; Mathieu J. (ed.) (1995) La mémoire dans la culture, Quebec City: University of Laval; Choay F. (2001) The invention of the historic monument, Cambridge University.
6.
Cf. Assmann J. (2006) Religion and cultural memory: ten studies, Stanford University Press, p. 9 f.
7.
The Shrine: Memory, Presence, and Prophecy of the Living God, Vatican Document of 8 May 1999, Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, Available at: www.vatican.va. Accessed on March 31, 2014.
8.
Koch G. (ed.) (2000) Byzantinische Malerei: Bildprogramme - Ikonographie - Stil, Symposion in Marburg vom 25.-29.6.1997 [=Spätantike - frühes Christentum - Byzanz: Reihe B, Studien und Perspektiven 7], Wiesbaden: Reichert, p. 128.
9.
See also Inge J. (2003) A Christian Theology of Place, Ashgate, p. 104 f.
10.
For an architectural and historical overview of the Great Mosque of Cordova see Creswell K. (1958) A Short Account of Early Muslim Architecture, Penguin Books, p. 213 f.
11.
Ibid., p. 215.
12.
See Schildgen B. D. (2008) Heritage or Heresy: Preservation and Destruction of Religious Art and Architecture in Europe, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 97 f.
13.
Ibid., p. 98.
14.
Nieto Cumplido M. (1976) La mezquita catedral de Córdoba y el ICOMOS, Servicio de publicaciones del Ayuntamiento de Córdoba, Córdoba. Cf. Schildgen op. cit., p. 98.
15.
See Velenis G. (1974) Some Observations on the Original Form of the Rotunda in Thessaloniki, Balkan Studies, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 298–307.
16.
Cf. Grabar O. (1983) Symbols and Signs in Islamic Architecture in: Holod R. & Rastopfer D., Architecture and Community: building in the Islamic world today, New York: Aperture, p. 28: “As a tower for the call to prayer, the minaret is but a sign suggesting a function; It becomes a symbol when it reminds one of Islam”.
17.
Weber M. (1948) Religious Rejections of the World and Their Directions, in: Hans Gerth H. & Wright Mills C. (eds.) From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, Routledge, pp. 323–59 (p. 341).
18.
Ibid.
19.
Cancik H. & Mohr H. (1988) Religionsästhetik in: Cancik H., Gladigow B. & Laubscher M., Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe, Vol. Ι, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, pp. 121–56; Münster D. (2001) Religionsästhetik und Anthropologie der Sinne, München: Akademischer Verlag; Lanwerd S. (2001) Religionsästhetik: Studien zum Verhältnis von Symbol und Sinnlichkeit, Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann; Idem (ed.) (2003) Der Kanon und die Sinne. Religionsaesthetik als akademische Disziplin (Etudes Luxembourgeoises d’Histoire et de Science des Religions), Luxembourg: Eurassoc; Koch A. (ed.) (2004) Themenheft: Ästhetik – Kunst – Religion, München: Münchener Theologische Zeitung 55/4; Mohr H. (2006) Religionsästhetik, in: Auffarth C., Kippenberg H. & Michaels A. (eds.) (2006) Wörterbuch der Religionen, Stuttgart: Kröner, pp. 431–3. Cf. Burch Brown F. (1989) Religious Aesthetics: A Theological Study of Making and Meaning, Princeton University; Idem (2000) Good taste, bad taste and Christian taste, Aesthetics in Religious Life, Oxford University.
20.
Heckel M. (1968) Staat, Kirche, Kunst: Rechtsfragen kirchlicher Kulturdenkmäler, Tübingen: Mohr, p. 131.
21.
Federal Reporter (1898) Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and Circuit and District Courts of the United States, Vol. 85, p. 965.
22.
Ibid., p. 966.
23.
Ibid., pp. 965–6.
24.
Von Mises L. (1972) The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality, Libertarian Press Inc., p. 62.
25.
Lefebvre H. (2005) The Production of Space, in: Leach N. (ed.) Rethinking architecture: a reader in cultural theory, Oxford: Routledge. p. 136.
26.
The Shrine: Memory, Presence, and Prophecy of the Living God, op. cit.
27.
See Allen T. (1988) Aniconism and Figural Representation in Islamic Art, in: Idem, Five Essays on Islamic Art, Manchester: Solipsist, pp. 17–37. Cf. De Kesel M. (2009) The Image as Crime. On the Monotheistic Ban on Images and the “Criminal” Nature of Art, in: Hlavajova M., Lutticken S. & Winder J. (eds.) The Return of Religion and other Myths: A Critical Reader in Contemporary Art, Utrecht: BAK Critical Reader Series, pp. 98–116.
28.
Durkheim E. (1912) The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, translated by Cosman C. (2001) Oxford University Press, p. 46.
29.
Cf. Bergot F. (1997) Présentation des œuvres d’art à caractère religieux dans les collections publiques, in: Forme et sens: La formation à la dimension religieuse du patrimoine culturel, Paris: École du Louvre/Ministère de la Culture, pp. 98–102; Paine C. (ed.) (2000) Godly things: museums, objects and religion, London: Leicester University.
30.
De Ceballos A. R. G. (2009) The Art of Devotion: Seventeenth-century Spanish Painting and Sculpture in its Religious Context, in: Bray X. (ed.) The sacred made real: Spanish painting and sculpture, 1600–1700, London: National Gallery - Yale University, p. 57.
31.
Bray X. (2009) The sacred made real: Spanish painting and sculpture, 1600–1700, in: Idem, op. cit., p. 17.
32.
Dworkin R. (1982) Law as interpretation, Critical Inquiry, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 179–200 (p. 179).
33.
Standard-setting in UNESCO, Conventions, Recommendations, Declarations and Charters adopted by UNESCO (1948–2006) (2007) Leiden – Boston: UNESCO Editions/Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, p. 44.
34.
Ibid., p. 104.
35.
Ibid., p. 403.
36.
The Declaration was adopted at the close of the Round Table of 71 Ministers of Culture on “Intangible Cultural Heritage, mirror of cultural diversity”, organized by UNESCO in Istanbul on 16 and 17 September 2002 (United Nations Year for Cultural Heritage). Full document available at: http://portal.unesco.org. Accessed on March 31, 2014.
37.
Official Journal of the European Union, C 83, 30.3.2010.
38.
Ibid., pp. 121–2.
39.
Official Journal L 74, 27.03.1993 pp. 74–9. One of the main purposes of the Directive is to enable Member States to secure the return to their territory of cultural objects which are classified as national treasures within the meaning of the Article 36 TFEU and have been removed from their territory in breach of the relevant national measures or of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3911/92 of December 9, 1992 on the export of cultural goods; cf. Odendahl K. (2005) Kulturgüterschutz: Entwicklung, Struktur und Dogmatik eines ebenenübergreifenden Normensystems [=Jus Publicum 140], Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, p. 327. It should be noted that the aforementioned Directive was amended by Directives 96/100/EC (Official Journal L 060, 01.03.1997 pp. 59–60) and 2001/38/EC (Official Journal L 187, 10.07.2001 pp. 43–4), while Regulation No 3911/92 was codified by the Council Regulation (EC) No 116/2009 of December 18, 2008 on the export of cultural goods (Official Journal L 39, 10.02.2009 pp. 1–7).
40.
The official text of the above Report (dated 30.5.2013) is available online at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/. Accessed on March 31, 2014.
41.
Cf. Gutmann J. (1964) Jewish Ceremonial Art, T. Yoseloff, p. 18 f.
42.
Council of Europe Treaty Series (CETS) No 121.
43.
Council of Europe Treaty Series (CETS) No 143.
44.
Council of Europe Treaty Series (CETS) No. 176.
45.
Cf. De Beyer M. & Takke J. (2012) Guidelines on Ways of Dealing with Religious Objects, Utrecht: Museum Catharijneconvent, p. 39: “We refer to an ensemble when there is a certain cohesiveness between movable and immovable property of historical or art-historical significance. This refers not only to buildings with their interiors, but also to the connections between certain objects … Four types of ensembles are distinguished: cohesion arising from historical continuity: an ensemble determined by cohesiveness in continuity of ownership and use; cohesion arising from composition: an ensemble determined by unity of composition or by production in the same period, but not according to an integrated architectural plan; cohesion arising from a total, integrated design: an ensemble determined by the cohesion of an integrated architectural plan, also known as a Gesamtkunstwerk; cohesion arising from provenance: ensemble determined by the cohesiveness of one of the previous ensemble types. In this case, however, the elements of the ensemble are no longer in the original location”.
46.
Data available online at: http://www.unesco.de/307.html. Accessed on March 31, 2014. Further information available at: http://www.kloster-maulbronn.de/. Accessed on March 31, 2014; cf. Anstett Janßen M. (ed.) (1999) Kloster Maulbronn: ein Kurzführer, Deutscher Kunstverlag.
47.
Cf. Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding and Contemporary Role of Historic Areas (1976), according to which ‘historic areas’ afford down the ages the most tangible evidence of the wealth and diversity of “cultural, religious and social activities”. Standard-setting in UNESCO, op. cit., p. 506 f.
48.
Stecher A. (2008) Eingegrenzt und Ausgegrenzt - Heimatverlust und Erinnerungskultur, dargestellt am Beispiel der versunkenen Dörfer in der Gemeinde Graun (Vinschgau/Südtirol), Saarbrücken, VDM, Müller.
49.
See, among many authors, M. Déjeant Pons (2006) The European Landscape Convention, Landscape Research, Vol. 31 Issue 4, pp. 363–84.
50.
Council of Europe, The Territorial Dimension Of Human Rights and Democracy, p. 38. Official document available online at: http://www.coe.int/. Accessed on March 31, 2014.
51.
Shackley M. (2003) Managing Sacred Sites: Service Provision and Visitor Experience, London: Thomson Learning, p. 124.
52.
Cf. J. Μallarach (ed.) (2008) Protected Landscapes and Cultural and Spiritual Values [=Values of Protected Landscapes and Seascapes 2], Heidelberg: Kasparek Verlag, pp. 51–63; J. Mallarach & T. Papayannis (eds.) (2009) The sacred dimension of protected areas: Proceedings of the second workshop of the Delos Initiative (Ouranoupolis 24–27 October 2007), Gland, Athens: IUCN - Mediterranean Institute for Nature and Anthropos (Med-INA) pp. 107–25; Della Dora V. (2012) Setting and Blurring Boundaries: Pilgrims, Tourists, and Landscape in Mount Athos and Meteora, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 39, Issue 2, pp. 951–74.
53.
Council Directive 92/43/EEC (of 21 May 1992) ‘on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora’. The aim of the Directive is to promote the maintenance of biodiversity, “taking account of economic, social, cultural and regional requirements” and to contribute “to the general objective of sustainable development”; see Official Journal 206, 22.7.1992, pp. 7–50.
54.
See Tsivolas Th. (2013) The legal protection of religious cultural goods [in Greek], Athens - Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas Publications, p. 264 f.
55.
Recommendation No. R (95) 9 ‘on the Integrated Conservation of Cultural Landscape Areas as Part of Landscape Policies’, Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on September 11, 1995, at the 543rd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies. Official document available online at: https://wcd.coe.int. Accessed on March 31, 2014.
56.
See the case Tara Prospecting Ltd v. Minister for Energy [1993] Irish Law Reports Monthly 771 cf. Doe, op. cit., p. 164 fn. 1 and p. 168 fn. 28.
57.
Wild R. & McLeod C. (eds.) (2008) Sacred Natural Sites: Guidelines for Protected Area Managers, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, p. 5.
58.
Ibid.
59.
Standard-setting in UNESCO, op. cit., p. 103 f.
60.
Ibid., p. 135 f.
61.
Ibid., p. 297 f.
62.
Ibid., p. 326 f.
63.
Cf. ibid., p. 104.
64.
According to the terminology adopted by the UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (Rome, 1995). See the official document of the relevant Convention online at: http://www.unidroit.org/english/conventions/1995culturalproperty/main.htm. Cf. the definition provided by the UNESCO Recommendation for the Protection of Movable Cultural Property: “movable cultural property shall be taken to mean all movable objects which are the expression and testimony of human creation or of the evolution of nature and which are of archaeological, historical, artistic, scientific or technical value and interest” in: Standard-setting in UNESCO, op. cit., p. 549 f.
65.
Standard-setting in UNESCO, op. cit., p. 136.
66.
Ibid., pp. 44–5.
67.
Ibid., p. 403.
68.
Ibid., p. 137.
69.
The official text of the Operational Guidelines, which are periodically revised (last revision in July 2013), is available online at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines. Accessed on March 31, 2014.
70.
Cf. Burton L. (2002) Worship and wilderness: Culture, religion, and law in public lands management, University of Wisconsin Press, p. 28 f.
71.
Wild R. & McLeod C., op. cit., p. 5.
72.
Fairchild Ruggles D. & Sihna A. (2009) Preserving the Cultural Landscape Heritage of Champaner-Pavagadh, Gujarat, India, in: Fairchild Ruggles D. & Silvermann H. (eds.) Intangible Heritage Embodied, Heidelberg - London - New York: Springer, pp. 96–7.
73.
Zizioulas J. (1996) Ecological Ascetism: a cultural revolution, Our Planet, Vol. 7, pp. 7–8.
74.
See Teall, J. L. (1971) The Byzantine agricultural tradition, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 25, pp. 33–59; Papayannis T. & Elissaios (1994) Nature and monasticism: The preservation of the Byzantine tradition on Mount Athos [in Greek], Athens: Goulandris Horn Foundation.
75.
Papayannis T. (2008) Characteristic Mt. Athos landscapes: the case of the Holy Simonopetra Monastery, in: Μallarach L. (ed.) Protected Landscapes and Cultural and Spiritual Values [=Values of Protected Landscapes and Seascapes 2], Heidelberg: Kasparek Verlag, pp. 51–63 (p. 54).
76.
Cf. Standard-setting in UNESCO, op. cit., p. 298.
77.
See de Coppet D. (ed.) (1992) Understanding rituals, London: Routledge; La Fontaine J.(ed.) (2004) The interpretation of ritual, London: Routledge; Bell C. (2009) Ritual. Perspectives and Dimensions, Oxford University.
78.
Standard-setting in UNESCO, op. cit., p. 605 f. For the religious and secular origins of the notion of ‘folklore’ see Propp V. (1984) Theory and History of Folkore, Liberman A. (ed.) [=Theory and History of Literature 5], Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, p. 11 f.
79.
Standard-setting in UNESCO, op. cit., p. 707 f.
80.
Standard-setting in UNESCO, op. cit., p. 326 f.
81.
Cf. Thibaut J. (1899) Etude de Musique byzantine, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, Vol. 8, Issue 1, pp. 122–47.
82.
Wellesz E. (1961) A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography (second edition), Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. viii.
83.
According to Art. 4 of the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions: “Cultural content” refers to the symbolic meaning, artistic dimension and cultural values that originate from or express cultural identities (Standard-setting in UNESCO, op. cit., p. 330).

References

Ahmad, Y. (2006). The scope and definitions of heritage: From tangible to intangible. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 12(3), 292–300.
Article Google Scholar
Ashworth, A., Graham, B., & Tunbridge, J. E. (2007). Pluralising pasts: Heritage, identity and place in multicultural societies. London: Pluto Press.
Google Scholar
Bercken, W. (2005). The ambiguity of religious aesthetics. Reflections on catholic and orthodox religious art. In W. Bercken (Ed.), Aesthetics as a religious factor in Eastern and Western Christianity: Selected papers of the International Conference held at the University of Utrecht, the Netherlands, in June 2004 [=Eastern Christian Studies 6] (pp. 37–51). Leuven: Peeters.
Google Scholar
Blake, J. (2000). On defining the cultural heritage. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 49, 61–85.
Google Scholar
Bouchenaki, M. (2007). A major advance towards a holistic approach to heritage conservation: The 2003 Intangible Heritage Convention. International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 2, 106–109.
Google Scholar
Crouch, C. (2000). The quiet continent: Religion and politics in Europe. In D. Marquand & R. Nettler (Eds.), Religion and democracy (pp. 90–103). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Google Scholar
Davie, G. (2000). Religion in modern Europe. A memory mutates [=European Societies, C. Crouch (Ed.)]. New York: Oxford University.
Google Scholar
Frigo, M. (2004). Cultural property v. Cultural heritage: A battle of concepts in international law? International Review of the Red Cross, 86, 367–368.
Google Scholar
Fromageau, J. (2006). La protection du patrimoine mondial religieux. In B. Basdevant-Gaudemet, M. Cornu, & J. Fromageau (Eds.), Le patrimoine culturel religieux, enjeux juridique et pratiques cultuelles [Collection Droit du patrimoine culturel et naturel] (pp. 35–49). Paris: L’Harmattan.
Google Scholar
Geffré, C. (2009). Europe: A project for the future on the basis of a common heritage. In E. Borgman, S. Scatena, & L. Susin (Eds.), Which religious heritages for the future? [=International Review of Theology, Concilium 2009/2] (pp. 24–38). London: SCM Press.
Google Scholar
Halman, L., & van Ingen, E. (2013). Secularization and the sources of morality: Religion and morality in contemporary Europe. In J. de Hart, P. Dekker, & L. Halman (Eds.), Religion and civil society in Europe (pp. 87–107). Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar
Heckel, M. (1968). Staat, Kirche, Kunst: Rechtsfragen kirchlicher Kulturdenkmäler. Tübingen: Mohr.
Google Scholar
Heckel, M. (1987). Der Denkmalschutz an den Sakralbauten in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland Kulturschutz und Kirchenfreiheit im säkularen Verfassungssystem. In Denkmalpflege und Denkmalschutz an den Sakralbauten in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und in Frankreich, [Deutsch – Französische Kolloquien Kirche – Staat – Gesellschaft – Strassburger Kolloquien – Band 7] Strassburg, pp. 85–102.
Google Scholar
Howes, G. (2007). The art of the sacred. An introduction to the aesthetics of art and belief. London/New York: I. B. Tauris.
Google Scholar
Karlen, P. (1979). Legal aesthetics. The British Journal of Aesthetics, 19, 195–212.
Google Scholar
Lee, C., & Schaaf, T. (Eds.). (2003). International workshop on the importance of sacred natural sites for biodiversity conservation. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Google Scholar
Maria, E. (2009). The legal protection of landscape in International, European and national law [in Greek]. Athens: Ant. N. Sakkoulas.
Google Scholar
McCrea, R. (2010). Religion and the public order of the European Union. New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Pearson, M. P., & Richards, C. (Eds.). (1994). Architecture and order: Approaches to social space. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Pollack, D., Müller, O., Pickel, G., & Müller, O. (2012). The social significance of religion in the enlarged Europe: Secularization individualization and pluralization. Farnham: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
Prieur, M. (2003). Legal provisions for cultural landscape protection in Europe. In Cultural landscapes: The challenges of conservation [World Heritage Papers 7] (pp. 150–155). Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Google Scholar
Prott, L., & O’Keefe, P. J. (1992). ‘Cultural Heritage’ or ‘Cultural Property’? International Journal of Cultural Property, 1(2), 307–320.
Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. (1994). The archaeology of religion. In C. Renfrew & E. B. Zubrow (Eds.), The ancient mind: Elements of cognitive archaeology (pp. 47–54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Simeoni, P. E. (2005). Popular worship of the most Holy Trinity of Vallepietra, central Italy the transformation of tradition and the safeguarding of intangible Cultural heritage. In H. Stovel, N. P. Stanley Price, & R. G. Killick (Eds.), Conservation of living religious heritage [=International Center for the study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property] (pp. 74–85). Rome: ICCROM.
Google Scholar
Trova, H. (1995). La garantie constitutionnelle de l’esthétique et de la mémoire. In Archaeological heritage: Current trends in its legal protection, International conference Athens 26–27 November 1992 [=Institute of Hellenic Constitutional History and Constitutional Law: Studies 5] (pp. 105–115). Athens: P. Sakkoulas Bros.
Google Scholar
Wynn, M. (2009). Faith and place, an essay in embodied religious epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Athens, Greece
Theodosios Tsivolas

Authors

Theodosios Tsivolas
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tsivolas, T. (2014). Defining Religious Cultural Heritage in Europe. In: Law and Religious Cultural Heritage in Europe. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07932-5_4

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07932-5_4
Published: 12 June 2014
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07931-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07932-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics