Although stating that Aristotle was a great philosopher is a truism, he and his philosophy remain fascinating to scholars; Del Soldato's book is an excellent example of this fascination. In order to present the fortuna of his authority in early modern Europe, the author has selected an impressive body of about two hundred source texts (prints, manuscripts, letters), of various provenance, in which the figure of Aristotle appears. The book offers an engaging story of the uneasy road of liberation from the influence of authority, and the path of humanity's self-development in search of truth and rationality, with the flexible but tyrannical figure of the philosopher as the main object of struggle.

The aim of Del Soldato's work is to demonstrate the manipulations of Aristotle's figure, as she puts it—“its use and abuse, from both transnational and interdisciplinary perspectives” (3)—which in consequence reveal the flexibility of Aristotle as an authority. She provides a fresh perspective by organizing her book according to literary genres, in which she finds a useful clue for interpreting cultural movement. The analyses are well contextualized in ongoing intellectual debates and the political landscape. The book consists of five chapters supplemented by four short texts in the form of appendixes. These include so-far unpublished transcriptions and translations of the preface by Alfonso Pandolfi to his Comparatio of Aristotle and Plato, and Federico Pendasio's Comparatio, whose manuscripts Del Soldato found in the Vatican Library and Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan, respectively.

The first three chapters are devoted to the genre of comparationes between Aristotle and Plato, which Del Soldato begins with the appearance of the De Differentiis of Gemistus Pletho (1439) and closes with Giuseppe Valletta's vernacular treatise On Philosophy (1697). Thanks to Del Soldato's compilation of an enormous number of sources and her careful analysis, we can follow the development of a genre initiated by Greek authors (Pletho, George of Trebizond, and Bessarion) and furthered by Latin and vernacular authors. This is undoubtedly the most valuable part of the work, as no one has yet attempted to study the comparationes as a whole, based on such a large number of sources.

In the author's interpretation, the two philosophers and their comparisons become a mirror of the political, theological, and philosophical anxieties of the era. I found particularly interesting the theological context of these comparisons, which aimed at proving which philosopher was more pious and had more affinities with Christian religion, and were also fierce debates on the possibility of reforming existing dogmas. Therefore, Jesuits tried hard to minimize any affinity between Christianity and Platonism, as this could lead to heresy. Del Soldato's great merit is that she shows and proves that the situation was not so clear-cut. Through many examples of comparationes she demonstrates the complexity of manipulation, where even reconciling Plato and Aristotle could serve different purposes. The only hesitation a reader may feel at this abundance of examples is that it obscures the author's own thoughts and comments.

In the remaining chapters Del Soldato looks at the manipulative strategies in the use of Aristotle's authority from the viewpoint of subsequent literary forms: legends, a proverbial anecdote, and a fictional story involving Aristotle (chapter 4), and the motif “if Aristotle were alive” (chapter 5). Such legends as Aristotle the Jew or Spaniard are described as examples of the national appropriation of his authority, acting as a kind of ennobling cultural agent. While Aristotle Spanicus was attractive mainly in a national context, Aristotle Judaicus was fought against by Catholics or Protestants who rejected any continuity between Judaism, Hellenism, and Christianity. Del Soldato's book ends with a chapter devoted to the phrase once formulated, by Galileo, among others: “if Aristotle were alive,” which represented the twilight of the philosopher's tyranny. Referring to a revived Aristotle paradoxically served mainly to legitimize new trends and scientific freedom.

To sum up, the book gives a detailed and well-written overview of the fortune of Aristotle's authority, its use and abuse in early modern Europe, which will undoubtedly be of interest to any scholar of Aristotelianism and anyone interested in the circulation of thought and intellectual trends.