In the history of the reception of Husserl's Crisis one notices a remarkable expansion and deepening of interpretive points of view. But since the Crisis is rather young — especially if one traces it back not to the publication of the first two parts in 1936, but more properly to the first complete critical edition of 1954¹ — one can hardly speak of the "history" of its reception. For at this point in time there is still missing that distance which first lends to historical perception its depth of focus and certainty in distinguishing between what is essential and what is marginal — especially with regard to a book which its author had to lay down incomplete at a moment which could hardly have been less favorable for a complete editorial reorganization.