1.

Record Nr.

UNISA996385823003316

Autore

Lucian, of Samosata

Titolo

Part of Lucian made English from the originall, in the yeare 1638 [[electronic resource] /] / by Jasper Mayne ..., to which are adjoyned those other dialogues of Lucian as they were formerly translated by Mr. Francis Hicks

Pubbl/distr/stampa

Oxford, : Printed by H. Hall for R. Davis, 1663

Descrizione fisica

[16], 398, [2] p

Altri autori (Persone)

MayneJasper <1604-1672.>

HickesFrancis <1566-1631.>

Lingua di pubblicazione

Inglese

Formato

Materiale a stampa

Livello bibliografico

Monografia

Note generali

Numerous errors in paging.

The epistle dedicatory signed by Jasper Mayne.

Reproduction of original in the Bodleian Library.

Sommario/riassunto

eebo-0014



2.

Record Nr.

UNINA9910495878303321

Autore

Dirlik Arif

Titolo

Revolution and history

Pubbl/distr/stampa

[Place of publication not identified], : University of California Press, 1989

ISBN

9780520342071

0520342070

9780520909571

0520909577

9780585335551

0585335559

Edizione

[Reprint 2020]

Descrizione fisica

1 online resource (312 p.)

Disciplina

951.04072

Soggetti

Historiography and photography

Lingua di pubblicazione

Inglese

Formato

Materiale a stampa

Livello bibliografico

Monografia

Note generali

Bibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph

Nota di contenuto

Front matter -- Contents -- Preface -- Part I. Introduction -- 1. The Problem -- 2. The Context -- Part II. The Social History Controversy and Marxist Analysis of Chinese History -- 3. Revolution and Social Analysis -- 4. Feudalism in Chinese History -- 5. Kuo Mo-jo and Slavery in Chinese History -- 6. The Periodization of Chinese History -- Part III. Conclusion -- 7. Revolution, Marxism, and Chinese History -- 8. Epilogue: Social Change and History -- Bibliography -- Index

Sommario/riassunto

In Revolution and History, Arif Dirlik examines the application of the materialist conception of history to the analysis of Chinese history in a period when Marxist ideas first gained currency in Chinese intellectual circles. His argument raises questions about earlier interpretations of Marxist historiography by scholars who based their opinions primarily on post-1949 writings.