東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Modern British labor historians and ...

Chou, Liang-Kai.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Modern British labor historians and their conceptions of history.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Modern British labor historians and their conceptions of history./
作者:	Chou, Liang-Kai.
面頁冊數:	393 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 54-09, Section: A, page: 3557.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International54-09A.
標題:	History, Modern. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=9404794

Modern British labor historians and their conceptions of history.
Chou, Liang-Kai.

Modern British labor historians and their conceptions of history. - 393 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 54-09, Section: A, page: 3557.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--State University of New York at Buffalo, 1993.

This study deals with ten influential historians who, since the 1880s, have contributed new perspectives to the study of British industrial society. The Whig interpretation of history and the empiricist-positivist approach of historical cognition are generally regarded as dominant visions in historical writings between 1830's and 1880's. But a lot of historians since the end of the nineteenth century questioned this historiographical tradition. These ten social historians belong to different generations. Arnold Toynbee, and Sidney and Beatrice Webb were born in the 1850's; John Lawrence and Barbara Hammond in the 1870's; and George Douglas Howard and Margaret Cole in the 1880's. Eric Hobsbawm and Edward P. and Dorothy Thompson are still writing. It is not difficult to point out the diversities among their social thought. Toynbee and the Hammonds were radical liberals; the Webbs and the Coles can be classified in the socialist group; and Hobsbawm and the Thompsons can be associated with the Marxist-influenced writers. However, these ten historians have some fundamental perceptions in common which distinguish them from the Whig interpretation.Subjects--Topical Terms:

516334
History, Modern.

Modern British labor historians and their conceptions of history.
LDR:03668nam a2200289 4500 001 1962126
005 20140730075034.5
008 150210s1993 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI9404794
035 $a AAI9404794
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Chou, Liang-Kai. $3 2098149
245 1 0 $a Modern British labor historians and their conceptions of history.
300 $a 393 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 54-09, Section: A, page: 3557.
500 $a Mentor: George G. Iggers.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--State University of New York at Buffalo, 1993.
520 $a This study deals with ten influential historians who, since the 1880s, have contributed new perspectives to the study of British industrial society. The Whig interpretation of history and the empiricist-positivist approach of historical cognition are generally regarded as dominant visions in historical writings between 1830's and 1880's. But a lot of historians since the end of the nineteenth century questioned this historiographical tradition. These ten social historians belong to different generations. Arnold Toynbee, and Sidney and Beatrice Webb were born in the 1850's; John Lawrence and Barbara Hammond in the 1870's; and George Douglas Howard and Margaret Cole in the 1880's. Eric Hobsbawm and Edward P. and Dorothy Thompson are still writing. It is not difficult to point out the diversities among their social thought. Toynbee and the Hammonds were radical liberals; the Webbs and the Coles can be classified in the socialist group; and Hobsbawm and the Thompsons can be associated with the Marxist-influenced writers. However, these ten historians have some fundamental perceptions in common which distinguish them from the Whig interpretation.
520 $a First, all of them criticized the structure of industrial-capitalist society and expressed interest In contemporary social reform. Second, in their devotion to social reform, all insisted on a value-oriented approach to the study of historical events. Toynbee found fault with the works of classical economists, especially David Ricardo, who applied the deductive method. The Hammonds, the Webbs and the Coles argued with twenty-century professional economic historians, such as L. L. Prince, George Unwin, John Clapham and Thomas Ashton, whose historical methods were influenced by Alfred Marshall's Neo-Classicism. The debates between Hobsbawm and Robert M. Hartwell on the standard of living of the working classes is also a clash of opinion on the theory of historical knowledge. The Thompsons, like Hobsbawm, criticize the method of old left historians on the hand, and disagree with the scholars who believe in the nomological approach to the study of industrial society on the other hand. Third, early industrial labor is one of the main issues in their writings. All of them have a "pessimistic" attitude toward the impact of the Industrial Revolution upon the working classes.
520 $a This study emphasizes the major links among these ten historians; it also exposes dissimilarities in their criticism of capitalist society, their perceptions of early industrial labor, and their attitudes to empiricist-positivist approaches to society. This investigation intends to explain the relationship between the historical and social thought of these historians rather than the social history of the early Industrial Revolution.
590 $a School code: 0656.
650 4 $a History, Modern. $3 516334
650 4 $a History, European. $3 1018076
690 $a 0582
690 $a 0335
710 2 $a State University of New York at Buffalo. $3 1017814
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 54-09A.
790 $a 0656
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 1993
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=9404794