新中国成立70年以来，马克思主义经典著作在中国的编译与传播，既是马克思主义中国化的首要前提，又是实现马克思主义中国化的基本途径。自新中国成立以来到1978年改革放时期，是中国历史发展的一个十分重要的特殊阶段，也构成了马克思主义经典著作编译传播史上的一个十分重要的特殊阶段。本书对这一时期马克思主义经典著作编译与传播的社会历史条件、编译与出版机构的建立与完善，以及编译与传播的重要阶段、主要类别、基本特征、传播途径及对马克思主义中国化的历史影响与现实启示等方面行深研究，梳理马克思主义经典著作版本演化的历史轨迹，总结经典文本编译与传播的经验教训，揭示其在推动马克思主义中国化过程中的历史作用和当代价值。

“用数据说话”由来已久，但互联网、人工智能语境下的大数据时代为数据新闻报道提供了新机遇和新课题。 《释放数据的力量：数据新闻生产与伦理研究》是一部数据新闻生产方面的基础理论著作。围绕当下数据新闻生产的前沿问题，作者运用传播学、叙事学、伦理学、管理学、文艺学、游戏学、数据科学等理论资源，对数据新闻的生产模式、叙事与伦理等问题行细化研究，采取审慎批判的视角，深剖析了数据新闻的边界泛化、数据科学方法论、交互叙事中的选择幻象、语图关系中的图像霸权、生产伦理中的实用主义客观性和透明性等问题，提出了诸多卓有见地的观。

口述历史是唐德刚倾注了大半生精力的事业，在帮众多近现代名人完成他们的口述自传或回忆录之后，也跟他们成了朋友。本书便是唐德刚多年来与诸多名人交往的见闻文章以及自己平时读书评论的合集，其中包括顾维钧、张学良、刘廷芳、吴先、刘绍唐、杨振宁等人和《传记文学》《鲁拜集》等书。作者无论是写人，还是评书籍，都十分注重细节，还穿插着很多逸闻、警句、反讽、隐喻，洒脱不羁，文笔流畅，展现出历史风貌的同时，也体现了作者多方面的才学。

　　看半小时漫画，传统节日的来历瞬间一清二楚。陈磊（笔名：二混子）领衔的半小时漫画团队，仅通过手绘漫画和段子，就让读者通晓了二十四节气以及九个中国人喜闻乐见的传统节日：春节、元宵节、清明节、端午节、七夕节、中元节、中秋节、重阳节和腊八节。这本书延续了半小时漫画系列既严谨又搞笑的风格，让你在哈哈大笑中学到传统节日的真正来历。 　　屈原自己其实都过端午节；春节的历史其实也就100多年；元宵节在古代其实是情人节；牛郎和织女其实没啥关系；古人过清明其实相当欢乐…… ???????这些节日来历的背后，其实是各种中国古代知识：历史、天文、地理、气候、历法等。让你在了解节日来历的同时，通晓了中国的传统文化和祖先们的古老智慧。 ???????翻本书，在笑出腹肌的同时，秒懂中国传统节日的真正来历！

第二次世界大战末期，美军在太平洋战场上已是节节胜利，正大踏步向日本本土推。随着胜利的临近，一系列问题也摆在了美国政府的面前：在不攻日本本土的情况下，日本会投降吗？一旦美军登上日本本土，日本人会不会拼死抵抗而给美军带来巨大伤亡？占领日本后，如何改造日本社会，要不要保留天皇……所以，了解日本人的思维和行为模式就成了美国政府的当务之急。同年6月，本书作者奉命从文化的角度对日本加以研究，以期找到答案。《菊与刀》就是这份答卷，它其实就是作者在对日本文化行分析后向美国政府提交的一份研究报告。事实证明，书中的观对日后美国对日关系及政策都产生了极大的影响，并且取得了良好的效果。因此，尽管这本书只有十几万字，但无论是从它对一个国家的命运所产生的影响来看，还是从它所取得的学术成就来看，《菊与刀》都是一部名副其实的巨著。“菊”与“刀”分别代表了日本人在面对理想与现实时的两种心态，也是两种不同生活状态的写照，作者分别从政治结构、社会阶层划分、消遣娱乐、人情世故，甚至是对儿童的教育等日本社会的不同领域都行了剖析，不仅论理清晰，而且文笔也很流畅、优美。

全书分两编，*编总论清史在史学上的地位和清史体例；第二编分为国、巩固国基、全盛、嘉道守文、咸同之转危为安五部分，对清朝各个时期的史实行了评述。 全书内容充实、条理清晰、考证翔实，具有极高的学术深度，在清史研究领域有着深远的影响，为现代清史研究的代表作之一。

美国，从立国、崛起到称霸，走过的套路好像武侠小说中的“大侠”； 欧洲，曾经是“武林盟主”，不过已经“退居二线”； 俄罗斯，在地缘战略上的诉求就和其国徽上的双头鹰一样——左顾右盼； 印度，要做“有声有色”的大国，实际情况却因其独特的地理环境变得复杂； 中国，具备成为“王者”的所有条件，但要想真正“上位”，还必须依靠智慧和勇气，踏踏实实拼出来！

本书是国家社科基金项目学术成果。内容分三大部分，前两章为上篇，主要讲金融消费者保护的基础理论；三至八章为中篇，是对西方金融产业发达国家以及我国台湾地区金融消费者保护监管机制的分析；*后两章为下篇，是对我国金融消费者保护监管机制的分析。书中运用了大量*手材料行论述，特别是对西方金融业发达国家相关法律法规的论述，运用了不少外文原版文献，这使得论述更加具有说服力。

现代阿富汗的历史就像是一部跌宕起伏的戏剧，充满了荒唐、惊悚和悲伤。两个多世纪以来，几乎每隔40年，就会有一个大国强行阻断阿富汗的发展，破坏其取得的步。待强权退出，阿富汗历史才能重新始。 这是一个被自己的恶魔破坏的国家，这是一个被反复争夺和统治的国家。塔米姆?安萨利通过阿富汗人的视角来解读祖国的历史，他驳斥了“帝国坟场”的论断，讲述了长期以来外部世界从未完全了解的阿富汗内部斗争，剖析了现代侵者屡战屡败的致命原因。在这里，外国的干涉和侵不是主旋律，它们只是扰乱了阿富汗的发展，阿富汗人有自己的故事，这是与所有侵完全不同的：高高在上的私权力、根深蒂固的部落文化、走火魔的激思想、错综复杂的地缘政治……塔米姆?安萨利带领我们走一个“真实的阿富汗”，为我们了解阿富汗这个长期处于国际话语权之外的国家提供了启示性的见解。

  《别输在性格上》不仅可以帮助读者了解自己的性格类型，读懂自己的行为，还可以帮助读者有针对性地完善自己的性格，超越自我。   《别输在性格上》主要介绍了完美型性格者、奉献型性格者、成就型性格者、浪漫型性格者、观察型性格者、怀疑型性格者、享乐型性格者、领袖型性格者与和平型性格者在生活、工作、爱情中经常会陷的误区，让读者通过了解和管理自己的性格，来摆脱这种性格的困扰与控制，并完善性格中的不足，从而更好地掌控自己的人生。   另外，针对每种性格中的特质，书中还给出了具体的职业建议，希望读者能够有所启发，找到适合自己的工作，在职场中可以充分地展示自我价值，让职场生涯更顺利。

《历史的季节：读史当明势》聚焦中国14个长寿王朝，对其建国70年前后这一历史节作切片式分析， 别生面图解王朝兴盛衰亡之历史轨迹。作者通过统计分析中国历史上的王朝样本，证实70年是王朝的“天花板”，抑或是“喇叭口”。大部分王朝都过不了这道“天花板”，少部分通过“天花板”的王朝则一般会延续很长时间，但问题仍然层出不穷。转身和改革是中国历史永恒的话题，历久弥新。   作者对历史复杂性的冷峻思考、对中国古代政治兴衰和传统文化积弊的慎思与明辨才妙趣横生而又发人深省，使我们在玑珠妙语和另辟蹊径中感悟历史的沧桑与魅力。孔子的笼子从1.0版到4.0版，强而无韧的秦王朝，隐士之多与少，武则天那无字碑该补何字？“妇人之仁”与“明主之仁”，皇帝被后儒越宠越坏了,史上的“贸易战”等等，遍地金瓯，蕴藉风流。

重拾中西方古典学问坠绪，不仅因为现代性问题迫使学问古共智慧，更因为古学问关乎亘古不移的人世问题。古学经典需要解释，解释是涵养精神的活动，也是思想取向的抉择；宁可跟随柏拉图犯错，也不与那伙人一起正确。举凡疏证诠解中国古学经典、移译西学整理旧故的晚近成果，不外乎愿与中西方古典大智慧一起思想，以期寻回精神的涵养，不负教书育人的人类亘古基业。 　　本书是《经典与解释》系列之一的《霍布斯的修辞》分册，内中具体研究了“霍布斯的哲学思想”，主要收录了：霍布斯《利维坦》中的推理与修辞、霍布斯的“非亚里士多德”政治修辞学、“教条”对抗“数理”、基督教国家的自然法等内容。

林语堂旅居美欧数十年，用多部传世经典专著，向西方介绍光辉灿烂的中国文化。本书旁征博引，纵横捭阖，以丰富的文史资料和自由的行文风格，重新演绎了北京数千年的历史演变，北京文化的各个层面——内城与外郛、市区与郊野、皇室与民众，以及皇宫、御苑、寺庙、佛塔、雕塑、绘画、书法等城市名片也尽收其中。本书以真实准确的纪实性、引人胜的可读性、高品位的艺术性，全方位再现原汁原味的北京，是贴心体会北京精神的大成之作！

Mülkiyet kar??t? ya?l? anar?ist, hayat?n?n son y?llar?nda ironik bir durumda kald?. ?svi?re vatanda?l???na girmenin yollar?n? arayan Bakunin'e sunulan se?enek, orada bir ev sahibi olmas?yd? ve belki de en hazini, sahip olaca?? bu ev nedeniyle, polisin, resm? tutanaklara “Michael Bakunin, rantiye” notunu dü?mesiydi. 18 May?s 1814'te Rusya'da do?an Michael Aleksandrovich Bakunin, 1 Temmuz 1876'da ?ldü?ünde ülkesinden ?ok uzaklardayd? ve cenazesinde yaln?zca 30–40 ki?i vard?. Gen? Bakunin i?in, “A?k, insan?n yeryüzündeki en üst misyonuydu. Bir insan?n kendini a?ks?z vermesi, Kutsal Ruh’a kar?? i?lenmi? bir günaht?”.. ?Kad?nlar taraf?ndan olduk?a ?ekici bulunan Mihail'in ise kad?nlarla ili?kisi hep ruhsal bir a?k olarak kald?.??svi?re'nin muhte?em manzaras? e?li?inde George Sand romanlar? okuyan Bakunin, Frans?z dü?üncesinin Alman dü?üncesinden üstün oldu?u inanc?n? sa?lamla?t?r?yordu. ? Bakunin, Marx i?in, “O, beni duygusal idealist olarak adland?r?yordu; hakl?yd?. Ben de onu, hoyrat, kendini be?enmi? ve ac?mas?z olarak de?erlendiriyordum; ben de hakl?yd?m” diyordu.. ? Kendisine ili?kin konularda kindar olmayan Bakunin, Herzen'in kar?s?na g?sterdi?i so?uklu?u hayat?n?n sonuna kadar unutamad?.?“Art?k reaksiyonun muzaffer gü?lerine kar?? Sisifos'un ta??n? yuvarlamak i?in ne gerekli güce ne de güvene sahibim. Bu yüzden, mücadeleden ?ekiliyor ve arkada?lar?mdan tek bir iyilik bekliyorum: "Unutulmak”,?Orta ve ge? on dokuzuncu yüzy?lda, radikal sol –yani, a?g?zlü kapitalizm ele?tirmenleri ve sanayi i??ilerinin ?zgürlü?ünün savunucular?– iki temel franksiyona ayr?l?yordu: Marksistler ve anar?istler. Kabaca s?ylemek gerekirse (ki bu son derece kar???k bir hik?yedir), kazanan Marksistler oldu ve yirminci yüzy?l?n tüm ba?ar?l? sol devrimleri –Rus, ?in ve Küba, ?rne?in– Marksist ilkelere ba?l?l?klar?n? ilan ettiler. ? Marksistler ile anar?istler aras?ndaki sava? bu noktada tarihsel bir meraktan ?te devam eden bir meseledir. Pi?man olmayan ya da ele?tirilmeyen tek ger?ek Marksist sol Kim Jong Il ve taraf etraftaki birka? entelektüel ve profes?rdür. Anar?izm ise uygulanabilir bir toplumsal hareket olarak ?kinci Dünya Sava??yla yava? yava? tükenmeye yüz tutmu?ken küreselle?me kar??t? hareket ve d?nemimizin di?er radikalizmleri i?inde yeniden dirilmeye ba?lam??t?r. ? Ne var ki, d?neminde –Marx’?n di?erleriyle aras?ndaki– bu sava? bir ?lüm kal?m meselesiydi ve Marksizm muhtemel kapitalizm kar??t? olarak ve yan? s?ra anar?izm kar??t? olarak tan?mlan?yordu. Asl?nda, Marx’?n yazarl??? anar?izme y?nelik sald?r?lar? a??s?ndan handiyse gülün? bir geni?li?e ula?m??t?r. Marx’?n Alman ?deolojisi kitab?n?n büyük b?lümü –yüzlerce sayfas?– bireyci/anar?ist Max Stirner’e y?nelik bir sald?r?dan ibarettir. Felsefenin Sefaleti Proudhon’a kar?? büyük?e bir fikir sava??d?r. Marx onca zaman ve enerjisini Bakunin’e sald?rmaya harcam??t?r: ?“dangalak!”?“canavar, et ve ya? y???n?,” “sap?k” vesaire: ?bu tabirler, has?mlar? s?z konusu oldu?unda Marx’?n bildik üslubudur: yazarl??? yar? bilimsel inceleme, yar? s?zlü tacizdir. Marx’?n, gerek kendi a?z?ndan gerekse de kimi s?zcülerini kullanarak ony?llar boyunca y?neltti?i ve muhtemelen di?erleri denli e?lenceli olmayan var olan su?lamas?, Bakunin’in bir muhbir oldu?u y?nündeydi ve Marx’?n bu ba?ar?l? sald?r?lar? nihayetinde Bakunin’in Enternasyonal ???i Z?mb?rt?s?ndan tasfiyesine yol a?t?.. ?

...amikor apaként elmegyek az óvodába, hogy elhozzam a kisfiamat, akkor milyen alapon választom ki, hogy kit viszek haza Talán megkérdezem az óvóntl, hogy melyik gyerek viselkedett a legjobban Vagy krülnézek, hogy melyik klyk a legszebb s ha az óvón azzal fogad, hogy az én gyerekem elpáholta t csoporttársát, és egy pohár kefirt nttt a takarító néni fejére, akkor ott hagyom, és választok egy normális gyereket Nem. Minden krülmények kzt a sajátomat viszem haza. Azért, mert az enyém! Ez a vele való kapcsolatom alapja. s ha ez az alap megvan, hazaviszem t, és otthon elbeszélgetek vele a pohár kefirrl, az ovistársakról, a takarító nénirl és a verekedésrl. Milyen egyszernek és természetesnek tnik mindez, ha a saját gyermekeinkrl van szó, de ha Jézus mondja ugyanezt az Atyáról, akkor zavarba jvünk, mert a szégyen és a félelem által belénk vésdtt kalmárszellem olyan mélyen járja át a lelkünket, hogy el sem tudjuk képzelni, hogy csak úgy, minden feltétel nélkül szeretni való emberek vagyunk...” BOLYKI LSZL 1973-ban született Budapesten. Zenész (Bolyki Brothers, Budapesti Fesztiválzenekar, Erkel Ferenc Kamarazenekar), spirituális szemlélet lelkigondozó, párkapcsolati és nismereti témákra szakosodott tréner, a Milyen zenét szeret Isten cím ktet szerzje. Bolyki László munkája azt tanítja nekünk, hogy a múlt si kultúrájának szimbolikus értékei a mai ember problémáiban is eleven lélektani, spirituális útmutatást tudnak nyújtani.” dr. SLE FERENC, a volt Országos Pszichiátriai és Neurológiai Intézet Valláslélektani Osztályának forvosa A Kegyelem és kalmárszellem nem csak egy knyv a sok kzül; fontos, hogy minél tbb olvasóhoz eljusson! Mindenkinek ajánlom szeretettel.” SZENCZY SNDOR a Baptista Szeretetszolgálat Alapítvány vezetje

Valamikor a muzsika egyszer volt, szerény és tiszteletreméltó, ma cicomás lett és zrzavaros, méltóságát és értékét veszített, gyalázatos iparrá süllyedt.” Mikor volt a muzsika egyszer, szerény és tiszteletreméltó, és vajon milyen úton-módon veszítette el méltóságát és értékét Meg tudjuk határozni, hogy melyek a zene zrzavaros és cicomás stíluselemei Tudjuk-e, hogy hogyan és miért süllyedt a zene gyalázatos iparrá Végül, de nem utolsósorban fel tudjuk-e mérni annak jelentségét, hogy a fenti idézet a 6. századból származik, a nagy keresztény gondolkodó, Boethiusz tollából E knyv a zene és a kereszténység hagyományosan feszültségektl terhelt kapcsolatát vizsgálja, a valamikor” és a ma” szakrális zenéjének tükrében. A szerz szándéka, hogy a zene a dicséret és magasztalás eszkze, és ne a feszültségek állandó forrása legyen a keresztény egyházak és gyülekezetek életében. BOLYKI LSZL 1994-ben szerezte mvész-tanári diplomáját a budapesti Zeneakadémián. A Bolyki Brothers énekegyüttes, a Budapesti Fesztiválzenekar és az Erkel Ferenc Kamarazenekar tagjaként rendszeresen fllép Európa, Amerika és zsia legjelentsebb zenei kzpontjaiban. Spirituális szemlélet lelkigondozó, párkapcsolati és nismereti témákra szakosodott tréner, a Kegyelem és kalmárszellem cím ktet szerzje.

Paradise Lost is an epic poem in blank verse by the 17th-century English poet John Milton (1608–1674). The first version, published in 1667, consisted of ten books with over ten thousand lines of verse. A second edition followed in 1674, arranged into twelve books (in the manner of Virgil's Aeneid) with minor revisions throughout and a note on the versification. It is considered by critics to be Milton's "major work", and helped solidify his reputation as one of the greatest English poets of his time. The poem concerns the Biblical story of the Fall of Man: the temptation of Adam and Eve by the fallen angel Satan and their expulsion from the Garden of Eden. Milton's purpose, stated in Book I, is to "justify the ways of God to men" Short Summary:The poem is separated into twelve "books" or sections, the lengths of which vary greatly (the longest is Book IX, with 1,189 lines, and the shortest Book VII, with 640). The Arguments at the head of each book were added in subsequent imprints of the first edition. Originally published in ten books, a fully "Revised and Augmented" edition reorganized into twelve books was issued in 1674, and this is the edition generally used today. The poem follows the epic tradition of starting in medias res (Latin for in the midst of things), the background story being recounted later.Milton's story has two narrative arcs, one about Satan (Lucifer) and the other following Adam and Eve. It begins after Satan and the other rebel angels have been defeated and banished to Hell, or, as it is also called in the poem, Tartarus. In Pand?monium, Satan employs his rhetorical skill to organise his followers; he is aided by Mammon and Beelzebub. Belial and Moloch are also present. At the end of the debate, Satan volunteers to poison the newly created Earth and God's new and most favoured creation, Mankind. He braves the dangers of the Abyss alone in a manner reminiscent of Odysseus or Aeneas. After an arduous traversal of the Chaos outside Hell, he enters God's new material World, and later the Garden of Eden. At several points in the poem, an Angelic War over Heaven is recounted from different perspectives. Satan's rebellion follows the epic convention of large-scale warfare. The battles between the faithful angels and Satan's forces take place over three days. At the final battle, the Son of God single-handedly defeats the entire legion of angelic rebels and banishes them from Heaven. Following this purge, God creates the World, culminating in his creation of Adam and Eve. While God gave Adam and Eve total freedom and power to rule over all creation, He gave them one explicit command: not to eat from the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil on penalty of death.

The Republic (Greek: Politeia) is a Socratic dialogue, written by Plato around 380 BC, concerning the definition of (justice), the order and character of the just city-state and the just man, reason by which ancient readers used the name On Justice as an alternative title (not to be confused with the spurious dialogue also titled On Justice). The dramatic date of the dialogue has been much debated and though it must take place some time during the Peloponnesian War, "there would be jarring anachronisms if any of the candidate specific dates between 432 and 404 were assigned". It is Plato's best-known work and has proven to be one of the most intellectually and historically influential works of philosophy and political theory. In it, Socrates along with various Athenians and foreigners discuss the meaning of justice and examine whether or not the just man is happier than the unjust man by considering a series of different cities coming into existence "in speech", culminating in a city (Kallipolis) ruled by philosopher-kings; and by examining the nature of existing regimes. The participants also discuss the theory of forms, the immortality of the soul, and the roles of the philosopher and of poetry in society. Short Summary (Epilogue):X.1—X.8. 595a—608b. Rejection of Mimetic ArtX.9—X.11. 608c—612a. Immortality of the SoulX.12. 612a—613e. Rewards of Justice in LifeX.13—X.16. 613e—621d. Judgment of the Dead The paradigm of the city — the idea of the Good, the Agathon — has manifold historical embodiments, undertaken by those who have seen the Agathon, and are ordered via the vision. The centre piece of the Republic, Part II, nos. 2–3, discusses the rule of the philosopher, and the vision of the Agathon with the allegory of the cave, which is clarified in the theory of forms. The centre piece is preceded and followed by the discussion of the means that will secure a well-ordered polis (City). Part II, no. 1, concerns marriage, the community of people and goods for the Guardians, and the restraints on warfare among the Hellenes. It describes a partially communistic polis. Part II, no. 4, deals with the philosophical education of the rulers who will preserve the order and character of the city-state.In Part II, the Embodiment of the Idea, is preceded by the establishment of the economic and social orders of a polis (Part I), followed by an analysis (Part III) of the decline the order must traverse. The three parts compose the main body of the dialogues, with their discussions of the “paradigm”, its embodiment, its genesis, and its decline.The Introduction and the Conclusion are the frame for the body of the Republic. The discussion of right order is occasioned by the questions: “Is Justice better than Injustice?” and “Will an Unjust man fare better than a Just man?” The introductory question is balanced by the concluding answer: “Justice is preferable to Injustice”. In turn, the foregoing are framed with the Prologue (Book I) and the Epilogue (Book X). The prologue is a short dialogue about the common public doxai (opinions) about “Justice”. Based upon faith, and not reason, the Epilogue describes the new arts and the immortality of the soul. ? About Author: Plato (Greek: Platon, " 428/427 or 424/423 BC – 348/347 BC) was a philosopher in Classical Greece. He was also a mathematician, student of Socrates, writer of philosophical dialogues, and founder of the Academy in Athens, the first institution of higher learning in the Western world. Along with his mentor, Socrates, and his most-famous student, Aristotle, Plato helped to lay the foundations of Western philosophy and science. Alfred North Whitehead once noted: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato." Plato's sophistication as a writer is evident in his Socratic dialogues; thirty-six dialogues and thirteen letters have been ascribed to him, although 15–18 of them have been contested. Plato's writings have been published in several fashions; this has led to several conventions regarding the naming and referencing of Plato's texts. Plato's dialogues have been used to teach a range of subjects, including philosophy, logic, ethics, rhetoric, religion and mathematics. Plato is one of the most important founding figures in Western philosophy. His writings related to the Theory of Forms, or Platonic ideals, are basis for Platonism. ? Early lifeThe exact time and place of Plato's birth are not known, but it is certain that he belonged to an aristocratic and influential family. Based on ancient sources, most modern scholars believe that he was born in Athens or Aegina between 429 and 423 BC. His father was Ariston. According to a disputed tradition, reported by Diogenes Laertius, Ariston traced his descent from the king of Athens, Codrus, and the king of Messenia, Melanthus. Plato's mother was Perictione, whose family boasted of a relationship with the famous Athenian lawmaker an

THIS BOOK, First published anonymously, March 1880, and soon in various unauthorized editions. It wasn't until the 1925 edition that Adams was listed as author. Henry Adams remarked (ironically as usual), "The wholesale piracy of Democracy was the single real triumph of my life."—it was very popular, as readers tried to guess who the author was and who the characters really were. ON the first of December, Mrs. Lee took the train for Washington, and before five o'clock that evening she was entering her newly hired house on Lafayette Square. She shrugged her shoulders with a mingled expression of contempt and grief at the curious barbarism of the curtains and the wall-papers, and her next two days were occupied with a life-and-death struggle to get the mastery over her surroundings. In this awful contest the interior of the doomed house suffered as though a demon were in it; not a chair, not a mirror, not a carpet, was left untouched, and in the midst of the worst confusion the new mistress sat, calm as the statue of Andrew Jackson in the square under her eyes, and issued her orders with as much decision as that hero had ever shown. Towards the close of the second day, victory crowned her forehead. A new era, a nobler conception of duty and existence, had dawned upon that benighted and heathen residence. The wealth of Syria and Persia was poured out upon the melancholy Wilton carpets; embroidered comets and woven gold from Japan and Teheran depended from and covered over every sad stuff-curtain; a strange medley of sketches, paintings, fans, embroideries, and porcelain was hung, nailed, pinned, or stuck against the wall; finally the domestic altarpiece, the mystical Corot landscape, was hoisted to its place over the parlour fire, and then all was over. The setting sun streamed softly in at the windows, and peace reigned in that redeemed house and in the heart of its mistress. "I think it will do now, Sybil," said she, surveying the scene.

When, in 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville came to study Democracy in America, the trial of nearly a half-century of the working of our system had been made, and it had been proved, by many crucial tests, to be a government of "liberty regulated by law," with such results in the development of strength, in population, wealth, and military and commercial power, as no age had ever witnessed. De Tocqueville had a special inquiry to prosecute, in his visit to America, in which his generous and faithful soul and the powers of his great intellect were engaged in the patriotic effort to secure to the people of France the blessings that Democracy in America had ordained and established throughout nearly the entire Western Hemisphere. He had read the story of the French Revolution, much of which had been recently written in the blood of men and women of great distinction who were his progenitors; and had witnessed the agitations and terrors of the Restoration and of the Second Republic, fruitful in crime and sacrifice, and barren of any good to mankind. He had just witnessed the spread of republican government through all the vast continental possessions of Spain in America, and the loss of her great colonies. He had seen that these revolutions were accomplished almost without the shedding of blood, and he was filled with anxiety to learn the causes that had placed republican government, in France, in such contrast with Democracy in America. De Tocqueville was scarcely thirty years old when he began his studies of Democracy in America. It was a bold effort for one who had no special training in government, or in the study of political economy, but he had the example of Lafayette in establishing the military foundation of these liberties, and of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and Hamilton, all of whom were young men, in building upon the Independence of the United States that wisest and best plan of general government that was ever devised for a free people.

More’s “Utopia” was written in Latin, and is in two parts, of which the second, describing the place ([Greek text]—or Nusquama, as he called it sometimes in his letters—“Nowhere”), was probably written towards the close of 1515; the first part, introductory, early in 1516. The book was first printed at Louvain, late in 1516, under the editorship of Erasmus, Peter Giles, and other of More’s friends in Flanders. It was then revised by More, and printed by Frobenius at Basle in November, 1518. It was reprinted at Paris and Vienna, but was not printed in England during More’s lifetime. Its first publication in this country was in the English translation, made in Edward’s VI.’s reign (1551) by Ralph Robinson. It was translated with more literary skill by Gilbert Burnet, in 1684, soon after he had conducted the defence of his friend Lord William Russell, attended his execution, vindicated his memory, and been spitefully deprived by James II. of his lectureship at St. Clement’s. Burnet was drawn to the translation of “Utopia” by the same sense of unreason in high places that caused More to write the book. Burnet’s is the translation given in this volume. The name of the book has given an adjective to our language—we call an impracticable scheme Utopian. Yet, under the veil of a playful fiction, the talk is intensely earnest, and abounds in practical suggestion. It is the work of a scholarly and witty Englishman, who attacks in his own way the chief political and social evils of his time. Beginning with fact, More tells how he was sent into Flanders with Cuthbert Tunstal, “whom the king’s majesty of late, to the great rejoicing of all men, did prefer to the office of Master of the Rolls;” how the commissioners of Charles met them at Bruges, and presently returned to Brussels for instructions; and how More then went to Antwerp, where he found a pleasure in the society of Peter Giles which soothed his desire to see again his wife and children, from whom he had been four months away. Then fact slides into fiction with the finding of Raphael Hythloday (whose name, made of two Greek words [Greek text] and [Greek text], means “knowing in trifles”), a man who had been with Amerigo Vespucci in the three last of the voyages to the new world lately discovered, of which the account had been first printed in 1507, only nine years before Utopia was written. Designedly fantastic in suggestion of details, “Utopia” is the work of a scholar who had read Plato’s “Republic,” and had his fancy quickened after reading Plutarch’s account of Spartan life under Lycurgus. Beneath the veil of an ideal communism, into which there has been worked some witty extravagance, there lies a noble English argument. Sometimes More puts the case as of France when he means England. Sometimes there is ironical praise of the good faith of Christian kings, saving the book from censure as a political attack on the policy of Henry VIII. Erasmus wrote to a friend in 1517 that he should send for More’s “Utopia,” if he had not read it, and “wished to see the true source of all political evils.” And to More Erasmus wrote of his book, “A burgomaster of Antwerp is so pleased with it that he knows it all by heart.” Sir Thomas More, son of Sir John More, a justice of the King’s Bench, was born in 1478, in Milk Street, in the city of London. After his earlier education at St. Anthony’s School, in Threadneedle Street, he was placed, as a boy, in the household of Cardinal John Morton, Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor. It was not unusual for persons of wealth or influence and sons of good families to be so established together in a relation of patron and client. The youth wore his patron’s livery, and added to his state. The patron used, afterwards, his wealth or influence in helping his young client forward in the world.