rub-journals_120.xml

<mets:mets xmlns:mets="http://www.loc.gov/METS/" xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
    <mets:dmdSec ID="DMD_rub-journals_120">
        <mets:mdWrap MIMETYPE="text/xml" MDTYPE="MODS">
            <mets:xmlData>
                <mods xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.7" xmlns:vl="http://visuallibrary.net/vl">
                    <titleInfo lang="eng">
                        <nonSort>The </nonSort>
                        <title>Herero genocide of 1904</title>
                        <subTitle>Source-critical and methodological considerations</subTitle>
                    </titleInfo>
                    <name type="personal">
                        <displayForm>Eckl, Andreas</displayForm>
                        <namePart type="family">Eckl</namePart>
                        <namePart type="given">Andreas</namePart>
                        <role>
                            <roleTerm type="code" authority="marcrelator">ctb</roleTerm>
                        </role>
                    </name>
                    <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
                    <genre authority="dini">article</genre>
                    <originInfo>
                        <dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf" keyDate="yes">2014-02-21</dateIssued>
                    </originInfo>
                    <language>
                        <languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
                    </language>
                    <physicalDescription>
                        <extent unit="page">31</extent>
                    </physicalDescription>
                    <abstract lang="eng">The Herero-German War of 1904 has been downplayed as a “normal colonial war” by some, and emphasised as a genocide by others. While the first position is untenable, the second is reconsidered in this article through a re-evaluation of the sources and their treatment by academic historians over the last forty years. It is argued that a more rigorous, reflected and nuanced source-critique would complement the current historiography of the topic, which suffers from a questionable selection, evaluation and interpretation of textual sources.</abstract>
                    <subject lang="ger">
                    </subject>
                    <subject lang="eng">
                    </subject>
                    <recordInfo>
                        <recordIdentifier>rub-journals_120</recordIdentifier>
                    </recordInfo>
                    <extension>
                        <vl:doctype>oaArticle</vl:doctype>
                    </extension>
                </mods>
            </mets:xmlData>
        </mets:mdWrap>
    </mets:dmdSec>
    <mets:fileSec>
        <mets:fileGrp USE="pdf upload">
            <mets:file MIMETYPE="application/pdf" ID="FILE0_rub-journals_120">
                <mets:FLocat xlink:href="https://namibian-studies.com/index.php/JNS/article/download/120/87" LOCTYPE="URL"/>
            </mets:file>
        </mets:fileGrp>
    </mets:fileSec>
    <mets:structMap TYPE="LOGICAL">
        <mets:div TYPE="document" ID="rub-journals_120" DMDID="DMD_rub-journals_120">
            <mets:fptr FILEID="FILE0_rub-journals_120"/>
        </mets:div>
    </mets:structMap>
</mets:mets>