The central issue of twentieth-century Mexican historiography is the effect of the Mexican Revolution (1910–1920) on the society. The official interpretation holds that the Revolution was a true social revolution that not only ended the neocolonialist society governed by Porfirio Díaz but also institutionalized social change. Hence, Mexican Revolution is always capitalized and the government's political party is the Institutional Revolutionary Party. Critics see the Revolution and the society it produced in a different light. Some assert that the Revolution changed little except to bring a different clique to power. Others argue that the Revolution died in 1940 when reformist president Lázaro Cárdenas turned the presidential office over to a conservative successor. Those using Marxist analysis deny that the Revolution was a revolution; to them, Mexico was and is a capitalist society operated for the benefit of the national and international bourgeoisie.

It has long been known that the early fourteenth century was one of the most distinguished periods in the history of the University of Oxford. For medieval Oxford it was the intellectual high point, excelling briefly (in the 1330s) even Paris in the areas of physics and theology. One has only to recall the names of William of Ockham, Walter Burley, and Thomas Bradwardine to be reminded of some of the leaders of that academic productivity. In fact, our view of what was happening educationally and intellectually at Oxford in that period has rested primarily on the most prominent names of theologians and natural philosophers, and a limited number of their works as well.