This article analyses how colonial rule remade Egyptian capital punishment. Around the turn of the twentieth century, British officials deliberately overturned the strong protections for defendants that Islamic law once offered, paving the way for a steady and sustained increase in execution rates. More executions meant more opportunities for ordinary people to practise the distinctive forms of ‘popular legalism’ that flourished on execution days. In keeping with established custom, the families of perpetrator and victim played leading roles on gallows days, defending kin and negotiating punishment. Women often took charge of these occasions, demonstrating and enhancing their social power while simultaneously directing the affective responses of the assembled crowds. Such public displays of gendered authority were anathema to Egyptian elites and colonial officials alike, turning both decisively against public punishment. The abolition of public executions thus erased a prominent manifestation of the social embeddedness of Islamic law.
{"title":"The Colonial Metamorphosis of Egyptian Capital Punishment, 1884–1903","authors":"Alaa El-Shafei","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf030","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses how colonial rule remade Egyptian capital punishment. Around the turn of the twentieth century, British officials deliberately overturned the strong protections for defendants that Islamic law once offered, paving the way for a steady and sustained increase in execution rates. More executions meant more opportunities for ordinary people to practise the distinctive forms of ‘popular legalism’ that flourished on execution days. In keeping with established custom, the families of perpetrator and victim played leading roles on gallows days, defending kin and negotiating punishment. Women often took charge of these occasions, demonstrating and enhancing their social power while simultaneously directing the affective responses of the assembled crowds. Such public displays of gendered authority were anathema to Egyptian elites and colonial officials alike, turning both decisively against public punishment. The abolition of public executions thus erased a prominent manifestation of the social embeddedness of Islamic law.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"135 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145282654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the aftermath of Idi Amin’s expulsion of Uganda’s South Asians in 1972, some of those made technically stateless arrived in India unsupported by the United Nations or any national government. Eleven of them attempted to fly on via Sri Lanka, without the required paperwork, to join their families in the United Kingdom. As large colonial empires gave way to postcolonial nation states, and as the international community and the former colonial metropole shed responsibilities towards their former subjects, the various destinations to which such stateless persons were considered for deportation reflect the uneasy status of diasporic communities. Using what official records saw as the ‘problem’ of this international flight, this article explores how the sealed realm of air travel became a locus for the articulation of their rights as these peoples of the postcolonial world used the devices of deportation and ‘shuttlecocking’ against national and international actors to challenge the inequitable application of notionally universal principles to deny material assistance and recognition of their rights as refugees and stateless persons. In this way, individuals and non-state actors were able to use air travel to intervene bodily to influence national and supranational discourses designed to exclude them.
{"title":"Air Travel, Statelessness, and the Rights Claims of Ugandan Asians, c.1973","authors":"Ria Kapoor","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf029","url":null,"abstract":"In the aftermath of Idi Amin’s expulsion of Uganda’s South Asians in 1972, some of those made technically stateless arrived in India unsupported by the United Nations or any national government. Eleven of them attempted to fly on via Sri Lanka, without the required paperwork, to join their families in the United Kingdom. As large colonial empires gave way to postcolonial nation states, and as the international community and the former colonial metropole shed responsibilities towards their former subjects, the various destinations to which such stateless persons were considered for deportation reflect the uneasy status of diasporic communities. Using what official records saw as the ‘problem’ of this international flight, this article explores how the sealed realm of air travel became a locus for the articulation of their rights as these peoples of the postcolonial world used the devices of deportation and ‘shuttlecocking’ against national and international actors to challenge the inequitable application of notionally universal principles to deny material assistance and recognition of their rights as refugees and stateless persons. In this way, individuals and non-state actors were able to use air travel to intervene bodily to influence national and supranational discourses designed to exclude them.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"102 2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145255245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Between 1951–55, the US Bureau of Reclamation conducted research in Lebanon to plan a hydroelectric and irrigation scheme using Lebanon's largest river, the Litani. Their research would later form the basis of the Litani project, Lebanon's largest development scheme until the 1990s. In the shadow of that project, communities in the Litani River basin worked to enroll these US technical assistance researchers and their technologies into fulfilling their urgent needs for potable water. The article argues that these enrollments comprised ‘vernacular development’, a highly contingent, bottom-up strategy that the intended subjects of development deployed in their encounters with agents of international development. Vernacular development was a mode of interaction that interrupted and subverted the technological and temporal framework animating midcentury international development. That framework promised elaborate works in the future, which almost never materialized. Through vernacular development strategies, Litani communities identified their own material needs and goals and experimented with strategies to enroll international researchers into attaining them. They derived these strategies from their experience with successive imperial and corporate planning missions that had come and gone in the decades prior to the postwar development era. Exploring hitherto unexamined agrarian sources in the US National Archives, this article contributes to the historiography of international development and the postcolonial Middle East.
{"title":"Vernacular development, drought, and US technical assistance in postcolonial Lebanon","authors":"Owain Lawson","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf026","url":null,"abstract":"Between 1951–55, the US Bureau of Reclamation conducted research in Lebanon to plan a hydroelectric and irrigation scheme using Lebanon's largest river, the Litani. Their research would later form the basis of the Litani project, Lebanon's largest development scheme until the 1990s. In the shadow of that project, communities in the Litani River basin worked to enroll these US technical assistance researchers and their technologies into fulfilling their urgent needs for potable water. The article argues that these enrollments comprised ‘vernacular development’, a highly contingent, bottom-up strategy that the intended subjects of development deployed in their encounters with agents of international development. Vernacular development was a mode of interaction that interrupted and subverted the technological and temporal framework animating midcentury international development. That framework promised elaborate works in the future, which almost never materialized. Through vernacular development strategies, Litani communities identified their own material needs and goals and experimented with strategies to enroll international researchers into attaining them. They derived these strategies from their experience with successive imperial and corporate planning missions that had come and gone in the decades prior to the postwar development era. Exploring hitherto unexamined agrarian sources in the US National Archives, this article contributes to the historiography of international development and the postcolonial Middle East.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145241965","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines changes in the bodies and environment of labourers carrying timber imported into London’s docks in the 1860s to the 1920s to provide a history of global capitalism from the ground up. Moving between London and Sweden, it shows how microphysical alterations in the skeletons of dockers, the wood they carried, and rivers in both countries materialized and modified macro-level changes in tides, forestry, and shipping. Repurposing the concept ‘lines of force’ from nineteenth-century physics, the article argues that lines — material, temporal, and spatial — reveal hidden relations between bodies and environments. Lines etched into bones or running through wood grain show how humans and other-than-humans were exposed to one another across varying distances, and how this exposure became accentuated under industrial capitalism. Second, they show how this mutual exposure operated over multiple timescales, from a worker’s lifetime to century-long modifications in tree growth and river flows. Finally, such lines reveal how ‘the world’ was not simply a space which steamships crossed, but a predicament, unique to and made by the relationships that living beings had with one another.
{"title":"Bodies, Tides, Timber, and the Global History of London’s Docks, 1860–1928","authors":"Simeon Koole, Ben Mechen","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf025","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines changes in the bodies and environment of labourers carrying timber imported into London’s docks in the 1860s to the 1920s to provide a history of global capitalism from the ground up. Moving between London and Sweden, it shows how microphysical alterations in the skeletons of dockers, the wood they carried, and rivers in both countries materialized and modified macro-level changes in tides, forestry, and shipping. Repurposing the concept ‘lines of force’ from nineteenth-century physics, the article argues that lines — material, temporal, and spatial — reveal hidden relations between bodies and environments. Lines etched into bones or running through wood grain show how humans and other-than-humans were exposed to one another across varying distances, and how this exposure became accentuated under industrial capitalism. Second, they show how this mutual exposure operated over multiple timescales, from a worker’s lifetime to century-long modifications in tree growth and river flows. Finally, such lines reveal how ‘the world’ was not simply a space which steamships crossed, but a predicament, unique to and made by the relationships that living beings had with one another.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"102 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145141494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Transparency, or publicity as it was then called, became a fundamental value linked to popular sovereignty in the late eighteenth century. Those who advocated greater publicity, particularly of legislative deliberations, did so as part of an overarching vision of political representation as a process by which the popular will was to be continuously reflected in government. Publicity, in short, would make popular sovereignty possible. But when elected officials in the early United States and revolutionary France made claims to speak for the people, the use of secrecy actually strengthened those claims by temporally dislocating disagreement to after the passage of unpopular policies rather than during the deliberative process. This reality created a paradox at the heart of representative government: secrecy was bolstering a type of regime to which it was simultaneously deemed anathema. Placing procedural decisions about publicity and secrecy front and center, this article addresses questions long plaguing historians: how did the American framers secure what Edmund Morgan called the “fiction of popular sovereignty”? And why were French revolutionaries unable to do the same? One answer, which has long been neglected despite its significance, is the procedural practices of constituent bodies in each context. This article undertakes a comparison of the procedural decisions in the American Constitutional Convention and subsequent legislature and the establishment of the French National Assembly and successor legislatures. It argues that there is nothing mystical about the legitimacy of popular sovereignty through representative government: it was the result of deliberate decisions about the procedures of governance.
{"title":"Secrecy and sovereignty in the Age of Revolutions","authors":"Katlyn Marie Carter","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf024","url":null,"abstract":"Transparency, or publicity as it was then called, became a fundamental value linked to popular sovereignty in the late eighteenth century. Those who advocated greater publicity, particularly of legislative deliberations, did so as part of an overarching vision of political representation as a process by which the popular will was to be continuously reflected in government. Publicity, in short, would make popular sovereignty possible. But when elected officials in the early United States and revolutionary France made claims to speak for the people, the use of secrecy actually strengthened those claims by temporally dislocating disagreement to after the passage of unpopular policies rather than during the deliberative process. This reality created a paradox at the heart of representative government: secrecy was bolstering a type of regime to which it was simultaneously deemed anathema. Placing procedural decisions about publicity and secrecy front and center, this article addresses questions long plaguing historians: how did the American framers secure what Edmund Morgan called the “fiction of popular sovereignty”? And why were French revolutionaries unable to do the same? One answer, which has long been neglected despite its significance, is the procedural practices of constituent bodies in each context. This article undertakes a comparison of the procedural decisions in the American Constitutional Convention and subsequent legislature and the establishment of the French National Assembly and successor legislatures. It argues that there is nothing mystical about the legitimacy of popular sovereignty through representative government: it was the result of deliberate decisions about the procedures of governance.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144924416","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It has long been recognized that the English workhouses of the Old Poor Law era (1601-1834) were important precursors to institutions of the modern social services, but what kind of places were they? Characterized by eighteenth-century humanitarians as ‘pauper prisons’, and by early nineteenth-century political economists as ‘pauper palaces’, workhouses were undoubtedly varied institutions with hybrid regimes that included both care and work, nurture and discipline. Integrating recent work that has revealed much about material conditions and the agency of workhouse inmates, this article reassesses work in Old Poor Law workhouses, focusing especially on houses of industry in the county of Norfolk. We find a new perspective on these poor law institutions by recognizing their serious and sustained efforts to keep inmates working productively. Simply put, workhouses worked in the long eighteenth century. To house the infirm, embed work habits in the young, provide temporary shelter and confinement for the able-bodied or unsettled poor, parishes poured time and resources into their local and regional workhouses. In their multifaceted nature, workhouses most resembled not the prisons or hospitals to which they are sometimes compared, but rather the institution of the household-family that was the bedrock of society in the long eighteenth century.
{"title":"The purposeful workhouse of England’s Old Poor Law","authors":"Susannah Ottaway","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf013","url":null,"abstract":"It has long been recognized that the English workhouses of the Old Poor Law era (1601-1834) were important precursors to institutions of the modern social services, but what kind of places were they? Characterized by eighteenth-century humanitarians as ‘pauper prisons’, and by early nineteenth-century political economists as ‘pauper palaces’, workhouses were undoubtedly varied institutions with hybrid regimes that included both care and work, nurture and discipline. Integrating recent work that has revealed much about material conditions and the agency of workhouse inmates, this article reassesses work in Old Poor Law workhouses, focusing especially on houses of industry in the county of Norfolk. We find a new perspective on these poor law institutions by recognizing their serious and sustained efforts to keep inmates working productively. Simply put, workhouses worked in the long eighteenth century. To house the infirm, embed work habits in the young, provide temporary shelter and confinement for the able-bodied or unsettled poor, parishes poured time and resources into their local and regional workhouses. In their multifaceted nature, workhouses most resembled not the prisons or hospitals to which they are sometimes compared, but rather the institution of the household-family that was the bedrock of society in the long eighteenth century.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"147 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144594489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the early modern period, while slavery became firmly entrenched in the Atlantic’s sugar economies, Southeast Asia witnessed the rise of distinct plantation regimes. Unlike their Atlantic counterparts, these Asian plantation regimes relied not on enslavement but on addiction — particularly to opium smoking — as a means to control and exploit plantation labour. Existing research has highlighted how such opium-driven regimes, along with Asian ‘coolie’ labour, proliferated globally in the nineteenth century following the abolitionist movement. Yet, their early modern origins in Southeast Asia remain largely unexplored. As a result, a deep plantation labour history outside the Atlantic World is still lacking, and researchers often continue to essentialize early modern plantation capitalism as inherently tied to slavery, while overlooking other, often more insidious, forms of plantation labour control that existed beyond the Atlantic. This article seeks to address this gap by examining the emergence and development of a narco-plantation regime on the sugar frontier of rural Batavia (Jakarta) from the late seventeenth to the early nineteenth centuries.
{"title":"Making sugar out of opium: A narco-plantation regime in early modern Southeast Asia","authors":"Guanmian Xu, Shohei Okubo","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf015","url":null,"abstract":"In the early modern period, while slavery became firmly entrenched in the Atlantic’s sugar economies, Southeast Asia witnessed the rise of distinct plantation regimes. Unlike their Atlantic counterparts, these Asian plantation regimes relied not on enslavement but on addiction — particularly to opium smoking — as a means to control and exploit plantation labour. Existing research has highlighted how such opium-driven regimes, along with Asian ‘coolie’ labour, proliferated globally in the nineteenth century following the abolitionist movement. Yet, their early modern origins in Southeast Asia remain largely unexplored. As a result, a deep plantation labour history outside the Atlantic World is still lacking, and researchers often continue to essentialize early modern plantation capitalism as inherently tied to slavery, while overlooking other, often more insidious, forms of plantation labour control that existed beyond the Atlantic. This article seeks to address this gap by examining the emergence and development of a narco-plantation regime on the sugar frontier of rural Batavia (Jakarta) from the late seventeenth to the early nineteenth centuries.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"135 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144228473","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Increasingly, since the early years of the twenty-first century, some have questioned the relevance of historians’ ‘fetishization of mobility’ in an era of closing borders. This has led to greater attention being placed on systems of ‘regulation and intervention’ that shape global migration. Shifting away from the narratives centred on movement and fluidity, we argue that immobility is not a mere lack of movement: it is about the power relations and barriers that enforce, experience, and resist stillness. By delving into the archives of Past and Present, we aim to construct a conversation around the processes of enforcing, experiencing, and challenging immobility. We have found that immobility shapes the experiences of both the historical actors found in the journal and the historians and scholars who write these histories. This issue explores immobility through three interconnected sections: ‘Spaces’ examines the physical and metaphorical places where movement is arrested, revealing the lived experiences within these confines and the technologies that facilitate and enforce stillness; ‘Shadows’ delves into the legal and administrative categorizations that produce and sustain immobility, focusing on the policies and ideologies that mark certain bodies as immobile; finally, ‘Aftermath’ reflects on the consequences of enforced immobility, exploring how displaced and immobilized individuals navigate and shape their identities and communities in the wake of restrictions.
{"title":"Immobility","authors":"Ana Struillou, Malika Zehni, Lamin Manneh","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf014","url":null,"abstract":"Increasingly, since the early years of the twenty-first century, some have questioned the relevance of historians’ ‘fetishization of mobility’ in an era of closing borders. This has led to greater attention being placed on systems of ‘regulation and intervention’ that shape global migration. Shifting away from the narratives centred on movement and fluidity, we argue that immobility is not a mere lack of movement: it is about the power relations and barriers that enforce, experience, and resist stillness. By delving into the archives of Past and Present, we aim to construct a conversation around the processes of enforcing, experiencing, and challenging immobility. We have found that immobility shapes the experiences of both the historical actors found in the journal and the historians and scholars who write these histories. This issue explores immobility through three interconnected sections: ‘Spaces’ examines the physical and metaphorical places where movement is arrested, revealing the lived experiences within these confines and the technologies that facilitate and enforce stillness; ‘Shadows’ delves into the legal and administrative categorizations that produce and sustain immobility, focusing on the policies and ideologies that mark certain bodies as immobile; finally, ‘Aftermath’ reflects on the consequences of enforced immobility, exploring how displaced and immobilized individuals navigate and shape their identities and communities in the wake of restrictions.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"174 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144797576","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In histories of Western political economy in the 1970s–1980s, Keynesianism is conventionally depicted as a victim of neoliberal ascendancy. Building on revisionist scholarship, this article looks beyond neoliberalism to explain the fate of Keynesianism in the transforming political economy of the United Kingdom in its global contexts. It explores a neglected case study: the intense controversies sparked by the Keynesian policy makers Wynne Godley and Francis Cripps. Responding to stagflation and strikes, Godley and Cripps demanded sweeping import controls to forestall mass unemployment and reverse Britain’s ‘decline’. They became celebrity economists, attracting admiration and opprobrium from government ministers and officials, political parties, journalists, and the City. Their arguments raised thorny questions, not just over economic policy, but also over Britain’s domestic statecraft and geopolitical relations after empire, during the Cold War, and inside the European Community. Revisiting these debates underscores the destabilizing impact of de-industrialization. It also reveals that (geo)political calculation determined the fate of Keynesian policy making more directly than neoliberal ideology. Godley and Cripps’s failure therefore illuminates a deeper political dilemma for fin-de-siècle Keynesians across Europe: upon which territorial order could they, and should they, exercise demand management as globalization accelerated? This question continues to shape Western politics in the twenty-first century.
{"title":"The Political Crisis of British Keynesianism, 1973–1983","authors":"Colm Murphy","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf012","url":null,"abstract":"In histories of Western political economy in the 1970s–1980s, Keynesianism is conventionally depicted as a victim of neoliberal ascendancy. Building on revisionist scholarship, this article looks beyond neoliberalism to explain the fate of Keynesianism in the transforming political economy of the United Kingdom in its global contexts. It explores a neglected case study: the intense controversies sparked by the Keynesian policy makers Wynne Godley and Francis Cripps. Responding to stagflation and strikes, Godley and Cripps demanded sweeping import controls to forestall mass unemployment and reverse Britain’s ‘decline’. They became celebrity economists, attracting admiration and opprobrium from government ministers and officials, political parties, journalists, and the City. Their arguments raised thorny questions, not just over economic policy, but also over Britain’s domestic statecraft and geopolitical relations after empire, during the Cold War, and inside the European Community. Revisiting these debates underscores the destabilizing impact of de-industrialization. It also reveals that (geo)political calculation determined the fate of Keynesian policy making more directly than neoliberal ideology. Godley and Cripps’s failure therefore illuminates a deeper political dilemma for fin-de-siècle Keynesians across Europe: upon which territorial order could they, and should they, exercise demand management as globalization accelerated? This question continues to shape Western politics in the twenty-first century.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144133720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Frederik Buylaert, Sandro Carocci, Thijs Lambrecht, Christian D Liddy, Alice Rio, Tristan W Sharp, Alice Taylor, Chris Wickham
Over the last few years, a number of articles have featured in Past and Present on the subject of late medieval lordship. Three were accepted within a four-month period between July and October 2023 (Christian D. Liddy, ‘The Making of Towns, the Making of Polities’; Tristan W. Sharp, ‘Seigneurial Predation in the Late Medieval Feud’; Frederik Buylaert, Thijs Lambrecht, Klaas Van Gelder, and Kaat Cappelle, ‘The Political Economy of Seigneurial Lordship in Flanders’). The three pieces approached the subject in quite different ways, and with very different findings; at the same time, they were clearly talking about the same thing, and all were concerned with assessing more closely what lords took from, and had to offer to, local societies, and their social and/or economic impact. This seemed a good opportunity to hold a workshop to place the articles in conversation with each other in order to identify commonalities, reflect on the wider field, and prompt more general questions. The round table took place on 17 June 2024 at King’s College London. The version presented here is a revised and edited transcript, but aiming to retain the feel of the original oral conversation. A brief opening section introduces the articles to give context to the discussion.
在过去的几年里，《过去》和《现在》上刊登了许多关于中世纪晚期贵族身份的文章。在2023年7月至10月的四个月期间，有三篇论文被接受(Christian D. Liddy，《城镇的形成，政治的形成》；特里斯坦·w·夏普，《中世纪晚期世仇中的宗主掠夺》；Frederik Buylaert, Thijs Lambrecht， Klaas Van Gelder和Kaat Cappelle，“佛兰德斯领主的政治经济学”)。这三篇文章以截然不同的方式探讨了这个主题，得出了截然不同的结论；同时，他们显然在讨论同一件事，他们都在关注更密切地评估领主从当地社会获取和提供了什么，以及他们的社会和/或经济影响。这似乎是一个很好的机会，可以举办一个研讨会，让这些文章相互交流，以确定共同点，反思更广泛的领域，并提出更普遍的问题。圆桌会议于2024年6月17日在伦敦国王学院举行。这里展示的版本是经过修改和编辑的文字记录，但旨在保留原始口头对话的感觉。一个简短的开头部分介绍了文章，为讨论提供了背景。
{"title":"Lordship in the Later Middle Ages: A Round Table Discussion","authors":"Frederik Buylaert, Sandro Carocci, Thijs Lambrecht, Christian D Liddy, Alice Rio, Tristan W Sharp, Alice Taylor, Chris Wickham","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtaf011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtaf011","url":null,"abstract":"Over the last few years, a number of articles have featured in Past and Present on the subject of late medieval lordship. Three were accepted within a four-month period between July and October 2023 (Christian D. Liddy, ‘The Making of Towns, the Making of Polities’; Tristan W. Sharp, ‘Seigneurial Predation in the Late Medieval Feud’; Frederik Buylaert, Thijs Lambrecht, Klaas Van Gelder, and Kaat Cappelle, ‘The Political Economy of Seigneurial Lordship in Flanders’). The three pieces approached the subject in quite different ways, and with very different findings; at the same time, they were clearly talking about the same thing, and all were concerned with assessing more closely what lords took from, and had to offer to, local societies, and their social and/or economic impact. This seemed a good opportunity to hold a workshop to place the articles in conversation with each other in order to identify commonalities, reflect on the wider field, and prompt more general questions. The round table took place on 17 June 2024 at King’s College London. The version presented here is a revised and edited transcript, but aiming to retain the feel of the original oral conversation. A brief opening section introduces the articles to give context to the discussion.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144133719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：