by Dr. Sarah Moxey (Open University)

Over the last decade or so contemporary Scottish politics has been a dominant topic on the news agenda, however, Scottish political history has not received the same spotlight. The Histories of Scottish Politics in the Age of Union c.1700-1945 conference, held at Durham University in July with the support of the Past and Present Society, put Scottish political history firmly into the limelight.

Spread over two days, this conference featured the very best in research and innovation in the field of Scottish political history. The timeframe of the conference showed how much politics has been democratised over the centuries, from Laura Stewart’s paper on the Scottish Constitution, showing the declining influence of the church in politics; to the role of the aristocracy through political networks and clan politics, as explored by Brendan Tam, Edwin Sheffield and Tom Pye; and the breakthrough of the working classes into Scottish politics, including through the Chartists and cooperative communities, as discussed by Dominic Barron-Carter, Sonny Angus and Dave Steele. All these papers highlighted the vast changes in political engagement within Scottish society and Scottish politics over three centuries.

This was also seen in the opening panel on courtroom politics. Kajsa Varjonen’s examination of how the prosecution of malt tax rioters was politicised was a fascinating insight into political tensions during the early days of the Union. Valerie Wallace’s exploration of the politics of subjecthood expanded upon this idea and Emma McLeod then offered a comparative study of Scottish sedition trials. Finally, Rachel Bennett and Lauren Darwin’s joint paper explored the more favourable treatment received by Scots charged with blasphemy. These impressive papers demonstrated that the distinctiveness of Scots law really shaped political relations during the early years of the union.

A stand-out panel on women in politics revealed their changing roles between the eighteenth and twentieth centuries. Natalee Garrett illuminated the role played by the Duchess of Gordon in fostering a sense of Scottishness in Georgian London through the use of society events, while Hannah Speed analysed the longer-term impact of the women’s suffrage movement on the individuals involved. Lisa Berry-Waite’s discussion of Scotland’s first female MP, the Duchess of Atholl, and Katie McCrossan’s paper on politics of the women’s co-operative movement showed the progress made by women from the role of political hostess to entering frontline politics. The breadth of research material here showed that art, fashion and memoir can be valuable sources to the political historian.

The first afternoon ended with Ewen Cameron’s keynote, ‘Where did the nineteenth century go?’ In a wide-ranging speech, he addressed the issue of trends in the field as well as noting that the digitisation of sources has opened new avenues for research. Cameron concluded that Scottish political history is ‘more in the centre of gravity of Scottish history than it has been, but it should not be forgotten that it remains a crucial century for understanding subsequent history.’ Katie McCrossan’s thoughtful response suggested that Scottish politics and political history has often suffered from increasing centralisation, but added that the conference had revealed that the political history of Scotland was indeed ‘more complex and vibrant than we realised’.

Ewen Cameron gives the Keynote at the “Histories of Scottish Politics in the Age of Union c. 1700-1945” Conference, Durham University Summer 2024, photograph by Naomi Lloyd-Jones, all rights reserved (2024)

Katie’s words certainly carried over into day two of the conference, where the panels continued to feature discussion of ideas of complexity and vibrancy. My own panel on twentieth-century politics posed questions on underexplored aspects of political history, from Jim Tomlinson’s consideration of whether there was a distinctive ‘Scottish economy’, to my paper asking why the period of the Second World War in Scottish politics has been so overlooked, and Mathew Nicolson’s thoroughly researched paper on island politics in Orkney and Shetland and the Liberal revival there.

An enjoyable mid-morning panel on constituency politics showed the political flexibility and opportunities for political advancement created by the union. Gary Hutchison considered the Scottish Conservatives moving south in the period 1832-68, while Kyle Thompson noted the opposite problems of English Liberal carpetbaggers searching for safer seats at the turn of the twentieth century. Martin Spychal explored Scottish county politics, noting problems with registers and fictitious voters, and shared the progress of the History of Parliament project, a valuable resource to conference attendees.

The spaces and places panel generated much discussion and admiration for the topics covered by the speakers, Thomas Archambaud, Petra Johana Poncarová and Oli Betts. From Scots in India, to Gaelic magazines and the politics of railway construction, the reaction from these papers spilled over to the lunch break, drawing appreciation for the variety of topics coming under the umbrella of Scottish political history. One of the final panels featured new avenues of exploration, including David Torrance’s insight into how devolved government in Northern Ireland acted as a model for those wishing the same for Scotland, and Stuart Neave’s innovative paper on how scientific terminology entered discussions around federalism and interpretations of the constitution. This panel showed the originality which continues to emerge in the field of Scottish political history.

The closing roundtable discussed the future of political history, beginning with Colin Kidd reflecting on his own experiences of the way Scottish political history has developed over his career. Conference organiser and roundtable host Naomi Lloyd-Jones agreed that explorations of the new political and the new British history are rarely seen together in the discipline. Valerie Wallace shared her perspective that looking beyond Scotland’s geographical boundaries for the wider influence of Scottish political history could be a fruitful direction for the field. Emma MacLeod asked valuable questions about how we define political history, as politics is comprised of power relationships – a definition can be applied widely. Malcolm Petrie commented how ‘uplifting and reassuring’ the conference had been in showing a strong future for the study of Scottish political history.

It was indeed a heartening note to end the conference on. While throughout the two days there had been much discussion of political arguments and debate, the atmosphere of the conference was the complete opposite. Instead, it had been that of supportive and friendly compatriotism, something which attendees frequently remarked upon. Conference organiser Naomi-Lloyd-Jones is to be heartily congratulated for creating such an outstanding event and fostering such a welcoming and inclusive atmosphere. It was an inspiring event to be a part of, which showed the future of Scottish political history is very bright indeed.

Past & Present was pleased to support this event and supports other events like it. Applications for event funding are welcomed from scholars working in the field of historical studies at all stages in their careers.

Past & Present logo, 2017 all rights reserved

by Prof. Pierre Asselin (San Diego State University)

As I sit here and reflect on the contemporary relevance of my Past & Present article “National liberation by other means: US visitor diplomacy in the Vietnam War” (August 2024) on US citizens who visited North Vietnam during the Vietnam War (1965-75), it strikes me how some world leaders learn from the past while others completely ignore or refuse to heed the lessons and other insights it offers.

The ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War is a telling example.  Consciously or serendipitously, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has borrowed from the North Vietnamese wartime/revolutionary playbook to offset his army’s inferiority relative to Russia’s, and frustrate Moscow’s geo-strategic designs over his country, as of the time of this writing at least.  He has done so by undertaking an aggressive diplomatic campaign à la Ho Chi Minh to win foreign hearts and minds, and vital military aid along with that.  While Hanoi at the time managed to secure material, economic, political, and moral support from a broad range of state and non-state actors – including the socialist bloc, Third World governments, and progressive action groups in the West –, Kyiv has been most successful at winning over state leaders and publics in Europe and North America.

To meet the purposes of their diplomatic campaign, Zelenskyy and his government have weaponized actual and alleged war crimes perpetrated by enemy forces on home soil, just as authorities in Hanoi did during their war against the United States, as I relate in my article.  Most interestingly, Kyiv, like Hanoi before it, has also resorted to what I call “visitor diplomacy” – namely, warzone tours carefully crafted and curated to elicit maximal sympathy from visitors – with a view to showcasing the merits of its cause and exposing the immorality of political leaders and military commanders on the other side.

Ho-chi-Minh with children (date unknown), Musée Annam, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Ukrainian authorities have even harnessed the power of famous people, including movie stars, just as the North Vietnamese did more than half-a-century ago.  At the height of its war against the United States, Hanoi rolled out the red carpet for Jane Fonda, Susan Sontag, and Joan Baez.  Since the onset of the Russian invasion in 2022, Zelenskyy has rubbed shoulders with Ben Stiller, Jessica Chastain, and Mark Strong, among other Hollywood celebrities.  Strong is in fact “ambassador” for United24, “the main venue for collecting charitable donations in support of Ukraine,” according to its official website.  United24 is fundamentally a front organization, a government-run organ created to facilitate the expeditious achievement of politico-military objectives.  Hanoi, too, created several such organizations during its war with the United States.

While Zelenskyy has demonstrated that History can teach us powerful and sometimes quite useful lessons, other leaders have proven Spanish philosopher George Santayana’s old adage true: “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.”  As I mention in my article, the international community banned usage of cluster munitions in the aftermath of the Vietnam War because they not only constitute dreadful anti-personnel devices, but also harm innocent civilians, especially children, during and long after conflicts.  In their obvious desire to make the Russians bleed in Ukraine as they made the Soviets bleed in Afghanistan in the 1980s, US policymakers have been oblivious to all that and transferred cluster munitions deliverable by artillery and ballistic missiles to their Ukrainian allies.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, for his part, has chosen to ignore some of the more valuable lessons learned the hard way by Washington decision-makers in the 1960s who were convinced the big and mighty United States would easily prevail over a “damn little piss-ant country” – in the words of US President Lyndon Johnson – like North Vietnam.  Just as American authorities never tried very hard to shape the global narrative on the war in Vietnam, to explain and justify in sensible terms the reasons for their massive military intervention there, Putin and his government have not done enough to seriously engage the international community and present their side of the story in a manner palatable to foreign audiences, especially in the West.  To be sure, few outside Russia itself buy the official line that this is about “de-Nazifying” Ukraine.  Shaping and controlling the narrative of a war is as important as waging it, the Cold War and the American war in Vietnam in particular have shown us.  Zelenskyy, like Ho Chi Minh before him, gets that.  Putin, in the image of Presidents Johnson and Richard Nixon, does not.  The Ukrainian President has masterfully exploited his underdog status, just as Ho Chi Minh did.  Putin, on the other hand, has failed miserably at countering the (predominantly Western) line demonizing him as a bully, a thug, and an existential threat to world peace, much as Johnson and especially Nixon failed to do in the Vietnam War.

In more ways than one the Americans did worse for lesser reasons in Vietnam – to say nothing of Iraq and Afghanistan more recently – than the Russians have done to this point in Ukraine.  Similarly, Washington, abetted by West European governments, has lavishly aided militarily and unconditionally supported politically the Israeli government in its ongoing war against Hamas, a war that has produced untold collateral physical damage and human suffering across the entirety of the Gaza Strip.  Irrespective of who may be on the right and the wrong side of History in the latter conflict, to condemn as the West has Russia’s actions in Ukraine while it, the West, not only tolerates but actively supports those of Israel in Gaza evinces a double standard, even duplicity and hypocrisy.  Yet, Moscow has thus far proven unable to capitalize on that pretense.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy paid a visit to the wounded defenders of Ukraine undergoing treatment at a military hospital (March 2022), Author: President Of Ukraine from Flickr, author has placed in public domain, via Wikimedia:Commons

Once their war ended, in light of all the death and sorrow they had endured, Vietnamese would cynically claim that the big powers had been prepared to sustain hostilities in their country “to the last Vietnamese.”  By that rationale, Moscow and Beijing, on the one hand, and the United States, on the other, had proven generous with their military aid to North and South Vietnam, respectively, because the war served and advanced their own selfish, national interests.  The big powers had never actually cared about Vietnam and the Vietnamese, for if they had, then they would have done more to end their suffering by diplomatic or related means.

Similarly, today, one must wonder whether US/Western policy toward Ukraine is motivated and conditioned by genuine feelings of empathy and solidarity with its government and people, or simply and uniquely by the ambition of weakening and humiliating Russia, to the last Ukrainian, if necessary.  After all, a negotiated solution at this point seems sensible and even desirable, but merely calling for it is tantamount to national treason in both West Europe and North America.

But the question begs an answer: What will average Ukrainians themselves think when their ordeal finally ends?  Kyiv certainly has a chance to emerge triumphant from its war against Russia.  But at what cost?  For even in victory, many in North Vietnam felt they had lost.  After all, what is there to celebrate when the enemy has been vanquished but one’s family, home, and country have been completely and utterly destroyed?

It took the Vietnamese ten years and millions of lives lost and irretrievably shattered to achieve and complete their own “national liberation” as leaders in Hanoi envisioned it.  Today, those who lived through and experienced the war, including combat veterans, feel neither joy nor elation when reflecting on their defeat of the United States; instead, they feel pain, loss, heartache, even regret.  Sometimes, there are no winners in war.  This is arguably the most important – and tragic – lesson the “victory” of Vietnam’s national liberation struggle teaches us.  Leaders and allies on both sides of the Russo-Ukrainian conflict should pay heed.

by Dr. Chiara Blanco (Newcastle University)

The academic conference ‘The Epistemology of Ancient Embryology’ took place over three days from the 1st to the 3rd of July 2024 at the Faculty of Classics, University of Cambridge in a hybrid format, and it included a total of 14 speakers and a peak of 53 attendants (22 in person and 31 online) from all over the world.

The conference explored ancient theories concerning the formation and development of the embryo, and how ancient physicians and philosophers sought to address this complex issue by applying their own doctrines and beliefs. This latter, particularly fascinating, aspect entailed a discussion of a plethora of different methodological solutions adopted by ancient thinkers, from analogies mostly based on artifacts, plants and other animals, to cosmological and mathematical calculations. Thus the conference provided a platform to compare different ancient views about the topic, while highlighting connections and the development of such ideas in the ancient world; its epistemological angle, along with its focus on interactions between different authors, which went beyond Classical antiquity, and also embraced ancient Egypt and China, constitutes a true novelty for the field.

Caterina Pellò (Geneva) opened the conference with a paper discussing some of the most relevant aspects of Presocratic embryology, such as the nature of the generative seed and resemblance, with a particular focus on Parmenides and Democritus, followed by Nathasja Roggo-van Luijn (Mainz), who discussed the use and relevance of analogies in the Hippocratic corpus, with a particular emphasis on Diseases of Women 1, On Generation and On the Nature of the Child. George Kazantzidis (Patras) continued the discussion of Hippocratic embryology with a specific focus on the role of marvel and precision in medical accounts, and how they affect the treatises’ narrative plot, by addressing the specific case of the seven-month foetus; Vishnya Knezhevich (Belgrade) investigated Philolaus’ embryology by positioning his view within ancient Greek embryological debates and through a comparison with Hippocratic literature. Alesia Preite (Heidelberg) presented an account of Platonic embryology as inferred from the Timaeus, by examining the relevance of marrow and its relation with the soul.

Four foetal positions in uterus – Full-figure anatomy of pregnant woman labelled with ailments, Wellcome Collection, via Wiki:Media Commons

With Nora Woodcock (Princeton) and Mariska Leunissen (North Carolina, Chapel Hill) the focus of the discussion shifted to Aristotelian embryology: Woodcock investigated the role of eggs in Aristotle’s biology by comparing it with that of the uterus, whereas Leunissen gave an account of the influences of female knowledge of embryology, both through experience and old-wives tales and superstitions, on Aristotelian biological works. Aistė Čelkytė (Leiden) examined Neopythagorean embryological theories, thus introducing a new ancient methodological framework for the study of the embryo, that is mathematical calculations.

Sophia Connell (Birkbeck University of London) examined the complex account of Galen’s reproductive gynaecological theories, while seeking to unpack the multiple sources of his information, from medical hearsay, to Hippocratic influence, which betray the author’s lack of observation. George Karamanolis (Vienna) investigated the issues pertaining early Christian beliefs about the soul of the embryo, which also entails ethical issues, and in particular the question as to whether the human soul is present from the time of conception. Chiara Blanco (Newcastle) explored medical and biological influences on first-century BCE Roman poet Lucretius, and how he merges Hippocratic and Aristotelian theories with his own atomistic philosophical framework. 

Anne Behnke Kinney (Virginia) and Lisa Raphals (University of California Riverside) explored embryological theories from ancient China; Kinney explored cosmological influences on the development of the foetus and how they affect notions of medical, social, and ritual practice; starting from an examination of recently excavated Chinese texts on embryology from the fourth, third and second century BCE, Raphals examined the relevance of factors of time, space and nurture in birth prognostication, which entails issues of fortune, nature and character. Finally, Cathie Spieser (Fribourg) focused on embryological theories in ancient Egypt, such as the conception of the embryo as an egg and the representation of life development through a matrix vase, by showing their interaction with ancient Greek knowledge.

The conference ended with a final discussion led by the organisers which involved speakers and attendants alike and reiterated the main preliminary results and most relevant observations which emerged from the conference, along with multiple connections between the different papers, and provided the first step towards the publication of the conference proceedings. The crosspollination of ideas within ancient Greece, between Greece and Rome, and even beyond, proved the existence of fertile ground for a broader interdisciplinary discussion about ancient medical, philosophical and mathematical theories, narrative style and the use of analogies, and methodology more broadly, which will be the object of our volume.

by the Past & Present editorial team

Past and Present was pleased to learn that Dr. Somak Biswas (Cambridge) has been awarded the 2024 UK Royal Historical Society’s (RHS) Gladstone Prize.

The RHS website explains:

“The Gladstone Book Prize was launched in 1998 following a founding donation from the Gladstone Memorial Trust on the centenary of William Gladstone’s death. The prize offers an annual award of £1,000 for a work of history on a topic not primarily related to British history that is the author’s first sole book publication. In 2015, the Linbury Trust made a generous donation of £12,500 in support of the Gladstone Prize.”

Dr. Biswas was awarded this year’s prize for his book Passages through India: Indian Gurus, Western Disciples and the Politics of Indophilia, 1890–1940 (Cambridge, 2023) which he worked on while a Past and Present Fellow at the Institute of Historical Research, London.

The judges citation states:

“We are very pleased to award this year’s prize to Somak Biswas’s ‘Passages Through India: Indian Gurus, Western Disciples and the Politics of Indophilia, 1890-1940′.

The panel agreed that is an elegantly written and inventive study that provocatively unsettles our historical understandings of leading Hindu Indian figures (including Gandhi, Tagore, Vivekananda), through analysing the intimate and affective ways in which their relations (embodied, spatial, social and imagined) with Western devotees was brokered and negotiated.

Somak’s book provides a nuanced reading of a strikingly emotive epistolary archive (English source material), and fluently moves from intimate registers to more expansive debates on subjecthood, transnational allegiances and the politics of belonging. ‘Passages Through India: Indian Gurus, Western Disciples and the Politics of Indophilia, 1890-1940′ is a very worthy winner of this year’s prize and we send our congratulations to Somak for his achievement.”

Our congradulations to Dr. Biswas on his scholarship being recognised in this way.

Past & Present logo, 2017 all rights reserved

by the Past & Present editorial team

Past and Present was pleased to learn that Dr. Damilola Adebayo (York University) was awarded two prizes at July’s Joint ICOHTEC-SHOT 2024 annual meeting at Viña del Mar, Chile.

The prize was awarded for his Open Access article “Electricity, Agency and Class in Lagos Colony, C.1860S–1914” which was published in Past & Present No. 262 (February 2024).

Dr. Adebayo was awarded the International Commitee for the History of Technology’s (ICOHTEC) Maurice Daumas Prize.

The Maurice Daumas Prize is awarded annually by ICOHTEC:

“…to the author of the best article submitted which deals with the history of technology in any period of the past or in any part of the world and which was published in a journal or edited volume in last two consequent years.”

Dr. Adebayo was also awarded the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers’ (IEEE) Bernard S. Finn IEEE History Prize.

The Bernard S. Finn IEEE History Prize is:

“…awarded annually to the best paper in the history of electrotechnology – power, electronics, telecommunications, and computer science.”

Our congradulations to Dr. Adebayo on his research being recognised with these two prestigious awards.