Podcasts about college oxford

In this episode, we open the creaking doors of the courtroom to the world of the supernatural. From Adele's eerily unsellable former home to 16th-century French tenants suing over ghostly disturbances, we explore how hauntings have—quite literally—made their case in court. Why do ghost stories grip us so tightly? Perhaps it's because they invade our safest spaces—our homes—and then, to make sense of the chaos, we drag them before the law.We delve into notorious legal disputes where phantoms played leading roles—from 19th-century mediums manipulating wills, to infamous murder houses cloaked in silence, to the one time New York's highest court ruled that a house was legally haunted. Whether it's a spectral milkmaid in Derbyshire or a ghost with pig-like eyes, the courtroom becomes the ultimate ghost story arena—where belief, fear, and justice meet.So grab your gavel (and your sage) as we ask: Can a ghost reduce your rent? Should sellers disclose hauntings? And most chillingly—what happens when the law declares a haunting... real?My Special Guest Is Naomi Ryan  Naomi Ryan is a criminal barrister and lover of all things macabre. After qualifying with a Masters in Law from St Catherine's College, Oxford, she taught criminal law to undergraduates at St Hilda's College Oxford and University College London before embarking on her career as a criminal barrister, where she both prosecuted and defended. She later moved into the Civil Service, where she has advised an array of senior government and legal figures on matters of constitutional, public and criminal law. She continues to work as an advisory lawyer whilst regularly giving talks about the darker side of legal history.In this episode, you will be able to: 1. Uncover real-life legal battles involving haunted houses—from 16th-century France to modern-day England and the US2. Explore how courts have ruled on ghostly claims, from rent reductions to cancelled house salesIf you value this podcast and want to enjoy more episodes please come and find us on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/Haunted_History_Chronicles⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠to ⁠support the podcast, gain a wealth of additional exclusive podcasts, writing and other content.Links to all Haunted History Chronicles Social Media Pages, Published Materials and more:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://linktr.ee/hauntedhistorychronicles?fbclid=IwAR15rJF2m9nJ0HTXm27HZ3QQ2Llz46E0UpdWv-zePVn9Oj9Q8rdYaZsR74I⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠NEW Podcast Shop:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.teepublic.com/user/haunted-history-chronicles⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me A Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://ko-fi.com/hauntedhistorychronicles⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Guest Links⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram:⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/spooky_barrister?igsh=MXIzOTFzd2NhbmFzaQ%3D%3D&utm_source=qr⁠

My Story  Talk 12 Brasenose College Oxford 1959-62 (Part 3) Welcome to Talk 12 in our series where I am reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life. This is now the third talk about the years I spent at Oxford. So far we have talked about life at Oxford, its academic programme, and my spiritual experience while I was there. Today I'm going to share with you my developing relationship with Eileen, our decision to get married shortly after I graduated, and how the Lord led us straight into pastoral ministry rather than going to Bible college first. Keeping in touch Throughout the two years after Eileen and I met, we had seen each other almost every day. Clearly, this could not continue while I was at Oxford, but we kept in touch as much as was then humanly possible. Of course, in those days there were no mobile phones. In fact, access to landlines was not easy, and anyway, it was extremely expensive. So Eileen and I kept in touch with each other by writing letters four or five times a week. We also managed to see each other every two weeks. As I have mentioned already, the terms at Oxford were only 8 weeks long, so by going home for the weekend after four weeks, and by Eileen travelling up to see me for the weekend after weeks two and six, we were able to see each other on a fortnightly basis. This was very clear evidence of Eileen's commitment to me as the journey on our Lambretta scooter through the busy traffic of central London was by no means easy. Obviously, we made the most of those precious weekends. On Saturdays we would often explore the surrounding countryside on our scooter or even travel further afield visiting pretty Cotswold villages like Bibury and Bourton on the Water. Or in the summer we loved getting into one of the punts moored by Magaden Bridge and heading up the Cherwell where we picnicked on the home-made sausage rolls and egg and bacon pie that Eileen had brought with her from home. On Sundays, of course, we went to church together before Eileen made the 60-mile journey back home to be ready for work on Monday. Of course, during the college vacations (which totalled half the year), the situation was completely different. I was able to see Eileen every day again. During the week, this was in the evenings as Eileen was at work during the daytime. And I was too, at least during the weeks that the schools had their holidays. As the Oxford terms were far shorter than the school terms I was able to earn some extra money by teaching in a local secondary school, which was to prove valuable for my future ministry as I was gaining experience in teaching children of a different age group from those I had taught in the years before I went to Oxford. But apart from working hours, Eileen and I saw each other every evening and every weekend. Sundays were taken up with church twice in the day, and midweek we regularly attended the Tuesday night prayer meeting, the Thursday night Bible study, and the Friday night youth meeting. We were desperate to learn more about our Pentecostal experience and the way the Pentecostal churches did things. In fact, whatever we were doing, our relationship with each other was from the start intimately connected with our relationship with the Lord and his will for our lives, even when we went on holiday. As I have already mentioned, our first holiday together was at a Christian Endeavour Holiday Home in Devon in 1959 just before I went up to Oxford. The following year we decided to explore the Lake District together. We travelled the three-hundred-mile journey on our scooter, stopping overnight in Aintree with one of Eileen's aunts, before finally arriving at a CE Home in Kents Bank near Grange-over-Sands. We had each visited the area before, but never together, and that fortnight was a wonderful opportunity to enjoy fellowship with other Christians as well as marvelling at the beauty of God's creation as we made daily trips into different parts of the Lakes. In 1961 we decided to go further afield and to spend four weeks touring France and northern Spain. So we exchanged our 125cc Lambretta for a new 175 which we trusted would cope well with the distances we would be travelling laden with two tents and all the paraphernalia required for camping. However, the moment we set off we both had some misgivings as the weight of luggage at the rear of the scooter made it harder to handle the machine safely, but undaunted we proceeded with caution and arrived safely at Southend airport where we had booked a flight on a cargo plane to northern France. Our first night in France was spent in a cow field with the kind permission of the farmer. We were both experienced campers, Eileen with the Girl Guides and I with the Boys' Brigade, but we had never before been woken by the sound of cows champing round our tent pegs and we quickly agreed to depart as soon as possible, particularly as there were no ‘facilities' available! We determined that after that we would make sure to check into proper camping sites. We travelled down the western side of France, stopping first at Paris for the weekend, camping in the Bois de Boulogne and visiting the thousand-strong Assemblies of God Church in the Rue du Sentier led by pastor André Nicole. Little did I know it then, but that was to be the first of many visits to French assemblies later in my ministry and sparked my interest in what the Holy Spirit was doing in European countries. In Angouleme we discovered that our GB plate had fallen off and, knowing that we were legally required to display one, we visited a garage there and asked if they knew where we could get a replacement. It was then that I realised how inadequate my A Level French course had been. Although we had studied numerous French authors, it was of little practical use to us now as no one had told us how to say the alphabet in French! Finally, by writing the letters down I managed to let them know what I wanted and learnt that in French GB is pronounced Jay-Bay. They told us that they could make us one, but it would take a couple of days. As a result, we had to travel further each day than originally planned which meant that we were both rather saddle-sore at the end of each day. We crossed the Spanish border between Biarritz and San Sebastian and immediately discovered that what we were doing was culturally unacceptable. Eileen was getting hoots and wolf-whistles from passing motorists because she was wearing trousers and not riding side-saddle! Of course, this would have been extremely dangerous bearing in mind the distances we were travelling each day and, at the risk of causing offense, we decided that we had no option but to carry on as we were. Extremely tired when we reached Burgos we decided to spend the night in a hotel and enjoy the luxury of proper beds. We did the same in Madrid for two or three nights before heading for Barcelona by way of Zaragoza. But before we reached Barcelona our scooter broke down on a mountain road and reluctantly I had to leave Eileen by the roadside with the scooter while I hitched a lift in a Citroen deux-chevaux into a village called Jorba to get help. It took two days to get the scooter fixed and by the time we eventually reached our campsite at Rosas, on the Mediterranean just north of Barcelona, it was already dark. A day or so later we arrived in Perpignan in southern France, intending to travel on up the eastern side of France on our way back home. But the scooter broke down again, and after two days camping at the back of an Esso station, we were compelled to return to England by train, leaving our scooter to be brought home courtesy of the RAC. Fortunately, it was still under warranty and was repaired by Lambretta after it finally arrived back in England some six weeks later. That holiday was the last we were to have together before we were married the following year and, in some ways, was a preparation for it. Like the holiday, married life is wonderful, but not without its unexpected events, delays, and difficulties. We were learning to face problems together, to be patient with each other, and to trust in the Lord to bring us through. Perhaps that's why I tend to advise young couples, wherever possible, to go on holiday together before deciding to get married. But that brings me to how I decided to propose to Eileen. Engagement and Marriage It was during my first term at Oxford. We had been ‘going out' together for two years, seeing each other almost every day. But we had never talked about marriage. I think that must have been because I was very conscious of how serious marriage is. Divorce in those days was far less common than it is today and for me, as a Christian, it would not have entered my head. I knew that marriage would be for life. What's more, I knew God had called me to serve him, and choosing the right partner was vitally important. So I was reluctant to commit myself. But just before I went to Oxford my father had a word with me. You'd better make your mind up about that girl, David. It would not be fair to keep her waiting for three years while you're at Oxford, if your intentions are not serious. Of course, I knew he was right. I had to make up my mind. The problem was, I didn't want to give her up, but I didn't want to marry her if she wasn't the right one for me. Finally I did what I should have done much sooner. I decided to pray about it. I got down on my knees in my bedroom at Oxford and told the Lord my dilemma. I told him that I would gladly marry Eileen if she was God's choice for me, but if not, I would give her up. And as soon as I said that prayer I received an overwhelming peace and an assurance that Eileen was the girl I was to marry. So, the next time I was home from Oxford, after a long and passionate kiss, I said to her, You will marry me, won't you, darling? Yes, those were my exact words! To which she replied, Oh yes! Of course I will. So we decided to get engaged the following summer after my first year at Oxford, knowing that the earliest we could expect to marry would be after I had graduated. After gaining her father's consent, we organised a wonderful garden party to celebrate our engagement on 2nd July, 1960, and eventually were married by Pastor Alfred Webb at Bethel Full Gospel Church, Vicarage Road, Dagenham, on 28th July, 1962. And the specially invited organist for the occasion was none other than Laurie N. Dixon, LRAM, the friend through whom I had first heard about the baptism in the Holy Spirit.    Our move to Colchester After our honeymoon in Cornwall, we moved directly into our first home, a bungalow in Colchester, where I had accepted the invitation to take over the pastorate of the small AoG church there. Colchester will be the subject of our next talk, but first I need to explain why we did not consider ministry in a Baptist church and why I did not go to Bible College as originally planned. With regard to the Baptists, the explanation is simple. Once we had been baptised in the Spirit, neither of us had attended our Baptist churches apart from perhaps an occasional visit. This was largely because the minister of Hornchurch Baptist was not sympathetic to a Pentecostal understanding of scripture, and the new minister of Elm Park Baptist had stated that the Pentecostals' exegesis of Acts was entirely unwarranted. Against this, my parents had told me that Leslie Moxham, our former Baptist minister at Elm Park, had noticed such a difference in me since I was baptised in the Spirit that he had said, If the baptism in the Spirit can make that much difference to David, I want it too. Leslie was later baptised in the Spirit and eventually became an AoG minister working with my friend Colin Blackman in the Tunbridge Wells assembly. And although, as we were to discover later some Baptists were beginning to get involved in the Charismatic Renewal, it was evident to us that our future lay with the Pentecostals rather than with the Baptists. But why didn't I go the Bible College before taking on a church? The answer is that I tried to. Early in 1962 I applied to London Bible College. There was a section on the application form where you were required to give an account of your experience of Christ. So I mentioned not only how I had become a Christian, but also how Jesus had baptised me in the Holy Spirit. My interview lasted about an hour, most of which was taken up with what I believed about speaking in tongues. Was it for today? And if it was, was it for everyone? As a result, I received a letter a few days later saying that they felt I would do better to apply to a Pentecostal bible college! Interestingly, their rejection of my application is mentioned in Ian Randall's history of LBC, Educating Evangelicals. The AoG Bible College was then at Kenley in Surrey. Its principal was Donald Gee. I had had a brief conversation with him after a meeting at the East Ham Easter Convention, and he had promised to send me the application form. But this never arrived. I also heard it rumoured that the lady teaching English at Kenley, on hearing that an Oxford graduate might be coming, had, presumably jokingly, commented that he'll be probably teaching me! This, together with the fact that some of my Pentecostal friends were telling me that I didn't need to go to Bible college, because I had got it – whatever that meant! – caused me to wonder if that was the direction I should be heading. So I said to the Lord, If you really don't want me to go to Bible College, let someone offer me the pastorate of a Pentecostal church. And within a week, I had my answer. I received a letter from the Colchester assembly asking if I would be their pastor. There was a bungalow available for rent for six and a half guineas a week (£6.51) towards which they were prepared to contribute £5.00. Apart from that, they could offer nothing, and it was understood that I would need to seek full time secular employment. But that's something for next time.  

My Story   Talk 11 Brasenose College, Oxford (1959-1962) Part 2 Welcome to Talk 11 in our series where I am reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life. Last time I finished by sharing with you how God powerfully spoke to me after a Philosophy tutorial through a verse in Psalm 119. Today I'll be talking in more detail about my spiritual experience at Oxford, which, looking back on it, was to be far more significant for my future life and ministry than the academic programme I was following. The most important thing a young Christian can do when going up to university is to make sure right from the start that they find, and have regular fellowship with, other Christians. There are two main ways of doing this, either by joining the Christian Union or by attending a local church – or preferably both, which is what I did. Christian Union and Local Church The CU at Brasenose was part of the OICCU – Oxford Inter-Collegiate Christian Union. Each college CU would have its own weekly meeting for prayer and Bible study, but there was also a regular Saturday night Bible Study held at the Northgate Hall, situated close to the Oxford Union building. This was well attended by Christians from across the whole university, and I became a regular attender at both these gatherings. I appreciated the opportunity to meet Christians from different denominational backgrounds, and, bearing in mind my experience of the Anglican chaplain at Brentwood School, was particularly pleased to discover that some Anglicans actually did profess the believe the Bible! However, much as I enjoyed fellowship with these good people, having been only recently baptised in the Spirit, and having begun to appreciate Pentecostal worship, I was very aware that something very important was lacking in their meetings – the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit. Of course, things are very different today, but in those days the Charismatic Renewal had not yet begun and most Anglicans, who in my experience tended to view other denominations as somewhat inferior, were highly suspicious of, if not totally unaware of, the rapidly growing worldwide Pentecostal Movement. And, of course, I was eager to enlighten them! But first a word about the local Pentecostal church. At the time, the only Pentecostal church in Oxford was the Elim Church situated on the Botley Road just beyond Oxford Railway Station. I was keen to attend there because, however valuable membership of a Christian union may be, there really is no substitute for the life and fellowship of a local church. So throughout my time at Oxford I regularly attended on Sundays both the morning and evening services, which meant incidentally that I missed both lunch and dinner in college because the mealtimes clashed with the times of the services. More importantly, on my very first Sunday in Oxford, it was there that I met three other students who were from Pentecostal churches, which led to our meeting regularly for prayer and to the formation of the Students' Pentecostal Fellowship.     Students' Pentecostal Fellowship The students I met after church that first Sunday morning in Oxford were, Michael Collins who came from Dorchester AoG and was in his second year at St. Peter's Hall reading Engineering, and Gladys Bland and John Miles who, like me, were in their first year. Gladys was from East Ham AoG and was doing postgraduate work in English Literature at Somerville College, and John was from Gloucester AoG and was reading English at Regents Park College. We were all delighted to meet each other because up to then there had been relatively few Pentecostals attending university. We soon became firm friends and agreed to meet regularly together for fellowship and prayer, particularly for spiritual gifts and for Christian students from a different denominational background to be baptised in the Spirit. Michael had a friend called Philip who was already Spirit filled, and he joined our prayer group too. I will never forget the day, early in our first year, when there was a prophecy in one of those meetings that people of all denominations, including professors and university lecturers, would be baptised in the Spirit. As I've already mentioned, the Charismatic Renewal had not yet begun or, if it had, we had not heard of it, and to be honest, I really wondered if that could possibly happen. But it did, and in our own small way we were to be a part of it. What we didn't know then was that similar groups were forming in other universities. There were students from a Pentecostal background at Cambridge and London Universities too, and once we heard about this we naturally wanted to get in touch with them. And a key person to help us do that was Richard Bolt. Richard had been an Anglican ordinand but after he was baptised in the Spirit in an AoG church in Durham his course at Clifton Theological College was terminated because he was laying hands on other students and praying for them to speak in tongues. Shortly after this he was welcomed by AoG and became an Assemblies of God minister based in a small assembly in Colchester. However, as the Lord was using him in healing and in leading others into the baptism in the Spirit, Richard's ministry extended well beyond Colchester as he took time to travel to universities and colleges to encourage Pentecostal students and to pray for others who wanted to be filled with the Spirit. He was certainly a great encouragement to me and my family. My mother was baptised in the Spirit under his ministry. But before I knew anything about how the Lord was using Richard, the thought had already crossed my mind that we ought to form, at least in Oxford, a university society for Pentecostal students. The Baptists had what was known as The John Bunyan Society which met every Sunday afternoon in Regents Park College where John Miles was a student. He and I attended this quite often and I mentioned to him that I thought it might be good to have something similar for Pentecostals. As a result of this, John wrote to Aaron Linford, the editor of Redemption Tidings, the AoG weekly magazine, and asked for advice. And it was at this point that Richard Bolt told us about the Pentecostal students at Cambridge and London. All this led to a gathering in London early in 1961 when the Students' Pentecostal Fellowship (SPF) was formed. Richard Bolt was recognised as its Travelling Secretary and Donald Underwood, a graduate of Trinity College, Dublin, as General Secretary. We organised annual weekend house-parties where students were exposed to the ministry of Pentecostal leaders, and evangelistic missions where students would sing, testify, and preach during the summer vacations. We also published a magazine known as The Pentecostal and developed a postal library service where students could borrow books by Pentecostal authors. At Oxford our group grew in numbers during our second year, partly due to an influx of students from Culham College led by Andrew Parfitt, the son of the AoG pastor at Maidstone, but also because our prayers were being answered and students from other denominations were getting baptised in the Spirit. But that leads me to how I personally started to be used in leading others into the baptism. Leading others into the baptism It all began a few weeks after I had started at Oxford when, after one of those Saturday night Bible Studies in the Northgate Hall, I was looking at a book on the bookstall which was about a revival that had broken out somewhere in Africa. Chris, one of my Anglican friends from Brasenose, saw what I was looking at and asked me if I had any personal experience of revival. So I began to tell him about the baptism in the Holy Spirit. As a result, Chris started to seek the baptism and came along to the Elim church where the pastor laid hands on him and prayed for him. But nothing happened and after a few weeks Chris came to me and said, I want you to pray for me. I'm coming to your room tomorrow and I want you to lay hands on me and pray for me. I was frankly unsure how to respond to this. I was very new to all this myself and I did not know if I had the authority to lay hands on him. I didn't know if such things were the responsibility of pastors, and I wasn't a pastor. But Chris was very insistent and so I agreed. The next day was Saturday and there were no lectures or tutorials for me to attend, so I decided to spend the night in prayer. This was something I had never done before, and have not done very often since, but I realised the seriousness of what Chris had asked me to do and I wanted to get it right. When Chris came the next day, we chatted for a bit, and then he said, Well, are you going to pray for me or not? I think he may have sensed that I was putting it off because, despite my night of prayer, I was nervous about it. He knelt down in front of me, and I plucked up courage and, quietly speaking in tongues, gently placed my hands on his shoulders. But nothing seemed to happen, and I didn't know what to do, when I remembered that in the Authorised Version (which most of us were still using in those days) Acts 19:6 says that it was when Paul had laid his hands upon the Ephesians that the Holy Spirit came on them and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. In other words, the Spirit came on them after Paul laid his hands on them.  And I found myself prophesying over Chris that he would receive, and that he would receive that very day. At which, Chris got up, said thank you, and left me. And I was left wondering if I had done the right thing. I had my answer at eight the following morning. I was still asleep, having had no sleep the previous night, when I was woken by something digging me in my ribs. It was Chris with his umbrella. What was he doing here?             Oh, it's you Chris. What on earth are you doing here? And then it occurred to me that he might have come to tell me what had happened, so I added,             You haven't received the baptism, have you? To which he responded as he continued to dig me in the ribs,             O ye of little faith! He had, of course, received, and he told me how it had happened. After he had left me he had returned to his room and had been reading a book by, or about, the famous missionary to China, Hudson Taylor. The book emphasised that in addition to faith we need courage in our Christian lives, and Chris realised that that was just what he needed. He looked up from the book intending to say, Yes, Lord. Give me courage. But instead of doing so, he found himself speaking in tongues! Little did I know it then, but Chris was to be the first among hundreds, if not thousands, of people who have begun to speak in tongues through the ministry the Lord has given me. But that's closely related to the subject of spiritual gifts and how I began to exercise them. Beginning to exercise spiritual gifts Shortly after I was baptised in the Spirit I visited the bookshop at the AoG National Offices at 51 Newington Causeway, London. I bought every book they had on the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts. As a young Baptist I had received little teaching about the Spirit and none whatsoever on spiritual gifts. And I was eager to learn. I devoured books like Harold Horton's The Gifts of the Spirit and Donald Gee's Concerning Spiritual Gifts, and I learnt that the baptism in the Spirit is not an end in itself, but a gateway to supernatural gifts like tongues,  interpretation, prophecy, and healing. And I was longing to receive and be used in whatever gifts the Lord might have for me. As it happened, I didn't have long to wait. I was still in my first year at Oxford when I was confronted with a situation at the church I was attending. The Elim church in Oxford was a well-attended lively church where the gifts of the Spirit were regularly in operation. On a Sunday morning there were often prophecies, tongues and interpretation. Some of my Christian friends from Brasenose came along to experience Pentecostal worship and so far I had not been embarrassed in any way by what went on in the meetings. However, one Sunday morning, when fortunately none of my friends was present, somebody spoke in tongues but there was no interpretation. No explanation was given for this and, although I was still new to these things, I knew that the Bible was very clear that speaking in tongues in church should be interpreted. I probably should have asked the pastor about this, but he was a busy man and I did not know him very well. Consequently I kept quiet about the matter, but was still concerned that everything was not quite as it should be. Shortly after that, when Richard Bolt was visiting, I told him about this and asked him what I should do. He said, The answer is very simple David. You interpret. To which I replied, But I don't have the gift. He then said, Then ask for it. But, bearing in mind that 1 Corinthians 12:11 tells us that these gifts are given as the Holy Spirit determines, I asked, But I know God wants me to have it? His answer to this was along the following lines. The very fact that I was concerned about it might well indicate that God wanted me to have it. And, anyway, we know from God's word that it is his will that tongues in church should be interpreted. So I would be in God's will if I went ahead and interpreted it. I should pray about it and next time it happened I should ask God for the interpretation and then speak out in faith. Our heavenly Father gives good gifts to his children when they ask him. Although I still had questions, I decided to do what he said and over the next few weeks kept asking the Lord about the matter. Then, one Sunday morning it happened. Someone spoke in tongues and I waited, hoping that someone else would interpret it. But when no one did, I asked the Lord to give me the right words to say and immediately a few words came into my mind which I began to speak out in faith. I say in faith, but I have to confess that my faith was mingled with doubt. I was half expecting the pastor to intervene and say that this was not the right interpretation! But to my intense relief he said nothing, and after the meeting people came and thanked me for my interpretation. So from time to time, I continued to interpret tongues, but still with the occasional doubt if what I said could really be the interpretation. And later in the series I will tell you how God wonderfully confirmed the genuineness of my gift when I interpreted a tongue that was identified as a language spoken in Africa. God certainly did some wonderful things while I was at Oxford, and I realise now that I was already exercising a ministry while I was there. I was leading our SPF prayer group, teaching others about spiritual gifts, as well as preaching in churches from time to time. It seems that others were recognising this before I did, and I was soon asked to share my testimony at the AoG National Youth Rally held in the Birmingham Town Hall and to contribute an article in Redemption Tidings entitled Pentecost in Oxford University. The Lord was clearly preparing the way for my future ministry. Next time, I'll tell you about my developing relationship with Eileen which led to our marriage immediately after I graduated and how I ultimately decided not to go to Bible College as originally planned, but to accept the pastorate of the Assemblies of God Church in Colchester.

My Story   Talk 10   Brasenose College, Oxford, 1959-1962   Welcome to Talk 10 in our series where I'm reflecting on God's goodness to me throughout my life. Today we begin on the years that I spent at Oxford between 1959 and 1962.   For me, life at Brasenose College began on Thursday, 8th October 1959, exactly one month after I had been baptised in the Holy Spirit. I travelled there by car with Eileen and my parents, who, after helping me unpack and settle into my room at the top of staircase 11, prayed with me before returning home. This was the beginning of an entirely new phase in my life. It was the first time that I was living away from home. I would be making new friends and be challenged by new ideas.   But there are some things which remain constant in our lives no matter what else may change. I knew that my parents loved me. I knew that Eileen loved me, and that I loved her. And I knew that God had a purpose for my life and that I was now at Brasenose as part of that overall plan. So I had confidence that all would be well.   The fact that I would now be reading PPE (Philosophy, Politics, and Economics) did not faze me, even though I had never studied any of those subjects before. My original purpose in accepting the place I had been offered had been to widen my sphere of knowledge before eventually concentrating on theology in order to prepare for the ministry.   And PPE would certainly do that. But there was far more to being at Oxford than the course I would be studying. There was the social and recreational life which I greatly enjoyed. And it was a great opportunity to interact with people of all faiths and none and to share my faith with them. Opportunity, too, to tell other Christians about the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and to meet other Pentecostal students and spend time in prayer with them for the supernatural gifts of the Spirit. And it was also a time when my relationship with Eileen would be strengthened even though we would be apart for weeks on end.   As I can't cover that in just one talk, today will be aboutlife at Brasenose, its domestic arrangements, its social life and sporting activities, and the academic programme and its challenge to my faith.   Next time I'll share in more detail about my spiritual experience including how the Lord led me into leading others into the Baptism in the Spirit, how I began to exercise spiritual gifts, and how we began the Students' Pentecostal Fellowship. And later I'll tell you about my developing relationship with Eileen which led to our marriage immediately after I had graduated and how I ultimately decided not to go to Bible College as originally planned, but to accept the pastorate of the Assemblies of God Church in Colchester.     Life at Brasenose When I arrived at Brasenose in October 1959 it was almost three years since I had been there previously in November 1956 when I had taken the scholarship examination. Back then I had never seen any of the students' rooms, as we were staying in a boarding house in the Woodstock Road. So I wasn't quite sure what to expect. But as soon as I entered my new room, I was pleasantly surprised. It was larger than my bedroom at home, was well furnished and overlooked one of the quads with a view of the Radcliffe Camera and the University Church of Saint Mary the Virgin in the background.   Students were usually allocated a room in college for the first year of their studies, and sometimes for the second year too, when you had opportunity to choose what room you would prefer. During my first year I discovered that the room beneath me was even larger than the room I was in and had the benefit of a bedroom separate from the main room which was used as a sitting room as well as a study.   So when I was offered the chance to live in college for a second year I opted for this room which proved to be extremely useful when we were holding prayer meetings for those interested in seeking spiritual gifts. But more of that next time. For my third year I lived ‘in digs' in a boarding house on the Botley Road, just 50 yards away from the Elim Pentecostal Church which I attended throughout my time in Oxford.   Meals at Brasenose were, in my opinion at least, of a high quality and I was introduced to dishes which I had never tasted at home. These included jugged hare and braised haunch of venison, the only meals I took a positive dislike to, probably because the meat was hung for several days before it was cooked which resulted in a rather unpleasant smell. Fortunately, we were allowed to sign out in advance for any evening meal, provided we dined in college at least five times a week.   Dinner was a rather formal occasion at which we were required to wear our gowns, and which was preceded by a Latin grace which began with the words: Oculi omnium spectant in te Deus. Tu das illis escas tempore opportuno… which means The eyes of all wait upon you O God. You give them their food in due season, and is taken from Psalm 145:15. Sadly, however, I'm not sure that many people took it seriously, even if they should have known what it meant, bearing in mind that at the time Latin at O level was still an entrance requirement for Oxford University.   Breakfast and lunch were far less formal occasions. Grace was not said and there were no requirements about a dress code or attendance. There were, in fact, very few requirements about life in college. Apart from academic regulations, what rules there were related to the time of day you had to be back in college and the time at which any female guests had to be out!     The gate in the porters' lodge was the only means of access to the College. It was locked at midnight and anyone seeking access after that would be reported to the Dean and a fine would be automatically payable. However, this could be avoided if you were agile enough to scale an eight-foot wall without being caught, something of course I never had to try!   As far as the ladies were concerned, they had to be out by 10pm. This, I imagine, is no longer relevant, as, like most Oxford colleges, Brasenose rightly accepts female students as well as men. But by the time I left Oxford the ‘swinging sixties' had hardly begun, and there was still at least a nominal acknowledgement of Christian moral values.   For residential students there was also a rule about the minimum number of nights you had to be in college over the course of a term. Any absence without permission from your ‘moral tutor' would be reported by your ‘scout'. Scouts, who were usually much older than the students, originally were little more than their servants and before my time would clean your shoes if you left them outside the door of your room.   Even in my time they were referred to by their surname only, whereas they had to refer to me as Mr Petts and address me as Sir. This was something I deplored, a tradition which harked back to the old upstairs/downstairs attitude of the aristocracy still very prevalent in the early decades of the last century. If you've ever watched Downton Abbey you'll know exactly what I mean.   Social and sport Probably the most frequent social activity at Oxford was drinking coffee and staying up until the early hours of the morning discussing religion or politics or whatever else was currently in the news. Of course, whenever I could I took the opportunity to share my faith with anyone who would listen. Most of these discussions took place either in my room or that of fellow students whose accommodation was close to mine.   And at least one of those students came to faith in Christ during his first term at Brasenose, largely through the ministry of Keith de Berry, the rector of St. Aldate's Church, but I like to think that my testimony also played a part in his decision to give his life to Christ. He went on to gain a first class degree in Chemistry and continued at Oxford to do a D.Phil., (the Oxford version of a PhD). Now, after more than sixty years he is still a committed Christian and once told me that his scientific research had only confirmed his faith in Christ.   Of course, late night discussions were by no means the only occasions when there was opportunity to witness to the truth of the gospel. So whether it was punting on the Cherwell on a lazy summer afternoon, or in the changing room after a football match, or playing tennis or table tennis (for which, in my final year, I was captain of the College team), I was always eager to share my faith.       But that doesn't mean that I was constantly ‘Bible bashing'. Far from it. I remember how on one occasion, when our team was playing tennis against another college, my doubles match had been delayed for some reason. Consequently, it looked as though I would be late for our Students' Pentecostal Fellowship prayer meeting.   But it was a three-set match, and we had lost the first set six-love and were losing the second set four-love. We had only to lose two more games, and the match would be over, and I could get off to the prayer meeting which by then had already started. But throwing away the match would hardly be fair to my partner and would not have glorified God.   Then I realised that my friends would wonder where I was and would be praying for me, wherever I was or whatever I was doing. Which inspired me to say to my partner,               Come on, John. We're going to win this match.   And we did. The level of our tennis suddenly improved, and, having lost ten games in a row, we went on to win all the next twelve, taking the match by two sets to one (4-6, 6-4, 6-0). I'm not sure that John believed my explanation that this was probably the result of answered prayer, but because of that experience I am personally convinced, not only that God is interested in every tiny detail of our lives, but that such experiences bear testimony to others of the reality of our faith.   Academic programme The academic year at Oxford began in early October and finished towards the end of June. Each term lasted just 8 weeks which meant that the long summer vacation provided the opportunity for students to get a summer job or travel abroad or, where necessary, to catch up on their reading.   Reading was, in fact, a major part of learning, and the world-renowned Bodleian Library situated virtually on the doorstep of Brasenose, provided access to millions of books and other printed items. Guidance as to which books to read was given in tutorials when your tutor would set you an essay to write in time for the following week, when you would read your essay to him and he would make appropriate comments.   At the beginning of term, he would also recommend what lectures might be helpful. Attendance at lectures was entirely optional, whereas attendance at tutorials was a compulsory part of one's course. The standard of lecturing varied immensely, some academics having very poor communication skills. As a result, attendance would steadily diminish week by week and in one case I remember the series was terminated early ‘due to an indisposition' on the part of the lecturer!   In my day, the system of assessment at Oxford, for PPE at least, was by written examination. After ‘prelims' (preliminary examinations) which were taken in March in your first year, there was no further examination until ‘finals' which were taken in the June of your third year.     I was required to take at least two papers in each subject, Philosophy, Politics, and Economics, plus two further papers of my choice. I opted to take these in Philosophy as this was my favourite, despite the fact that it had been the most challenging to my Christian faith.   For example, during my second year I had been asked by my tutor to write an essay on the ontological argument for the existence of God. This was one of the arguments used by the philosopher René Descartes in an attempt to prove God's existence. During the course of my essay I said something to the effect that although philosophy cannot prove the existence of God it cannot disprove it either. It was at this point, as I was reading my essay to my tutor, that he interrupted me by saying: Oh, I don't know. I think if you mean by ‘prove' what we normally mean by ‘prove', and if you mean by ‘God' what we normally mean by ‘God', then we can probably disprove God's existence. But perhaps we can talk about it another time. This was the first time in my life that I had been confronted with such an outright denial of God's existence, and my tutor's statement shocked me deeply. It challenged everything I had based my life upon. I felt numb. As soon as he had left the room I instinctively wanted to call out to God for help. But what if my tutor was right and there was no God to call out to? But I called out anyway:             God, if there is a God, HELP! And He did! I walked into my bedroom and picked up my Bible and opened it. It fell open at Psalm 119, verse 99. My teacher had told me that he could prove that there is no God. Who was I to challenge the statement of an Oxford tutor? But in that verse the Psalmist said: I have more insight than all my teachers, for I meditate on your statutes. I came later to realise that by reading the Bible the most simple believer can gain more understanding of the things that really matter than all the intellectual rationalising of the philosopher. That verse brought immediate reassurance to my heart. It was not just the content of the verse that reassured me – though it certainly did – but the fact that, of all the verses there are in the Bible, I should turn at random to that very one. This was surely no coincidence. God had spoken to me in a remarkable and powerful way. And as the years have gone by I have learned how to counteract the arguments of the atheists. I'm so glad now that I did not abandon my faith back then. People will always be bringing up challenges to our faith, but just because I don't know the answer doesn't mean that there is no answer! And until I know what it is, I just need to keep on trusting the One who said, I AM the truth.  

The public often imagines corporations as self-contained actors that provide a set of goods and services to consumers. Underpinning this image have been ideas of ownership, rights to capital and intellectual property, and corporate responsibility to stakeholders including consumers, workers, and shareholders. But what if almost everything we are told about the essence of the firm is wrong? So writes Sir John Kay, a British economist, corporate director, and longstanding fellow of St John's College (Oxford) in his new book, The Corporation in the 21st Century.The book revolves around contrasts between historical conceptions of corporations, capitalism, and contemporary practices. Kay writes, “A central thesis of [this] book is that business has evolved, but the language that is widely used to describe business has not.” In the 19th and 20th centuries, firms could be defined in terms of their control over material forms of productive capital (factories, steel foundries, railways, etc.) Socioeconomic critiques of capitalism, most prominently from Karl Marx, often centered on firms' control of the means of production. Kay contends that firms today access productive capital as a service. For example, Amazon does not own its warehouses but rents them from another firm. Kay writes that today's corporations and capitalism “[have] very little to do with ‘capital' and nothing whatsoever to do with any struggle between capitalists and workers to control the means of production.”Kay joins Luigi and Bethany to discuss the implications of this evolution in firms' relation to capital: Why is it important to capitalism that its biggest firms no longer own their means of production? Why does the language used to describe this matter? What do Apple's manufacturing facilities, Amazon's warehouses, and TikTok's algorithms tell us about our notions of business ownership? How have these changes to capitalism redefined the struggle between the owners of capital, managers, workers, and consumers? In the process, Kay, Luigi, and Bethany explore the failures of capitalism and imagine what could and should be the purpose of the 21st-century corporation.Show Notes:Read an excerpt from the book (published by Yale University Press) on ProMarketIn Bethany and Luigi's closing discussion of Kay's book, Luigi cites several articles he has published on the topic, which we have linked below for the listener's reference. In this past scholarship, Luigi studies how a firm and its operations often intertwine with other firms to form an ecosystem, and it is only through this ecosystem that value is created. Apple and Foxconn provide one example. Legally, they are distinct firms, yet Luigi contends they can be understood as elements of an ecosystem that creates value. Hence, it is sometimes productive to think beyond legal boundaries to consider how multiple firms may compose such a value-creating ecosystem in practice. Within the Apple/Foxconn ecosystem, Apple has a significant influence in dictating terms for Foxconn. Further, if Apple has such dominating power over its suppliers, then Apple could be said to have market power that raises antitrust concerns, which are less obvious if we take the legal boundaries of firms as the correct method of conceptualizing them.Zingales, L., 2000. In search of new foundations. The Journal of Finance, 55(4), pp.1623-1653.Rajan, R.G. and Zingales, L., 1998. Power in a Theory of the Firm. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(2), pp.387-432.Rajan, R.G. and Zingales, L., 2001. The firm as a dedicated hierarchy: A theory of the origins and growth of firms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(3), pp.805-851.Zingales, L. (1998) Corporate Governance. In: Newman, P., Ed., The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law, Palgrave Macmillan, London.Lancieri, F., Posner, E.A. and Zingales, L., 2023. The Political Economy of the Decline of Antitrust Enforcement in the United States. Antitrust Law Journal, 85(2), pp.441-519.

Today I talked to Julia Caterina Hartley about Iran and French Orientalism: Persia in the Literary Culture of Nineteenth-Century France (Bloomsbury. 2023). New translations of Persian literature into French, the invention of the Aryan myth, increased travel between France and Iran, and the unveiling of artefacts from ancient Susa at the Louvre Museum are among the factors that radically altered France's perception of Iran during the long nineteenth century. And this is reflected in the literary culture of the period. In an ambitious study spanning poetry, historiography, fiction, travel-writing, ballet, opera, and marionette theatre, Julia Hartley reveals the unique place that Iran held in the French literary imagination between 1829 and 1912. Iran's history and culture remained a constant source of inspiration across different generations and artistic movements, from the 'Oriental' poems of Victor Hugo to those of Anna de Noailles and Théophile Gautier's strategic citation of Persian poetry to his daughter Judith Gautier's full-blown rewriting of a Persian epic. Writing about Iran could also serve to articulate new visions of world history and religion, as was the case in the intellectual debates that took place between Michelet, Renan, and Al-Afghani. Alternatively joyous, as in Félicien David's opera Lalla Roukh, and ominous, as in Massenet's Le Mage, Iran elicited a multiplicity of treatments.  This is most obvious in the travelogues of Flandin, Gobineau, Loti, Jane Dieulafoy, and Marthe Bibesco, which describe the same cities and cultural practices in altogether different ways. Under these writers' pens, Iran emerges as both an Oriental other and an alter ego, its culture elevated above that of all other Muslim nations. At times this led French writers to critique notions of European superiority. But at others, they appropriated Iran as proto-European through racialist narratives that reinforced Orientalist stereotypes. Drawing on theories of Orientalism and cultural difference, this book navigates both sides of this fascinating and complex literary history. It is the first major study on the subject. Julia Hartley is a Lecturer in Comparative Literature at the University of Glasgow. She was previously Laming Fellow at the Queen's College Oxford and Edward W. Said Visiting Fellow at Columbia University. She is the author of Reading Dante and Proust by Analogy (2019) and peer-reviewed articles in Iranian Studies and Nineteenth-Century French Studies. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Today I talked to Julia Caterina Hartley about Iran and French Orientalism: Persia in the Literary Culture of Nineteenth-Century France (Bloomsbury. 2023). New translations of Persian literature into French, the invention of the Aryan myth, increased travel between France and Iran, and the unveiling of artefacts from ancient Susa at the Louvre Museum are among the factors that radically altered France's perception of Iran during the long nineteenth century. And this is reflected in the literary culture of the period. In an ambitious study spanning poetry, historiography, fiction, travel-writing, ballet, opera, and marionette theatre, Julia Hartley reveals the unique place that Iran held in the French literary imagination between 1829 and 1912. Iran's history and culture remained a constant source of inspiration across different generations and artistic movements, from the 'Oriental' poems of Victor Hugo to those of Anna de Noailles and Théophile Gautier's strategic citation of Persian poetry to his daughter Judith Gautier's full-blown rewriting of a Persian epic. Writing about Iran could also serve to articulate new visions of world history and religion, as was the case in the intellectual debates that took place between Michelet, Renan, and Al-Afghani. Alternatively joyous, as in Félicien David's opera Lalla Roukh, and ominous, as in Massenet's Le Mage, Iran elicited a multiplicity of treatments.  This is most obvious in the travelogues of Flandin, Gobineau, Loti, Jane Dieulafoy, and Marthe Bibesco, which describe the same cities and cultural practices in altogether different ways. Under these writers' pens, Iran emerges as both an Oriental other and an alter ego, its culture elevated above that of all other Muslim nations. At times this led French writers to critique notions of European superiority. But at others, they appropriated Iran as proto-European through racialist narratives that reinforced Orientalist stereotypes. Drawing on theories of Orientalism and cultural difference, this book navigates both sides of this fascinating and complex literary history. It is the first major study on the subject. Julia Hartley is a Lecturer in Comparative Literature at the University of Glasgow. She was previously Laming Fellow at the Queen's College Oxford and Edward W. Said Visiting Fellow at Columbia University. She is the author of Reading Dante and Proust by Analogy (2019) and peer-reviewed articles in Iranian Studies and Nineteenth-Century French Studies. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

Today I talked to Julia Caterina Hartley about Iran and French Orientalism: Persia in the Literary Culture of Nineteenth-Century France (Bloomsbury. 2023). New translations of Persian literature into French, the invention of the Aryan myth, increased travel between France and Iran, and the unveiling of artefacts from ancient Susa at the Louvre Museum are among the factors that radically altered France's perception of Iran during the long nineteenth century. And this is reflected in the literary culture of the period. In an ambitious study spanning poetry, historiography, fiction, travel-writing, ballet, opera, and marionette theatre, Julia Hartley reveals the unique place that Iran held in the French literary imagination between 1829 and 1912. Iran's history and culture remained a constant source of inspiration across different generations and artistic movements, from the 'Oriental' poems of Victor Hugo to those of Anna de Noailles and Théophile Gautier's strategic citation of Persian poetry to his daughter Judith Gautier's full-blown rewriting of a Persian epic. Writing about Iran could also serve to articulate new visions of world history and religion, as was the case in the intellectual debates that took place between Michelet, Renan, and Al-Afghani. Alternatively joyous, as in Félicien David's opera Lalla Roukh, and ominous, as in Massenet's Le Mage, Iran elicited a multiplicity of treatments.  This is most obvious in the travelogues of Flandin, Gobineau, Loti, Jane Dieulafoy, and Marthe Bibesco, which describe the same cities and cultural practices in altogether different ways. Under these writers' pens, Iran emerges as both an Oriental other and an alter ego, its culture elevated above that of all other Muslim nations. At times this led French writers to critique notions of European superiority. But at others, they appropriated Iran as proto-European through racialist narratives that reinforced Orientalist stereotypes. Drawing on theories of Orientalism and cultural difference, this book navigates both sides of this fascinating and complex literary history. It is the first major study on the subject. Julia Hartley is a Lecturer in Comparative Literature at the University of Glasgow. She was previously Laming Fellow at the Queen's College Oxford and Edward W. Said Visiting Fellow at Columbia University. She is the author of Reading Dante and Proust by Analogy (2019) and peer-reviewed articles in Iranian Studies and Nineteenth-Century French Studies. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/middle-eastern-studies

Today I talked to Julia Caterina Hartley about Iran and French Orientalism: Persia in the Literary Culture of Nineteenth-Century France (Bloomsbury. 2023). New translations of Persian literature into French, the invention of the Aryan myth, increased travel between France and Iran, and the unveiling of artefacts from ancient Susa at the Louvre Museum are among the factors that radically altered France's perception of Iran during the long nineteenth century. And this is reflected in the literary culture of the period. In an ambitious study spanning poetry, historiography, fiction, travel-writing, ballet, opera, and marionette theatre, Julia Hartley reveals the unique place that Iran held in the French literary imagination between 1829 and 1912. Iran's history and culture remained a constant source of inspiration across different generations and artistic movements, from the 'Oriental' poems of Victor Hugo to those of Anna de Noailles and Théophile Gautier's strategic citation of Persian poetry to his daughter Judith Gautier's full-blown rewriting of a Persian epic. Writing about Iran could also serve to articulate new visions of world history and religion, as was the case in the intellectual debates that took place between Michelet, Renan, and Al-Afghani. Alternatively joyous, as in Félicien David's opera Lalla Roukh, and ominous, as in Massenet's Le Mage, Iran elicited a multiplicity of treatments.  This is most obvious in the travelogues of Flandin, Gobineau, Loti, Jane Dieulafoy, and Marthe Bibesco, which describe the same cities and cultural practices in altogether different ways. Under these writers' pens, Iran emerges as both an Oriental other and an alter ego, its culture elevated above that of all other Muslim nations. At times this led French writers to critique notions of European superiority. But at others, they appropriated Iran as proto-European through racialist narratives that reinforced Orientalist stereotypes. Drawing on theories of Orientalism and cultural difference, this book navigates both sides of this fascinating and complex literary history. It is the first major study on the subject. Julia Hartley is a Lecturer in Comparative Literature at the University of Glasgow. She was previously Laming Fellow at the Queen's College Oxford and Edward W. Said Visiting Fellow at Columbia University. She is the author of Reading Dante and Proust by Analogy (2019) and peer-reviewed articles in Iranian Studies and Nineteenth-Century French Studies. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Today I talked to Julia Caterina Hartley about Iran and French Orientalism: Persia in the Literary Culture of Nineteenth-Century France (Bloomsbury. 2023). New translations of Persian literature into French, the invention of the Aryan myth, increased travel between France and Iran, and the unveiling of artefacts from ancient Susa at the Louvre Museum are among the factors that radically altered France's perception of Iran during the long nineteenth century. And this is reflected in the literary culture of the period. In an ambitious study spanning poetry, historiography, fiction, travel-writing, ballet, opera, and marionette theatre, Julia Hartley reveals the unique place that Iran held in the French literary imagination between 1829 and 1912. Iran's history and culture remained a constant source of inspiration across different generations and artistic movements, from the 'Oriental' poems of Victor Hugo to those of Anna de Noailles and Théophile Gautier's strategic citation of Persian poetry to his daughter Judith Gautier's full-blown rewriting of a Persian epic. Writing about Iran could also serve to articulate new visions of world history and religion, as was the case in the intellectual debates that took place between Michelet, Renan, and Al-Afghani. Alternatively joyous, as in Félicien David's opera Lalla Roukh, and ominous, as in Massenet's Le Mage, Iran elicited a multiplicity of treatments.  This is most obvious in the travelogues of Flandin, Gobineau, Loti, Jane Dieulafoy, and Marthe Bibesco, which describe the same cities and cultural practices in altogether different ways. Under these writers' pens, Iran emerges as both an Oriental other and an alter ego, its culture elevated above that of all other Muslim nations. At times this led French writers to critique notions of European superiority. But at others, they appropriated Iran as proto-European through racialist narratives that reinforced Orientalist stereotypes. Drawing on theories of Orientalism and cultural difference, this book navigates both sides of this fascinating and complex literary history. It is the first major study on the subject. Julia Hartley is a Lecturer in Comparative Literature at the University of Glasgow. She was previously Laming Fellow at the Queen's College Oxford and Edward W. Said Visiting Fellow at Columbia University. She is the author of Reading Dante and Proust by Analogy (2019) and peer-reviewed articles in Iranian Studies and Nineteenth-Century French Studies. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Today I talked to Julia Caterina Hartley about Iran and French Orientalism: Persia in the Literary Culture of Nineteenth-Century France (Bloomsbury. 2023). New translations of Persian literature into French, the invention of the Aryan myth, increased travel between France and Iran, and the unveiling of artefacts from ancient Susa at the Louvre Museum are among the factors that radically altered France's perception of Iran during the long nineteenth century. And this is reflected in the literary culture of the period. In an ambitious study spanning poetry, historiography, fiction, travel-writing, ballet, opera, and marionette theatre, Julia Hartley reveals the unique place that Iran held in the French literary imagination between 1829 and 1912. Iran's history and culture remained a constant source of inspiration across different generations and artistic movements, from the 'Oriental' poems of Victor Hugo to those of Anna de Noailles and Théophile Gautier's strategic citation of Persian poetry to his daughter Judith Gautier's full-blown rewriting of a Persian epic. Writing about Iran could also serve to articulate new visions of world history and religion, as was the case in the intellectual debates that took place between Michelet, Renan, and Al-Afghani. Alternatively joyous, as in Félicien David's opera Lalla Roukh, and ominous, as in Massenet's Le Mage, Iran elicited a multiplicity of treatments.  This is most obvious in the travelogues of Flandin, Gobineau, Loti, Jane Dieulafoy, and Marthe Bibesco, which describe the same cities and cultural practices in altogether different ways. Under these writers' pens, Iran emerges as both an Oriental other and an alter ego, its culture elevated above that of all other Muslim nations. At times this led French writers to critique notions of European superiority. But at others, they appropriated Iran as proto-European through racialist narratives that reinforced Orientalist stereotypes. Drawing on theories of Orientalism and cultural difference, this book navigates both sides of this fascinating and complex literary history. It is the first major study on the subject. Julia Hartley is a Lecturer in Comparative Literature at the University of Glasgow. She was previously Laming Fellow at the Queen's College Oxford and Edward W. Said Visiting Fellow at Columbia University. She is the author of Reading Dante and Proust by Analogy (2019) and peer-reviewed articles in Iranian Studies and Nineteenth-Century French Studies. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Today I talked to Julia Caterina Hartley about Iran and French Orientalism: Persia in the Literary Culture of Nineteenth-Century France (Bloomsbury. 2023). New translations of Persian literature into French, the invention of the Aryan myth, increased travel between France and Iran, and the unveiling of artefacts from ancient Susa at the Louvre Museum are among the factors that radically altered France's perception of Iran during the long nineteenth century. And this is reflected in the literary culture of the period. In an ambitious study spanning poetry, historiography, fiction, travel-writing, ballet, opera, and marionette theatre, Julia Hartley reveals the unique place that Iran held in the French literary imagination between 1829 and 1912. Iran's history and culture remained a constant source of inspiration across different generations and artistic movements, from the 'Oriental' poems of Victor Hugo to those of Anna de Noailles and Théophile Gautier's strategic citation of Persian poetry to his daughter Judith Gautier's full-blown rewriting of a Persian epic. Writing about Iran could also serve to articulate new visions of world history and religion, as was the case in the intellectual debates that took place between Michelet, Renan, and Al-Afghani. Alternatively joyous, as in Félicien David's opera Lalla Roukh, and ominous, as in Massenet's Le Mage, Iran elicited a multiplicity of treatments.  This is most obvious in the travelogues of Flandin, Gobineau, Loti, Jane Dieulafoy, and Marthe Bibesco, which describe the same cities and cultural practices in altogether different ways. Under these writers' pens, Iran emerges as both an Oriental other and an alter ego, its culture elevated above that of all other Muslim nations. At times this led French writers to critique notions of European superiority. But at others, they appropriated Iran as proto-European through racialist narratives that reinforced Orientalist stereotypes. Drawing on theories of Orientalism and cultural difference, this book navigates both sides of this fascinating and complex literary history. It is the first major study on the subject. Julia Hartley is a Lecturer in Comparative Literature at the University of Glasgow. She was previously Laming Fellow at the Queen's College Oxford and Edward W. Said Visiting Fellow at Columbia University. She is the author of Reading Dante and Proust by Analogy (2019) and peer-reviewed articles in Iranian Studies and Nineteenth-Century French Studies. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/french-studies

In this episode of Haunted History Chronicles, we delve into the eerie intersection of the supernatural and the law with criminal barrister Naomi Ryan. From the infamous Cock Lane Ghost to the chilling murder of Zona Shue, we'll explore how the supernatural has influenced legal cases throughout history, even as recently as 1994 with the trial of Stephen Young. Naomi will guide us through these unnerving stories, including the Red Barn Murder and the mysterious case of Eric Tombe, revealing how ghostly testimony and paranormal events have shaped trials from the past to the present day. Prepare for the law vs. the supernatural! My Special Guest Is Naomi Ryan Naomi Ryan is a criminal barrister and lover of all things macabre. After qualifying with a Masters in Law from St Catherine's College, Oxford, she taught criminal law to undergraduates at St Hilda's College Oxford and University College London before embarking on her career as a criminal barrister, where she both prosecuted and defended. She later moved into the Civil Service, where she has advised an array of senior government and legal figures on matters of constitutional, public and criminal law. She continues to work as an advisory lawyer whilst regularly giving talks about the darker side of legal history. In this episode, you will be able to aspects of the following cases: 1. The Cock Lane Ghost: A haunting in 18th-century London that stirred public fascination and found its way into legal proceedings. 2. The Red Barn Murder: The notorious 1827 case where spectral visions reportedly helped uncover the truth behind a gruesome murder. 3. Zona Shue's Ghostly Testimony: The 1897 trial where the victim's ghost allegedly provided crucial evidence, leading to her husband's conviction for murder. 4. Stephen Young's 1994 Trial: A modern case where claims of supernatural intervention and Ouija board communications influenced the verdict in a high-profile murder case. If you value this podcast and want to enjoy more episodes please come and find us on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/Haunted_History_Chronicles⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to support the podcast, gain a wealth of additional exclusive podcasts, writing and other content. Links to all Haunted History Chronicles Social Media Pages, Published Materials and more:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://linktr.ee/hauntedhistorychronicles?fbclid=IwAR15rJF2m9nJ0HTXm27HZ3QQ2Llz46E0UpdWv-zePVn9Oj9Q8rdYaZsR74I⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ *NEW* Podcast Shop:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.teepublic.com/user/haunted-history-chronicles⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Buy Me A Coffee: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://ko-fi.com/hauntedhistorychronicles⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Guest Links ⁠⁠⁠ Instagram: ⁠https://www.instagram.com/spooky_barrister?igsh=MXIzOTFzd2NhbmFzaQ%3D%3D&utm_source=qr ⁠⁠

My guest today is a Scottish crime writer. Born into a working-class family in Fife, she studied English at St Hilda's College Oxford, where she was the first student to be admitted from a Scottish state school. She first worked as a journalist, then a dramatist and, in 1987, published her first novel, Report for Murder. Since then, my guest has released dozens of books, many of which have been adapted for television. She has sold more than 19 million books, and won numerous awards too, including the L.A. Times Book of the Year, and the Diamond Dagger, awarded by the Crime Writers' Association for her lifetime contribution to crime writing in the English language. She has also performed at Glastonbury, in a band composed of authors called ‘The Fun Lovin' Crime Writers'. Welcome Val McDermid. Be attitude for gains. https://plus.acast.com/s/my-perfect-console. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In recent podcasts, we have talked a lot about ESG, and the corporate responsibilities companies must take into account in their day-to-day working. The ways in which consumers view companies has changed dramatically over the last two decades, and corporate reputation is more important than ever, and reputations and brands are scrutinized than ever before. To help us unpack the importance of corporate reputation, as well as the risks companies can incur by not upholding a positive reputation, we are honoured to be joined by Rupert Younger.Rupert Younger is the founder and director of Oxford University's Centre for Corporate Reputation and co-author of two books - The Reputation Game and The Activist Manifesto. He has published widely on matters related to legitimacy, status, stigma, celebrity, reputation, and trust. He chaired The University of Oxford's Socially Responsible Investment Committee (2012-2017) and is a member of the Senior Common Rooms at Wooster College Oxford and St Antony's College Oxford. His views are regularly featured in major news outlets including the BBC, CNN, the Financial Times, and The Wall Street Journal. Outside of Oxford, he is an Ambassador for the international mine clearance charity The HALO Trust and was appointed by HM Queen Elizabeth II as her High Sheriff of Hampshire for 2013-14. Rupert also co-founded the strategic communications consulting firm FGS Global.

The works of William Shakespeare are synonymous with English identity, but why is this? Why is a 16th-century playwright still considered relevant today? And why are some of our favourite rom-coms based on his plays?  In this episode of OxPods, English Language and Literature undergraduate Freya Radford interviews Dr Carla Suthren, a Lecturer in English at St Catherine's College Oxford, whose research focuses on Renaissance literature and the interchange of different literature between eras, in particular the classical influence. They discuss how Shakespeare still influences English study and modern culture today, considering just why we are still so obsessed with the Bard. To learn more about OxPods, visit our website ⁠⁠www.oxpods.co.uk⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠or follow us on socials ⁠⁠@ox.pods. ⁠⁠ OxPods is made possible through the support of our generous benefactors. Special thanks to: St Peter's College JCR, Jesus College JCR & Lady Margaret Hall JCR for supporting us in 2024.

The global security environment is in a state of flux. Not only is Europe contending with the kinetic threat posed by Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, but emerging threats – including climate change, AI, cyber, quantum computing, food and water shortages, and advanced robotics – are increasingly becoming threat multipliers. In this context, strategic foresight has become an important capability for governments and government institutions to enable informed and better decision-making. This panel discussion, which is jointly hosted by the IIEA and Deloitte, aims to provoke an open discussion about the present and future threat environments and to reflect on how organisations can best develop and utilise strategic foresight capabilities to navigate a changing, contested, and challenging security context. About the Speakers: Dr Raluca Csernatoni is a Fellow at Carnegie Europe where she specialises in European security and defence, as well as emerging disruptive technologies. Csernatoni is currently a guest professor on European security and counterterrorism at the Brussels School of Governance and its Centre for Security, Diplomacy and Strategy, at Vrije Universiteit Brussels in Brussels, Belgium; Dr Florian Klein founded and leads the Centre for the Long View (CLV) network, which is Deloitte's global centre of excellence for scenario planning and AI-enabled sensing. Florian has authored several books on mega trends and on designing strategic decision systems; Dr Eamonn Noonan of the EPRS Policy Foresight Unit has been involved in the inter-institutional ESPAS network (European Strategy and Policy Analysis System) since 2015. He recently returned from an EU Fellowship at St. Antony's College Oxford. As an Irish diplomat, he had postings to Luxemburg and Norway. He has studied in Florence, Mainz and Cork.

The war in Ukraine is entering what could well be its decisive phase as Kyiv prepares a counter-offensive and Russia announces plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus as early as the summer. More than ever before, this moves Belarus onto the front line of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its confrontation with NATO. Yet, for three decades, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka has tried to walk a tightrope between hugging Moscow close and clinging onto policy independence that is domestically popular and secures power for him, his family, and his allies. His increasing economic dependence and the war to his south have forced “Europe's last dictator” to pick a side. In Belarus in Crisis: From Domestic Unrest to the Russia–Ukraine War (Hurst, 2023), Paul Hansbury explains why Lukashenka had no choice but to buckle. He writes that "a 'quiet' annexation of Belarus to Russia is largely happening, even if many Belarusians are unaware of the fact" and “the outcome of the Russo-Ukraine war has arguably become the decisive factor shaping Berlarus's future statehood”. Educated at Birkbeck, University of London, and St Antony's College Oxford, Paul Hansbury is a consulting analyst whose doctoral research was into the foreign policies of small powers - using Belarus as his primary case study. *His own book recommendations were Putin's Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? by Karen Dawisha (Simon & Schuster, 2014) and Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard by Joseph Conrad (Penguin Classics, 2007 - first published 1904). Tim Gwynn Jones is an economic and political-risk analyst at Medley Advisors, who also writes the Twenty-Four Two newsletter on Substack and hosts the In The Room podcast series. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The war in Ukraine is entering what could well be its decisive phase as Kyiv prepares a counter-offensive and Russia announces plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus as early as the summer. More than ever before, this moves Belarus onto the front line of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its confrontation with NATO. Yet, for three decades, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka has tried to walk a tightrope between hugging Moscow close and clinging onto policy independence that is domestically popular and secures power for him, his family, and his allies. His increasing economic dependence and the war to his south have forced “Europe's last dictator” to pick a side. In Belarus in Crisis: From Domestic Unrest to the Russia–Ukraine War (Hurst, 2023), Paul Hansbury explains why Lukashenka had no choice but to buckle. He writes that "a 'quiet' annexation of Belarus to Russia is largely happening, even if many Belarusians are unaware of the fact" and “the outcome of the Russo-Ukraine war has arguably become the decisive factor shaping Berlarus's future statehood”. Educated at Birkbeck, University of London, and St Antony's College Oxford, Paul Hansbury is a consulting analyst whose doctoral research was into the foreign policies of small powers - using Belarus as his primary case study. *His own book recommendations were Putin's Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? by Karen Dawisha (Simon & Schuster, 2014) and Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard by Joseph Conrad (Penguin Classics, 2007 - first published 1904). Tim Gwynn Jones is an economic and political-risk analyst at Medley Advisors, who also writes the Twenty-Four Two newsletter on Substack and hosts the In The Room podcast series. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

The war in Ukraine is entering what could well be its decisive phase as Kyiv prepares a counter-offensive and Russia announces plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus as early as the summer. More than ever before, this moves Belarus onto the front line of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its confrontation with NATO. Yet, for three decades, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka has tried to walk a tightrope between hugging Moscow close and clinging onto policy independence that is domestically popular and secures power for him, his family, and his allies. His increasing economic dependence and the war to his south have forced “Europe's last dictator” to pick a side. In Belarus in Crisis: From Domestic Unrest to the Russia–Ukraine War (Hurst, 2023), Paul Hansbury explains why Lukashenka had no choice but to buckle. He writes that "a 'quiet' annexation of Belarus to Russia is largely happening, even if many Belarusians are unaware of the fact" and “the outcome of the Russo-Ukraine war has arguably become the decisive factor shaping Berlarus's future statehood”. Educated at Birkbeck, University of London, and St Antony's College Oxford, Paul Hansbury is a consulting analyst whose doctoral research was into the foreign policies of small powers - using Belarus as his primary case study. *His own book recommendations were Putin's Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? by Karen Dawisha (Simon & Schuster, 2014) and Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard by Joseph Conrad (Penguin Classics, 2007 - first published 1904). Tim Gwynn Jones is an economic and political-risk analyst at Medley Advisors, who also writes the Twenty-Four Two newsletter on Substack and hosts the In The Room podcast series. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

The war in Ukraine is entering what could well be its decisive phase as Kyiv prepares a counter-offensive and Russia announces plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus as early as the summer. More than ever before, this moves Belarus onto the front line of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its confrontation with NATO. Yet, for three decades, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka has tried to walk a tightrope between hugging Moscow close and clinging onto policy independence that is domestically popular and secures power for him, his family, and his allies. His increasing economic dependence and the war to his south have forced “Europe's last dictator” to pick a side. In Belarus in Crisis: From Domestic Unrest to the Russia–Ukraine War (Hurst, 2023), Paul Hansbury explains why Lukashenka had no choice but to buckle. He writes that "a 'quiet' annexation of Belarus to Russia is largely happening, even if many Belarusians are unaware of the fact" and “the outcome of the Russo-Ukraine war has arguably become the decisive factor shaping Berlarus's future statehood”. Educated at Birkbeck, University of London, and St Antony's College Oxford, Paul Hansbury is a consulting analyst whose doctoral research was into the foreign policies of small powers - using Belarus as his primary case study. *His own book recommendations were Putin's Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? by Karen Dawisha (Simon & Schuster, 2014) and Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard by Joseph Conrad (Penguin Classics, 2007 - first published 1904). Tim Gwynn Jones is an economic and political-risk analyst at Medley Advisors, who also writes the Twenty-Four Two newsletter on Substack and hosts the In The Room podcast series. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/russian-studies

The war in Ukraine is entering what could well be its decisive phase as Kyiv prepares a counter-offensive and Russia announces plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus as early as the summer. More than ever before, this moves Belarus onto the front line of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its confrontation with NATO. Yet, for three decades, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka has tried to walk a tightrope between hugging Moscow close and clinging onto policy independence that is domestically popular and secures power for him, his family, and his allies. His increasing economic dependence and the war to his south have forced “Europe's last dictator” to pick a side. In Belarus in Crisis: From Domestic Unrest to the Russia–Ukraine War (Hurst, 2023), Paul Hansbury explains why Lukashenka had no choice but to buckle. He writes that "a 'quiet' annexation of Belarus to Russia is largely happening, even if many Belarusians are unaware of the fact" and “the outcome of the Russo-Ukraine war has arguably become the decisive factor shaping Berlarus's future statehood”. Educated at Birkbeck, University of London, and St Antony's College Oxford, Paul Hansbury is a consulting analyst whose doctoral research was into the foreign policies of small powers - using Belarus as his primary case study. *His own book recommendations were Putin's Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? by Karen Dawisha (Simon & Schuster, 2014) and Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard by Joseph Conrad (Penguin Classics, 2007 - first published 1904). Tim Gwynn Jones is an economic and political-risk analyst at Medley Advisors, who also writes the Twenty-Four Two newsletter on Substack and hosts the In The Room podcast series. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/eastern-european-studies

The war in Ukraine is entering what could well be its decisive phase as Kyiv prepares a counter-offensive and Russia announces plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus as early as the summer. More than ever before, this moves Belarus onto the front line of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its confrontation with NATO. Yet, for three decades, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka has tried to walk a tightrope between hugging Moscow close and clinging onto policy independence that is domestically popular and secures power for him, his family, and his allies. His increasing economic dependence and the war to his south have forced “Europe's last dictator” to pick a side. In Belarus in Crisis: From Domestic Unrest to the Russia–Ukraine War (Hurst, 2023), Paul Hansbury explains why Lukashenka had no choice but to buckle. He writes that "a 'quiet' annexation of Belarus to Russia is largely happening, even if many Belarusians are unaware of the fact" and “the outcome of the Russo-Ukraine war has arguably become the decisive factor shaping Berlarus's future statehood”. Educated at Birkbeck, University of London, and St Antony's College Oxford, Paul Hansbury is a consulting analyst whose doctoral research was into the foreign policies of small powers - using Belarus as his primary case study. *His own book recommendations were Putin's Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? by Karen Dawisha (Simon & Schuster, 2014) and Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard by Joseph Conrad (Penguin Classics, 2007 - first published 1904). Tim Gwynn Jones is an economic and political-risk analyst at Medley Advisors, who also writes the Twenty-Four Two newsletter on Substack and hosts the In The Room podcast series. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The war in Ukraine is entering what could well be its decisive phase as Kyiv prepares a counter-offensive and Russia announces plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus as early as the summer. More than ever before, this moves Belarus onto the front line of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its confrontation with NATO. Yet, for three decades, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka has tried to walk a tightrope between hugging Moscow close and clinging onto policy independence that is domestically popular and secures power for him, his family, and his allies. His increasing economic dependence and the war to his south have forced “Europe's last dictator” to pick a side. In Belarus in Crisis: From Domestic Unrest to the Russia–Ukraine War (Hurst, 2023), Paul Hansbury explains why Lukashenka had no choice but to buckle. He writes that "a 'quiet' annexation of Belarus to Russia is largely happening, even if many Belarusians are unaware of the fact" and “the outcome of the Russo-Ukraine war has arguably become the decisive factor shaping Berlarus's future statehood”. Educated at Birkbeck, University of London, and St Antony's College Oxford, Paul Hansbury is a consulting analyst whose doctoral research was into the foreign policies of small powers - using Belarus as his primary case study. *His own book recommendations were Putin's Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? by Karen Dawisha (Simon & Schuster, 2014) and Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard by Joseph Conrad (Penguin Classics, 2007 - first published 1904). Tim Gwynn Jones is an economic and political-risk analyst at Medley Advisors, who also writes the Twenty-Four Two newsletter on Substack and hosts the In The Room podcast series. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The war in Ukraine is entering what could well be its decisive phase as Kyiv prepares a counter-offensive and Russia announces plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus as early as the summer. More than ever before, this moves Belarus onto the front line of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its confrontation with NATO. Yet, for three decades, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka has tried to walk a tightrope between hugging Moscow close and clinging onto policy independence that is domestically popular and secures power for him, his family, and his allies. His increasing economic dependence and the war to his south have forced “Europe's last dictator” to pick a side. In Belarus in Crisis: From Domestic Unrest to the Russia–Ukraine War (Hurst, 2023), Paul Hansbury explains why Lukashenka had no choice but to buckle. He writes that "a 'quiet' annexation of Belarus to Russia is largely happening, even if many Belarusians are unaware of the fact" and “the outcome of the Russo-Ukraine war has arguably become the decisive factor shaping Berlarus's future statehood”. Educated at Birkbeck, University of London, and St Antony's College Oxford, Paul Hansbury is a consulting analyst whose doctoral research was into the foreign policies of small powers - using Belarus as his primary case study. *His own book recommendations were Putin's Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? by Karen Dawisha (Simon & Schuster, 2014) and Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard by Joseph Conrad (Penguin Classics, 2007 - first published 1904). Tim Gwynn Jones is an economic and political-risk analyst at Medley Advisors, who also writes the Twenty-Four Two newsletter on Substack and hosts the In The Room podcast series. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is the climate crisis a reflection of our lack of understanding of our true nature as human beings in the cosmos? Could our inability to ask such difficult questions be at the root of our collective impotence to reduce carbon emissions and usher in the magnitude of cultural change necessary in order to avoid impending and irreversible tipping points?    Graham Parkes, thinks so. In fact, Graham Parkes' new book, HOW TO THINK ABOUT THE CLIMATE CRISIS: A Philosophical Guide to Saner Ways of Living (Bloomsbury Academic, 2021)  is exactly that - about how to think differently about the climate crisis – by learning from the great ancient wisdom traditions – particularly Chinese philosophies such as Confucianism and Taoism. Contrary to contemporary positive psychologists and happiness industry gurus,  so-called "human flourishing" is not individualistic in these ancient Chinese philosophical traditions, but rather, thriving is relational in and as a society - in a harmonious relationship with the natural world. But as Graham discusses in his book and in our interview – our thinking in the West has been obstructed and taken over by very powerful libertarian ideologies and warped Far Right theologies with the backing of many billionaires and corporate special interests – particularly the fossil fuel industry. Graham painstakingly covers a lot of ground in his book – it's a detailed, well researched and very sober analysis not only of the reality of global heating, but also of the social and political forces obstructing us, resulting in the predicament and political impasse we find ourselves in today. Even in the hour and a half that we spoke, we still only scratched the surface of the many issues and ideas in his book, so I really do hope you get a chance to read his book. A native of Glasgow, Graham Parkes has taught philosophy at universities in the United States, Europe, and East Asia, and is now Professorial Research Fellow at the University of Vienna. He has published widely in the fields of European, Chinese, and Japanese thought, with a long-standing emphasis on environmental philosophy. Profesor Parkes was educated at the Queen's College Oxford, in philosophy and psychology, and the University of California at Berkeley, where he received a PhD in philosophy in 1978. He he taught Asian and comparative philosophy for almost thirty years in the Philosophy Department at the University of Hawai'i at Mānoa. He has been a visiting scholar at Harvard University, at the Reischauer Institute of Japanese Studies,  and the Center for the Study of World Religions. In 2008 Parkes moved to University College Cork in Ireland, where he was the Professor of Philosophy and then Head of the School of Philosophy and Sociology. He founded the Irish Institute of Japanese Studies and served as Director for four years, until leaving Ireland in 2015. He has also held research appointments in France, Italy, and Japan, and has been a visiting professor in Austria, China, Japan, and Singapore.  

Stroke research is important, and there's not enough of it. Finding funding for small and medium sized projects is hard and getting wider awareness of them is even harder. Collavidence seeks to change that. It's a Kickstarter-like platform for medical research, with a focus on stroke. Research teams Post research projects they are developing, and the public can choose to back them. They also participate in working groups with other experts to further refine the projects as the y pursue results. Collavidence Chief Knowledge Office Dr. Aravind Ganesh joins us in this episode to talk about the platform and how democratizing the research funding process can help us all. If you don't see the audio player below, visit the original post here, or look for the Strokecast in you podcast app.   Click here for a machine-generated transcript Who is Dr. Aravind Ganesh? Dr. Aravind Ganesh Dr. Aravind Ganesh is a Vascular and Cognitive Neurologist. He completed his MD degree at the University of Calgary, followed by a DPhil in Clinical Neurosciences at the University of Oxford's Centre for Prevention of Stroke and Dementia as a Rhodes scholar. He earned an Associate Fellowship from the United Kingdom's Higher Education Academy through his teaching contributions at St John's College (Oxford). He completed his neurology residency in Calgary, followed by a combined fellowship in stroke and cognitive neurology, funded by Alberta Innovates and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Ganesh is a Fellow of the Canadian Stroke Consortium, and is actively involved in the development of best-practice guidelines for stroke and dementia care. His clinical research is focused on the natural history, prevention, and treatment of stroke and cognitive impairment. He is passionate about medical education, and serves on the editorial boards of Neurology, Neurology: Clinical Practice, and Stroke. Should you back projects on Collavidence? Maybe. If you feel the project has value (or could have value), if it sounds like something you would like to support, if the team behind it seem credible, and if you can afford it, go for it! Contributions don't have to be large to be meaningful. Be aware that it's always possible a project won't work out. There are lots of things that can go wrong, just like on other crowd funding platforms like Kickstarter and Go Fund Me. Exercise caution, like you do with other financial concerns. If you want to have a concrete, direct impact on the research projects that can make life better for the stroke community, though, this might be a great way to do it. Survey Do you have thoughts about the Strokecast as a show? I want to hear about it. Please complete the listener survey at http://Strokecast.com/survey by March 31, 2023 to share your insight. I'd realy appreciate it. Hack of the Week This week's hack is more for researchers. That's to communicate with the community. Often researchers may pursue projects to address what they see as problems in the stroke field, and that's great. It's also important, though, to listen to the people they want to help. Does a research project address a problem member of the survivor community actually care about solving? A recurring theme from disability advocates is, "Nothing about us without us." That means before folks try to solve things for people with disabilities, they ought to actually communicate with people with disabilities. Don't try to solve a problem we don't have. And don't assume that solution created by just a group of abled folks will work or appeal to disabled folks. Get the input of people with disabilities, and involve us in the process. Hire disabled consultants and architects on projects benefiting the disabled. And keep in mind that accessible design is good design. Nothing about us without us. Links Where do we go from here? Check out some of the projects on Collavidence.com Share this episode with someone you know with this link: http://Strokecast.com/CrowdFundingResearch Complete the Strokecast listener survey at http://Strokecast.com/survey Don't get best…get better More thoughts from Dr. Aravind Ganesh How can we generate more funding for stroke research and open up research to the broader stroke community around the world? Collavidence may have the answer. We talk about it with Chief Knowledge Officer Dr. Aravind Ganesh in this episode. How can we generate more funding for stroke research and open up research to the broader stroke community around the world? Collavidence may have the answer. We talk about it with Chief Knowledge Officer Dr. Aravind Ganesh in this episode. How can we generate more funding for stroke research and open up research to the broader stroke community around the world? Collavidence may have the answer. We talk about it with Chief Knowledge Officer Dr. Aravind Ganesh in this episode. How can we generate more funding for stroke research and open up research to the broader stroke community around the world? Collavidence may have the answer. We talk about it with Chief Knowledge Officer Dr. Aravind Ganesh in this episode. How can we generate more funding for stroke research and open up research to the broader stroke community around the world? Collavidence may have the answer. We talk about it with Chief Knowledge Officer Dr. Aravind Ganesh in this episode. How can we generate more funding for stroke research and open up research to the broader stroke community around the world? Collavidence may have the answer. We talk about it with Chief Knowledge Officer Dr. Aravind Ganesh in this episode. How can we generate more funding for stroke research and open up research to the broader stroke community around the world? Collavidence may have the answer. We talk about it with Chief Knowledge Officer Dr. Aravind Ganesh in this episode. How can we generate more funding for stroke research and open up research to the broader stroke community around the world? Collavidence may have the answer. We talk about it with Chief Knowledge Officer Dr. Aravind Ganesh in this episode. How can we generate more funding for stroke research and open up research to the broader stroke community around the world? Collavidence may have the answer. We talk about it with Chief Knowledge Officer Dr. Aravind Ganesh in this episode.

In this episode, Alma-Constance and Lucinda ask about when children can make decisions about medical treatment and why sometimes a court is involved. They talk to Imogen Goold, Professor of Medical Law at St Anne's College Oxford university and Gresham visiting professor, as she is an expert in the area of how doctors and parents talk to children about illness, their rights, and responsibilities and how the courts become involved in these decisions. Imogen tells us·      who makes the decisions about children's medical treatment at different ages·      what happens if the parents disagree with doctors·      what happens if a young person disagrees with their parents about medical treatment plans·      And how judges make their decisions when asked to decide about this issue  Imogen says that when she was 10 years old she really liked reading books. and thought she wanted to be a doctor as she loved sciences. She also loved baking and entered the Great British Bake Off and met Mary Berry who liked her scones!Alma-Constance and Lucinda would love to hear from you! Tell us what you think of our episode, and if you've got any questions,  ideas about a topic or someone you'd like us to interview,  please  contact us through the website, kidslaw.info  or on social media  on Twitter @KidsLawInfo, Facebook and Instagram @KidsLawInfo You can also email us: kidslaw@spark21.orgPlease subscribe, rate, and share with your friends. See you in the next episode!Resources@ImogenGooldhttps://www.law.ox.ac.uk/people/imogen-gooldhttps://www.law.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-02-professor-imogen-goold-gives-gresham-college-lecture-children-and-consent-medicalChildren and young people- Consent to treatmentOperation Ouch Keep your questions coming in. Please subscribe, rate, and share the podcast with your friends. See you soon in the next episode!You can follow us @kidslawinfo on Twitter and Instagram

All Souls College Oxford was one of the meeting points of English public intellectuals in the twentieth century. Its Fellows prided themselves on agreeing in everything except their opinions. They included Cabinet Ministers from all the three major parties, and academics of diverse political allegiances, who met for frank conversations and lively disagreements. Davenport-Hines investigates historic strands of conservative thought: aversion to rapid and disruptive change, mistrust of majority opinions, prizing of community loyalties and pride over the assertion of aggressive individualism, the recession of the Church of England, and the impact of militarism. Conservative Thinkers from All Souls College Oxford (Boydell & Brewer, 2022) draws on the ideas of two conservative thinkers, 'Trimmer' Halifax and Michael Oakeshott, to examine the conservative assumptions, ideas, writings and influence of seven Fellows of All Souls from the last century. Their brands of conservatism regarded popular democracy as an unavoidable necessity which must be managed rather than loved. Their scepticism about the rule of the people was rooted in a meritocratic commitment to the government of the wise. They disliked plutocracy, regretted consumerism, and loathed sloppy and self-serving thought. All were more or less dissatisfied with the workings of the Westminster parliamentary model. Charles Coutinho, PH. D., Associate Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written for Chatham House's International Affairs, the Institute of Historical Research's Reviews in History and the University of Rouen's online periodical Cercles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

All Souls College Oxford was one of the meeting points of English public intellectuals in the twentieth century. Its Fellows prided themselves on agreeing in everything except their opinions. They included Cabinet Ministers from all the three major parties, and academics of diverse political allegiances, who met for frank conversations and lively disagreements. Davenport-Hines investigates historic strands of conservative thought: aversion to rapid and disruptive change, mistrust of majority opinions, prizing of community loyalties and pride over the assertion of aggressive individualism, the recession of the Church of England, and the impact of militarism. Conservative Thinkers from All Souls College Oxford (Boydell & Brewer, 2022) draws on the ideas of two conservative thinkers, 'Trimmer' Halifax and Michael Oakeshott, to examine the conservative assumptions, ideas, writings and influence of seven Fellows of All Souls from the last century. Their brands of conservatism regarded popular democracy as an unavoidable necessity which must be managed rather than loved. Their scepticism about the rule of the people was rooted in a meritocratic commitment to the government of the wise. They disliked plutocracy, regretted consumerism, and loathed sloppy and self-serving thought. All were more or less dissatisfied with the workings of the Westminster parliamentary model. Charles Coutinho, PH. D., Associate Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written for Chatham House's International Affairs, the Institute of Historical Research's Reviews in History and the University of Rouen's online periodical Cercles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

All Souls College Oxford was one of the meeting points of English public intellectuals in the twentieth century. Its Fellows prided themselves on agreeing in everything except their opinions. They included Cabinet Ministers from all the three major parties, and academics of diverse political allegiances, who met for frank conversations and lively disagreements. Davenport-Hines investigates historic strands of conservative thought: aversion to rapid and disruptive change, mistrust of majority opinions, prizing of community loyalties and pride over the assertion of aggressive individualism, the recession of the Church of England, and the impact of militarism. Conservative Thinkers from All Souls College Oxford (Boydell & Brewer, 2022) draws on the ideas of two conservative thinkers, 'Trimmer' Halifax and Michael Oakeshott, to examine the conservative assumptions, ideas, writings and influence of seven Fellows of All Souls from the last century. Their brands of conservatism regarded popular democracy as an unavoidable necessity which must be managed rather than loved. Their scepticism about the rule of the people was rooted in a meritocratic commitment to the government of the wise. They disliked plutocracy, regretted consumerism, and loathed sloppy and self-serving thought. All were more or less dissatisfied with the workings of the Westminster parliamentary model. Charles Coutinho, PH. D., Associate Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written for Chatham House's International Affairs, the Institute of Historical Research's Reviews in History and the University of Rouen's online periodical Cercles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

All Souls College Oxford was one of the meeting points of English public intellectuals in the twentieth century. Its Fellows prided themselves on agreeing in everything except their opinions. They included Cabinet Ministers from all the three major parties, and academics of diverse political allegiances, who met for frank conversations and lively disagreements. Davenport-Hines investigates historic strands of conservative thought: aversion to rapid and disruptive change, mistrust of majority opinions, prizing of community loyalties and pride over the assertion of aggressive individualism, the recession of the Church of England, and the impact of militarism. Conservative Thinkers from All Souls College Oxford (Boydell & Brewer, 2022) draws on the ideas of two conservative thinkers, 'Trimmer' Halifax and Michael Oakeshott, to examine the conservative assumptions, ideas, writings and influence of seven Fellows of All Souls from the last century. Their brands of conservatism regarded popular democracy as an unavoidable necessity which must be managed rather than loved. Their scepticism about the rule of the people was rooted in a meritocratic commitment to the government of the wise. They disliked plutocracy, regretted consumerism, and loathed sloppy and self-serving thought. All were more or less dissatisfied with the workings of the Westminster parliamentary model. Charles Coutinho, PH. D., Associate Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written for Chatham House's International Affairs, the Institute of Historical Research's Reviews in History and the University of Rouen's online periodical Cercles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

All Souls College Oxford was one of the meeting points of English public intellectuals in the twentieth century. Its Fellows prided themselves on agreeing in everything except their opinions. They included Cabinet Ministers from all the three major parties, and academics of diverse political allegiances, who met for frank conversations and lively disagreements. Davenport-Hines investigates historic strands of conservative thought: aversion to rapid and disruptive change, mistrust of majority opinions, prizing of community loyalties and pride over the assertion of aggressive individualism, the recession of the Church of England, and the impact of militarism. Conservative Thinkers from All Souls College Oxford (Boydell & Brewer, 2022) draws on the ideas of two conservative thinkers, 'Trimmer' Halifax and Michael Oakeshott, to examine the conservative assumptions, ideas, writings and influence of seven Fellows of All Souls from the last century. Their brands of conservatism regarded popular democracy as an unavoidable necessity which must be managed rather than loved. Their scepticism about the rule of the people was rooted in a meritocratic commitment to the government of the wise. They disliked plutocracy, regretted consumerism, and loathed sloppy and self-serving thought. All were more or less dissatisfied with the workings of the Westminster parliamentary model. Charles Coutinho, PH. D., Associate Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written for Chatham House's International Affairs, the Institute of Historical Research's Reviews in History and the University of Rouen's online periodical Cercles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

All Souls College Oxford was one of the meeting points of English public intellectuals in the twentieth century. Its Fellows prided themselves on agreeing in everything except their opinions. They included Cabinet Ministers from all the three major parties, and academics of diverse political allegiances, who met for frank conversations and lively disagreements. Davenport-Hines investigates historic strands of conservative thought: aversion to rapid and disruptive change, mistrust of majority opinions, prizing of community loyalties and pride over the assertion of aggressive individualism, the recession of the Church of England, and the impact of militarism. Conservative Thinkers from All Souls College Oxford (Boydell & Brewer, 2022) draws on the ideas of two conservative thinkers, 'Trimmer' Halifax and Michael Oakeshott, to examine the conservative assumptions, ideas, writings and influence of seven Fellows of All Souls from the last century. Their brands of conservatism regarded popular democracy as an unavoidable necessity which must be managed rather than loved. Their scepticism about the rule of the people was rooted in a meritocratic commitment to the government of the wise. They disliked plutocracy, regretted consumerism, and loathed sloppy and self-serving thought. All were more or less dissatisfied with the workings of the Westminster parliamentary model. Charles Coutinho, PH. D., Associate Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written for Chatham House's International Affairs, the Institute of Historical Research's Reviews in History and the University of Rouen's online periodical Cercles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/british-studies

House of the Dragon was inspired by a medieval period known as The Anarchy. What do the real historical conflicts tell us about power, succession, class, and the status of women in medieval times, and why are fantasy writers so drawn to them? New Generation Thinker Sarah Peverley is Professor English Literature at Liverpool University. She is joined by Professor Carolyne Larrington of St John's College Oxford, and Danielle Park, lecturer in Late Medieval History at the University of York. A 12th century war of succession between Empress Matilda, daughter of Henry I, and her cousin Stephen of Blois which caused widespread breakdown in law and order in England and Normandy inspired the premise of House of the Dragon, with King Viserys Targaryen I lobbying for his eldest daughter Rhaenyra to be his heir whilst his nobles prefer his son Aegon II. And the warring dynastic families of the Starks and Lannisters in Game of Thrones are based on the 15th century Houses of York and Lancaster who battled for the throne of England throughout of the Wars of the Roses. Producer: Ruth Thomson This New Thinking episode of the Arts and Ideas podcast was made in partnership with the Arts and Humanities Research Council, part of UKRI You can find other episodes showcasing New Research in a collection on the programme website of BBC Radio e's Free Thinking https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03zws90 It includes episodes on Beowulf https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0db7883 What language did Columbus speak https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0d0tk22 Hey Presto magic in medicine and the history of panto https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p090yn26

House of the Dragon draws on ‘The Anarchy' - a 12th century war of succession. What does this conflict tell us about power, succession, class, and the status of medieval women ? New Generation Thinker Sarah Peverley is joined by Professor Carolyne Larrington of St John's College Oxford, and Danielle Park, lecturer in Late Medieval History at the University of York. A 12th century war of succession between Empress Matilda, daughter of Henry I, and her cousin Stephen of Blois which caused widespread breakdown in law and order in England and Normandy inspired the premise of House of the Dragon, with King Viserys Targaryen I lobbying for his eldest daughter Rhaenyra to be his heir whilst his nobles prefer his son Aegon II. And the warring dynastic families of the Starks and Lannisters in Game of Thrones are based on the 15th century Houses of York and Lancaster who battled for the throne of England throughout of the Wars of the Roses. This New Thinking episode of the Arts and Ideas podcast was made in partnership with the Arts and Humanities Research Council, part of UKRI You can find other episodes showcasing New Research in a collection on the programme website of BBC Radio e's Free Thinking https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03zws90 It includes episodes on Beowulf https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0db7883 What language did Columbus speak https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0d0tk22 Hey Presto magic in medicine and the history of panto https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p090yn26

In 1791, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth adopted one of the world's most avant-garde constitutions, one establishing a progressive constitutional monarchy. And yet in 1795, the Commonwealth altogether disappeared, partitioned between Prussia, Austria and Russia. This contrast between the Commonwealth's seemingly advanced regime and its total collapse in four years has earned it the neglect of historians. Yet for nearly four centuries, it stayed a major actor in central European politics, controlling at its peak somewhere between a third and a fourth of the European landmass, with liberal political and religious rights for its time and vibrant intellectual, economic and cultural conditions. This week, we cover this fascinating history with two leading experts. Norman Davies is the Polish-Welsh honorary fellow at St Antony's College (Oxford). He's a professor Emeritus at UCL and the author of many books on Poland, including God's Playground: A History of Poland (1979). Adam Zamoyski—in his third appearance on the podcast—is the author of Poland: A History (2009). As always, please rate and review Uncommon Decency on Apple Podcasts, and send us your comments or questions either on Twitter at @UnDecencyPod or by e-mail at undecencypod@gmail.com. And please consider supporting the show through Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/undecencypod.

Is it too difficult to dismiss officers who commit misconduct from the police? Are there a few rotten apples or a culture of sexism? Helen King, former assistant commissioner for the Metropolitan Police and principal of St Anne's College Oxford, and Emily Lawford, assistant editor at Prospect join Sarah Collins on the podcast to discuss Baroness Casey's recent review. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When Ian Gardiner was 10 years old, he was the fastest kid in his class to solve the rubix cube. He was also quick enough to sense a business opportunity so he sold the solution to his classmates. Despite the modest circumstances of his childhood in Glasgow, he went on to secure a place at St Peter's College Oxford and row not once, but twice in the prestigious Oxford Cambridge boat race, the culmination of 6 hours of training 6 days per week for 7 months on top of demanding Oxford academic expectations. What becomes of a man who has the sort of innate smarts and stamina? Surprisingly he has found himself halfway around the world, and together with his wife Andrea Gardiner one half of the possibly the most dynamic couple in the Australian startup eco-system with their firm Jelix ventures. Ian is also the co-founder of the wonderfully expansive network of technology and investment enthusiasts Innovation Bay and for good measure the host of probably my favourite Australian startup podcast Open the Podbay doors. Along the way Ian became a Member of YPO, had a stint as the Head of Startups at AWS in Australia/NZ, has won the Pearcy award for IT Entrepreneur of the year. He is a Passionate startup mentor, Cyclist, gamer, skier, husband, geek, and father (but not necessarily in that order). Links and resources Ian Gardiner on LinkedIn Jelix Ventures Podcasts Open the Pod Bay Doors Other Oxford Cambridge boat race For more information about Scale: Scale Investors Scale Educated

Dr Rumaitha Al Hosni is an Extraordinary Junior Research Fellow in Physiology at Queen's College Oxford. Rumaitha spent the first 15 years of her life in the coastal city of Dar es Salaam in Tanzania, followed by a few years in Oman, before moving to the UK in 2011 to pursue higher education. In this podcast, we ask her about her experiences of London, Oxford, Dar Es Salaam, and Muscat, while also finding out more about her incredible work in ion channel physiology and pharmacology._________Anglo Omani Society accounts:Instagram: angloomanisocietyLinkedin: The Anglo-Omani SocietyTwitter: @AngloOmaniSOCFacebook: The Anglo-Omani Society

Do we underappreciate comic writing ? It's 400 years since the birth of France's great satirical playwright, Jean-Baptiste Pocquelin, better known by his pen-name Molière. Stendhal described him as “the great painter of man as he is” and his works have continued to be translated and performed on both the French and British stage with recent adaptations by Christopher Hampton, Anil Gupta and the Scottish poet and playwright, Liz Lochhead. She joins Anne McElvoy to help consider what we make of Molière now and how well his plays work in translation, alongside Clare Finburgh-Delijani, Professor of European Theatre at Goldsmiths, University of London and Suzanne Jones, a Junior Research Fellow in French at St Anne's College Oxford. Their discussion looks at various adaptations of Tartuffe, Moliere's play translated as The Hypocrite or The Imposter, which was first performed in 1664. Listen out for a Words and Music episode which picks out key speeches from plays including The Miser, the Imaginary Invalid, The School for Wives and the Misanthrope. You can hear that on BBC Radio 3 at 5.30pm Sunday 16th - followed by a new adaptation of The Miser scripted by Barunka O'Shaughnessy. You can also find out about the court music of Lully in Composer of the Week and there's a special edition of Radio 3's Early Music Show. Producer: Ruth Watts

The Tudor court was all about competitive displays of power and wealth. This series examines the influence of music and entertainment on the balance of power.  In this talk, Jeremy Summerly, Director of Music at St Peter's College Oxford, explores how Henry VIII used music to shape his own image and consolidate the reformation in England.         This talk was originally recorded at Hampton Court Palace in 2017. For more information on the history and stories of our palaces visit: www.hrp.org.uk/history-and-stories

Dubbed the Queen of Crime, Val McDermid has written 35 books (she thinks, but she's stopped counting), sold over 17million copies and been translated into 40 languages. At the vanguard of female crimewriters, she's created countless female sleuths but is probably best known for one of her male ones - Dr Tony Hill of the TV series Wire In The Blood. She also created Traces the BBC series aired earlier this year starring Martin (Line of Duty) Compston.Now 65, she's gone back to her youth. In her new book, 1979, Val explores what it was like to be a young female journalist in the male dominated tabloid newsrooms of the late 70s. And she should know because she was that hack.But Val started out over 60 years ago as a working class kid in Fife where, at 16, she became the first ever state school educated pupil from Scotland to go to St Hilda's College Oxford. Val lives not far from me in Edinburgh, so she popped round to hang out with Sausage the cat and chat being a young lesbian in a hetrosexual white man's world, anger, ageing and discovering an unexpected ‘cure' for hot flushes.• You can buy all the books mentioned in this podcast at Bookshop.org, including 1979 by Val McDermid, and the book that inspired this podcast, The Shift: how I lost and found myself after 40 - and you can too, by me!• The Shift (on life after 40) with Sam Baker is created and hosted by Sam Baker and edited by Emily Sandford. If you enjoyed this podcast, please rate/review/follow as it really does help other people find us. And let me know what you think on twitter @sambaker or instagram @theothersambaker. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Our first Oxford Cambridge grudge match of the season and it did not disappoint! We saw a very spirited St Catharine side go through to the second round, and there is a chance for University College to get a second chance, which they certainly deserve.Note, there is, unfortunately, a few audio bugs in the episode that we could not iron out, apologies for that! Hopefully, the gremlins are expunged next week.

We have our first specialised university of the season as London Business School enters their second-ever University Challenge contest against Hertford College Oxford. Can the graduate college hold their own, or will the lack of domain breadth be their undoing? Also, we discuss fantastic national emblems, Tom's love of history and appreciate the importance of 90s music, plus a trip to stats corner and yet another disagreement about best dressed...

Bob and Ben speak with Jon Waterlow about his book It's Only a Joke Comrade! Humor, Trust and Everyday Life Under Stalin and the role humor plays in helping humans make sense of the world in even the darkest times. Jon also shares his take on humor's role in politics under Stalin and today, the process he went through to uncover these jokes, and how the artistic technique of crosshatching helps us understand what it was like to live under the Stalinist system. He also discusses his decision to forego publishing his book with an academic publisher and why he decided to leave a bright future in the academy to purse fulfillment elsewhere. Dr. Jonathan Waterlow received his Doctorate in History from the University of Oxford and was a Postdoctoral Fellow at St. Anthony's College (Oxford) and the University of Toronto. He is also the cohost of the Voices in the Dark podcast, which is available anywhere you get The Road to Now. This episode is a rebroadcast of The Road to Now #107 and was edited by Gary Fletcher.

A TORCH Book at Lunchtime webinar on ‘China's Good War: How World War II is Shaping a New Nationalism' by Professor Rana Mitter. Book at Lunchtime is a series of bite-sized book discussions held weekly during term-time, with commentators from a range of disciplines. The events are free to attend and open to all. About the book: For most of its history, the People's Republic of China limited public discussion of the war against Japan. It was an experience of victimization - and one that saw Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai-shek fighting for the same goals. But now, as China grows more powerful, the meaning of the war is changing. Professor Rana Mitter argues that China's reassessment of the World War II years is central to its newfound confidence abroad and to mounting nationalism at home. China's Good War begins with the academics who shepherded the once-taboo subject into wider discourse. Encouraged by reforms under Deng Xiaoping, they researched the Guomindang war effort, collaboration with the Japanese, and China's role in forming the post-1945 global order. But interest in the war would not stay confined to scholarly journals. Today public sites of memory—including museums, movies and television shows, street art, popular writing, and social media—define the war as a founding myth for an ascendant China. Wartime China emerges as victor rather than victim. The shifting story has nurtured a number of new views. One rehabilitates Chiang Kai-shek's war efforts, minimizing the bloody conflicts between him and Mao and aiming to heal the wounds of the Cultural Revolution. Another narrative positions Beijing as creator and protector of the international order that emerged from the war—an order, China argues, under threat today largely from the United States. China's radical reassessment of its collective memory of the war has created a new foundation for a people destined to shape the world. Speakers: Professor Rana Mitter is Professor of the History and Politics of Modern China at the University of Oxford. His books include China's War with Japan: The Struggle for Survival, 1937-1945 (Penguin, 2013), [US title: Forgotten Ally] which won the 2014 RUSI/Duke of Westminster's Medal for Military Literature, and was named a Book of the Year in the Financial Times and Economist, and China's Good War: How World War II is Shaping a New Nationalism (Harvard, 2020). His recent documentary on contemporary Chinese politics "Meanwhile in Beijing" is available on BBC Sounds. He is a regular presenter of BBC Radio 3's Free Thinking/BBC Arts and Ideas Podcast. Professor David Priestland is Professor of Modern History at St Edmund's College Oxford. His research specialises in communism and market liberalism, especially in the communist and post-communist worlds. His publications include a comparative history of communism, The Red Flag: Communism and the Making of the Modern World, and Merchant, Soldier, Sage: A New History of Power, a study of the history of market liberalism and its place in global history. Professor Vivienne Shue is Professor Emeritus of Contemporary China Studies and Emeritus Fellow of St Anthony's College Oxford. Her current research examines certain distinctively 21st century Chinese governance techniques and practices, including high-tech national development planning. Her publications include The Reach of the State: Sketches of the Chinese Body Politic, and most recently To Govern China, co-edited with Professor Patricia Thornton. She is the former director of Oxford's Contemporary China Studies Programme.

A TORCH Book at Lunchtime webinar on ‘China's Good War: How World War II is Shaping a New Nationalism' by Professor Rana Mitter. Book at Lunchtime is a series of bite-sized book discussions held weekly during term-time, with commentators from a range of disciplines. The events are free to attend and open to all. About the book: For most of its history, the People's Republic of China limited public discussion of the war against Japan. It was an experience of victimization - and one that saw Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai-shek fighting for the same goals. But now, as China grows more powerful, the meaning of the war is changing. Professor Rana Mitter argues that China's reassessment of the World War II years is central to its newfound confidence abroad and to mounting nationalism at home. China's Good War begins with the academics who shepherded the once-taboo subject into wider discourse. Encouraged by reforms under Deng Xiaoping, they researched the Guomindang war effort, collaboration with the Japanese, and China's role in forming the post-1945 global order. But interest in the war would not stay confined to scholarly journals. Today public sites of memory—including museums, movies and television shows, street art, popular writing, and social media—define the war as a founding myth for an ascendant China. Wartime China emerges as victor rather than victim. The shifting story has nurtured a number of new views. One rehabilitates Chiang Kai-shek's war efforts, minimizing the bloody conflicts between him and Mao and aiming to heal the wounds of the Cultural Revolution. Another narrative positions Beijing as creator and protector of the international order that emerged from the war—an order, China argues, under threat today largely from the United States. China's radical reassessment of its collective memory of the war has created a new foundation for a people destined to shape the world. Speakers: Professor Rana Mitter is Professor of the History and Politics of Modern China at the University of Oxford. His books include China's War with Japan: The Struggle for Survival, 1937-1945 (Penguin, 2013), [US title: Forgotten Ally] which won the 2014 RUSI/Duke of Westminster's Medal for Military Literature, and was named a Book of the Year in the Financial Times and Economist, and China's Good War: How World War II is Shaping a New Nationalism (Harvard, 2020). His recent documentary on contemporary Chinese politics "Meanwhile in Beijing" is available on BBC Sounds. He is a regular presenter of BBC Radio 3's Free Thinking/BBC Arts and Ideas Podcast. Professor David Priestland is Professor of Modern History at St Edmund's College Oxford. His research specialises in communism and market liberalism, especially in the communist and post-communist worlds. His publications include a comparative history of communism, The Red Flag: Communism and the Making of the Modern World, and Merchant, Soldier, Sage: A New History of Power, a study of the history of market liberalism and its place in global history. Professor Vivienne Shue is Professor Emeritus of Contemporary China Studies and Emeritus Fellow of St Anthony's College Oxford. Her current research examines certain distinctively 21st century Chinese governance techniques and practices, including high-tech national development planning. Her publications include The Reach of the State: Sketches of the Chinese Body Politic, and most recently To Govern China, co-edited with Professor Patricia Thornton. She is the former director of Oxford's Contemporary China Studies Programme.

  Oxford University offers a very unique learning experience that combines the tutorial system, ancient traditions, cutting-edge research and facilities, as well as diverse individuals from all corners of the world. The University is comprised of 39 colleges, with all students and faculty belonging to a college as well as their course department. One of the largest Oxford colleges is St Catherine's College, fondly referred to as St Catz. I am delighted to be joined by the person leading St Catz to discuss the Oxford learning experience as well as her experience leading the College. Professor Kersti Börjars is the Master of St Catherine's College and Professor of Linguistics. Her academic focus is in how languages change and why it happens. In January of 2020 Prof Börjars became the Master of St Catherine's, coming from the University of Manchester where she was a linguistics professor and Associate Vice-President. Prof Kersti Börjars: https://www.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/person/borjars/ St Catherine's College Oxford: https://www.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/

Today Frances has a guest, her friend Dr Emma Cleobury, whose parents were both Olympic athletes - Sylvia Cheeseman and John Disley. There is  plenty of chat about running, marathons, King's College Oxford, the Cutty Sark and Whitechapel Bell Foundry.John Disley and Chris Brasher founded the London Marathon in 1981, and Emma was there at the finish, as a volunteer, as a 'spindler' and 'plucker'Frances reads Vera's 1908 letter, a first hand account of the finish of the London Olympics marathon at  White City and Emma has plenty of marathon anecdotes.Frances and Emma recorded a video chat between Australia and the UK; this is the audio from that recording, so apologies that the audio is not as good as usual. You can watch the video, on the Machell Cox Letters YouTube channel,  in 2 parts, at this link.https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfFVcOvI9WjcCEN1BjLPV3gFrances thinks the noisy bird who screeched during Vera's letter was a butcherbird.Please do email Frances about any of this content - machellcoxletters@gmail.comAlso on Twitter - @CoxLettersAll content is subject to copyright, and belongs to both Frances Thompson and the Bodleian Library.Intro - 00:00David Machell Cox - 6:02Corpus Christi College Cambridge - 7:22King's College Cambridge - 11:24Ten siblings, family tree - 20:301908 Marathon - 22:00Sylvia Cheeseman - 23:35John Disley - 27:181981 London Marathon - 27:57Bendigo (Victoria, Australia) and the Whitechapel Bell Foundry - 33:00The Cutty Sark - 35:201908 London Marathon - 37:25Vera's 1908 marathon letter - 39:18

TORCH Goes Digital! presents Big Tent - Live Events! Part of the Humanities Cultural Programme, one of the founding stones for the future Stephen A. Schwarzman Centre for the Humanities. In this joint event between St Peter's College and TORCH, distinguished and multi-award-winning British filmmaker, social campaigner and St Peter’s College alumnus, Ken Loach (Jurisprudence, 1957), will discuss his filmmaking career with Professor Judith Buchanan, Master of St Peter’s College Oxford. Their conversation will concentrate on two remarkable films: The Wind That Shakes the Barley (2006) and I, Daniel Blake (2016).

TORCH Goes Digital! presents Big Tent - Live Events! Part of the Humanities Cultural Programme, one of the founding stones for the future Stephen A. Schwarzman Centre for the Humanities. In this joint event between St Peter's College and TORCH, distinguished and multi-award-winning British filmmaker, social campaigner and St Peter’s College alumnus, Ken Loach (Jurisprudence, 1957), will discuss his filmmaking career with Professor Judith Buchanan, Master of St Peter’s College Oxford. Their conversation will concentrate on two remarkable films: The Wind That Shakes the Barley (2006) and I, Daniel Blake (2016).

We have reached the end of the first round matches! This week saw Magdalene, Cambridge playing against University, Oxford in yet another Oxbridge showdown. What got us so frustrated this week? What do we think about risk-taking in this competition? Listen to find out and stay tuned till the end for our best-dressed segment.

Maureen reflects on her time studying with Iris Murdoch (and others) at St Anne's College Oxford in the late 1950s, and reflects on the effect that it had on her later career as an academic. Interviewed by Miles Leeson from the IMRC, Chichester.

Episode 6 of this season's University Challenge is once again here, and this time it's a real nail-biter between two of the oldest colleges in the UK. With a combined age of 1451, these institutions are the purest example of Oxbridge Pedigree.Unlike their respective institutions, the teams are on the younger side, with an average age of 24 and 23 for Balliol and Clare respectively. Who comes out on top in this latest iteration of the Oxbridge competition? Listen with us and find out.Also making an appearance this week: A new mysterious segment!

We are back once again for the third round of the 2020/2021 University Challenge series. This time, we have a real contrast of a competition between Open University, the largest UK university, and Linacre College, one of the smallest post-grad colleges of Oxford University. With an average age of 52, will Open's team win out against Linacre? The answer might well surprise you.

Leonardo, Lock-down and Lateral Thinking — A Conversation with Professor Martin Kemp Martin Kemp (Trinity College, Oxford | Emeritus Professor) In this episode, Tracey Camilleri talks to Oxford art historian, author, academic and world expert on Leonardo da Vinci, Professor Martin Kemp. Originally trained as a scientist, Kemp speaks about the advantages of looking at the world through multiple lenses and disciplines. He considers the importance of authenticity and the crucial difference between fakes and the real thing. He reflects on the toppling of statues in response to Black Lives Matter (#BLM) and how some images, like that of Che Guevara, become icons. As an expert in looking and focused noticing, he discusses the current pandemic and how the virus is represented visually. Above all he reflects on the messiness of being human in a digital world of AI and computer simulation. Martin Kemp's website with links to his books, lectures and research http://www.martinjkemp.com Connect wit Prof. Kemp on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/martin-kemp-9a837a1b Music : Dan Phillipson | Out in Front Visit the Thompson Harrison website https://www.thompsonharrison.com/ Connect with Tracey Camilleri on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/tracey-camilleri-20694ab/ Connect with Sam Rockey on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/samanthajrockey/ When you're ready to #BeHeard, contact the podcast specialists at

This digital event explores how 3D-modelling technologies and virtual reality can open new understandings of the past. Prof Matthew Nicholls describes the creation of a large-scale 3D model of Ancient Rome, exploring the use of computer modelling in the study of ancient structures. Richard Smith brings the technological perspective, discussing the tools which enable the exploration of such a model in virtual reality. The talk will focus particularly on the Theatre of Pompey, a Roman theatre complex, completed in 55 BCE, which no longer survives. Prof Matthew Nichols is Senior Tutor at St. John's College Oxford. He previously held a lectureship and then a chair in Classics at the University of Reading. There he developed a large scale 3D model of ancient Rome, which he has used extensively in teaching, research, outreach, and commercial work, winning several national awards for teaching and innovation. Richard Smith is Technology Support Officer at the Bodleian Libraries, Oxford, where he provides technology support and 3D printing, advises on 3D modelling and AR/VR projects, and leads training courses on immersive technologies. He is also the co-founder of the Oxford X-Reality Hub, Oxford's central resource for virtual and augmented reality. Dr Lia Costiner – Merton College, hosted this event as founder of the (en)coding Heritage TORCH Network.

This week I’m delighted to welcome back Mike MacNair to the show. Mike is an Associate Professor of Law at St Hugh’s College Oxford, and the man responsible for the behemoth that was the ‘Revolutionary Strategy Series’. This is the first of a two parter where we I get to ask Mike some questions raised by reading and discussion of his seminal work

In this podcast, Scott Jones, CEO of 123 Internet Group welcomes Sandra Clarke, Dean of Law at The University of Buckingham. They discuss the Impact of COVID-19 on the university, their students and academics.Sandra Clarke is Dean of the School of Law. She leads the School of Law in providing the well-established LLB (Hons) degree and the LLM International and Commercial Law and is responsible for developing the Law portfolio.Sandra is interested in property law, particularly land law, and co-authors a leading undergraduate textbook, ‘Land Law Directions'. She teaches Land Law and Legal Skills and is particularly interested in innovative assessment practice in legal education and technology-enhanced learning. She is a member of the Solicitors' Regulation Authority Reference Group on changes to legal education.Sandra graduated from St Catherine's College Oxford and was later called to the Bar by Lincoln's Inn. From 2014 to 2018 she was Head of Law at the University of Greenwich.Support the show (https://www.123internet.agency/podcasts)

What makes us human? — Being human in a digital context Robin Dunbar (Emeritus Professor of Evolutionary Psychology | Magdalen College, Oxford University) In this first episode, Tracey Camilleri talks to Prof Robin Dunbar of ‘Dunbar number’ *fame. He is Emeritus Professor of Evolutionary Psychology at Magdalen College, Oxford University. Robin brings his years of research and discovery about what make us human and how these insights can help leaders make better ‘human-shaped’ decisions. The conversations ranges across topics from the importance of triggering the endorphin system – through mechanisms such as laughter - and its positive effect on productivity, to more pragmatic advice on how leaders can better facilitate virtual meetings and maintain the ‘musical flow’ of conversation to arrive at more satisfaction and connection for their teams. * Dunbar's number (150) is a suggested cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships — relationships in which an individual knows who each person is and how each person relates to every other person. Learn more about Robin Dunbar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Dunbar Music : Dan Phillipson | Out in Front Visit the Thompson Harrison website https://www.thompsonharrison.com/ Connect with Tracey Camilleri on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/tracey-camilleri-20694ab/ Connect with Sam Rockey on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/samanthajrockey/ When you're ready to #BeHeard, contact the podcast specialists at

December 2019    During World War Two, 34 alumnae of St Hugh’s College Oxford ended up working at Bletchley Park and its Outstations and In March 2020 the college will be holding a symposium to celebrate them.    In this, the last of three episodes this month, our Oral History Officer Jonathan Byrne tells us how this has opened up a potential new source for us to discover more of our Veterans and to hopefully capture more stories before it is too late.   The rest of this episode is given over to the fascinating stories of Wenda Reynolds and Nancy Sandars two of those St Hugh’s College ladies.   Bletchley local, Miss Wenda Reynolds worked at GC&CS in both the Mansion and Hut 9 from 1941 till 1945.   Miss Nancy Sandars served first as a motorcycle despatch rider, and then joined the WRNS as a Y-Service Wireless Operator.   In memoriam, Miss Wenda Reynolds (1914-2017) and Miss Nancy Sandars (1914-2015)   Image: ©Bletchley Park Trust 2019   #BPark, #Bletchleypark, #WW2

How does science drive the economy? What are the origins of the creative sector, and how should it be governed? In this episode of the Governance Podcast, David Edgerton (King's College London) sits down with Terence Kealey (University of Buckingham) to discuss the counterintuitive role science plays, and should play, in society.  Subscribe on iTunes and Spotify Subscribe to the Governance Podcast on iTunes and Spotify today and get all our latest episodes directly in your pocket. Follow Us For more information about our upcoming podcasts and events, follow us on facebook, twitter or instagram (@csgskcl). The Guest Terence Kealey is a professor of clinical biochemistry at the University of Buckingham in the United Kingdom, where he served as vice chancellor until 2014. As a clinical biochemist Dr. Kealey studied human experimental dermatology. He published around 45 original peer-reviewed papers and around 35 scientific reviews, also peer-reviewed. In 1996 he published his first book, The Economic Laws of Scientific Research, where he argued that, contrary to the conventional wisdom,  governments need not fund science. His second book, Sex, Science and Profits (2008) argues that science is not a public good but, rather, is organized in invisible colleges, thereby making government funding irrelevant. Professor Kealey trained initially in medicine at Bart's Hospital Medical School, London. He studied for his doctorate at Oxford University, where he worked first as a Medical Research Council Training Fellow and then as a Wellcome Senior Research Fellow in Clinical Science. David Edgerton  is the Hans Rausing Professor of the History of Science and Technology and Professor of Modern British History at King's College London. He graduated from St John's College Oxford and Imperial College London. After teaching at the University of Manchester he became the founding director of the Centre for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine at Imperial College London (1993-2003) where he was also Hans Rausing Professor. He joined the History department with the Centre on its transfer to King's in August 2013. He was a Leverhulme Trust Major Research Fellow, 2006-2009, and gave the 2009 Wilkins-Bernal-Medawar Prize Lecture at the  Royal Society.  Skip Ahead 1:00: Terence, you and I have known each other for many years. You started off as a scientist, as I did, indeed, and we've both found our way to thinking about the place of science in society and in the economy. How did you start on this path? 3:53: Where did you develop your thoughts about science funding? It's very unusual for a scientist to be writing about the economics of science at all, especially from the positions you were taking. Where did you find the space to articulate your criticisms? 6:48: I imagine you were politically engaged in some way at this time. What were you reading outside science, what positions were you taking in this rather strained political atmosphere of the 1980s? 8:52: In the 1980s, you're pointing out that the university labs are getting fuller and fuller. Now I assume that most of the money that paid for all those new researchers was government money. Your argument, as it developed over the years, was that governments need not fund research in universities or elsewhere. So you were effectively saying that the Thatcher governments were spending too much on scientific research. 10:51: But the great bulk of the money going into universities from the so-called private sector is surely charitable money from the Wellcome Trust and Cancer Research and so on, and highly focused on the biomedical sector.  11:44: Now the Thatcher governments presented themselves as wanting to reverse the British decline, and many of the people arguing for more investment in research argued that the British decline since the 1870s was caused by a lack of investment in research. So you might imagine that the Thatcher governments would in fact launch a program of such investments, and it's interesting today to see the Brexiters today including Dominic Cummings talking about increasing funding for research... Why weren't the Thatcher governments pursuing that policy of investment? 15:13: So you don't see her [Thatcher] as following through on the liberal arguments from Gladstone onwards. 15:57: Terence, let me put this to you: in 1979, the British R&D - GDP ratio was higher than it was in 1990, when Margaret Thatcher left office. That's to say, essentially the private sector, dominating overall R&D funding, was spending less on research as a portion of GDP at the end of the Thatcher period. That doesn't seem to square with your crowding out thesis.  18:30: One could argue that the effectiveness of R&D productivity has declined since the 1970s-- obviously that is the case in pharmaceuticals; perhaps it's the case more generally. 21:41: I'd like to go back just a little bit to an issue that we both addressed in the 80s and early 90s, which is pertinent here. That is the relationship between national investments in R&D and national rates of economic growth. We both put forward the argument that there was no positive correlation between these numbers. And I think I recall correctly that experts in science policy and scientists were incredulous and thought that we'd lost a few marbles along the way. How did you come to this conclusion? 24:28: If you look at the industrially funded British R&D, it was relatively high into the late 1960s and the rates of British economic growth were low, and this wasn't because the British were bad at exploiting the research; I think that even there we had an element of an inverse correlation between national growth rates and national privately funded civil R&D. 26:49: One very striking conclusion you report in your first book, The Economic Laws of Scientific Research, is that the higher the GDP per capita of a country, the higher the R&D - GDP ratio. That's important because the richer the country is, the lower the rate of economic growth.  29:52: If one were to put in the phrase 'economics of science' into google scholar, very quickly we'd be taken back to some foundation work in the late 50s and early 60s which treated science as a public good, and out of that a whole series of arguments about the need for the state to fund science. 38:37: So what you're saying is that that model of economics of science in the late 50s and early 60s which suggests that science is a public good misunderstands that science cannot be a public good in the same way that the light from a lighthouse is a public good... We can't all read a scientific paper and understand what it's about. 44:15: One of the new features of our public life is the centrality of a certain discourse about innovation and creativity; we're all supposed to be innovative and entrepreneurial. There's not a CV that doesn't claim innovation in some way... but you seem to be saying something rather interesting in that context, which is that what appears to be innovation is to a very considerable extent the result of learning, dare I say it, imitation. So what enterprises that want to create something new do is steal other people's ideas. That's very interesting. Another way in which your idea could be developed is to understand why creative institutions, far from being a universal feature of the economy, are in fact highly concentrated-- very particular firms have contributed very large proportions of innovation in the 20th century; very few universities account for a big chunk of Nobel Prizes. Could your model help explain this? 50:46: Terence, one of the many things you've done in your career is to become a Vice Chancellor. And you're clearly very committed to education and learning. Tell us a little bit about that role... that entrepreneurial drive to conquer the world of knowledge.

Robert Alexander's new book, Representation and the Electoral College (Oxford UP, 2019) is an important analysis of the Electoral College, from the debates about it at the constitutional convention and during the early days of the republic to contemporary controversies that surround this unique construction. Alexander frames the book with the theoretical conundrum of representation, unpacking different kinds of representation and how these competing interpretations of representation have contributed to the ways in which voters, parties, candidates, and electors approach the Electoral College and understand its function within the American constitutional system. By tracing the historical arguments for the Electoral College and the ways in which the electors themselves are chosen and are supposed to act, Alexander pays attention to the ways that the Electoral College has evolved over the course of more than 200 years. This book excellently explains the original competing demands that led to the creation of the Electoral College, and goes on to analyze how it has functioned in context of the rise of political parties, shifting ideological preferences, and geographic and national pressures. Alexander's earlier research on the electors themselves helps inform the analysis here, integrating the perspectives of individuals who serve a constitutional function but are rarely surveyed or studied within that context. This book brings together historical, constitutional, theoretical, and contemporary perspectives in analyzing and exploring the Electoral College. It is also a very well-written book, making it accessible to a wide range of readers. Lilly J. Goren is professor of Political Science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She co-edited the award-winning Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Robert Alexander’s new book, Representation and the Electoral College (Oxford UP, 2019) is an important analysis of the Electoral College, from the debates about it at the constitutional convention and during the early days of the republic to contemporary controversies that surround this unique construction. Alexander frames the book with the theoretical conundrum of representation, unpacking different kinds of representation and how these competing interpretations of representation have contributed to the ways in which voters, parties, candidates, and electors approach the Electoral College and understand its function within the American constitutional system. By tracing the historical arguments for the Electoral College and the ways in which the electors themselves are chosen and are supposed to act, Alexander pays attention to the ways that the Electoral College has evolved over the course of more than 200 years. This book excellently explains the original competing demands that led to the creation of the Electoral College, and goes on to analyze how it has functioned in context of the rise of  political parties, shifting ideological preferences, and geographic and national pressures. Alexander’s earlier research on the electors themselves helps inform the analysis here, integrating the perspectives of individuals who serve a constitutional function but are rarely surveyed or studied within that context. This book brings together historical, constitutional, theoretical, and contemporary perspectives in analyzing and exploring the Electoral College. It is also a very well-written book, making it accessible to a wide range of readers. Lilly J. Goren is professor of Political Science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She co-edited the award-winning Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Robert Alexander’s new book, Representation and the Electoral College (Oxford UP, 2019) is an important analysis of the Electoral College, from the debates about it at the constitutional convention and during the early days of the republic to contemporary controversies that surround this unique construction. Alexander frames the book with the theoretical conundrum of representation, unpacking different kinds of representation and how these competing interpretations of representation have contributed to the ways in which voters, parties, candidates, and electors approach the Electoral College and understand its function within the American constitutional system. By tracing the historical arguments for the Electoral College and the ways in which the electors themselves are chosen and are supposed to act, Alexander pays attention to the ways that the Electoral College has evolved over the course of more than 200 years. This book excellently explains the original competing demands that led to the creation of the Electoral College, and goes on to analyze how it has functioned in context of the rise of  political parties, shifting ideological preferences, and geographic and national pressures. Alexander’s earlier research on the electors themselves helps inform the analysis here, integrating the perspectives of individuals who serve a constitutional function but are rarely surveyed or studied within that context. This book brings together historical, constitutional, theoretical, and contemporary perspectives in analyzing and exploring the Electoral College. It is also a very well-written book, making it accessible to a wide range of readers. Lilly J. Goren is professor of Political Science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She co-edited the award-winning Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Robert Alexander’s new book, Representation and the Electoral College (Oxford UP, 2019) is an important analysis of the Electoral College, from the debates about it at the constitutional convention and during the early days of the republic to contemporary controversies that surround this unique construction. Alexander frames the book with the theoretical conundrum of representation, unpacking different kinds of representation and how these competing interpretations of representation have contributed to the ways in which voters, parties, candidates, and electors approach the Electoral College and understand its function within the American constitutional system. By tracing the historical arguments for the Electoral College and the ways in which the electors themselves are chosen and are supposed to act, Alexander pays attention to the ways that the Electoral College has evolved over the course of more than 200 years. This book excellently explains the original competing demands that led to the creation of the Electoral College, and goes on to analyze how it has functioned in context of the rise of  political parties, shifting ideological preferences, and geographic and national pressures. Alexander’s earlier research on the electors themselves helps inform the analysis here, integrating the perspectives of individuals who serve a constitutional function but are rarely surveyed or studied within that context. This book brings together historical, constitutional, theoretical, and contemporary perspectives in analyzing and exploring the Electoral College. It is also a very well-written book, making it accessible to a wide range of readers. Lilly J. Goren is professor of Political Science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She co-edited the award-winning Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Robert Alexander’s new book, Representation and the Electoral College (Oxford UP, 2019) is an important analysis of the Electoral College, from the debates about it at the constitutional convention and during the early days of the republic to contemporary controversies that surround this unique construction. Alexander frames the book with the theoretical conundrum of representation, unpacking different kinds of representation and how these competing interpretations of representation have contributed to the ways in which voters, parties, candidates, and electors approach the Electoral College and understand its function within the American constitutional system. By tracing the historical arguments for the Electoral College and the ways in which the electors themselves are chosen and are supposed to act, Alexander pays attention to the ways that the Electoral College has evolved over the course of more than 200 years. This book excellently explains the original competing demands that led to the creation of the Electoral College, and goes on to analyze how it has functioned in context of the rise of  political parties, shifting ideological preferences, and geographic and national pressures. Alexander’s earlier research on the electors themselves helps inform the analysis here, integrating the perspectives of individuals who serve a constitutional function but are rarely surveyed or studied within that context. This book brings together historical, constitutional, theoretical, and contemporary perspectives in analyzing and exploring the Electoral College. It is also a very well-written book, making it accessible to a wide range of readers. Lilly J. Goren is professor of Political Science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She co-edited the award-winning Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Robert Alexander's new book, Representation and the Electoral College (Oxford UP, 2019) is an important analysis of the Electoral College, from the debates about it at the constitutional convention and during the early days of the republic to contemporary controversies that surround this unique construction. Alexander frames the book with the theoretical conundrum of representation, unpacking different kinds of representation and how these competing interpretations of representation have contributed to the ways in which voters, parties, candidates, and electors approach the Electoral College and understand its function within the American constitutional system. By tracing the historical arguments for the Electoral College and the ways in which the electors themselves are chosen and are supposed to act, Alexander pays attention to the ways that the Electoral College has evolved over the course of more than 200 years. This book excellently explains the original competing demands that led to the creation of the Electoral College, and goes on to analyze how it has functioned in context of the rise of  political parties, shifting ideological preferences, and geographic and national pressures. Alexander's earlier research on the electors themselves helps inform the analysis here, integrating the perspectives of individuals who serve a constitutional function but are rarely surveyed or studied within that context. This book brings together historical, constitutional, theoretical, and contemporary perspectives in analyzing and exploring the Electoral College. It is also a very well-written book, making it accessible to a wide range of readers. Lilly J. Goren is professor of Political Science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She co-edited the award-winning Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012).

The Netflix series The Last Czars and HBO's Chernobyl have (in very different ways) brought Russian & Soviet history to televisions across the world. In this episode, Ben sits down with fellow Russian historians Philippa Hetherington and Jonathan Waterlow to discuss their opinions on the two series, what they think they got right, and ways that producers and scholars might benefit most from collaboration on future projects. Philippa, who is a featured scholar in The Last Czars, shares her experience being interviewed, her impression of the show after seeing it, and her work to correct historical errors that viewers identified after release. Dr. Philippa Hetherington is a Lecturer in Modern Eurasian History at the School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University College London. Her research focuses on the legal history of imperial Russia and the early Soviet Union in global and transnational context. You can follow Philippa on twitter at @philippahether. Dr. Jonathan Waterlow is the author of It's Only a Joke Comrade! Humor, Trust and Everyday Life Under Stalin, and cohost of the Voices in the Dark podcast. He received his Doctorate in History from the University of Oxford and was a Postdoctoral Fellow at St. Anthony's College (Oxford) and the University of Toronto. For more on It's Only a Joke Comrade!, check out RTN #107 Laughing at Stalin: The Politics of Humor w/ Jon Waterlow or pick up a copy by clicking here. You can follow Jon on twitter at @JonWaterlow.  The Road to Now is part of The Osiris Podcast Network. This episode was edited by Gary Fletcher.

Ryan speaks to a panel of Oxford students and faculty about major takeaways from traveling through all 50 states and steps we can take to increase listening in our own communities. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/50-states-of-mind/message

James Clad is Senior Fellow for Asia at the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington DC. He is also a senior adviser for Asia at the CNA Corporation in Arlington, Virginia. During 2002-10, he served as U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense for South and Southeast Asia (including Australasia and the Pacific islands) and as Senior Counselor at the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. From 1995-2002, he was professor of Asian Studies at Georgetown University and Director/Asia-Pacific Energy at Cambridge Energy Research Associates. Trained as a New Zealand lawyer, James Clad’s career has focused on Asian diplomatic, energy and security issues – broadening after 2002 to include the Middle East. During the 1980s-90s, he held Far Eastern Economic Review staff positions in various Asian capitals, and held fellowships at Harvard University and St. Antony’s College/Oxford. In 1991, he joined the Carnegie Endowment in Washington DC as senior associate for Asia. In the early 1980s, Mr. Clad belonged to the New Zealand diplomatic service, serving in Delhi and more extensively in Jakarta. His books include Business, Money & Power in Southeast Asia (1991); After the Crusade — America in the Post-Superpower Era (1996), and Borderlands of Asia (2012), a volume of political geography. His recent articles deal with power politics in the western Pacific, with China/U.S. relations, and the U.S. shale revolution. In 2009, he received the US Secretary of Defense Exceptional Public Service Award and in 2012 became a Member of the New Zealand Order of Merit (MNZM), a royal honour.

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter SubscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/the-dissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuy PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ------------------Follow me on--------------------- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT Dr. Stephen Law is formally Reader in Philosophy at Heythrop College, and before that Research Fellow at The Queen's College Oxford. He is currently editor of the Royal Institute of Philosophy journal THINK. He has published several books, including The Philosophy Gym, A Very Short Introduction to Humanism, and Believing Bullshit. He is a Fellow of The Royal Society of Arts and Commerce and in 2008 became the provost of the Centre for Inquiry UK. In this episode, we start off by talking about the limitations of naturalism in terms of knowledge acquisition, the is-ought problem, and the flaws of relativism. Then, we move on to discussing Liberalism, as is presented by Stephen Law in his book, The War for Children's Minds, and the important distinction between freedom of thought and freedom of action. We also deal with the issue of religion in a scientific world and the approach of the New Atheists. We question the idea that the West is going through some sort of “moral crisis”, and the bad outcomes that pushing for that narrative might have. And, finally, we address the flaws in arguments between religious people and atheist when it comes to the problem of evil and the Evil-God challenge. Time Links: 00:54 The limitations of naturalism 09:12 The is-ought distinction 13:56 The flaws of relativism 17:09 Liberalism and freedom of thought 25:20 Religion in a modern scientific world 28:24 The New Atheists 31:44 Freedom of thought is not freedom of action 36:04 Are we really going through a “moral crisis” in the West? 41:33 The problem of evil and the Evil-God challenge in debates between religious people and atheists 48:25 Follow Dr. Law's work! -- Follow Dr. Law's work: THINK: https://bit.ly/2tBIZRX Personal Website/Blog: https://bit.ly/2GKaD7M Books: https://amzn.to/2tzAo2j Twitter handle: @stephenlaw60 -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS: KARIN LIETZCKE, ANN BLANCHETTE, SCIMED, PER HELGE HAAKSTD LARSEN, LAU GUERREIRO, RUI BELEZA, MIGUEL ESTRADA, ANTÓNIO CUNHA, CHANTEL GELINAS, JIM FRANK, JERRY MULLER, FRANCIS FORD, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BRIAN RIVERA, ADRIANO ANDRADE, YEVHEN BODRENKO, SERGIU CODREANU, ADAM BJERRE, JUSTIN WATERS, AND ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY FIRST PRODUCER, Yzar Wehbe!

Michael Gates was a Scholar of St. Catherine's College Oxford, where he gained an M.A. in English Language and Literature. He worked for five years in radio before moving to Finland where he helped establish the Finnish office of Richard Lewis Communications, which provides cross-cultural, communication skills and business language training world-wide. He is now Vice Chairman of Richard Lewis Communications internationally, but also takes an active role as a speaker and trainer. His clients have included Nokia, Microsoft, the World Bank, Duke Fuqua Business School, Rolls-Royce, the University of Oxford, and the Central Eurasian Leadership Academy. He is a board member of the Finnish-British Trade Association, and Director of Operations of The English-Speaking Union of Finland. He has published numerous articles and chapters in books on cross-cultural topics, including in The Telegraph, La Tribune, People Management, and Management Next, the leading Indian magazine for senior executives. He has five children, and has lived in Finland for more than 30 years.    

Bob and Ben speak with Jon Waterlow about his new book It's Only a Joke Comrade! Humor, Trust and Everyday Life Under Stalin and the role humor plays in helping humans make sense of the world in even the darkest times. Jon also shares his take on humor's role in politics under Stalin and today, the process he went through to uncover these jokes, and how the artistic technique of crosshatching helps us understand what it was like to live under the Stalinist system. He also discusses his decision to forego publishing his book with an academic publisher and why he decided to leave a bright future in the academy to purse fulfillment elsewhere. Dr. Jonathan Waterlow received his Doctorate in History from the University of Oxford and was a Postdoctoral Fellow at St. Anthony's College (Oxford) and the University of Toronto. He is also the cohost of the Voices in the Dark podcast, which is available anywhere you get The Road to Now. This episode was edited by Gary Fletcher. Our intro also features Solomon Sawyer's world podcast debut. Solomon is Ben Sawyer's son. He is 3 years old. The Road to Now is part of the Osiris Podcast Network. For more on this episode and all others, visit our website: www.TheRoadToNow.com.