Historians have long asserted the close connection between ethnology—the practice of systematically describing cultural differences—and the politics of imperial domination. But in this respect, the Ottoman Empire presents an apparent paradox. Despite expanding across a territory that encompassed all or part of over 30 modern nation-states, early Ottoman authors almost avoided describing the cultural diversity of the empire’s subject peoples.

The Mughal (Timurid) empire in its prime (1526-1707) was markedly different in its institutional makeup and cultural outlook than the Delhi Sultanate in its era of expansion (1206-1414). If the Delhi sultans ruled as vassals of the Abbasid caliph in Baghdad and Cairo, the Mughals ruled as kings of the world, a fact reflected in their regnal titles such as “World-Seizer” (Jahangir); “King of the World” (Shah Jahan); “Alamgir” (World-Seizer), which had not been thinkable in the time of the Delhi sultans. This change can be attributed to the Mongol heritage of the Mughals.

When Thomas Roe arrived in India in 1616 as the first English ambassador to the Mughal Empire, the English barely had a toehold in the subcontinent. Their understanding of South Asian trade, culture, and the complexities of Indian society was sketchy at best. To the Mughal court, with its vast wealth and influence, the English were minor players on a very large stage.

Chinese elites of the late Ming dynasty (1368-1644) were, like many writers elsewhere in the early modern era, obsessed with the ideal of authenticity (zhen). This showed nowhere more clearly than in their appreciation of folksongs. Supposedly composed by lower class people in the “streets and alleyways,” folksongs represented a form of poetic utterance free of the literary constraints that stifled elite writing. Praised and cited across a wide spectrum of literary opinion, folksongs appeared in collections by Yang Shen (Gujin fengyao,1543), Li Kaixian (Shijing yanci, c.

This paper examines the challenges and opportunities of centring Indigenous thought in imperial, legal, and political history before 1900, contributing to the growing field of Global Indigenous Intellectual History. It addresses key issues, including the interpretation and representation of Indigenous concepts, the description of their norms, and the shift from Eurocentric to Indigenous perspectives.

The Oxford Conservative Thought (OCT) Reading Group is a non-partisan group devoted to academic exploration of small-c conservative political thought. We welcome, and actively encourage, viewpoint diversity and constructive engagement across ideological divides (all good-willed participants are welcome!)

Please register here: https://forms.gle/W4tX5qFgSAU171ap9

Each week we read one assigned text, and we recommend more for anyone who is very keen!

The OCT meets weekly in term time on Fridays from 4-5:30pm.

You can view our reading list here:

In this month's seminar, co-hosted with the Gradel Institue of Charity, we will be joined by sociologist and non-profit strategist Leah Reisman, and EY sustainability partner and climate strategy advisor, Ben Taylor, to discuss the powerful role consultants play in shaping how organisations think about and do impact, in the non-profit, private and public sectors.

Digital surveillance is a daily and all-encompassing reality of life in China. This book explores how Chinese citizens make sense of digital surveillance and live with it. It investigates their imaginaries about surveillance and privacy from within the Chinese socio-political system. Based on in-depth qualitative research interviews, detailed diary notes, and extensive documentation, Ariane Ollier-Malaterre strives to ‘de-Westernize’ the internet and surveillance literature.