During the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries, the Ulster lordship of Tír Eoghain was bitterly contested between two rival branches of the Uí Néill dynasty: the Clann Éinrí Aimhréidh and the Clann Briain Catha an Dúin. Traditionally, historians have focused mainly on the local origins and ramifications of this feud and have paid only cursory attention to how events ranging from the Shannon Estuary through to the Outer Hebrides shaped the course of this struggle. For instance, throughout the later fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries a range of different regional players from across this wider ‘Irish Sea world’ became drawn into pulled into this conflict, each possessing a vested interest in the outcome of the Uí Néill successional war. By drawing upon a rich corpus of primary sources, including Irish, Scottish and English material, this article locates the Uí Néill feud within a wider dynastic and geopolitical context. Ultimately, the article argues for the necessity of exploring this feud from within a wider geographic and dynastic framework of interpretation, and paying closer attention to how events within the Irish Sea world could impact and impinge upon the politics of the wider archipelago.

In January 1922, Jessie Mackay represented the Self-Determination for Ireland League of New Zealand (S.D.I.L.N.Z.) at the Irish Race Congress in Paris. Irish people around the world were invited to attend this grand ‘family reunion’, where delegates discussed ways to assist the Irish revival, created an international organisation to connect members of the Irish ‘race’ and enjoyed exhibitions of Irish art, drama, music and dancing. Among those who assembled in Paris were delegates from Australasia who represented the S.D.I.L.N.Z. and the Self-Determination for Ireland League of Australia. These Australasian delegates played a pivotal role in keeping the congress on course. This article interweaves the history of the S.D.I.L.N.Z. with biographical details of Mackay's life in 1921 and 1922. Drawing on new archival research and material from New Zealand newspapers and periodicals, it adds to previous treatments of the congress by offering a distinct Australasian point of view. It investigates the S.D.I.L.N.Z. and why Mackay was chosen to represent it, how she contributed to the congress and what she made of proceedings.

Even under sakoku (policy of national self-isolation), Japan observed the outside world. The result of the Meiji Restoration in 1868 was to create or reinforce close engagement with the world by writers, artists, officials and diplomats alike. While the first foreign language of most Japanese was to be English, some were more conversant with French or Italian (and in many cases, as late as the 1930s, with German). There has also been a handful variously able to read, write or speak a minoritised language like Irish; or an immensely challenging language like Finnish.

The seventieth anniversary of the 1953 coup that toppled the government of Mohammad Mossadeq in Iran provides the opportunity to assess not only the history of Iran during Mossadeq's premiership and the consequential oil crisis, but also to examine Mossadeq's legacy, the oil nationalization, and the conflict between Iran and the West. Mosaddeq's personality and distinct profile, which continued to haunt the West for decades even after his death, contributed to the mythical place this affair has occupied in the Iranian national memory, but now, seven decades later, how do we use that period as a lens through which to examine other chapters in Iran's history? What can we make of the scholarship and sources about Iran before 1951 or after 1953? What is the impact of this affair on the collective memory of Iranians in and outside Iran as we enter the second quarter of the 21st century?

Why have scandalous sprees of lawbreaking by U.S. government officials proven so seductive yet so difficult to prosecute? This article takes the Iran-Contra scandal of the Reagan–Bush era as an instructive case study and red flag in the attitudinal erosion of the belief in the rule of law among American conservatives. Before the scandal broke, officials and legal counsels willfully mis-interpreted a clear prohibition to fund counter-revolutionaries and fabricated a post-facto presidential permission in order to sell weapons to Iran without congressional oversight. Congress's assumption that government officials would obey its statutes resulted in neither wrongdoing being punishable by criminal sanctions. Conservatives therefore argued that ends justified neglecting certain laws while also denying they had broken any laws. Prosecutors found themselves compelled to prosecute Iran-Contra's defendants over more prosaic crimes such as lying and stealing rather than more abstract and damaging ones. President George H. W. Bush's pardon of Iran-Contra defendants contributed to an impunity that further eroded the American rule of law to this day.