Chapter 2 portrays the changing legal landscape addressing the legality – or lack thereof – of the cross-border movement and trade of cultural property. It starts by identifying the key features of legal divergence across national legal systems, concerning both private law and public law aspects, and discusses how this disparity poses a challenge for dealing not only with past actions but also with the current features of the global market for cultural objects. It then provides an overview of the evolution of international institutions and legal norms related to cultural property, such as the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property,

1 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, Nov. 14, 1970, 823 U.N.T.S. 231

This chapter moves from examining institutional changes to the cultural history of morals and emotions, by examining how the evolution of the idea of the self came to supplant the institutional mediation of local law courts. It traces how three concepts – self-love, happiness, and interest – were developed and disseminated as religious and interpersonal ethics, all related to the development of the self within the singular mind. This was a crucial move that allowed the idea and practice of savings to move from taking the form of a debt owed, to the interest-bearing capital described above. It also validated the crucial concept of interest within religion, and this was related to the increasing moral acceptance of the interest rate. Although a legal interest rate had existed from the Elizabethan Act of 1571, interest rates are difficult to find mentioned explicitly in the seventeenth century. By the eighteenth, however, they had become commonplace.

Morgan’s legacy was twofold: his development of processes for handling crises and his recruitment of people during crises who would live on long after he died to influence the practice of last resort lending specifically and central banking more generally.

In this chapter I argue that Francisco Suárez takes efficient causation to be intensional, rather than extensional. He thinks that co-referring terms cannot be substituted salva veritate into statements about efficient causation. I expect this thesis to be controversial, because it appears to threaten Suárez’s realism about efficient causation. After providing some background about how Suárez understands efficient causation, in the second section I offer some preliminary reasons for thinking that Suárez is an eliminativist about per accidens efficient causation, and accordingly that he is committed to an intensional account of efficient causation. In the third section, I offer a more detailed interpretation of Suárez’s account of per se and per accidens efficient causes, and I consider several alternative interpretations. In the fourth and final section, I respond to the objection that Suárez’s intensional account is inconsistent with his realism about efficient causation.

How far have we come? What strategies will most likely aid in achieving our goals? What evidence must be gathered to go further? We have focused in the book on how tests provide valuable information when making decisions about who to admit, who to hire, who to license, who to award scholarships to, and so on. Given limited resources, efficiency in selection should be essential. However, tests used for these purposes also reveal race and sex differences that conflict with society’s desire for fairness. How do we make policies and decisions so as to maximize efficiency while also minimizing adverse impact? There is no statistical solution to this problem. We suggest an approach that will get us closer to an acceptable solution than where we currently stand. A first step is to gather all relevant data so that any selection policy can be evaluated as to both kinds of errors. Second, make such data publicly available so that all interested parties can have access and everything is transparent. As mentioned previously, numerous times such data are not made available due to a fear of criticism. Third, causal connections between policies and outcomes should be established. Finally, if considerations other than merit are important, those arguments should be made public and modifications examined to measure the impact of policy adjustments.

How did Turkish Islamists capture state power in a historically secular and periodically repressive political context? How does culture matter in political mobilization? Chapter 1 attends to these general questions to frame the book and its key issues. The chapter revolves around five themes. The first presents the main argument: that the cultural groundwork Islamists laid through a quiet, gradual, and remarkably robust model of mobilization served as a critical factor in their seizure of state power by the start of the twenty-first century. The next theme explains the book’s conceptual vocabulary, such as culture, cultural groundwork, and dispositional training, as well as the different components of the main argument. The third theme provides an overview of the two-part historical analysis by placing Turkish Islamism within the universe of movements of Sunni revivalist Islam; and by drawing out the similarities and difference between the Turkish movement and regional counterparts. The fourth theme engages in a critical dialogue with existing explanations for the rise of religious politics in Turkey, especially those that trace this rise to the 1980 military coup. The final theme previews the process of field site selection, data collection, data analysis, and, more broadly, the book’s methodological approach.

Following the abolition of the slave trade, Cambridge men turned their intellectual attentions to the institution of slavery as a whole. Nevertheless, students, alumni, and fellows were torn on how best to create an empire of free labour and on the prospects for freed people of colour in post-emancipation societies. The early nineteenth century was a colorful era of experimentation as Cambridge activists sought to gradually achieve abolition without precipitating the violence and rebellion that characterized the Haitian Revolution, whilst Black and radical white abolitionists advocated for an immediate end to racial slavery. Historians have long ignored this phase of Cambridge debate on enslavement post-1807, which has resulted in a historiography of Cambridge abolitionism which overemphasizes its radical nature. In reality, a growing conservatism dominated this period of abolitionist thought at Cambridge – particularly as some Cambridge fellows and alumni continued to eschew pro-slavery rhetoric.

This chapter presents a critical analysis of how historians have used the concept of capitalism. It argues that the financial history of capital needs to be integrated more fully into the histories of all social relations if we want to use history to refine a ‘presentist’ concept about financial power and its effect on society and political choice. It is a contention of what has been termed the ‘new history of capitalism’ that financial history is often too narrowly institutional in that it focuses to narrowly on economic growth and not the social effects of financialisation on broader society. Finance, in these histories, when socialised, is generally presented as having a negative role on broader social relations. However, capital was created institutionally through relations of interdependence first, and then once created was used by those who accumulated great amounts of it to become more powerful.

Chapter 5 seeks to identify the normative foundations of a property theory of ownership and custody of cultural objects. It begins by examining the case study of the current legislative, administrative, and judicial framework in Italy, which aims to grant cultural institutions an essentially eternal right to control the reproduction and use of images of their cultural holdings. It then addresses the redefinition of a “museum” adopted in 2022 by the International Council of Museums and the implications this may have for the role of cultural institutions. The chapter then seeks to delineate the contours of a property theory of cultural objects and the corresponding sets of in rem rights and in rem duties that should apply to cultural institutions as both proprietors and custodians, by reconsidering the role of “placeness” of cultural institutions and their collections. In particular, a theory of ownership and custody of cultural objects held by cultural institutions should refer to the link between culture and space in considering the mirror-image questions that have been at the center of legal, professional, and public attention, namely: does a cultural institution have an in rem right to appropriate the value components of cultural objects, such as by limiting or prohibiting others from using or reproducing images of items in its collection; and, conversely, does a cultural institution have an in rem duty, as a custodian of culture, to actively make accessible to the public images and other information on items in its collections?

Immigration is one of the most politically charged aspects of human rights law. This chapter examines the application of Article 8 ECHR in cases where migrants face deportation and where family members seek entry to the Contracting State. In practice few applicants succeed in using Article 8 ECHR to resist deportation even in cases where they were born or lived almost their entire life in the State. This has led to the criticism that the ECtHR prioritises State sovereignty, above migrants, rendering the rights virtually meaningless and legitimising States’ practices. An opposing perspective is that the process of having to justify deportation to an international human rights court is an incursion into State sovereignty that exceeds the limits of the ECtHR’s role. The case law on family reunification is equally contested by both those that believe the ECtHR is exceeding its legitimate function and those that believe the ECtHR is averting its eyes to the hardship and suffering of migrants. The final part of this chapter examines the ways in which Article 8 ECHR has been shaped by domestic immigration law and the driving forces behind the interpretation and application of rights.