had actually been held March 2 and 3, with a dozen sessions, including ones dedicated to questions like "Are recent developments in American politics unprecedented, or is Trump merely populism revisited?" and "What can we learn from past attempts to learn from the past?"

Ferguson is no stranger to controversy. But on Thursday he acknowledged the conference needed more diversity.

"Everybody was keenly aware that it was too white and too male," he said. The problem was "explicitly discussed" before the event, Ferguson said. He also said women had been invited, but all, except one, were unable to attend.

Three female historians who had been invited confirmed to The New York Times that they had declined because of other obligations. The only woman at the event, Mary Sarotte, who headed aStanford history department did not have a role in arranging the conference, but Satia said she was still astonished to learn about its existence only two days before it was "happening in the building next door."

She became aware of it, she said, when a colleague posted the image of the all-male roster. The image was not public on the event's website.

The secrecy and lack of advertising were peculiar and didn't seem in the interest of "sharing and producing knowledge," Satia added.

As for Ferguson's comment that the organizers were concerned about the demographics, she said, "Should he have gone forward with a conference that looked like that?"

Lisa Lapin, vice president for communications at Stanford, said the university was aware of the efforts to attract a more diverse group to