Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4) (remove)
Institute
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (4) (remove)
How to write (international) legal histories that would be true to their protagonists while simultaneously relevant to present audiences? Most of us would also want to write "critically" – that is to say, at least by aiming to avoid Eurocentrism, hagiography and commitment to an altogether old-fashioned view of international law as an instrument of progress. Hence we write today our histories "in context". But this cannot be all. Framing the relevant "context" is only possible by drawing upon more or less conscious jurisprudential and political preferences. Should attention be focused on academic debates, military power, class structures or assumptions about the longue durée? Such choices determine for us what we think of as relevant "contexts", and engage us as participants in large conversations about law and power that are not only about what once "was" but also what there will be in the future.
Political theology’s recent rise to academic prominence has, no doubt, been inspired by the sense of a certain staleness of standard (read: Anglo-American) analytical political and legal theory. Especially postcolonial and postmodern philosophy has resuscitated debates about the reality of secularization in Europe, pointing out that much of our shared political metaphysic is indeed that – a metaphysic – with close historical links to debates in theology. That should be no surprise. For almost half a millennium theology stood as the primus inter pares among the three "higher faculties" at European universities. The best minds at work in Europe explained the social and political changes to European audiences within a fully God-centric intellectual universe. Awareness of that fact, as Wim Decock points out in this massive and brilliant work, not only assists us in understanding the development of our political and legal vocabularies. It also enables us to grasp the contingency of our present debates, the way opposite standpoints on political and legal obligation refer back to assumptions about human nature, the roles of individual and society and the nature of "law" that are hard to detach from religious speculation. ...
In The Gentle Civilizer of Nations, I suggested that international law began in the 1860’s as part of liberal entrenchment in Europe as the clouds of nationalism, racism and socialism were rising in the political horizon. It began as a project of practicalmen, attorneys and lawyers active in politics and parliament, and not out of philosophical contemplation or system-construction. University professors were involved, but these were professors of something that was seen more as a craft than a science. What they aimed at was to "civilize" the behaviour of their nations, but also the colonies, and to do this by coordinating liberal legislative reform in Europe, by supporting formal empire in the colonies, and by doing all this as part of a set of cosmopolitan legal projects they grouped into their "international law" (Droit international, diritto internazionale, Völkerrecht). ...
The article presents a brief overview of research and publication in the history of international law in Europe today. The upsurge of interest in historical studies is traced back to a sense of present transformation, with historical studies seeking to explore both aspects of continuity and change in the international legal system. The article outlines three tasks for the discipline in the future: to begin work for international law’s Ideengeschichte, to focus on the relationship between the West and its "Other", and to undertake studies in the historical sociology of international law.