Anne Orford - Histories of International Law and Empire

University Paris 1 (Pantheon Sorbonne) - 23 January 2013
Abstract:
There is a growing body of international legal scholarship concerned with the question of whether and how the imperial past is relevant to the internationalist present. The exploration of this question brings international lawyers into conversation with scholars studying similar issues in world history, philosophy, politics, literature, postcolonial studies, critical geography, intellectual history, and political economy. Yet as is often the case with interdisciplinary work, the resulting discussions are often riven by conflicts and territorial disputes over the proper way to interpret, understand, and study particular texts, events, or figures. This lecture addresses some of the methodological challenges that international legal scholars face when we attempt to write histories of international law and empire.
More particularly, this lecture is a defence of the place of anachronism in international legal thinking. The claim that the we might want to study the past because of its implications for the present represents an implicit challenge to the approach to the history of political thought that has dominated much Anglophone scholarship over the past forty years. The contextualist Cambridge school of intellectual history has cultivated a sensitivity to anachronism amongst historians of European political thought, particularly that of early modern Europe. Historians influenced by that school argue that past texts must not be approached anachronistically in light of current debates, problems and linguistic usages, or in a search for the development of canonical themes, fundamental concepts, or timeless
doctrines. The clear demarcation between past and present that underpins much modern historical research requires that everything must be placed in the context of its time, and present-day questions must not be allowed to distort our interpretation of past events, texts, or concepts. Anachronism is one of the most regularly denounced sins of historical scholarship.
This lecture argues in contrast that international legal thinking is necessarily ana-chronic -- that is, that the operation of modern law is not governed solely by a chronological sense of time, in which events and texts are confined to their proper place in a historical progression from then to now. The past, far from being fixed and immutable, is constantly being retrieved by lawyers as a source or rationalisation of present obligation. Thus while some legal historians identify as historians, and preach against the sin of anachronism, lawyers are and must be sinners in this sense. If the self-imposed task of today's contextualist historians is to think about concepts in their proper time and place, the task of international legal scholars is to think about how concepts move across time and space.

[@moanahughes3593]

Law exists by consent founded on belief, culture, tradition and commerce of the people who wield/benefit from it.

[@teluobir]

Thank you, very interesting indeed

[@PapistWitness]

That Vitoria portrait story is fantastic

[@brianross5826]

Russian communism leads to all this mess, Vladimir isn't a bad guy if you mind your manners, the problem, is the historic communism coming into the world, and I'm sure he is doing the best he can...a little honesty goes a long way, just a discussion of current events can really help him, honesty is the answer not death, or even litigation but a simple heart to heart about the struggles of anti - fascism v. communism, purge v. tame, its the same battle all parents face with children, kind of a nature nurture thing, go do your own will or control of the people. someday, the future will look back and thank us for the struggle of all of the tone setting events we have made an example of. I don't condone the attacks of innocent people, but fully understand the difficulties of success in governments, and change, that returns favors, if people would be honest with each other in a calm scholarly approach, address both sides of the story compare and contrast and decide. chemical weapons attacks and things like that are problems in the world, that are VERY difficult to deal with, but remember advocacy can create comradery without initiations of war. kind of a good cop bad cop approach, rather than leaving war criminals defenseless and without an exit counselling, at times, people are repeat offenders and need to be "dealt with" just normal people before the flood hits, but need to remain in control to properly maintain success in all governments, however tame can lead to distribution, tough call, but eventually this will neutralize, but usually follows with a new threat. nothing can steal consistency, just keep your heads up and ill do my best to stay in touch and report my findings that are consistently ignored by the united states government, the seat is tough to get, look at Nixon, but at times, we neeed to call on our mother, the Geneva, to protect us from intruders. good cops need to protect back. and to get a criminal you need to think like a criminal, something I have been good at. e - mail me if you neeed me😐2020👍

[@brianross5826]

for congress safety cause now I'm in danger is a patriot act investigation endangering all civilians, and has left me without my religion, which a lot the FTC (an order by bush) out of time and space is fully responsible for an attack on sandy hook ct using a war machine to ignite the flames of Adam Lanza at 7:00 am in the morning on 12/14/12 and left all of the financial responsibility to Newtown police department, and my mother Carole m Ross, retired human resources administrator in a rock and a hard place, during the horrific tone setting event which follows her around in everything we do and continues to undermine and remove medical attention from the disabled, the most persecuted of all rights movements, due to the lack of ability to reason and distinguish fiction from reality. I am schitzo affective (a genetic disorder I have dealt with since the age of 5) and am testifying to the best of my knowledge through discussions with the fbi nsa and the cia, during the Saleh v. bush, jewel v. nsa George wu v. usa for the ninth circuit and for impact in the planet for protection to the people in this war on the media which smallest to largest we all feel. even middle school students are impacted with by the war on the media intitated by the bush administration to remove the discussion of war which does jeopardize our borders, however discussion of current events is important to the understanding of the world, an us interest, a much larger scale impact to the global economy than the bush administration ever could even think about coming neat due to their failure with the supply side economics that lead to "the worst housing crisis in 70 years" Barack Obama, we are defenseless as a country and government by the bush administration. silent but deadly and at war with the entire world, and long gone, ot of the news silent but deadly, including attacks on nsa children and Donald trump

[@samwatson9510]

all authority is biased, they kiss one hand and stab another, depending on what's in it.

[@samwatson9510]

*be

[@samwatson9510]

they threw identity into the 'business' pot. nationality became a joke.

[@samwatson9510]

money slaves.