Abstract
Expanding now familiar debates about the impact of the ‘historical turn’
upon the field of international law, this article considers some of the
different ways in which ‘turn to history’ scholars have confronted the
methodological and theoretical tensions arising from the central, yet
paradoxical, role occupied by the sources doctrine in international law.
We suggest that the anxiety over the sources of international law as
the basic methodological precepts of the discipline has been a
catalyzing element for a radical reengagement with the canon of
international law, one with a significant impact on the field’s existing
parameters and doctrinal limits. Within the three streams of
scholarship we explore here, history has become a site of creative
engagement for scholars in opening up the discipline to diverse ends,
one in which a new doctrinal universe can be created, and new issues,
sources, subjects, and approaches can be explored. Yet, by opening up
international law’s sources doctrine, reactionary causes and unjust ends
may equally well be the result. This account is an attempt at
diversifying the narrative surrounding the causal relationship between
history and the ongoing changes to the field of international law, along
with the differential practices, techniques and epistemological
foundations behind the history of international law as an evolving
discipline, and of the different scholarly motivations of its
specialists.
Originalsprog | Engelsk |
---|---|
Tidsskrift | Leiden Journal of International Law |
Vol/bind | 33 |
Udgave nummer | 1 |
Sider (fra-til) | 37-56 |
Antal sider | 20 |
ISSN | 0922-1565 |
DOI | |
Status | Udgivet - 1 mar. 2020 |
Udgivet eksternt | Ja |
Bibliografisk note
Publisher Copyright:© 2019 Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law.
Emneord
- 'turn to history' in international law
- crisis
- International Law
- historiography
- sources doctrine