Bibliographic Essay 591national Judiciary (Cambridge University Press, 2005), although this, too, is probably
too dense for a lay readership. For a thorough account of the draft ing of the Court’s
statute, see Ole Spiermann, “ ‘Who Attempts Too Much Does Nothing Well’: Th e 1920
Advisory Committee of Jurists and the Statute of the Permanent Court of Interna-
tional Justice,” 73 BYBIL 187– 260 (2002). On the various occasions on which the
United States considered becoming a party to the Court, see Michael Dunne, Th e
United States and the World Court, 1920– 1935 (Pinter, 1988). On Anzilotti’s activity as
a judge on the Court, see José Maria Ruda, “Th e Opinions of Judge Dionisio Anzilotti
at the Permanent Court of International Justice,” 3 EJIL 100– 22 (1992). On Walther
Schücking’s tenure on the bench, see Ole Spiermann, “Professor Walther Schücking at
the Permanent Court of International Justice,” 22 EJIL 783– 99 (2011). For a thorough
account of the experience of the mixed- claims commissions to which Mexico was a
party, see A. H. Feller, Th e Mexican Claims Commissions 1923– 1934: A Study in the
Law and Procedure of International Tribunals (Macmillan, 1935).
For a general history of the Hague Academy of International Law, see S. Verosta,
“L’histoire de l’Académie de droit international de la Haye, établie avec le concours de
la Donation Carnegie pour la paix international”; and R. Y. Jennings, “Fift y Years of
Hague Academy Lectures on Public International Law,” both found in René- Jean Du-
puy (ed.), Academy of International Law, Jubilee Book 1923– 1973, 7– 56 and 99– 115,
respectively (A. W. Sijthoff , 1973). On the Hague Conference on the Codifi cation of
International Law of 1930, see R. P. Dhokalia, Th e Codifi cation of Public International
Law (Manchester University Press, 1970), 116– 33. On the Harvard Research project,
see John P. Grant and J. Craig Barker (eds.), Th e Harvard Research in International
Law: Contemporary Analysis and Appraisal (William S. Hein, 2007).
Th ere is information (spotty as usual) on various individual international lawyers
active in this period. On Karl Strupp, see Sandra Link, Ein Realist mit Idealen— Der
Völkerrechtler Karl Strupp (1886– 1940) (Nomos, 2003). On Hans Wehberg, see Clau-
dia Denfeld, Hans Wehberg (1885– 1962): Die Organisation der Staatengemeinschaft
(Nomos, 2008). Lauterpacht has received more attention than most. See Elihu Lauter-
pacht, Th e Life of Sir Hersch Lauterpacht, QC, FBA, LLD (Cambridge University Press,
2010); Martti Koskenniemi, Th e Gentle Civilizer of Nations: Th e Rise and Fall of Inter-
national Law 1870– 1960 (Cambridge University Press, 2001), 353– 412; Marti Kosken-
niemi, “Hersch Lauterpacht (1897– 1960),” in Jack Beatson and Reinhard Zimmer-
mann (eds.), Jurists Uprooted: German- Speaking Émigré Lawyers in Twentieth- Century
Britain (Oxford University Press, 2004), 601– 61; Janne Elisabeth Nijman, Th e Concept
of International Legal Personality: An Inquiry into the History and Th eory of Interna-
tional Law (T. M. C. Asser Press, 2004), 297– 304. On Álvarez, see Liliana Obregón,
“Noted for Dissent: Th e International Life of Alejandro Álvarez,” 19 Leiden J. Int’l L.
983– 1016 (2006). For an excellent short account of the contribution and signifi cance
of Pitman B. Potter, a neglected fi gure, see Brian C. Schmidt, Th e Po liti cal Discourse of
Anarchy: A Disciplinary History of International Relations (State University of New
York Press, 1998) 201– 9.