Justice among Nations. A History of International Law - Stephen C. Neff

592 Bibliographic Essay

Kaufmann has also received some attention. For an excellent short career biography
of him, see Stephen Cloyd, “Erich Kaufmann,” in Arthur J. Jacobson and Bernhard
Schlink (eds), Weimar: A Jurisprudence of Crisis, 189– 94 (University of California
Press, 2000). See also Koskenniemi, Gentle Civilizer of Nations, 249– 61. For the most
thorough study, see Frank Degenhardt, Zwischen Machtstaat und Völkerbund: Erich
Kaufmann (1880– 1972) (Nomos, 2008). On James Brown Scott’s commitment to pre-
Grotian natural- law approaches to international law, see Christopher L. Rossi, Broken
Chain of Being: James Brown Scott and the Origins of Modern International Law (Th e
Hague: Kluwer International, 1998). On James Brierly, see Carl Landauer, “J. L. Brierly
and the Modernization of International Law,” 25 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational
Law 881– 918 (1993), which presents him as a modernist and critic of positivism. See
also Hersch Lauterpacht, “Brierly’s Contribution to International Law,” 32 BYBIL 1– 19
(1955– 56); and Nijman, Concept, 131– 49. On the Spanish scholar and World Court
judge Rafael Altamira, see Yolanda Gamarra, “Rafael Altamira y Crevea (1866– 1951):
Th e International Judge as ‘Gentle Civilizer,’ ” 14 JHIL 1– 49 (2012). On Wellington
Koo, see Jonathan Clements, Wellington Koo: China (Haus, 2008).
Walther Schücking has received some recent attention, aft er long neglect. He was
the subject of several articles in vol. 22 of the EJIL, including Frank Bodendiek, “Wal-
ther Schücking and the Idea of ‘International Or ga ni za tion’,” 22 EJIL 741– 54 (2011);
Christian J. Tams, “Re- Introducing Walther Schücking,” 22 EJIL 725– 39 (2011); Jost
Delbrück, “Law’s Frontier— Walther Schücking and the Quest for the Lex Ferenda,” 22
EJIL 801– 8 (2011); and Mónica García- Salmones, “Walther Schücking and the Pacifi st
Traditions of International Law,” 22 EJIL 755– 82 (2011).
As noted, there is little attention to national traditions. See, however, Emmanuelle
Jouannet, “A Century of French International Law Scholarship,” 61 Maine Law Re-
view 84– 131 (2009); and James Crawford, “Public International Law in Twentieth-
Century En gland,” in Beatson and Zimmermann (eds.), Jurists Uprooted, 681– 707.
Th e Vienna School is in a class of its own regarding the amount of attention that has
been lavished on it (probably well in excess of its actual infl uence). Th e best work on
the subject is now Jochen von Bernstorff and Th omas Dunlap, Th e Public Interna-
tional Law Th eory of Hans Kelsen: Believing in Universal Law (Ca mbridge Universit y
Press, 2010). Still very useful is Josef Kunz, “Th e ‘Vienna School’ and International
Law,” 11 NYULQR 370– 421 (1934), with international law matters treated at 392– 421.
For fi ne short accounts, see Wolfgang Friedmann, Legal Th eory (5th ed.; Stevens and
Sons, 1967), 105– 17; Gustavo Gozzi, Diritti e civilità: Storia e fi losofi a del diritto inter-
nazionale (Il Mulino, 2010), 167– 92; and Michael Stolleis, A History of Public Law in
Germany 1914– 1945 (trans. by Th omas Dunlap; Oxford University Press, 2004), 151–

60. On the formative period, see Clemens Jabloner, “Kelsen and His Circle: Th e Vien-
    nese Years,” 9 EJIL 368– 85 (1998). See also George A. Lipsky (ed.), Law and Politics in
    the World Community: Essays on Hans Kelsen’s Pure Th eory and Related Problems in
    International Law (University of California Press, 1953). For support of the Vienna
    School approach from the English- speaking world, see Harold J. Laski, Studies in Law